Implement a trusted trader scheme off our own bat.
It’s up to the EU what the RoI does
Again, no it's not. If we have an open border for EU widgets we would need to have an open border for, say, US widgets. So either we have no tariffs for anything or we have a border
How we enforce the border is up to us.
We say that EU widgets must follow our laws and duty must be paid on EU imports. We say the same for US imports. Problem solved.
On the Irish border we enforce that away from the border by prosecuting smugglers that we catch rather than border posts. The law is still the same.
In practice that's impossible. There are farms that straddle the border, villages too. There has to be enforcement on the border. The border is not a dead zone, far from it, the economy is too integrated.
I am appalled at my own ignorance in having to ask: is it an absolute given that a hard border leads immediately to a full-fat restitution of the Troubles? And why? And if not, surely the policing requirements for a brexit-caused hard border will be orders of magnitude less than those which obtained in the troubles?
It makes it a more likely. You have a generation that has grown up being able to drive from Donegal to work/play in Derry, or visa versa, and the only noticeable change is the road signs. In an age of contactless cards even the currency issue is less noticeable. Then, all of a sudden, you get a reminder that there is a border there, a border that most Irish people consider to have been illegitimately imposed. I'm not going to get into an argument about whether it was, perception is everything. People in Derry, Tyrone, Fermanagh and Armagh find it harder to move about - more inconvenient. That starts feeding into a grievance that has been there for centuries, it did not start in 1968.
Imagine the French had successfully invaded us in 1805 and then in 1918 we had voted in a radical government that declared independence. After a bit of a struggle they agree to go but only if they can keep Kent, Sussex and Essex - because Kent now has a majority of French ancestry, which creates an overall majority in those three counties (even though Sussex and Essex alone remain majority English). Jokes about Essex aside that would be a very sore point indeed. And that's how people in Ireland see it. Having no boder there makes it just about tolerable.
Thanks for the comprehensive answer. If the issue is movement of people not goods, techno wizardry about paying import duties doesn't really solve it, presumably? I assume Irish citizens will have the right to pass freely over the border in either direction under GFA or whatever but will presumably have to pass through a CTA channel while Latvian plumbers get the full immigration control treatment. Though it sounds as if the border is so rustic that it actually would take Troubles-level manning to stop the Latvians slipping through on a farm track.
How many troops does the EU have to police their hard border?
The hard men might not care who put it up.
Those hard men who we were told had bought into the peace process, putting ther weapons beyond use? Those hard men?
Byrne was on the radio because of the latest "dissident" republican activity. A bomb in this case.
INLA, Real IRA/New IRA - you saying these "dissidents" were just ahead of the Brexit game?
I'm saying that Brexit will provide a catalyst if not act as recruiting sergeant. A hard border trebly so.
So we can agree that there is a core of nationalists/criminals who - despite the Good Friday Agreement, have never accepted its provisions, have remained armed and trained - and have made murderous attempts. And it has been nothing to do with Brexit.
American lawmakers seem to be relaxed about this. You'd think Nanci Pelosi would have been more concerned that there's a group been actively flaunting the GFA since it was signed.
If you have a border post then that will prove to be a target for those republicans. At present there is no such focal point. So you would have to protect it and so it escalates.
We have said we have no need for those border posts. We will address enforcement away form the border.
As I said at the start of this dialogue, it is the EU that will be building those posts. And defending them. Now we see why the EU needs its own army.
And I said that it won't necessarily be the EU enforcing the border it might come through a WTO MFN ruling. I mean this is assuming the EU waives its phyto-sanitary checks and so forth.
Implement a trusted trader scheme off our own bat.
It’s up to the EU what the RoI does
Again, no it's not. If we have an open border for EU widgets we would need to have an open border for, say, US widgets. So either we have no tariffs for anything or we have a border
How we enforce the border is up to us.
We say that EU widgets must follow our laws and duty must be paid on EU imports. We say the same for US imports. Problem solved.
On the Irish border we enforce that away from the border by prosecuting smugglers that we catch rather than border posts. The law is still the same.
I'm no HMRC expert but how do you catch smugglers if not at the border?
ANPR noting lorries heading through with the occasional check. I don't have someone from HMRC head into the office when I submit the quarterly VAT reclaim.
Polls indicate a majority would support unification over the return of a hard border, so arguably the moment No Deal becomes government policy it should trigger a border poll.
Implement a trusted trader scheme off our own bat.
It’s up to the EU what the RoI does
Again, no it's not. If we have an open border for EU widgets we would need to have an open border for, say, US widgets. So either we have no tariffs for anything or we have a border
A *physical* border is not the same as zero tariff.
The vast bulk of trading is done by a small number of firms. Register them, have self declaration and spot checks
"The vast bulk of trading is done by a small number of firms" - that is absolute twaddle. There are dozens of farms that cross the border let alone the cross border communities that trade every day.
We would have to register Irish citizens and companies and, outside the EU and the data protections it offers, not to mention the fact that being put on a UK government database is hardly the most attractive thing to sell an Irish person whose historical trust in it is not great, that isn't going to happen.
Implement a trusted trader scheme off our own bat.
It’s up to the EU what the RoI does
Again, no it's not. If we have an open border for EU widgets we would need to have an open border for, say, US widgets. So either we have no tariffs for anything or we have a border
A *physical* border is not the same as zero tariff.
The vast bulk of trading is done by a small number of firms. Register them, have self declaration and spot checks
The point of checkpoints is to catch those evading the rules not to confirm those obeying them . Where would the spot checks take place?
It's worth repeating the key facts. Ireland can't afford a hard border, whether conceded through a lack of a backstop or through No Deal. Northern Ireland can afford it ten times less. Ireland won't willingly align itself with the UK outside of the Single Market, nor will the other Member states require it to. Which means the backstop will be the number one requirement for any deal of any kind with any of the countries that we share a continent with.
Implement a trusted trader scheme off our own bat.
It’s up to the EU what the RoI does
Again, no it's not. If we have an open border for EU widgets we would need to have an open border for, say, US widgets. So either we have no tariffs for anything or we have a border
How we enforce the border is up to us.
We say that EU widgets must follow our laws and duty must be paid on EU imports. We say the same for US imports. Problem solved.
On the Irish border we enforce that away from the border by prosecuting smugglers that we catch rather than border posts. The law is still the same.
I'm no HMRC expert but how do you catch smugglers if not at the border?
The same way we already do with Alcohol and Tobacco smuggling for resale. This isn't hypothetical it is already a real issue with real solutions.
Alcohol and Tobacco duties are greater than customs duties in a lot of instance and it is a high value difference in a concentrated form, something that would be very profitable for smugglers. HMRC already has away from the border methods to detect, prosecute and punish smuggling. It has those processes today and enforces them today. Without any border posts.
Implement a trusted trader scheme off our own bat.
It’s up to the EU what the RoI does
Again, no it's not. If we have an open border for EU widgets we would need to have an open border for, say, US widgets. So either we have no tariffs for anything or we have a border
How we enforce the border is up to us.
We say that EU widgets must follow our laws and duty must be paid on EU imports. We say the same for US imports. Problem solved.
On the Irish border we enforce that away from the border by prosecuting smugglers that we catch rather than border posts. The law is still the same.
I'm no HMRC expert but how do you catch smugglers if not at the border?
The same way we already do with Alcohol and Tobacco smuggling for resale. This isn't hypothetical it is already a real issue with real solutions.
Alcohol and Tobacco duties are greater than customs duties in a lot of instance and it is a high value difference in a concentrated form, something that would be very profitable for smugglers. HMRC already has away from the border methods to detect, prosecute and punish smuggling. It has those processes today and enforces them today. Without any border posts.
It is low level smuggling between EU member states. This would be a major route into a nation with a different regulatory regime.
Implement a trusted trader scheme off our own bat.
It’s up to the EU what the RoI does
Again, no it's not. If we have an open border for EU widgets we would need to have an open border for, say, US widgets. So either we have no tariffs for anything or we have a border
How we enforce the border is up to us.
We say that EU widgets must follow our laws and duty must be paid on EU imports. We say the same for US imports. Problem solved.
On the Irish border we enforce that away from the border by prosecuting smugglers that we catch rather than border posts. The law is still the same.
Managing this poses real issues because of the highly integrated cross-border economy – farms, villages and daily commutes all straddle the border. So how we enforce the border away from it is not entirely up to us. Without Irish co-operation it is, in practice, not possible.
Without co-operation it will be difficult but not impossible. It depends where you balance risk rewards.
How many troops does the EU have to police their hard border?
Google WTO MFN big man.
WTO MFN neither requires an army nor customs posts.
WTO MFN rules do not require an army, but they require the EU to set up the same customs posts, border inspection posts and similar to be set up at its Irish external border as they exist at other EU external borders. Without mitigation (FTA) the RoI/NI border must look exactly the same as the Finnland/Russia border.
If the UK were to not install any border there of its own, the WTO MFN rules would in turn restrict the UK from performing any kind of border control at any other of its borders, e.g. ports, airports.
WTO MFN rules require WTO members to apply the exact same border controls at any of their borders, to imports from any country. They explicitly prohibit any divergence of border regimes.
Polls indicate a majority would support unification over the return of a hard border, so arguably the moment No Deal becomes government policy it should trigger a border poll.
Well quite. That, hopefully if the N Irish vote for unification, obviates the backstop and gives us a geographically neat border in the Irish sea. The unionists that have sent DUP MPs for years to Westminster will keep their Irish and British passports and FOM so they'll be fine even if it leads to a few tears in the Fountain !
Implement a trusted trader scheme off our own bat.
It’s up to the EU what the RoI does
Again, no it's not. If we have an open border for EU widgets we would need to have an open border for, say, US widgets. So either we have no tariffs for anything or we have a border
How we enforce the border is up to us.
We say that EU widgets must follow our laws and duty must be paid on EU imports. We say the same for US imports. Problem solved.
On the Irish border we enforce that away from the border by prosecuting smugglers that we catch rather than border posts. The law is still the same.
I'm no HMRC expert but how do you catch smugglers if not at the border?
The same way we already do with Alcohol and Tobacco smuggling for resale. This isn't hypothetical it is already a real issue with real solutions.
Alcohol and Tobacco duties are greater than customs duties in a lot of instance and it is a high value difference in a concentrated form, something that would be very profitable for smugglers. HMRC already has away from the border methods to detect, prosecute and punish smuggling. It has those processes today and enforces them today. Without any border posts.
It is low level smuggling between EU member states. This would be a major route into a nation with a different regulatory regime.
No reason the same principles can't apply. Self declaration by companies, prosecuting companies that break the law, intelligence led investigations and tolerance for imports for personal consumption.
Take the onus away from the border and put it on companies.
How many troops does the EU have to police their hard border?
Google WTO MFN big man.
WTO MFN neither requires an army nor customs posts.
WTO MFN rules do not require an army, but they require the EU to set up the same customs posts, border inspection posts and similar to be set up at its Irish external border as they exist at other EU external borders. Without mitigation (FTA) the RoI/NI border must look exactly the same as the Finnland/Russia border.
If the UK were to not install any border there of its own, the WTO MFN rules would in turn restrict the UK from performing any kind of border control at any other of its borders, e.g. ports, airports.
WTO MFN rules require WTO members to apply the exact same border controls at any of their borders, to imports from any country. They explicitly prohibit any divergence of border regimes.
Thank you. Some people need telling a thousand times.
Implement a trusted trader scheme off our own bat.
It’s up to the EU what the RoI does
Again, no it's not. If we have an open border for EU widgets we would need to have an open border for, say, US widgets. So either we have no tariffs for anything or we have a border
How we enforce the border is up to us.
We say that EU widgets must follow our laws and duty must be paid on EU imports. We say the same for US imports. Problem solved.
On the Irish border we enforce that away from the border by prosecuting smugglers that we catch rather than border posts. The law is still the same.
I'm no HMRC expert but how do you catch smugglers if not at the border?
The same way we already do with Alcohol and Tobacco smuggling for resale. This isn't hypothetical it is already a real issue with real solutions.
Alcohol and Tobacco duties are greater than customs duties in a lot of instance and it is a high value difference in a concentrated form, something that would be very profitable for smugglers. HMRC already has away from the border methods to detect, prosecute and punish smuggling. It has those processes today and enforces them today. Without any border posts.
It is low level smuggling between EU member states. This would be a major route into a nation with a different regulatory regime.
No reason the same principles can't apply. Self declaration by companies, prosecuting companies that break the law, intelligence led investigations and tolerance for imports for personal consumption.
Take the onus away from the border and put it on companies.
As I said, borders are to catch those evading the law. All the checks can of course be done away from the border but borders are to catch the criminals. Or terrorists.
Implement a trusted trader scheme off our own bat.
It’s up to the EU what the RoI does
Again, no it's not. If we have an open border for EU widgets we would need to have an open border for, say, US widgets. So either we have no tariffs for anything or we have a border
Implement a trusted trader scheme off our own bat.
It’s up to the EU what the RoI does
Again, no it's not. If we have an open border for EU widgets we would need to have an open border for, say, US widgets. So either we have no tariffs for anything or we have a border
The problem with leaving the EU is not the tariffs- its the non tariff barriers and product definitions. In the examples you give goods must comply with the precise definitions of either EU or US legislation. That's kind of the whole point of the single market. Even if we could reset our systems to the US overnight, the paperwork will be insane. Also we have zero say in the product definitions. Boris flouncing out from the EU means we lose the existing EU product definitions and certifications on November 1st.
For comparison the Canadian CETA took 7 years to sort out and is still not full ratified. The critical problem for the UK is that the Hard Brexiteers will not accept ECJ disputes resolution procedures and setting up bespoke systems cannot be done quickly, so Canada+ or Norway- are equally unattainable. May's deal was a messy and very flawed compromise, but literally the only thing that can allow an exit from the EU and/or the single market without a major economic crisis.
So bluntly, Johnson has to do a deal. If he does not then he clearly risks the Troubles part 2- and this time he loses. So Tories: a united Ireland and a divided Great Britain, and an economic slump that will last for years.
If that *is* what you voted for then you are worse than fools.
Thanks for the comprehensive answer. If the issue is movement of people not goods, techno wizardry about paying import duties doesn't really solve it, presumably? I assume Irish citizens will have the right to pass freely over the border in either direction under GFA or whatever but will presumably have to pass through a CTA channel while Latvian plumbers get the full immigration control treatment. Though it sounds as if the border is so rustic that it actually would take Troubles-level manning to stop the Latvians slipping through on a farm track.
The other issue is (for example) dodgy Brazilian beef arriving in Belfast and then waltzing into the single market. Ireland really really wants to be tied to Europe because, bluntly, it is a counterweight to ourselves, for the last 1000 just about their only aggressor. We have to face that reality. They are not going to leave the single market for that reason and, as a result, they are not going to abandon the backstop becasue it protects their membership of it. And that is a matter of overriding political principle as much as "sovereignty" is to the Brexiteers, if not more. They want to be in the EU's orbit, not ours, and given the history you cannot blame them.
In other news, Duncan Smith says he also wants the transition period removed from the WA so we can do a trade deal with the USA. Johnson is trapped.
No he isn't as unless the Republicans take back the House of Representatives and the backstop is removed from the Withdrawal Agreement there will be no WA passing the Commons and no US trade deal anyway.
Passing the Withdrawal Agreement in any case just opens the way to FTA talks with the EU whether we have a transition period or not
In other news, Duncan Smith says he also wants the transition period removed from the WA so we can do a trade deal with the USA. Johnson is trapped.
No he isn't as unless the Republicans take back the House of Representatives and the backstop is removed from the Withdrawal Agreement there will be no WA passing the Commons and no US trade deal anyway
So he's going to go ahead with No Deal, or is he hoping to be stopped?
It is low level smuggling between EU member states. This would be a major route into a nation with a different regulatory regime.
No reason the same principles can't apply. Self declaration by companies, prosecuting companies that break the law, intelligence led investigations and tolerance for imports for personal consumption.
Take the onus away from the border and put it on companies.
As I said, borders are to catch those evading the law. All the checks can of course be done away from the border but borders are to catch the criminals. Or terrorists.
"All the checks can of course be done away from the border" - Enough said.
Read some George Orwell. You are making an argument for authoritarianism.
Crime happens, it is a fact of life. I am not an authoritarian who thinks we should abolish civil liberties to ensure there is zero crime, we balance free liberties with the risk of crime occuring. Yes some criminals may get through if we do checks away from the border. That is a price I am willing to pay to avoid terrorism and violence, is it not a price you are willing to pay?
Checks are still done, the WTO MFN rules are satisfied, the GFA is satisfied, there may be some crime but we tackle that not at the border risking the GFA but through the criminal justice system as we already do for smuggling that already exists. What exactly is the problem?
Thanks for the comprehensive answer. If the issue is movement of people not goods, techno wizardry about paying import duties doesn't really solve it, presumably? I assume Irish citizens will have the right to pass freely over the border in either direction under GFA or whatever but will presumably have to pass through a CTA channel while Latvian plumbers get the full immigration control treatment. Though it sounds as if the border is so rustic that it actually would take Troubles-level manning to stop the Latvians slipping through on a farm track.
The other issue is (for example) dodgy Brazilian beef arriving in Belfast and then waltzing into the single market. Ireland really really wants to be tied to Europe because, bluntly, it is a counterweight to ourselves, for the last 1000 just about their only aggressor. We have to face that reality. They are not going to leave the single market for that reason and, as a result, they are not going to abandon the backstop becasue it protects their membership of it. And that is a matter of overriding political principle as much as "sovereignty" is to the Brexiteers, if not more. They want to be in the EU's orbit, not ours, and given the history you cannot blame them.
Not Brazilian but American under IDS's trade deal with Trump. That's the problem.
Implement a trusted trader scheme off our own bat.
It’s up to the EU what the RoI does
Again, no it's not. If we have an open border for EU widgets we would need to have an open border for, say, US widgets. So either we have no tariffs for anything or we have a border
Implement a trusted trader scheme off our own bat.
It’s up to the EU what the RoI does
Again, no it's not. If we have an open border for EU widgets we would need to have an open border for, say, US widgets. So either we have no tariffs for anything or we have a border
The problem with leaving the EU is not the tariffs- its the non tariff barriers and product definitions. In the examples you give goods must comply with the precise definitions of either EU or US legislation. That's kind of the whole point of the single market. Even if we could reset our systems to the US overnight, the paperwork will be insane. Also we have zero say in the product definitions. Boris flouncing out from the EU means we lose the existing EU product definitions and certifications on November 1st.
For comparison the Canadian CETA took 7 years to sort out and is still not full ratified. The critical problem for the UK is that the Hard Brexiteers will not accept ECJ disputes resolution procedures and setting up bespoke systems cannot be done quickly, so Canada+ or Norway- are equally unattainable. May's deal was a messy and very flawed compromise, but literally the only thing that can allow an exit from the EU and/or the single market without a major economic crisis.
So bluntly, Johnson has to do a deal. If he does not then he clearly risks the Troubles part 2- and this time he loses. So Tories: a united Ireland and a divided Great Britain, and an economic slump that will last for years.
If that *is* what you voted for then you are worse than fools.
Actually Counties Antrim and Down both voted Leave so it is the backstop which also risks reviving the Troubles with an Irish sea border leading to a revival of loyalist paramilitaries in republican areas
Thanks for the comprehensive answer. If the issue is movement of people not goods, techno wizardry about paying import duties doesn't really solve it, presumably? I assume Irish citizens will have the right to pass freely over the border in either direction under GFA or whatever but will presumably have to pass through a CTA channel while Latvian plumbers get the full immigration control treatment. Though it sounds as if the border is so rustic that it actually would take Troubles-level manning to stop the Latvians slipping through on a farm track.
The other issue is (for example) dodgy Brazilian beef arriving in Belfast and then waltzing into the single market. Ireland really really wants to be tied to Europe because, bluntly, it is a counterweight to ourselves, for the last 1000 just about their only aggressor. We have to face that reality. They are not going to leave the single market for that reason and, as a result, they are not going to abandon the backstop becasue it protects their membership of it. And that is a matter of overriding political principle as much as "sovereignty" is to the Brexiteers, if not more. They want to be in the EU's orbit, not ours, and given the history you cannot blame them.
On my understanding neither the UK nor Ireland would be allowed under WTO rules to prevent the transit of that beef through their own territory into the other territory. It's up to each territory to protect their own borders. An exception is made for customs unions, which are treated as a single territory.
Checks are still done, the WTO MFN rules are satisfied, the GFA is satisfied, there may be some crime but we tacklet that not at the border risking the GFA but through the criminal justice system as we already do for smuggling that already exists. What exactly is the problem?
As I said the US wants to know that we are treating them fairly. We can only do that by border checks the operation of which are, inter alia, a foundation of a sovereign nation.
Polls indicate a majority would support unification over the return of a hard border, so arguably the moment No Deal becomes government policy it should trigger a border poll.
On no grounds whatsoever, every poll shows a majority of Unionists back even a hard border over reunification and the pre suspension First Minister of Northern Ireland and leader of the largest party in Northern Ireland at Westminster is a Unionist.
In any case Boris has made clear there will be no hard border even with No Deal
Thanks for the comprehensive answer. If the issue is movement of people not goods, techno wizardry about paying import duties doesn't really solve it, presumably? I assume Irish citizens will have the right to pass freely over the border in either direction under GFA or whatever but will presumably have to pass through a CTA channel while Latvian plumbers get the full immigration control treatment. Though it sounds as if the border is so rustic that it actually would take Troubles-level manning to stop the Latvians slipping through on a farm track.
The other issue is (for example) dodgy Brazilian beef arriving in Belfast and then waltzing into the single market. Ireland really really wants to be tied to Europe because, bluntly, it is a counterweight to ourselves, for the last 1000 just about their only aggressor. We have to face that reality. They are not going to leave the single market for that reason and, as a result, they are not going to abandon the backstop becasue it protects their membership of it. And that is a matter of overriding political principle as much as "sovereignty" is to the Brexiteers, if not more. They want to be in the EU's orbit, not ours, and given the history you cannot blame them.
Not Brazilian but American under IDS's trade deal with Trump. That's the problem.
Take your pick of a number of dodgy sources of meat - our own was pretty dodgy until quite recently. The point being our joint membership of the single market and CU made a barely tolerable situation tolerable, along with improvements to civil rights in NI and the GFA. Now one of those pillars is being removed and we have a problem that too few English people recognise. They don't quite see how, psychologically, this is part of their country administered by a foreign state. Sure, their constitution no longer says that but changing it came from a result of a very balanced set of circumstances soon no longer to exist.
Thanks for the comprehensive answer. If the issue is movement of people not goods, techno wizardry about paying import duties doesn't really solve it, presumably? I assume Irish citizens will have the right to pass freely over the border in either direction under GFA or whatever but will presumably have to pass through a CTA channel while Latvian plumbers get the full immigration control treatment. Though it sounds as if the border is so rustic that it actually would take Troubles-level manning to stop the Latvians slipping through on a farm track.
The other issue is (for example) dodgy Brazilian beef arriving in Belfast and then waltzing into the single market. Ireland really really wants to be tied to Europe because, bluntly, it is a counterweight to ourselves, for the last 1000 just about their only aggressor. We have to face that reality. They are not going to leave the single market for that reason and, as a result, they are not going to abandon the backstop becasue it protects their membership of it. And that is a matter of overriding political principle as much as "sovereignty" is to the Brexiteers, if not more. They want to be in the EU's orbit, not ours, and given the history you cannot blame them.
On my understanding neither the UK nor Ireland would be allowed under WTO rules to prevent the transit of that beef through their own territory into the other territory. It's up to each territory to protect their own borders. An exception is made for customs unions, which are treated as a single territory.
So that'd be the Gardai responsibility to prevent the dodgy beef arriving in Dublin in your example ?
Polls indicate a majority would support unification over the return of a hard border, so arguably the moment No Deal becomes government policy it should trigger a border poll.
On no grounds whatsoever, every poll shows a majority of Unionists back a hard border over reunification and the pre suspension First Minister of Northern Ireland and leader of the largest party in Northern Ireland at Westminster is a Unionist
The Good Friday Agreement does not require a majority of unionists to support unification.
The problem with leaving the EU is not the tariffs- its the non tariff barriers and product definitions. In the examples you give goods must comply with the precise definitions of either EU or US legislation. That's kind of the whole point of the single market. Even if we could reset our systems to the US overnight, the paperwork will be insane. Also we have zero say in the product definitions. Boris flouncing out from the EU means we lose the existing EU product definitions and certifications on November 1st.
For comparison the Canadian CETA took 7 years to sort out and is still not full ratified. The critical problem for the UK is that the Hard Brexiteers will not accept ECJ disputes resolution procedures and setting up bespoke systems cannot be done quickly, so Canada+ or Norway- are equally unattainable. May's deal was a messy and very flawed compromise, but literally the only thing that can allow an exit from the EU and/or the single market without a major economic crisis.
So bluntly, Johnson has to do a deal. If he does not then he clearly risks the Troubles part 2- and this time he loses. So Tories: a united Ireland and a divided Great Britain, and an economic slump that will last for years.
If that *is* what you voted for then you are worse than fools.
Ireland gets the attention because it's a pre-requisite to negotiation. Similar practical issues apply cross-Channel to a much larger trade. Not only have people not prepared for that negotiation, most don't even accept the negotiation is necessary and will happen.
Implement a trusted trader scheme off our own bat.
It’s up to the EU what the RoI does
Again, no it's not. If we have an open border for EU widgets we would need to have an open border for, say, US widgets. So either we have no tariffs for anything or we have a border
Implement a trusted trader scheme off our own bat.
It’s up to the EU what the RoI does
Again, no it's not. If we have an open border for EU widgets we would need to have an open border for, say, US widgets. So either we have no tariffs for anything or we have a border
The problem with leaving the EU is not the tariffs- its the non tariff barriers and product definitions. In the examples you give goods must comply with the precise definitions of either EU or US legislation. That's kind of the whole point of the single market. Even if we could reset our systems to the US overnight, the paperwork will be insane. Also we have zero say in the product definitions. Boris flouncing out from the EU means we lose the existing EU product definitions and certifications on November 1st.
For comparison the Canadian CETA took 7 years to sort out and is still not full ratified. The critical problem for the UK is that the Hard Brexiteers will not accept ECJ disputes resolution procedures and setting up bespoke systems cannot be done quickly, so Canada+ or Norway- are equally unattainable. May's deal was a messy and very flawed compromise, but literally the only thing that can allow an exit from the EU and/or the single market without a major economic crisis.
So bluntly, Johnson has to do a deal. If he does not then he clearly risks the Troubles part 2- and this time he loses. So Tories: a united Ireland and a divided Great Britain, and an economic slump that will last for years.
If that *is* what you voted for then you are worse than fools.
Actually Counties Antrim and Down both voted Leave so it is the backstop which also risks reviving the Troubles with an Irish sea border leading to a revival of loyalist paramilitaries in republican areas
Loyalist paramilitaries existed to keep the Catholic population down when it was behaving in a manner not exactly the same a a doormat, and keep the Protestant population on top, in the same manner as the KKK in the Southern US. As a result that is not a likely scenario.
In other news, Duncan Smith says he also wants the transition period removed from the WA so we can do a trade deal with the USA. Johnson is trapped.
No he isn't as unless the Republicans take back the House of Representatives and the backstop is removed from the Withdrawal Agreement there will be no WA passing the Commons and no US trade deal anyway
So he's going to go ahead with No Deal, or is he hoping to be stopped?
He is going to go ahead with No Deal yes unless the backstop is removed from the Withdrawal Agreement and a technical solution replaces it, which as the Brady amendment showed is the only Brexit solution with a majority in the Commons
How many troops does the EU have to police their hard border?
Google WTO MFN big man.
WTO MFN neither requires an army nor customs posts.
WTO MFN rules do not require an army, but they require the EU to set up the same customs posts, border inspection posts and similar to be set up at its Irish external border as they exist at other EU external borders. Without mitigation (FTA) the RoI/NI border must look exactly the same as the Finnland/Russia border.
If the UK were to not install any border there of its own, the WTO MFN rules would in turn restrict the UK from performing any kind of border control at any other of its borders, e.g. ports, airports.
WTO MFN rules require WTO members to apply the exact same border controls at any of their borders, to imports from any country. They explicitly prohibit any divergence of border regimes.
No they do not. WTO MFN rules do not require exact controls everywhere, they require the same tariffs and barriers to all trading partners but how we enforce those tariffs and barriers is up to us.
Polls indicate a majority would support unification over the return of a hard border, so arguably the moment No Deal becomes government policy it should trigger a border poll.
On no grounds whatsoever, every poll shows a majority of Unionists back even a hard border over reunification and the pre suspension First Minister of Northern Ireland and leader of the largest party in Northern Ireland at Westminster is a Unionist.
In any case Boris has made clear there will be no hard border even with No Deal
People in Ireland don't trust the UK Government, especially Boris "why doesn't he have a name like Murphy" Johnson, which is why the backstop is so politically important. There's a lot of history behind that mistrust that the last 20 years of relatively good relations will not overcome
Checks are still done, the WTO MFN rules are satisfied, the GFA is satisfied, there may be some crime but we tacklet that not at the border risking the GFA but through the criminal justice system as we already do for smuggling that already exists. What exactly is the problem?
As I said the US wants to know that we are treating them fairly. We can only do that by border checks the operation of which are, inter alia, a foundation of a sovereign nation.
So are you saying we aren't a sovereign nation today as we don't do those checks today?
I thought you said we were always sovereign?
We can choose to balance the risk/reward for checks how we choose, that is our right as a sovereign nation. The same rules will apply to all countries of origin, including US trade travelling via Ireland.
Implement a trusted trader scheme off our own bat.
It’s up to the EU what the RoI does
Again, no it's not. If we have an open border for EU widgets we would need to have an open border for, say, US widgets. So either we have no tariffs for anything or we have a border
Implement a trusted trader scheme off our own bat.
It’s up to the EU what the RoI does
Again, no it's not. If we have an open border for EU widgets we would need to have an open border for, say, US widgets. So either we have no tariffs for anything or we have a border
The problem with leaving the EU is not the tariffs- its the non tariff barriers and product definitions. In the examples you give goods must comply with the precise definitions of either EU a messy and very flawed compromise, but literally the only thing that can allow an exit from the EU and/or the single market without a major economic crisis.
So bluntly, Johnson has to do a deal. If he does not then he clearly risks the Troubles part 2- and this time he loses. So Tories: a united Ireland and a divided Great Britain, and an economic slump that will last for years.
If that *is* what you voted for then you are worse than fools.
Actually Counties Antrim and Down both voted Leave so it is the backstop which also risks reviving the Troubles with an Irish sea border leading to a revival of loyalist paramilitaries in republican areas
Loyalist paramilitaries existed to keep the Catholic population down when it was behaving in a manner not exactly the same a a doormat, and keep the Protestant population on top, in the same manner as the KKK in the Southern US. As a result that is not a likely scenario.
No it is a very likely scenario, loyalist paramilitaries existed to keep Protestant areas of Northern Ireland in the UK and preserve their culture and take on the IRA, if they feel Protestant Ulster is under threat again they will return to take up arms again
In other news, Duncan Smith says he also wants the transition period removed from the WA so we can do a trade deal with the USA. Johnson is trapped.
No he isn't as unless the Republicans take back the House of Representatives and the backstop is removed from the Withdrawal Agreement there will be no WA passing the Commons and no US trade deal anyway
So he's going to go ahead with No Deal, or is he hoping to be stopped?
He is going to go ahead with No Deal yes unless the backstop is removed from the Withdrawal Agreement and a technical solution replaces it, which as the Brady amendment showed is the only Brexit solution with a majority in the Commons
How do you know he's not bluffing? He knows the consequencies. I assume he's reassured Amber Rudd et al that No Deal will not actually happen. How can you be so certain of what's in his mind?
I thought the WTO was a toothless tiger? Or does that not apply in this case?
The UK can't take that chance. We are leaving as people keep saying and will thrive under WTO rules. And now we're going to flout those rules.
Plus the UK government is not known for not gold plating any particular regulation.
We have already taken the chance. Back before the March 29th deadline the UK published our tariff schedules in the event there was no deal. We were applying tariffs to the RoW and the EU26. For one country the UK said that for 12 months there would be no tariffs for goods sent to NI, that country was RoI.
I have no idea why remainers seem to think Ireland is their trump card.
"You can't leave the EU, the Irish won't let us" is bound to return a stonking majority for No Deal if that is the reason why an election is called.
People voted to leave because we are sick of being told by foreign countries what we can and cannot do with our own borders.
If our border checks with Ireland consist of two huts and an arthritic eighty year old night watchman with myopia, job done.
That runs two ways. The Irish see the backstop as necessary because they have a far greater history than us of being told what to do by an overseas power. They are not going to abandon it so we have a choice to make. If you think No Deal is no problem then good luck to you.
The Chief Constable of PSNI should stop being so negative and start believing in Britain.
Monday morning quarterbackers should stop being murder-friendly imbeciles and start listening to professional law enforcers.
Simon Byrne will have to deal with the relatives of policemen and women killed through the foly of politicians heeding advice from the Gallowgates of this worlde. Gallowgate merely has to sit on a computer and share his profound ignorance of Northern Ireland.
Come on man, I was being sarcastic.
A little bit of lea way for a new poster that doesn’t understand some of our entrenched positions! Top marks to Topping to put his views on the line wether you agree or not. I haven’t got the linguistic skills and many wouldn’t be interested in ‘letter from the costa’ anyway but maybe some of more prolific posters could take time out and take the same risk as Topping
Actually, a discussion of the British expat/migrant reactions to Brexit may well be of interest. How many will return, and what will their attitudes be? What will those wh stay put do? What do their hosts make of it all?
These officials don't seem to be doing much at the open border between Northern Cyprus and Cyprus in Nicosia, https://www.cyprusholidayadvisor.com/border-crossings.htm This is a border between an EU member and a state that the EU doesn't even recognise.
Thanks for the comprehensive answer. If the issue is movement of people not goods, techno wizardry about paying import duties doesn't really solve it, presumably? I assume Irish citizens will have the right to pass freely over the border in either direction under GFA or whatever but will presumably have to pass through a CTA channel while Latvian plumbers get the full immigration control treatment. Though it sounds as if the border is so rustic that it actually would take Troubles-level manning to stop the Latvians slipping through on a farm track.
The other issue is (for example) dodgy Brazilian beef arriving in Belfast and then waltzing into the single market. Ireland really really wants to be tied to Europe because, bluntly, it is a counterweight to ourselves, for the last 1000 just about their only aggressor. We have to face that reality. They are not going to leave the single market for that reason and, as a result, they are not going to abandon the backstop becasue it protects their membership of it. And that is a matter of overriding political principle as much as "sovereignty" is to the Brexiteers, if not more. They want to be in the EU's orbit, not ours, and given the history you cannot blame them.
On my understanding neither the UK nor Ireland would be allowed under WTO rules to prevent the transit of that beef through their own territory into the other territory. It's up to each territory to protect their own borders. An exception is made for customs unions, which are treated as a single territory.
So that'd be the Gardai responsibility to prevent the dodgy beef arriving in Dublin in your example ?
Correct. Which is why the rest of the EU will not allow Ireland to remain in the Single Market on the same terms without securing its border. This doesn't mean the rEU will force a hard border. It means it is highly motivated to get the backstop into any agreement it makes with the UK.
Polls indicate a majority would support unification over the return of a hard border, so arguably the moment No Deal becomes government policy it should trigger a border poll.
On no grounds whatsoever, every poll shows a majority of Unionists back a hard border over reunification and the pre suspension First Minister of Northern Ireland and leader of the largest party in Northern Ireland at Westminster is a Unionist
The Good Friday Agreement does not require a majority of unionists to support unification.
The Good Friday Agreement is basically dead anyway if both Unionists and Nationalists no longer agree to it, it only worked when the DUP and Sinn Fein shared power at Stormont which is no longer the case, the DUP were never great fans of it anyway and Boris as PM would of course then ignore it if the DUP rip it up
Thanks for the comprehensive answer. If the issue is movement of people not goods, techno wizardry about paying import duties doesn't really solve it, presumably? I assume Irish citizens will have the right to pass freely over the border in either direction under GFA or whatever but will presumably have to pass through a CTA channel while Latvian plumbers get the full immigration control treatment. Though it sounds as if the border is so rustic that it actually would take Troubles-level manning to stop the Latvians slipping through on a farm track.
The other issue is (for example) dodgy Brazilian beef arriving in Belfast and then waltzing into the single market. Ireland really really wants to be tied to Europe because, bluntly, it is a counterweight to ourselves, for the last 1000 just about their only aggressor. We have to face that reality. They are not going to leave the single market for that reason and, as a result, they are not going to abandon the backstop becasue it protects their membership of it. And that is a matter of overriding political principle as much as "sovereignty" is to the Brexiteers, if not more. They want to be in the EU's orbit, not ours, and given the history you cannot blame them.
On my understanding neither the UK nor Ireland would be allowed under WTO rules to prevent the transit of that beef through their own territory into the other territory. It's up to each territory to protect their own borders. An exception is made for customs unions, which are treated as a single territory.
That is a myth.
Countries choose to protect their own borders but there is no obligation to do so.
If we decide it is better to have an open border and impose the same laws via different means then that is our choice, so long as we impose the same laws how we do that is up to us.
Implement a trusted trader scheme off our own bat.
It’s up to the EU what the RoI does
Again, no it's not. If we have an open border for EU widgets we would need to have an open border for, say, US widgets. So either we have no tariffs for anything or we have a border
Implement a trusted trader scheme off our own bat.
It’s up to the EU what the RoI does
Again, no it's not. If we have an open border for EU widgets we would need to have an open border for, say, US widgets. So either we have no tariffs for anything or we have a border
The problem with leaving the EU is not the tariffs- its the non tariff barriers and product definitions. In the examples you give goods must comply with the precise definitions of either EU a messy and very flawed compromise, but literally the only thing that can allow an exit from the EU and/or the single market without a major economic crisis.
So bluntly, Johnson has to do a deal. If he does not then he clearly risks the Troubles part 2- and this time he loses. So Tories: a united Ireland and a divided Great Britain, and an economic slump that will last for years.
If that *is* what you voted for then you are worse than fools.
Actually Counties Antrim and Down both voted Leave so it is the backstop which also risks reviving the Troubles with an Irish sea border leading to a revival of loyalist paramilitaries in republican areas
Loyalist paramilitaries existed to keep the Catholic population down when it was behaving in a manner not exactly the same a a doormat, and keep the Protestant population on top, in the same manner as the KKK in the Southern US. As a result that is not a likely scenario.
No it is a very likely scenario, loyalist paramilitaries existed to keep Protestant areas of Northern Ireland in the UK and preserve their culture and take on the IRA, if they feel Protestant Ulster is under threat again they will return to take up arms again
No - loyalist paramilitaries existed to preserve the Protestant ascendancy in NI over the Catholic population and prevent their obtaining civil rights.
I have no idea why remainers seem to think Ireland is their trump card.
"You can't leave the EU, the Irish won't let us" is bound to return a stonking majority for No Deal if that is the reason why an election is called.
People voted to leave because we are sick of being told by foreign countries what we can and cannot do with our own borders.
If our border checks with Ireland consist of two huts and an arthritic eighty year old night watchman with myopia, job done.
That runs two ways. The Irish see the backstop as necessary because they have a far greater history than us of being told what to do by an overseas power. They are not going to abandon it so we have a choice to make. If you think No Deal is no problem then good luck to you.
The Irish want the backstop to protect their trade with the UK, the bulk of which is with the Eng,Wales, Scotland. They see the way to protect this as the UK staying in the CU and SM. It is as simple as that.
And wasn't there various roads which passed from one country to another and then back again ?
It was hard and those 40,000 troops spent a lot of time in woods and streams trying to ensure its integrity.
I think you mean security personnel.
And wasn't it more like 30,000 during the 1980s and 1990s ?
How many were keeping order in the Belfast ghettoes and the likes of Coalisland ?
Are we going to discuss the deployments? Very happy to. 30,000 is still more than HMF can provide.
Of the 30,000 only approximately 10,000 came from Britain as you well know.
Not that its really relevant as the chance of a hard border is minimal and even if there was there's not going to be thousands of military personnel sent from Britain to uphold it.
I have no idea why remainers seem to think Ireland is their trump card.
"You can't leave the EU, the Irish won't let us" is bound to return a stonking majority for No Deal if that is the reason why an election is called.
People voted to leave because we are sick of being told by foreign countries what we can and cannot do with our own borders.
If our border checks with Ireland consist of two huts and an arthritic eighty year old night watchman with myopia, job done.
That runs two ways. The Irish see the backstop as necessary because they have a far greater history than us of being told what to do by an overseas power. They are not going to abandon it so we have a choice to make. If you think No Deal is no problem then good luck to you.
That's fine, the Irish feel quite rightly they don't want to be told what to do by us. Well the feeling is mutual, we don't want to be told what to do by the EU.
Why should our freedom be subordinate to Ireland's? Why shouldn't we be equally free?
Polls indicate a majority would support unification over the return of a hard border, so arguably the moment No Deal becomes government policy it should trigger a border poll.
On no grounds whatsoever, every poll shows a majority of Unionists back even a hard border over reunification and the pre suspension First Minister of Northern Ireland and leader of the largest party in Northern Ireland at Westminster is a Unionist.
In any case Boris has made clear there will be no hard border even with No Deal
People in Ireland don't trust the UK Government, especially Boris "why doesn't he have a name like Murphy" Johnson, which is why the backstop is so politically important. There's a lot of history behind that mistrust that the last 20 years of relatively good relations will not overcome
Nationalists never trust any British government, so what, I would happily give Catholic Nationalist counties of Northern Ireland back to the Republic and just keep the Protestant Unionist bits
The Irish will have to put up a border and it will be entirely our fault. There is no washing our hands of blame here, no matter what the childish Brexiteerrs, who refuse to take responsibility for anything, might think.
I have no idea why remainers seem to think Ireland is their trump card.
"You can't leave the EU, the Irish won't let us" is bound to return a stonking majority for No Deal if that is the reason why an election is called.
People voted to leave because we are sick of being told by foreign countries what we can and cannot do with our own borders.
If our border checks with Ireland consist of two huts and an arthritic eighty year old night watchman with myopia, job done.
That runs two ways. The Irish see the backstop as necessary because they have a far greater history than us of being told what to do by an overseas power. They are not going to abandon it so we have a choice to make. If you think No Deal is no problem then good luck to you.
The Irish want the backstop to protect their trade with the UK, the bulk of which is with the Eng,Wales, Scotland. They see the way to protect this as the UK staying in the CU and SM. It is as simple as that.
No. Quite the opposite in fact. Only 11% of Irish exports go to the UK and that proportion is declining. They want to protect their potion in the single market and decrease their reliance on the UK for historical strategic reasons. They don't want to be sucked in to being our satellite again. Better to be tied to an EU that has treated them far better, even taking into account the financial crisis.
In other news, Duncan Smith says he also wants the transition period removed from the WA so we can do a trade deal with the USA. Johnson is trapped.
No he isn't as unless the Republicans take back the House of Representatives and the backstop is removed from the Withdrawal Agreement there will be no WA passing the Commons and no US trade deal anyway
So he's going to go ahead with No Deal, or is he hoping to be stopped?
He is going to go ahead with No Deal yes unless the backstop is removed from the Withdrawal Agreement and a technical solution replaces it, which as the Brady amendment showed is the only Brexit solution with a majority in the Commons
How do you know he's not bluffing? He knows the consequencies. I assume he's reassured Amber Rudd et al that No Deal will not actually happen. How can you be so certain of what's in his mind?
As he knows that if he does not deliver Brexit by the next general election with No Deal if necessary the Tories are toast as is he and the Brexit Party will replace them as the main party of the right in GB
Thanks for the comprehensive answer. If the issue is movement of people not goods, techno wizardry about paying import duties doesn't really solve it, presumably? I assume Irish citizens will have the right to pass freely over the border in either direction under GFA or whatever but will presumably have to pass through a CTA channel while Latvian plumbers get the full immigration control treatment. Though it sounds as if the border is so rustic that it actually would take Troubles-level manning to stop the Latvians slipping through on a farm track.
The other issue is (for example) dodgy Brazilian beef arriving in Belfast and then waltzing into the single market. Ireland really really wants to be tied to Europe because, bluntly, it is a counterweight to ourselves, for the last 1000 just about their only aggressor. We have to face that reality. They are not going to leave the single market for that reason and, as a result, they are not going to abandon the backstop becasue it protects their membership of it. And that is a matter of overriding political principle as much as "sovereignty" is to the Brexiteers, if not more. They want to be in the EU's orbit, not ours, and given the history you cannot blame them.
On my understanding neither the UK nor Ireland would be allowed under WTO rules to prevent the transit of that beef through their own territory into the other territory. It's up to each territory to protect their own borders. An exception is made for customs unions, which are treated as a single territory.
That is a myth.
Countries choose to protect their own borders but there is no obligation to do so.
If we decide it is better to have an open border and impose the same laws via different means then that is our choice, so long as we impose the same laws how we do that is up to us.
I clarify what I said. If a company in Brazil wants to import beef into the UK through Ireland, on my understanding, Ireland is not allowed under WTO rules to prevent the transit of that beef. It is allowed to stop beef being imported into Ireland if so permitted by its own MFN rules.
The Irish will have to put up a border and it will be entirely our fault. There is no washing our hands of blame here, no matter what the childish Brexiteerrs, who refuse to take responsibility for anything, might think.
No, it takes two to tango.
They could have ensured the EU gave Cameron a better deal so we voted to remain. They could have ensured the EU gave May a better deal so Parliament voted to accept it. They have the chance right now to give Boris a better deal so Parliament can accept it.
Three strikes and we're out. If its without a deal so be it, but that's their choice as much as ours.
The Irish will have to put up a border and it will be entirely our fault. There is no washing our hands of blame here, no matter what the childish Brexiteerrs, who refuse to take responsibility for anything, might think.
We will not put up a border, if the Republic does then Boris wins the PR war with Varadkar
The Irish will have to put up a border and it will be entirely our fault. There is no washing our hands of blame here, no matter what the childish Brexiteerrs, who refuse to take responsibility for anything, might think.
No, it takes two to tango.
They could have ensured the EU gave Cameron a better deal so we voted to remain. They could have ensured the EU gave May a better deal so Parliament voted to accept it. They have the chance right now to give Boris a better deal so Parliament can accept it.
Three strikes and we're out. If its without a deal so be it, but that's their choice as much as ours.
Thanks for the comprehensive answer. If the issue is movement of people not goods, techno wizardry about paying import duties doesn't really solve it, presumably? I assume Irish citizens will have the right to pass freely over the border in either direction under GFA or whatever but will presumably have to pass through a CTA channel while Latvian plumbers get the full immigration control treatment. Though it sounds as if the border is so rustic that it actually would take Troubles-level manning to stop the Latvians slipping through on a farm track.
The other issue is (for example) dodgy Brazilian beef arriving in Belfast and then waltzing into the single market. Ireland really really wants to be tied to Europe because, bluntly, it is a counterweight to ourselves, for the last 1000 just about their only aggressor. We have to face that reality. They are not going to leave the single market for that reason and, as a result, they are not going to abandon the backstop becasue it protects their membership of it. And that is a matter of overriding political principle as much as "sovereignty" is to the Brexiteers, if not more. They want to be in the EU's orbit, not ours, and given the history you cannot blame them.
On my understanding neither the UK nor Ireland would be allowed under WTO rules to prevent the transit of that beef through their own territory into the other territory. It's up to each territory to protect their own borders. An exception is made for customs unions, which are treated as a single territory.
That is a myth.
Countries choose to protect their own borders but there is no obligation to do so.
If we decide it is better to have an open border and impose the same laws via different means then that is our choice, so long as we impose the same laws how we do that is up to us.
I clarify what I said. If a company in Brazil wants to import beef into the UK through Ireland, on my understanding, Ireland is not allowed under WTO rules to prevent the transit of that beef. It is allowed to stop beef being imported into Ireland if so permitted by its own MFN rules.
And wasn't there various roads which passed from one country to another and then back again ?
It was hard and those 40,000 troops spent a lot of time in woods and streams trying to ensure its integrity.
I think you mean security personnel.
And wasn't it more like 30,000 during the 1980s and 1990s ?
How many were keeping order in the Belfast ghettoes and the likes of Coalisland ?
Are we going to discuss the deployments? Very happy to. 30,000 is still more than HMF can provide.
Of the 30,000 only approximately 10,000 came from Britain as you well know.
Not that its really relevant as the chance of a hard border is minimal and even if there was there's not going to be thousands of military personnel sent from Britain to uphold it.
That was the point of my piece. We couldn't replicate it but would have to replicate it. 10,000? And the UDR? Where is that coming from?
The Irish will have to put up a border and it will be entirely our fault. There is no washing our hands of blame here, no matter what the childish Brexiteerrs, who refuse to take responsibility for anything, might think.
No, it takes two to tango.
They could have ensured the EU gave Cameron a better deal so we voted to remain. They could have ensured the EU gave May a better deal so Parliament voted to accept it. They have the chance right now to give Boris a better deal so Parliament can accept it.
Three strikes and we're out. If its without a deal so be it, but that's their choice as much as ours.
Proves my point.
No, mine.
You falsely claimed it will be "entirely our fault". Everyone needs to take responsibility, no one nation is responsible. If there is a failure to reach accord it is a failure of all parties to reach the accord not one.
Implement a trusted trader scheme off our own bat.
It’s up to the EU what the RoI does
Again, no it's not. If we have an open border for EU widgets we would need to have an open border for, say, US widgets. So either we have no tariffs for anything or we have a border
Implement a trusted trader scheme off our own bat.
It’s up to the EU what the RoI does
Again, no it's not. If we have an open border for EU widgets we would need to have an open border for, say, US widgets. So either we have no tariffs for anything or we have a border
The problem with leaving the EU is not the tariffs- its the non tariff barriers and product definitions. In the examples you give goods must comply with the precise definitions of either EU a messy and very flawed compromise, but literally the only thing that can allow an exit from the EU and/or the single market without a major economic crisis.
So bluntly, Johnson has to do a deal. If he does not then he clearly risks the Troubles part 2- and this time he loses. So Tories: a united Ireland and a divided Great Britain, and an economic slump that will last for years.
If that *is* what you voted for then you are worse than fools.
Actually Counties Antrim and Down both voted Leave so it is the backstop which also risks reviving the Troubles with an Irish sea border leading to a revival of loyalist paramilitaries in republican areas
Loyalist paramilitaries existed to keep the Catholic population down when it was behaving in a manner not exactly the same a a doormat, and keep the Protestant population on top, in the same manner as the KKK in the Southern US. As a result that is not a likely scenario.
No it is a very likely scenario, loyalist paramilitaries existed to keep Protestant areas of Northern Ireland in the UK and preserve their culture and take on the IRA, if they feel Protestant Ulster is under threat again they will return to take up arms again
No - loyalist paramilitaries existed to preserve the Protestant ascendancy in NI over the Catholic population and prevent their obtaining civil rights.
They existed as a response to the IRA but whatever the reasons for their existence if Protestant Ulster is threatened loyalist paramilitaries will arise again to defend their communities!
I have no idea why remainers seem to think Ireland is their trump card.
"You can't leave the EU, the Irish won't let us" is bound to return a stonking majority for No Deal if that is the reason why an election is called.
People voted to leave because we are sick of being told by foreign countries what we can and cannot do with our own borders.
If our border checks with Ireland consist of two huts and an arthritic eighty year old night watchman with myopia, job done.
That runs two ways. The Irish see the backstop as necessary because they have a far greater history than us of being told what to do by an overseas power. They are not going to abandon it so we have a choice to make. If you think No Deal is no problem then good luck to you.
That's fine, the Irish feel quite rightly they don't want to be told what to do by us. Well the feeling is mutual, we don't want to be told what to do by the EU.
Why should our freedom be subordinate to Ireland's? Why shouldn't we be equally free?
I have no idea why remainers seem to think Ireland is their trump card.
"You can't leave the EU, the Irish won't let us" is bound to return a stonking majority for No Deal if that is the reason why an election is called.
People voted to leave because we are sick of being told by foreign countries what we can and cannot do with our own borders.
If our border checks with Ireland consist of two huts and an arthritic eighty year old night watchman with myopia, job done.
That runs two ways. The Irish see the backstop as necessary because they have a far greater history than us of being told what to do by an overseas power. They are not going to abandon it so we have a choice to make. If you think No Deal is no problem then good luck to you.
That's fine, the Irish feel quite rightly they don't want to be told what to do by us. Well the feeling is mutual, we don't want to be told what to do by the EU.
Why should our freedom be subordinate to Ireland's? Why shouldn't we be equally free?
Because we (or more specifically you) don't know what being unfree really means - we have never been occupied by a foreign army. They have - indeed many of them consider we still occupy part of their country. We have always had freedom - they have not. But I know from experience that you don't accept our country's many crimes in Ireland and equate them to our membership of the EU. Which is either bizarre or offensive - I can't decide which.
The Irish will have to put up a border and it will be entirely our fault. There is no washing our hands of blame here, no matter what the childish Brexiteerrs, who refuse to take responsibility for anything, might think.
We will not put up a border, if the Republic does then Boris wins the PR war with Varadkar
What PR war?
We had a good relationship with Ireland and a great compromise and we decided to throw it all away for no benefit.
I have no idea why remainers seem to think Ireland is their trump card.
"You can't leave the EU, the Irish won't let us" is bound to return a stonking majority for No Deal if that is the reason why an election is called.
People voted to leave because we are sick of being told by foreign countries what we can and cannot do with our own borders.
If our border checks with Ireland consist of two huts and an arthritic eighty year old night watchman with myopia, job done.
That runs two ways. The Irish see the backstop as necessary because they have a far greater history than us of being told what to do by an overseas power. They are not going to abandon it so we have a choice to make. If you think No Deal is no problem then good luck to you.
That's fine, the Irish feel quite rightly they don't want to be told what to do by us. Well the feeling is mutual, we don't want to be told what to do by the EU.
Why should our freedom be subordinate to Ireland's? Why shouldn't we be equally free?
Because we (or more specifically you) don't know what being unfree really means - we have never been occupied by a foreign army. They have - indeed many of them consider we still occupy part of their country. We have always had freedom - they have not. But I know from experience that you don't accept our country's many crimes in Ireland and equate them to our membership of the EU. Which is either bizarre or offensive - I can't decide which.
So because we have been free it is OK for us not be free in the future? I don't think so.
I accept crimes have occured and I accept crimes will occur in the future. I am talking about what is lawful not what is criminal.
The Irish will have to put up a border and it will be entirely our fault. There is no washing our hands of blame here, no matter what the childish Brexiteerrs, who refuse to take responsibility for anything, might think.
No, it takes two to tango.
They could have ensured the EU gave Cameron a better deal so we voted to remain. They could have ensured the EU gave May a better deal so Parliament voted to accept it. They have the chance right now to give Boris a better deal so Parliament can accept it.
Three strikes and we're out. If its without a deal so be it, but that's their choice as much as ours.
“They could have appeased us a lot, but they appeased us a little.”
Appeasement doesn’t work. We’ll have to face the consequences of our own decisions.
As someone who lives three miles from the border the level of ignorance and scaremongering over the issue is breathtaking. The threat of a hard border is nonsense since with nearly 300 crossings it would be unenforceable even if the will was there from either side. Dublin's position is a bluff to keep the UK in the customs union or better still in the EU altogether, and May fell for it.
Has Nancy Pelosi actually read the GFA? It says nothing about customs or border arrangements, and the Supreme Court has already ruled that Brexit does not violate it.
Invoking the threat of violence is also pretty low and dishonest. Cancelling Brexit tomorrow won't make a blind bit of difference to dissident republicans who will continue to try and kill police officers regardless as they have always done.
Thanks for the comprehensive answer. If the issue is movement of people not goods, techno wizardry about paying import duties doesn't really solve it, presumably? I assume Irish citizens will have the right to pass freely over the border in either direction under GFA or whatever but will presumably have to pass through a CTA channel while Latvian plumbers get the full immigration control treatment. Though it sounds as if the border is so rustic that it actually would take Troubles-level manning to stop the Latvians slipping through on a farm track.
The other issue is (for example) dodgy Brazilian beef arriving in Belfast and then waltzing into the single market. Ireland really really wants to be tied to Europe because, bluntly, it is a counterweight to ourselves, for the last 1000 just about their only aggressor. We have to face that reality. They are not going to leave the single market for that reason and, as a result, they are not going to abandon the backstop becasue it protects their membership of it. And that is a matter of overriding political principle as much as "sovereignty" is to the Brexiteers, if not more. They want to be in the EU's orbit, not ours, and given the history you cannot blame them.
On my understanding neither the UK nor Ireland would be allowed under WTO rules to prevent the transit of that beef through their own territory into the other territory. It's up to each territory to protect their own borders. An exception is made for customs unions, which are treated as a single territory.
That is a myth.
Countries choose to protect their own borders but there is no obligation to do so.
If we decide it is better to have an open border and impose the same laws via different means then that is our choice, so long as we impose the same laws how we do that is up to us.
I clarify what I said. If a company in Brazil wants to import beef into the UK through Ireland, on my understanding, Ireland is not allowed under WTO rules to prevent the transit of that beef. It is allowed to stop beef being imported into Ireland if so permitted by its own MFN rules.
AFAIK that is correct. How is it relevant?
It's relevant because it means goods passing across an unprotected Irish border don't necessarily meet EU standards.
What is irrelevant is this whole discussion of the UK claiming not to put up a controlled border. This was contradicted by the civil servants working on No Deal planning.
Polls indicate a majority would support unification over the return of a hard border, so arguably the moment No Deal becomes government policy it should trigger a border poll.
On no grounds whatsoever, every poll shows a majority of Unionists back even a hard border over reunification and the pre suspension First Minister of Northern Ireland and leader of the largest party in Northern Ireland at Westminster is a Unionist.
In any case Boris has made clear there will be no hard border even with No Deal
People in Ireland don't trust the UK Government, especially Boris "why doesn't he have a name like Murphy" Johnson, which is why the backstop is so politically important. There's a lot of history behind that mistrust that the last 20 years of relatively good relations will not overcome
Nationalists never trust any British government, so what, I would happily give Catholic Nationalist counties of Northern Ireland back to the Republic and just keep the Protestant Unionist bits
Scotland is as Remain as Antrim and Down are Unionist. But I have seen you yourself say in this forum that Scotland voted as part of the UK. Antrim and Down are (in my view) an integral part of Ireland, Gerrymandered partition is illegitimate.
The Irish will have to put up a border and it will be entirely our fault. There is no washing our hands of blame here, no matter what the childish Brexiteerrs, who refuse to take responsibility for anything, might think.
We will not put up a border, if the Republic does then Boris wins the PR war with Varadkar
What PR war?
We had a good relationship with Ireland and a great compromise and we decided to throw it all away for no benefit.
Our fault. Our responsibility.
Symptom of delusions of grandeur.
Our choice to leave the EU. That's our right as they agreed when they ratified the Lisbon Treaty after the GFA. If the Irish instead of the British had chosen to exercise Article 50 would it have been appropriate or inappropriate for the British to choose to prevent Ireland from being able to exercise its sovereign right to leave? Would it have been appropriate or inappropriate for the British to insist the Irish could only leave by adopting in the future British (EU) laws without a say in them?
It is their choice to demand the backstop and if they don't compromise now their choice for that too. It takes two to tango. If both sides compromise we can reach a deal, if they don't then that is a failure of both parties.
The Irish will have to put up a border and it will be entirely our fault. There is no washing our hands of blame here, no matter what the childish Brexiteerrs, who refuse to take responsibility for anything, might think.
We will not put up a border, if the Republic does then Boris wins the PR war with Varadkar
What PR war?
We had a good relationship with Ireland and a great compromise and we decided to throw it all away for no benefit.
Our fault. Our responsibility.
Symptom of delusions of grandeur.
Correction, we had a good relationship with the Republic before Varadkar decided to refuse any compromise with the UK on a technical solution due to the threat of Sinn Fein in the Dail and insisted on an Irish sea border.
As someone who lives three miles from the border the level of ignorance and scaremongering over the issue is breathtaking. The threat of a hard border is nonsense since with nearly 300 crossings it would be unenforceable even if the will was there from either side. Dublin's position is a bluff to keep the UK in the customs union or better still in the EU altogether, and May fell for it.
It was the UK that requested a UK-wide customs backstop. The practical difficulty of enforcing normal border checks is one reason why the backstop is needed for Northern Ireland, not an argument against it.
And wasn't there various roads which passed from one country to another and then back again ?
It was hard and those 40,000 troops spent a lot of time in woods and streams trying to ensure its integrity.
I think you mean security personnel.
And wasn't it more like 30,000 during the 1980s and 1990s ?
How many were keeping order in the Belfast ghettoes and the likes of Coalisland ?
Are we going to discuss the deployments? Very happy to. 30,000 is still more than HMF can provide.
Of the 30,000 only approximately 10,000 came from Britain as you well know.
Not that its really relevant as the chance of a hard border is minimal and even if there was there's not going to be thousands of military personnel sent from Britain to uphold it.
That was the point of my piece. We couldn't replicate it but would have to replicate it. 10,000? And the UDR? Where is that coming from?
Wouldn't a new UDR come from the same place as the original UDR ie Northern Ireland ?
You would be better asking "where's the money coming from"
I suspect Northern Ireland would be very quickly told to sort out its own mess one way or another.
As someone who lives three miles from the border the level of ignorance and scaremongering over the issue is breathtaking. The threat of a hard border is nonsense since with nearly 300 crossings it would be unenforceable even if the will was there from either side. Dublin's position is a bluff to keep the UK in the customs union or better still in the EU altogether, and May fell for it.
It was the UK that requested a UK-wide customs backstop. The practical difficulty of enforcing normal border checks is one reason why the backstop is needed for Northern Ireland, not an argument against it.
May stupidly did that because she had stupidly agreed to the NI backstop.
Parliament thankfully stopped her and now she is gone.
The Irish will have to put up a border and it will be entirely our fault. There is no washing our hands of blame here, no matter what the childish Brexiteerrs, who refuse to take responsibility for anything, might think.
We will not put up a border, if the Republic does then Boris wins the PR war with Varadkar
What PR war?
We had a good relationship with Ireland and a great compromise and we decided to throw it all away for no benefit.
Our fault. Our responsibility.
Symptom of delusions of grandeur.
Correction, we had a good relationship with the Republic before Varadkar decided to refuse any compromise with the UK on a technical solution due to the threat of Sinn Fein in the Dail and insisted on an Irish sea border.
Varadkar's fault, Varadkar's responsibility
You might not have noticed but to some EU lovers everything is the fault of the UK or Brexit.
The Irish will have to put up a border and it will be entirely our fault. There is no washing our hands of blame here, no matter what the childish Brexiteerrs, who refuse to take responsibility for anything, might think.
We will not put up a border, if the Republic does then Boris wins the PR war with Varadkar
What PR war?
We had a good relationship with Ireland and a great compromise and we decided to throw it all away for no benefit.
Our fault. Our responsibility.
Symptom of delusions of grandeur.
Correction, we had a good relationship with the Republic before Varadkar decided to refuse any compromise with the UK on a technical solution due to the threat of Sinn Fein in the Dail and insisted on an Irish sea border.
Varadkar's fault, Varadkar's responsibility
So you mean like the Tories refused a softer Brexit due to the threat of the Brexit Party? In fact this whole charade is because the Tories were afraid of UKIP.
Polls indicate a majority would support unification over the return of a hard border, so arguably the moment No Deal becomes government policy it should trigger a border poll.
On no grounds whatsoever, every poll shows a majority of Unionists back even a hard border over reunification and the pre suspension First Minister of Northern Ireland and leader of the largest party in Northern Ireland at Westminster is a Unionist.
In any case Boris has made clear there will be no hard border even with No Deal
People in Ireland don't trust the UK Government, especially Boris "why doesn't he have a name like Murphy" Johnson, which is why the backstop is so politically important. There's a lot of history behind that mistrust that the last 20 years of relatively good relations will not overcome
Nationalists never trust any British government, so what, I would happily give Catholic Nationalist counties of Northern Ireland back to the Republic and just keep the Protestant Unionist bits
Scotland is as Remain as Antrim and Down are Unionist. But I have seen you yourself say in this forum that Scotland voted as part of the UK. Antrim and Down are (in my view) an integral part of Ireland, Gerrymandered partition is illegitimate.
What has that got to do with anything? Islington and Oxford were more Remain than Scotland and the Brexit Party came second in Scotland in the European Parliament elections.
Antrim is also more Unionist thsn Scotland is Nationalist.
Antrim and Down are integral parts of the UK and always will be despite your anti British, hard left views
The Irish will have to put up a border and it will be entirely our fault. There is no washing our hands of blame here, no matter what the childish Brexiteerrs, who refuse to take responsibility for anything, might think.
We will not put up a border, if the Republic does then Boris wins the PR war with Varadkar
What PR war?
We had a good relationship with Ireland and a great compromise and we decided to throw it all away for no benefit.
Our fault. Our responsibility.
Symptom of delusions of grandeur.
Correction, we had a good relationship with the Republic before Varadkar decided to refuse any compromise with the UK on a technical solution due to the threat of Sinn Fein in the Dail and insisted on an Irish sea border.
Varadkar's fault, Varadkar's responsibility
So you mean like the Tories refused a softer Brexit due to the threat of the Brexit Party? In fact this whole charade is because the Tories were afraid of UKIP.
The lack of self awareness is mind blowing.
Indeed both parties are responsible for their own actions and a compromise is only possible if both parties reach an accord the other can ratify and if they fail that is the responsibility of both parties.
Anyone who thinks one party alone is responsible is an ignorant fool.
The Irish will have to put up a border and it will be entirely our fault. There is no washing our hands of blame here, no matter what the childish Brexiteerrs, who refuse to take responsibility for anything, might think.
We will not put up a border, if the Republic does then Boris wins the PR war with Varadkar
What PR war?
We had a good relationship with Ireland and a great compromise and we decided to throw it all away for no benefit.
Our fault. Our responsibility.
Symptom of delusions of grandeur.
Correction, we had a good relationship with the Republic before Varadkar decided to refuse any compromise with the UK on a technical solution due to the threat of Sinn Fein in the Dail and insisted on an Irish sea border.
Varadkar's fault, Varadkar's responsibility
You might not have noticed but to some EU lovers everything is the fault of the UK or Brexit.
To some Diehard Remainers their loyalty is to Brussels not the UK, we know that
As I commented on this point earlier, the figures pertaining to the British military commitment at the height of the troubles, whilst stark, don't have anything to do with the prospect of reestablishing a border, and conflating the two is alarmist at best.
On a non related point, the standard expected of the new arrangements by remainers varies wildly. Surely the idea behind keeping the border open is so that the people of North and South can visit, live and work freely both sides of the border, and not 'feel' that the border exists. I don't see why the this also has to extend to big business. Business doesn't have personal sensitivities, it just needs things to operate smoothly and efficiently. Someone earlier today said we have to guarantee exactly the same frictionless trade as being within the single market. False moving goalpost.
The Irish will have to put up a border and it will be entirely our fault. There is no washing our hands of blame here, no matter what the childish Brexiteerrs, who refuse to take responsibility for anything, might think.
We will not put up a border, if the Republic does then Boris wins the PR war with Varadkar
What PR war?
We had a good relationship with Ireland and a great compromise and we decided to throw it all away for no benefit.
Our fault. Our responsibility.
Symptom of delusions of grandeur.
Correction, we had a good relationship with the Republic before Varadkar decided to refuse any compromise with the UK on a technical solution due to the threat of Sinn Fein in the Dail and insisted on an Irish sea border.
Varadkar's fault, Varadkar's responsibility
So you mean like the Tories refused a softer Brexit due to the threat of the Brexit Party? In fact this whole charade is because the Tories were afraid of UKIP.
The lack of self awareness is mind blowing.
Indeed both parties are responsible for their own actions and a compromise is only possible if both parties reach an accord the other can ratify and if they fail that is the responsibility of both parties.
Anyone who thinks one party alone is responsible is an ignorant fool.
Not when your idea of a ‘compromise’ is something that cant be given.
As someone who lives three miles from the border the level of ignorance and scaremongering over the issue is breathtaking. The threat of a hard border is nonsense since with nearly 300 crossings it would be unenforceable even if the will was there from either side. Dublin's position is a bluff to keep the UK in the customs union or better still in the EU altogether, and May fell for it.
Has Nancy Pelosi actually read the GFA? It says nothing about customs or border arrangements, and the Supreme Court has already ruled that Brexit does not violate it.
Invoking the threat of violence is also pretty low and dishonest. Cancelling Brexit tomorrow won't make a blind bit of difference to dissident republicans who will continue to try and kill police officers regardless as they have always done.
Was there not a border at one point? I seem to recall PBers posting photos of the border and customs posts.
The Irish will have to put up a border and it will be entirely our fault. There is no washing our hands of blame here, no matter what the childish Brexiteerrs, who refuse to take responsibility for anything, might think.
We will not put up a border, if the Republic does then Boris wins the PR war with Varadkar
What PR war?
We had a good relationship with Ireland and a great compromise and we decided to throw it all away for no benefit.
Our fault. Our responsibility.
Symptom of delusions of grandeur.
Correction, we had a good relationship with the Republic before Varadkar decided to refuse any compromise with the UK on a technical solution due to the threat of Sinn Fein in the Dail and insisted on an Irish sea border.
Varadkar's fault, Varadkar's responsibility
You might not have noticed but to some EU lovers everything is the fault of the UK or Brexit.
To some Diehard Remainers their loyalty is to Brussels not the UK, we know that
Polls indicate a majority would support unification over the return of a hard border, so arguably the moment No Deal becomes government policy it should trigger a border poll.
On no grounds whatsoever, every poll shows a majority of Unionists back even a hard border over reunification and the pre suspension First Minister of Northern Ireland and leader of the largest party in Northern Ireland at Westminster is a Unionist.
In any case Boris has made clear there will be no hard border even with No Deal
People in Ireland don't trust the UK Government, especially Boris "why doesn't he have a name like Murphy" Johnson, which is why the backstop is so politically important. There's a lot of history behind that mistrust that the last 20 years of relatively good relations will not overcome
Nationalists never trust any British government, so what, I would happily give Catholic Nationalist counties of Northern Ireland back to the Republic and just keep the Protestant Unionist bits
Scotland is as Remain as Antrim and Down are Unionist. But I have seen you yourself say in this forum that Scotland voted as part of the UK. Antrim and Down are (in my view) an integral part of Ireland, Gerrymandered partition is illegitimate.
What has that got to do with anything? Islington and Oxford were more Remain than Scotland and the Brexit Party came second in Scotland in the European Parliament elections.
Antrim is also more Unionist thsn Scotland is Nationalist.
Antrim and Down are integral parts of the UK and always will be despite your anti British, hard left views
You are wrong. If NI votes to leave the UK they are gone, just as if the Scottish independence referendum had gone the other way then Scotland would have gone independent. Even if Dumfries and Galloway or the Scottish Borders had voted No they would not be partitioned.
As someone who lives three miles from the border the level of ignorance and scaremongering over the issue is breathtaking. The threat of a hard border is nonsense since with nearly 300 crossings it would be unenforceable even if the will was there from either side. Dublin's position is a bluff to keep the UK in the customs union or better still in the EU altogether, and May fell for it.
Has Nancy Pelosi actually read the GFA? It says nothing about customs or border arrangements, and the Supreme Court has already ruled that Brexit does not violate it.
Invoking the threat of violence is also pretty low and dishonest. Cancelling Brexit tomorrow won't make a blind bit of difference to dissident republicans who will continue to try and kill police officers regardless as they have always done.
Indeed they have. And the unenforceability of the border was my point. Problem is that if the WTO tells us we need to have border checks we will need to have border checks. And yes at all the BCPs. But as you say we can't do that so where does that leave us? Without a hard border. And in order not to have a hard border we will need some other kind of arrangement. A withdrawal agreement perhaps.
I have no idea why remainers seem to think Ireland is their trump card.
"You can't leave the EU, the Irish won't let us" is bound to return a stonking majority for No Deal if that is the reason why an election is called.
People voted to leave because we are sick of being told by foreign countries what we can and cannot do with our own borders.
If our border checks with Ireland consist of two huts and an arthritic eighty year old night watchman with myopia, job done.
That runs two ways. The Irish see the backstop as necessary because they have a far greater history than us of being told what to do by an overseas power. They are not going to abandon it so we have a choice to make. If you think No Deal is no problem then good luck to you.
That's fine, the Irish feel quite rightly they don't want to be told what to do by us. Well the feeling is mutual, we don't want to be told what to do by the EU.
Why should our freedom be subordinate to Ireland's? Why shouldn't we be equally free?
Because we (or more specifically you) don't know what being unfree really means - we have never been occupied by a foreign army. They have - indeed many of them consider we still occupy part of their country. We have always had freedom - they have not. But I know from experience that you don't accept our country's many crimes in Ireland and equate them to our membership of the EU. Which is either bizarre or offensive - I can't decide which.
So because we have been free it is OK for us not be free in the future? I don't think so.
I accept crimes have occured and I accept crimes will occur in the future. I am talking about what is lawful not what is criminal.
The backstop does not make us unfree because, in reality, we can leave it as easily as we like. You don't accept that I know. It's flawed but then humanity is flawed. The EU isn't sending an army over to ensure compliance. If it were you might have a point - as it is we are a nuclear armed country that can walk away from any arrangement with Europe whenever we like however we like. Ireland does not have that luxury.
My Oxford entrance exam, the high point of my academic career given it went rapidly downhill thereafter, was answering the question "What Constitutes a State?". In a nutshell I said a 'state' was any piece of land you could successfully defend from potential aggressors. It got me, wholly undeservedly, into Oxford. But it is true. So long as we can successfully defend ourselves we can walk from the backstop/EU when we like - always could.
And WTF does "I am talking about what is lawful not what is criminal" even mean?
The Irish will have to put up a border and it will be entirely our fault. There is no washing our hands of blame here, no matter what the childish Brexiteerrs, who refuse to take responsibility for anything, might think.
We will not put up a border, if the Republic does then Boris wins the PR war with Varadkar
What PR war?
We had a good relationship with Ireland and a great compromise and we decided to throw it all away for no benefit.
Our fault. Our responsibility.
Symptom of delusions of grandeur.
Correction, we had a good relationship with the Republic before Varadkar decided to refuse any compromise with the UK on a technical solution due to the threat of Sinn Fein in the Dail and insisted on an Irish sea border.
Varadkar's fault, Varadkar's responsibility
You might not have noticed but to some EU lovers everything is the fault of the UK or Brexit.
It's not the fault of the UK. It's a consequence of the UK leaving the EU without accepting regulatory alignment of goods North of the border to those of the EU.
The Irish will have to put up a border and it will be entirely our fault. There is no washing our hands of blame here, no matter what the childish Brexiteerrs, who refuse to take responsibility for anything, might think.
We will not put up a border, if the Republic does then Boris wins the PR war with Varadkar
What PR war?
We had a good relationship with Ireland and a great compromise and we decided to throw it all away for no benefit.
Our fault. Our responsibility.
Symptom of delusions of grandeur.
Correction, we had a good relationship with the Republic before Varadkar decided to refuse any compromise with the UK on a technical solution due to the threat of Sinn Fein in the Dail and insisted on an Irish sea border.
Varadkar's fault, Varadkar's responsibility
You might not have noticed but to some EU lovers everything is the fault of the UK or Brexit.
To some Diehard Remainers their loyalty is to Brussels not the UK, we know that
Implement a trusted trader scheme off our own bat.
It’s up to the EU what the RoI does
Again, no it's not. If we have an open border for EU widgets we would need to have an open border for, say, US widgets. So either we have no tariffs for anything or we have a border
Implement a trusted trader scheme off our own bat.
It’s up to the EU what the RoI does
Again, no it's not. If we have an open border for EU widgets we would need to have an open border for, say, US widgets. So either we have no tariffs for anything or we have a border
The problem with leaving the EU is not the tariffs- its the non tariff barriers and product definitions. In the examples you give goods must comply with the precise definitions of either EU a messy and very flawed compromise, but literally the only thing that can allow an exit from the EU and/or the single market without a major economic crisis.
So bluntly, Johnson has to do a deal. If he does not then he clearly risks the Troubles part 2- and this time he loses. So Tories: a united Ireland and a divided Great Britain, and an economic slump that will last for years.
If that *is* what you voted for then you are worse than fools.
Actually Counties Antrim and Down both voted Leave so it is the backstop which also risks reviving the Troubles with an Irish sea border leading to a revival of loyalist paramilitaries in republican areas
Loyalist paramilitaries existed to keep the Catholic population down when it was behaving in a manner not exactly the same a a doormat, and keep the Protestant population on top, in the same manner as the KKK in the Southern US. As a result that is not a likely scenario.
No it is a very likely scenario, loyalist paramilitaries existed to keep Protestant areas of Northern Ireland in the UK and preserve their culture and take on the IRA, if they feel Protestant Ulster is under threat again they will return to take up arms again
No - loyalist paramilitaries existed to preserve the Protestant ascendancy in NI over the Catholic population and prevent their obtaining civil rights.
They existed as a response to the IRA but whatever the reasons for their existence if Protestant Ulster is threatened loyalist paramilitaries will arise again to defend their communities!
Would you describe 'loyalist paramilitaries' as terrorists?
Comments
We would have to register Irish citizens and companies and, outside the EU and the data protections it offers, not to mention the fact that being put on a UK government database is hardly the most attractive thing to sell an Irish person whose historical trust in it is not great, that isn't going to happen.
It's time to face those facts.
Alcohol and Tobacco duties are greater than customs duties in a lot of instance and it is a high value difference in a concentrated form, something that would be very profitable for smugglers. HMRC already has away from the border methods to detect, prosecute and punish smuggling. It has those processes today and enforces them today. Without any border posts.
And wasn't it more like 30,000 during the 1980s and 1990s ?
How many were keeping order in the Belfast ghettoes and the likes of Coalisland ?
Without mitigation (FTA) the RoI/NI border must look exactly the same as the Finnland/Russia border.
If the UK were to not install any border there of its own, the WTO MFN rules would in turn restrict the UK from performing any kind of border control at any other of its borders, e.g. ports, airports.
WTO MFN rules require WTO members to apply the exact same border controls at any of their borders, to imports from any country.
They explicitly prohibit any divergence of border regimes.
Take the onus away from the border and put it on companies.
For comparison the Canadian CETA took 7 years to sort out and is still not full ratified. The critical problem for the UK is that the Hard Brexiteers will not accept ECJ disputes resolution procedures and setting up bespoke systems cannot be done quickly, so Canada+ or Norway- are equally unattainable. May's deal was a messy and very flawed compromise, but literally the only thing that can allow an exit from the EU and/or the single market without a major economic crisis.
So bluntly, Johnson has to do a deal. If he does not then he clearly risks the Troubles part 2- and this time he loses. So Tories: a united Ireland and a divided Great Britain, and an economic slump that will last for years.
If that *is* what you voted for then you are worse than fools.
Plus the UK government is not known for not gold plating any particular regulation.
Passing the Withdrawal Agreement in any case just opens the way to FTA talks with the EU whether we have a transition period or not
Read some George Orwell. You are making an argument for authoritarianism.
Crime happens, it is a fact of life. I am not an authoritarian who thinks we should abolish civil liberties to ensure there is zero crime, we balance free liberties with the risk of crime occuring. Yes some criminals may get through if we do checks away from the border. That is a price I am willing to pay to avoid terrorism and violence, is it not a price you are willing to pay?
Checks are still done, the WTO MFN rules are satisfied, the GFA is satisfied, there may be some crime but we tackle that not at the border risking the GFA but through the criminal justice system as we already do for smuggling that already exists. What exactly is the problem?
https://twitter.com/thairshaikh/status/1164621779060633603?s=21
In any case Boris has made clear there will be no hard border even with No Deal
"You can't leave the EU, the Irish won't let us" is bound to return a stonking majority for No Deal if that is the reason why an election is called.
People voted to leave because we are sick of being told by foreign countries what we can and cannot do with our own borders.
If our border checks with Ireland consist of two huts and an arthritic eighty year old night watchman with myopia, job done.
I thought you said we were always sovereign?
We can choose to balance the risk/reward for checks how we choose, that is our right as a sovereign nation. The same rules will apply to all countries of origin, including US trade travelling via Ireland.
This must break multiple WTO rules.
https://www.cyprusholidayadvisor.com/border-crossings.htm
This is a border between an EU member and a state that the EU doesn't even recognise.
Countries choose to protect their own borders but there is no obligation to do so.
If we decide it is better to have an open border and impose the same laws via different means then that is our choice, so long as we impose the same laws how we do that is up to us.
Not that its really relevant as the chance of a hard border is minimal and even if there was there's not going to be thousands of military personnel sent from Britain to uphold it.
Why should our freedom be subordinate to Ireland's? Why shouldn't we be equally free?
They could have ensured the EU gave Cameron a better deal so we voted to remain.
They could have ensured the EU gave May a better deal so Parliament voted to accept it.
They have the chance right now to give Boris a better deal so Parliament can accept it.
Three strikes and we're out. If its without a deal so be it, but that's their choice as much as ours.
You falsely claimed it will be "entirely our fault". Everyone needs to take responsibility, no one nation is responsible. If there is a failure to reach accord it is a failure of all parties to reach the accord not one.
We had a good relationship with Ireland and a great compromise and we decided to throw it all away for no benefit.
Our fault. Our responsibility.
Symptom of delusions of grandeur.
I accept crimes have occured and I accept crimes will occur in the future. I am talking about what is lawful not what is criminal.
Appeasement doesn’t work. We’ll have to face the consequences of our own decisions.
Has Nancy Pelosi actually read the GFA? It says nothing about customs or border arrangements, and the Supreme Court has already ruled that Brexit does not violate it.
Invoking the threat of violence is also pretty low and dishonest. Cancelling Brexit tomorrow won't make a blind bit of difference to dissident republicans who will continue to try and kill police officers regardless as they have always done.
What is irrelevant is this whole discussion of the UK claiming not to put up a controlled border. This was contradicted by the civil servants working on No Deal planning.
It is their choice to demand the backstop and if they don't compromise now their choice for that too. It takes two to tango. If both sides compromise we can reach a deal, if they don't then that is a failure of both parties.
Varadkar's fault, Varadkar's responsibility
You would be better asking "where's the money coming from"
I suspect Northern Ireland would be very quickly told to sort out its own mess one way or another.
Just because someone else exercises their own free will doesn't absolve you of responsibility for your own actions.
Parliament thankfully stopped her and now she is gone.
The lack of self awareness is mind blowing.
Antrim is also more Unionist thsn Scotland is Nationalist.
Antrim and Down are integral parts of the UK and always will be despite your anti British, hard left views
Anyone who thinks one party alone is responsible is an ignorant fool.
On a non related point, the standard expected of the new arrangements by remainers varies wildly. Surely the idea behind keeping the border open is so that the people of North and South can visit, live and work freely both sides of the border, and not 'feel' that the border exists. I don't see why the this also has to extend to big business. Business doesn't have personal sensitivities, it just needs things to operate smoothly and efficiently. Someone earlier today said we have to guarantee exactly the same frictionless trade as being within the single market. False moving goalpost.
My Oxford entrance exam, the high point of my academic career given it went rapidly downhill thereafter, was answering the question "What Constitutes a State?". In a nutshell I said a 'state' was any piece of land you could successfully defend from potential aggressors. It got me, wholly undeservedly, into Oxford. But it is true. So long as we can successfully defend ourselves we can walk from the backstop/EU when we like - always could.
And WTF does "I am talking about what is lawful not what is criminal" even mean?