Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Crossing the Border in the event of Brexit: Whats gonna happen?

Options
1246

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    Del.Monte
    Registered Users Posts: 12,363 ✭✭✭✭Del.Monte


    CelticRambler wrote: »
    Last time I checked (I can almost see it from where I am at the moment) Calais was in France, and there are many thousands of non-EU citizens waiting there in the hope of getting to the UK. What incentive will there be for the French to keep them in the EU if they want to get to a country that's no longer part of it?

    Presumably there would have to be a serious effort by the French to properly secure their own borders and reinstate passport controls with other adjoining states. This is the obvious outcome of a Brexit and the EU project would begin to unravel.

    ****



  • Options
    #93
    Charles Babbage
    Registered Users Posts: 5,457 ✭✭✭Charles Babbage


    murphaph wrote: »
    What I believe will happen:
    Nothing much will change. Some fudges will be made so things stay as they are at the border, with possible spot checks for customs or whatever. Our EU partners are not so insensitive as to force us (somehow) to police the border with NI like it's the Polish border with Ukraine or something. They understand the repercussions this could have.

    Likewise, even the hardline Brexiters in GB will see the danger in fortifying the UK's side of the border for fear of derailing the peace process and throwing us back to the days of republican terrorism, possibly entailing bombs on the British mainland not just in NI. Not worth the risk IMO.

    A blind eye will be turned to the border if the Brexiters prevail, mark my words.

    This kind of thing is doable if they UK joins the EEA. But if they have a more loosely coupled arrangement then the joins begin to show. The danger is that it facilitates racketeering that put regular businesses under pressure. Or that they start harassing people travelling with spot checks and the like, possibly in response to the above, and the PSNI loses its even handed reputation, which in turn would affect its recruitment and generally unwind large parts of the peace settlement.


  • Options
    #94
    Phoebas
    Registered Users Posts: 9,370 ✭✭✭Phoebas


    Del.Monte wrote: »
    No they aren't EU citizens until they set foot in Europe - then the generous EU Germans welcome them in
    What? You need to be resident in Germany for 6-8 years before you can even apply for German citizenship (and then a host of conditions kick in).
    You don't just get it by 'setting foot' in Germany. :confused:


  • Options
    #95
    First Up
    Registered Users Posts: 14,822 ✭✭✭✭First Up


    Del.Monte wrote:
    No they aren't EU citizens until they set foot in Europe - then the generous EU Germans welcome them in and divide them up amongst the rest of us. Even if the Germans kept them all, do you think they are going to have some special type of citizenship that only allows them reside in Germany? Have you been living under a rock for the last couple of years? Anyway, we are miles off topic at this point.

    You are a bit mixed up about that too. Migrants (genuine asylum seekers or people chancing their arm) do not get EU citizenship on arrival. They are handled in varying ways (some well, some not) but they all first go through a vetting procedure and they do not have free movement within the EU. Their right to work is also severly curtailed. The UK has opted out of the migrant re-settlement programme (so has Denmark).

    Getting EU citizenship is a very long process - at least five and up to ten years.

    The UK has a far bigger immigrant flow from its former colonies in Africa and South Asia than from the EU - or asylum seekers. Leaving the EU has no affect on that.

    The UK is responsible for the majority of non European immigration into Europe. It is notable that the other EU countries have tolerated the granting of EU passports to the hordes of Bangladeshi, Pakistani, Indian, Ugandan, Kenyan and other immigrants into the UK and made no attempt to differentiate or restrict their EU citizenship.


  • Options
    #96
    Del.Monte
    Registered Users Posts: 12,363 ✭✭✭✭Del.Monte


    I'm not mixed up about anything and thank you for your ongoing condescension, but I won't feed it as this thread would be better in After Hours.

    ****



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #97
    First Up
    Registered Users Posts: 14,822 ✭✭✭✭First Up


    Del.Monte wrote:
    I'm not mixed up about anything and thank you for your ongoing condescension, but I won't feed it as this thread would be better in After Hours.

    Its hard not to appear condescending when you have to correct someone's mistakes in virtually every sentence.

    You are mixed up about quite a lot as I and other posters have been pointing out.


  • Options
    #98
    CelticRambler
    Registered Users Posts: 6,695 ✭✭✭CelticRambler


    Del.Monte wrote: »
    Presumably there would have to be a serious effort by the French to properly secure their own borders and reinstate passport controls with other adjoining states. This is the obvious outcome of a Brexit and the EU project would begin to unravel.

    :confused::confused::confused::confused:

    You haven't been to France recently, have you? There already is a serious effort by the French to secure their own borders, hence the reason I had to wait 45 minutes to get in (by road) last Saturday. That was driving a French-reg vehicle.

    But that's beside the point - the thousands of migrants in Calais don't have passports, so there's no checking to be done. However, the French forces of law and order spend a huge amount of time, money and manpower on keeping them in. You haven't driven around Calais recently, have you? Been stuck in the Tunnel while security tries to catch migrants and get them back to France?

    Why should the French spend one centime more on respecting intra-EU agreements if/when Britain votes to leave? Much easier (and more popular with the French voters in an election year) to open the doors and let them go to the Promised Land.


  • Options
    #99
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    First Up wrote: »
    Whatever about the impact on the cohesion of the UK, the fantasy that Ireland North and South would be allowed operate a cosy local arrangment is jaw droppingly niave.

    The UK will neither leave an open back door on the Irish border, nor impose an internal border between NI and the rest of the UK.

    Ireland will not be allowed leave an open back door for non-EU (of UK origin or transit) imports, nor will Irish exports to the rest of the EU have to suffer additional procedures to ensure we are not being so used.

    The border between the EU and the UK will be in Louth, Monaghan, Cavan, Leitrim and Donegal.

    No, that can't be taken as a certainty. This Northern Ireland Select Committee report mentions a number of options including stricter controls between the 2 islands rather than singularly focusing on the border itself.

    http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201617/cmselect/cmniaf/48/4802.htm


  • Options
    #100
    Phoebas
    Registered Users Posts: 9,370 ✭✭✭Phoebas


    Deleted User wrote: »
    No, that can't be taken as a certainty. This Northern Ireland Select Committee report mentions a number of options including stricter controls between the 2 islands rather than singularly focusing on the border itself.

    http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201617/cmselect/cmniaf/48/4802.htm

    Whatever about how the UK want to arrange things, the border needs to be secured on the Irish side too.
    I don't think were going to have an Irish customs post in Larne.


  • Options
    #101
    First Up
    Registered Users Posts: 14,822 ✭✭✭✭First Up


    Deleted User wrote:
    No, that can't be taken as a certainty. This Northern Ireland Select Committee report mentions a number of options including stricter controls between the 2 islands rather than singularly focusing on the border itself.


    That has already been discussed. Whatever about closer control of travel between the Republic and Britain, border controls between NI and Britain would be about as hot a political potato as you could think of. Would any British government give a higher priority to internal travel within Ireland than internal travel within the UK?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #102
    Charles Babbage
    Registered Users Posts: 5,457 ✭✭✭Charles Babbage


    First Up wrote: »
    That has already been discussed. Whatever about closer control of travel between the Republic and Britain, border controls between NI and Britain would be about as hot a political potato as you could think of. Would any British government give a higher priority to internal travel within Ireland than internal travel within the UK?

    If you mean checking people then there is no point checking them at the border, as they would not be on the main roads, but every point checking them at GB ports and airports.

    It isn't rocket science, impose controls at Stranraer then people would whine, impose checks at the border and people would shoot at you. Sticks and stones and all that.


  • Options
    #103
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    First Up wrote: »
    That has already been discussed. Whatever about closer control of travel between the Republic and Britain, border controls between NI and Britain would be about as hot a political potato as you could think of. Would any British government give a higher priority to internal travel within Ireland than internal travel within the UK?

    It's not about the British government giving higher priority to 'internal travel within Ireland', its about the practality & logistics associated with screening travel between the 2 islands.


  • Options
    #104
    Consonata
    Registered Users Posts: 1,294 ✭✭✭Consonata


    Fred Swanson wrote:
    Finland and Poland operate a border zone arrangement with Russia. Russian citizens are allowed to cross the border but cannot go more than 50km from the border.


    That's basically making Donegal part of the UK haha


  • Options
    #105
    Charles Babbage
    Registered Users Posts: 5,457 ✭✭✭Charles Babbage


    Fred Swanson wrote: »
    This post has been deleted.

    An equivalent concept would be for any person with a valid Irish visa to be allowed an incidental visit to NI, but not to go to GB.

    They can't really be stopped and NI is not a major target for someone legally entitled to be in the 26 counties, so why not just allow it?


  • Options
    #106
    First Up
    Registered Users Posts: 14,822 ✭✭✭✭First Up


    Deleted User wrote:
    It's not about the British government giving higher priority to 'internal travel within Ireland', its about the practality & logistics associated with screening travel between the 2 islands.


    But that is how it would be interpreted and portrayed politically.


  • Options
    #107
    Dravokivich
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Music Moderators, Politics Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 22,360 CMod ✭✭✭✭Dravokivich


    CelticRambler wrote: »
    Last time I checked (I can almost see it from where I am at the moment) Calais was in France, and there are many thousands of non-EU citizens waiting there in the hope of getting to the UK. What incentive will there be for the French to keep them in the EU if they want to get to a country that's no longer part of it?

    Well to be honest, it's been presented on TV that the French had a habit of passing the buck onto any other country a migrant displayed intent on getting to. It gets mentioned quite a lot on those Border shows on Sky Living, so much so that the UK have presence in French ports such as Calais and can refuse entry at the port before someone even got onto a boat.
    Deleted User wrote: »
    It's not about the British government giving higher priority to 'internal travel within Ireland', its about the practality & logistics associated with screening travel between the 2 islands.

    That already happens, although on a minimal level. Fly into Stanstead and you've to show your passport. Get the boat to Holy Head and you've to pass through Customs. They filter out people passed on their Passports / Identifications.


  • Options
    #108
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    First Up wrote: »
    But that is how it would be interpreted and portrayed politically.

    From the unionist perspective maybe. But what about the nationalist viewpoint? We dogmatically follow the script and return the border to the state it was in the bad old days of the troubles and the pre single European market era with customs, police checkpoints etc. Pure manna from heaven politically for the dissidents I feel. Plus what about the expense of doing all this? I as a taxpayer would object to the increased costs it would bring. If its going to be an 'external EU frontier' let the EU as a whole contribute to the cost.
    Originally posted by Dravokivich: That already happens, although on a minimal level. Fly into Stanstead and you've to show your passport. Get the boat to Holy Head and you've to pass through Customs. They filter out people passed on their Passports / Identifications.

    Personally its the option I would put on a more formal basis if Brexit happens.


  • Options
    #109
    Dodge
    Registered Users Posts: 10,154 ✭✭✭✭Dodge


    Dravokivich wrote: »
    It gets mentioned quite a lot on those Border shows on Sky Living

    As a general rule, don't let Sky Living be your primary source of information.


  • Options
    #110
    LXFlyer
    Registered Users Posts: 17,542 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    Dravokivich wrote: »
    That already happens, although on a minimal level. Fly into Stanstead and you've to show your passport. Get the boat to Holy Head and you've to pass through Customs. They filter out people passed on their Passports / Identifications.

    Passport checks by UK Border Force on ROI - UK flights and ferries tend to be only on a spot check basis rather than every flight - it's to check for non-Irish/UK citizens who may not have a visa.

    Airlines may check but that's up to them.

    Travelling into the UK from ROI on flights and ferries passengers have always been subject to passing through customs, although I have yet to see a check being performed on any flight I've taken!


  • Options
    #111
    CelticRambler
    Registered Users Posts: 6,695 ✭✭✭CelticRambler


    Dravokivich wrote: »
    Well to be honest, it's been presented on TV that the French had a habit of passing the buck onto any other country a migrant displayed intent on getting to. It gets mentioned quite a lot on those Border shows on Sky Living, so much so that the UK have presence in French ports such as Calais and can refuse entry at the port before someone even got onto a boat.

    They're still the legitimate crossing points though, and the French have a small patch of territory in Folkestone for the same reason. It's the French (and only the French) that guard the coastline and stop people getting into their own boats and sailing to Britain. It's illegal even to try to swim across the Channel from France to the UK for charity (which is why those trips are always done in the opposite direction).

    In the last six months, the French have been asking the UK to foot the ever-increasing bill for keeping non-EU migrants from moving to another EU country. Post-Brexit, there'd be no logical reason for the French to continue pouring their resources into stopping non-EU migrants from leaving the EU.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #112
    Vic_08
    Registered Users Posts: 3,041 ✭✭✭Vic_08


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Plus what about the expense of doing all this? I as a taxpayer would object to the increased costs it would bring. If its going to be an 'external EU frontier' let the EU as a whole contribute to the cost.

    You should know by know that as an Irish taxpayer you are just expected to bend over and take it no matter what.

    Will the Mexicans pay for Trump's wall? Like fuk they will. Will the Irish pay for Boris' border? Of course, sure paying for everyone's mistakes without kicking up about it is what we're good at.


  • Options
    #113
    First Up
    Registered Users Posts: 14,822 ✭✭✭✭First Up


    Deleted User wrote:
    From the unionist perspective maybe. But what about the nationalist viewpoint? We dogmatically follow the script and return the border to the state it was in the bad old days of the troubles and the pre single European market era with customs, police checkpoints etc. Pure manna from heaven politically for the dissidents I feel. Plus what about the expense of doing all this? I as a taxpayer would object to the increased costs it would bring. If its going to be an 'external EU frontier' let the EU as a whole contribute to the cost.

    The "nationalist" viewpoint that matters on this is the British one. If Brexit goes through, the mood in the UK will be to pull up the drawbridge. Similarly the EU mood will be to let them stew.

    There has to be EU customs procedures for goods entering the republic. That means a border.

    In that environment and that political reality, I see zero chance of the UK imposing an internal border to convenience Ireland or the rest of the EU.


  • Options
    #114
    First Up
    Registered Users Posts: 14,822 ✭✭✭✭First Up


    Vic_08 wrote:
    You should know by know that as an Irish taxpayer you are just expected to bend over and take it no matter what.


    Ever hear of the External Borders Fund?

    No, I expect you haven't. But don't let ignorance slow you down.


  • Options
    #115
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    First Up wrote: »
    Ever hear of the External Borders Fund?

    No, I expect you haven't. But don't let ignorance slow you down.

    Appears to be for Schengen countries only. Do you expect Ireland to join Schengen?

    http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/financing/fundings/migration-asylum-borders/external-borders-fund/index_en.htm


  • Options
    #116
    n97 mini
    Registered Users Posts: 8,295 ✭✭✭n97 mini


    Charles Babbage wrote: »
    On the contrary your post is ridiculous. Even in the troubles when there were thousands of troops it was pretty easy for people to come and go and indeed truck loads of explosives in many cases. It is questionable whether Britain wishes to deploy thousands of troops again, which wouldn't work anyway and would lead to the entire peace settlement failing apart, when a few dozen inspectors in GB could do the job better. There isn't a huge number of EU immigrants trying to get to NI.

    Who said anything about re-deploying the British Army. That's nonsense. Re "EU immigrants" trying to get to NI, without wanting to spell it out for you, NI is usually not the destination, but it is used as an easy way to access ROI from GB and vice versa.


  • Options
    #117
    First Up
    Registered Users Posts: 14,822 ✭✭✭✭First Up


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Appears to be for Schengen countries only. Do you expect Ireland to join Schengen?

    http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/financing/fundings/migration-asylum-borders/external-borders-fund/index_en.htm

    It applies to all EU external borders. Its primary stated purpose is to protect the integrity of Schengen (which we might well join after a Brexit) but if Ireland had an external border running through it, we would not have to burden the cost on our own.


  • Options
    #118
    GM228
    Registered Users Posts: 8,925 ✭✭✭GM228


    First Up wrote: »
    Ever hear of the External Borders Fund?

    It's irrelevant, the External Borders Funed (EBF) ceased in 2013! It was replaced by the Internal Security Fund-Borders and Visa (ISF).
    First Up wrote: »
    It applies to all EU external borders. Its primary stated purpose is to protect the integrity of Schengen (which we might well join after a Brexit) but if Ireland had an external border running through it, we would not have to burden the cost on our own.

    Ireland and the UK do not participate in the ISF which replaced the EBF, so the ISF is also irrelevant.


  • Options
    #119
    First Up
    Registered Users Posts: 14,822 ✭✭✭✭First Up


    GM228 wrote:
    Ireland and the UK do not participate in the ISF which replaced the EBF, so the ISF is also irrelevant.

    Not at the moment. We are talking about a post Brexit scenario - remember?


  • Options
    #120
    GM228
    Registered Users Posts: 8,925 ✭✭✭GM228


    First Up wrote: »
    Not at the moment. We are talking about a post Brexit scenario - remember?

    Post Brexit it still won't apply unless Ireland become part of Schengen.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #121
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    First Up wrote: »
    the integrity of Schengen (which we might well join after a Brexit).

    So having to show passports every time we wanted to go to Newry akin to something like going from Poland to Kaliningrad. Are you aware of the unhappy history of the border in Ireland?


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement