How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 7)
Discussion
Ghibli said:
The trouble is Sway, it's you that it ignorant. At present we trade as an EU country. When we leave we will be trading from outside the EU yet we will have an open border.
What if the EU don't want to risk us exporting non regulated products to them? Why do you think they are suggesting moving the border to the Irish Sea?
Because they want to force NI out of the UK as the price for Brexit?What if the EU don't want to risk us exporting non regulated products to them? Why do you think they are suggesting moving the border to the Irish Sea?
Ghibli said:
Sway said:
I know this, you know this, certain posters after a huge amount of debate on this very topic still don't...
Don't mention POAO additional checks - few of which occur at borders.
Which other countries have an open border with any EU country.Don't mention POAO additional checks - few of which occur at borders.
Ghibli said:
Sway said:
What if the EU don't want to risk us exporting non regulated products to them? Why do you think they are suggesting moving the border to the Irish Sea?
As Sway said if we leave with no deal it's the EU's problem not ours. Our concern is what comes into our country and if we're happy with the EU standards on all goods then we don't need to check, i.e. the same as today.Ghibli said:
To simplify, how much chlorinated chicken do we currently Import? If none why not.
Because the EU is protectionist and doesn't allow them. This has been discussed in great detail previously.Sway said:
Ghibli said:
Sway said:
I know this, you know this, certain posters after a huge amount of debate on this very topic still don't...
Don't mention POAO additional checks - few of which occur at borders.
Which other countries have an open border with any EU country.Don't mention POAO additional checks - few of which occur at borders.
What are you trying to say?
Ghibli said:
Sway said:
Really? We wouldn't be able to import fraudulently labelled meat?
You're completely ignorant on this subject. Exacerbated by you presenting ANPR being the only mechanism of control for Products of Animal Origin.
The trouble is Sway, it's you that it ignorant. At present we trade as an EU country. When we leave we will be trading from outside the EU yet we will have an open border. You're completely ignorant on this subject. Exacerbated by you presenting ANPR being the only mechanism of control for Products of Animal Origin.
What if the EU don't want to risk us exporting non regulated products to them? Why do you think they are suggesting moving the border to the Irish Sea?
To simplify, how much chlorinated chicken do we currently Import? If none why not.
If the EU don't want to risk non-regulated products, they'll control them. In the same way they do now (what, you think meat crosses borders within the EU without documentation and checks?).
They've already said as much.
Very different from an "open border". You're just completely unaware of how the controls work - irrespective of CoO.
Sway said:
Ghibli said:
Digga said:
Customs declarations cross-reference to vehicle registrations. It is very simple. No different to the present methods of tracking shipping containers to and from RoW really.
That's assuming you have what you say you are carrying in the lorry. Of course being an EU member we wouldn't be able to import anything that would breach regulation.You're completely ignorant on this subject. Exacerbated by you presenting ANPR being the only mechanism of control for Products of Animal Origin.
In reality, there are no current borders being managed entirely via the methods you are suggesting Sway. This would be a world-first, many technology and trade experts suggest the capabilities are not here yet and won't be for at least 5 years. Every other border in the world which crosses customs territories has some form of fixed border in place (even Norway/Sweden where there is FMOL have border posts). This does not mean it is not possible for a border of that nature to be WTO compliant, or eventually possible, but you have to acknowledge that doing it immediately on the 29th is impossible, and doing it within a realistic timescale will be possible, but difficult and costly and rely on a good relationship between both parties.
Conversely, the likelihood that there will be extensive movement of chlorinated chicken and US beef, even illegitimately re-branded as Irish or EU products, is essentially zero. Yes the open border will increase the opportunity for smuggling if our regulatory and customs regime starts to divert significantly from the EU, but it will be a pittance compared to the normal trading between us and Ireland. However, the lack of control of the border will certainly cause political pain to all parties.
As always, the truth is somewhere in the middle. I'm hoping the news about softening of the backstop will mean May's deal can finally get through Parliament, and everyone can then start focusing on a proper technological solution for the border which is acceptable to all parties and which can be implemented within the transition period (even if that means we have an extended transition until it is done).
Ghibli said:
Sway said:
Ghibli said:
Sway said:
I know this, you know this, certain posters after a huge amount of debate on this very topic still don't...
Don't mention POAO additional checks - few of which occur at borders.
Which other countries have an open border with any EU country.Don't mention POAO additional checks - few of which occur at borders.
What are you trying to say?
Ghibli said:
Vanden Saab said:
May be you can think how it could be stopped at the moment......
Where can you buy American chlorinated chicken at the moment in the EU?As for the whole Chlorinated Chicken/food safety question, it's a bit of a red herring. It's been done to death on these threads, so let's not go full Groundhog day again shall we?
mattmurdock said:
The problem (as we can see with the various posts about Tony427's actions) is that both sides are highlighting extreme cases as example of why their side is right, which opens both to ridicule. Pro-Remain state any slight obstacle is suddenly life or death, while Pro-Leave state any complicated issue is actually really easy if you just think about it. Project Fear vs. Project Wishful Thinking.
In reality, there are no current borders being managed entirely via the methods you are suggesting Sway. This would be a world-first, many technology and trade experts suggest the capabilities are not here yet and won't be for at least 5 years. Every other border in the world which crosses customs territories has some form of fixed border in place (even Norway/Sweden where there is FMOL have border posts). This does not mean it is not possible for a border of that nature to be WTO compliant, or eventually possible, but you have to acknowledge that doing it immediately on the 29th is impossible, and doing it within a realistic timescale will be possible, but difficult and costly and rely on a good relationship between both parties.
Conversely, the likelihood that there will be extensive movement of chlorinated chicken and US beef, even illegitimately re-branded as Irish or EU products, is essentially zero. Yes the open border will increase the opportunity for smuggling if our regulatory and customs regime starts to divert significantly from the EU, but it will be a pittance compared to the normal trading between us and Ireland. However, the lack of control of the border will certainly cause political pain to all parties.
As always, the truth is somewhere in the middle. I'm hoping the news about softening of the backstop will mean May's deal can finally get through Parliament, and everyone can then start focusing on a proper technological solution for the border which is acceptable to all parties and which can be implemented within the transition period (even if that means we have an extended transition until it is done).
Agreed on most points - one thing I will point out is that your statement on the technology solution not being in entirely in place anywhere isn't true. In reality, there are no current borders being managed entirely via the methods you are suggesting Sway. This would be a world-first, many technology and trade experts suggest the capabilities are not here yet and won't be for at least 5 years. Every other border in the world which crosses customs territories has some form of fixed border in place (even Norway/Sweden where there is FMOL have border posts). This does not mean it is not possible for a border of that nature to be WTO compliant, or eventually possible, but you have to acknowledge that doing it immediately on the 29th is impossible, and doing it within a realistic timescale will be possible, but difficult and costly and rely on a good relationship between both parties.
Conversely, the likelihood that there will be extensive movement of chlorinated chicken and US beef, even illegitimately re-branded as Irish or EU products, is essentially zero. Yes the open border will increase the opportunity for smuggling if our regulatory and customs regime starts to divert significantly from the EU, but it will be a pittance compared to the normal trading between us and Ireland. However, the lack of control of the border will certainly cause political pain to all parties.
As always, the truth is somewhere in the middle. I'm hoping the news about softening of the backstop will mean May's deal can finally get through Parliament, and everyone can then start focusing on a proper technological solution for the border which is acceptable to all parties and which can be implemented within the transition period (even if that means we have an extended transition until it is done).
It's used for every air and sea freight import.
The only "challenge" is getting electronic manifests to link to ANPR. Block chain is given as one potential - which actually gives even greater benefits than efficient border processing. It gives a full auditable trail for the entire supply chain, not just the border crossing detail.
If that's not in place, the principle and lack of friction is still feasible - ANPR controlled routes to inspection points away from the border aren't quite as good, and more costly to maintain. However they do ensure no physical barriers/infrastructure that could be considered onerous. Customs officers "tag" a lorry, give them instruction to travel to x BIP a few miles away, ANPR ensures they go there directly.
Sway said:
We'll let the House determine relative levels of knowledge on this topic chap.
If the EU don't want to risk non-regulated products, they'll control them. In the same way they do now (what, you think meat crosses borders within the EU without documentation and checks?).
They've already said as much.
Very different from an "open border". You're just completely unaware of how the controls work - irrespective of CoO.
Hang on a minute. You have been saying that there isn't a problem at the border now you say the EU will have to control the border if they don't want non-regulated products.If the EU don't want to risk non-regulated products, they'll control them. In the same way they do now (what, you think meat crosses borders within the EU without documentation and checks?).
They've already said as much.
Very different from an "open border". You're just completely unaware of how the controls work - irrespective of CoO.
Have you suddenly realised that there are two parties in the negotiations.
Ghibli said:
Sway said:
We'll let the House determine relative levels of knowledge on this topic chap.
If the EU don't want to risk non-regulated products, they'll control them. In the same way they do now (what, you think meat crosses borders within the EU without documentation and checks?).
They've already said as much.
Very different from an "open border". You're just completely unaware of how the controls work - irrespective of CoO.
Hang on a minute. You have been saying that there isn't a problem at the border now you say the EU will have to control the border if they don't want non-regulated products.If the EU don't want to risk non-regulated products, they'll control them. In the same way they do now (what, you think meat crosses borders within the EU without documentation and checks?).
They've already said as much.
Very different from an "open border". You're just completely unaware of how the controls work - irrespective of CoO.
Have you suddenly realised that there are two parties in the negotiations.
I said, that they will prevent the import of non-compliant regulated goods such as POAO in the same way they do now. There's not a problem now, and no IRA bombings, so why would there be in future when they conduct the same controls for regulated goods as they do today?
Sway said:
Agreed on most points - one thing I will point out is that your statement on the technology solution not being in entirely in place anywhere isn't true.
It's used for every air and sea freight import.
The only "challenge" is getting electronic manifests to link to ANPR. Block chain is given as one potential - which actually gives even greater benefits than efficient border processing. It gives a full auditable trail for the entire supply chain, not just the border crossing detail.
If that's not in place, the principle and lack of friction is still feasible - ANPR controlled routes to inspection points away from the border aren't quite as good, and more costly to maintain. However they do ensure no physical barriers/infrastructure that could be considered onerous. Customs officers "tag" a lorry, give them instruction to travel to x BIP a few miles away, ANPR ensures they go there directly.
If the technology is in place why don't the Goverment work out how long it will take to put it in place on the Irish border and set that as a deadline and work towards it?It's used for every air and sea freight import.
The only "challenge" is getting electronic manifests to link to ANPR. Block chain is given as one potential - which actually gives even greater benefits than efficient border processing. It gives a full auditable trail for the entire supply chain, not just the border crossing detail.
If that's not in place, the principle and lack of friction is still feasible - ANPR controlled routes to inspection points away from the border aren't quite as good, and more costly to maintain. However they do ensure no physical barriers/infrastructure that could be considered onerous. Customs officers "tag" a lorry, give them instruction to travel to x BIP a few miles away, ANPR ensures they go there directly.
Ghibli said:
Sway said:
We'll let the House determine relative levels of knowledge on this topic chap.
If the EU don't want to risk non-regulated products, they'll control them. In the same way they do now (what, you think meat crosses borders within the EU without documentation and checks?).
They've already said as much.
Very different from an "open border". You're just completely unaware of how the controls work - irrespective of CoO.
Hang on a minute. You have been saying that there isn't a problem at the border now you say the EU will have to control the border if they don't want non-regulated products.If the EU don't want to risk non-regulated products, they'll control them. In the same way they do now (what, you think meat crosses borders within the EU without documentation and checks?).
They've already said as much.
Very different from an "open border". You're just completely unaware of how the controls work - irrespective of CoO.
Have you suddenly realised that there are two parties in the negotiations.
Sway said:
Agreed on most points - one thing I will point out is that your statement on the technology solution not being in entirely in place anywhere isn't true.
It's used for every air and sea freight import.
The only "challenge" is getting electronic manifests to link to ANPR. Block chain is given as one potential - which actually gives even greater benefits than efficient border processing. It gives a full auditable trail for the entire supply chain, not just the border crossing detail.
If that's not in place, the principle and lack of friction is still feasible - ANPR controlled routes to inspection points away from the border aren't quite as good, and more costly to maintain. However they do ensure no physical barriers/infrastructure that could be considered onerous. Customs officers "tag" a lorry, give them instruction to travel to x BIP a few miles away, ANPR ensures they go there directly.
Agree - I was simply talking about the land border.It's used for every air and sea freight import.
The only "challenge" is getting electronic manifests to link to ANPR. Block chain is given as one potential - which actually gives even greater benefits than efficient border processing. It gives a full auditable trail for the entire supply chain, not just the border crossing detail.
If that's not in place, the principle and lack of friction is still feasible - ANPR controlled routes to inspection points away from the border aren't quite as good, and more costly to maintain. However they do ensure no physical barriers/infrastructure that could be considered onerous. Customs officers "tag" a lorry, give them instruction to travel to x BIP a few miles away, ANPR ensures they go there directly.
Sway said:
Then you cannot read.
I said, that they will prevent the import of non-compliant regulated goods such as POAO in the same way they do now. There's not a problem now, and no IRA bombings, so why would there be in future when they conduct the same controls for regulated goods as they do today?
I must be missing something. Which country has an open border with the EU apart from turkey who is in the customs union?I said, that they will prevent the import of non-compliant regulated goods such as POAO in the same way they do now. There's not a problem now, and no IRA bombings, so why would there be in future when they conduct the same controls for regulated goods as they do today?
Ghibli said:
Sway said:
Then you cannot read.
I said, that they will prevent the import of non-compliant regulated goods such as POAO in the same way they do now. There's not a problem now, and no IRA bombings, so why would there be in future when they conduct the same controls for regulated goods as they do today?
I must be missing something. Which country has an open border with the EU apart from turkey who is in the customs union?I said, that they will prevent the import of non-compliant regulated goods such as POAO in the same way they do now. There's not a problem now, and no IRA bombings, so why would there be in future when they conduct the same controls for regulated goods as they do today?
Who is suggesting POAO currently pass through an open border within the EU, or that controls would change in a manner noticeable by the regular Irish man on the street near the line on the map?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff