Brexit - was it worth it? (Vol. 2)

[Oilchange]

Agreed, I am hoping that Boris is simply keeping his powder dry because if it were me I'd be much less accommodating.
Starting with excluding hangers on from the G7 conference...

[Vasco]

Vanden Saab said:

Vasco said:

I'm sure I'm not the only one who is struggling to understand what all the fuss is about - sausages apparently........

......

It is about whether NI is part of the UK... The EU seem to think this is not the case and that they have somehow taken it over and are trying to impose their rules on part of the UK. The protocol was always about allowing goods to flow freely between the UK and NI while respecting that there is no border in Ireland so some extra checks might be required.
The EU are now trying to stop certain products from flowing at all which is totally against both the letter and the purpose of the protocol. They seem to think that by doing this the UK will agree to follow all their rules in the whole of the UK forever. By trying to do this they either do not understand the UK mentality or completely stupid or both.
Some EU supporters suggest we agreed to this idea but cannot provide even a scintilla of where it says anything of the sort in the agreement.

Thank you, very helpful. No wonder I wanted to get out of the EU at the earliest opportunity.

[roger.mellie]

Wombat3 said:

I know exactly what I said. Sometimes when faced with a situation like that you do what you have to do because the alternative is worse.

The issue is more about how you end up there in the first place with people who have no respect for a democratic mandate and never had any intention of trying to strike a balanced agreement in the first place (in any area)

Like I said, bunch of s.

The only people bleating about us possibly breaking some aspect of this agreement are all firmly rooted in the remain camp, again, simply because it suits a narrative.

The NIP is a classic example of what is taught on every negotiating skills course ever run: The only deal that is worth doing and will last is a win-wun deal.

The NIP is not that and therefore its no surprise to see it failing. I firmly suspect we knew this would happen, indeed expected it.

What it has achieved is that there has been a fundamental change brought about by agreeing to it which is that we have left the EU.

Having got there then we move on and it's not us that are being shown up as being vindictive & impractical. As Raab said this morning, there would be general outrage if we spoke about Wallonia or Catalonia or Corsica in the terms that people in the EU are referencing NI. What's needed is a modicum of respect for the integrity of our nation.

Edited by Wombat3 on Sunday 13th June 11:54

Sorry, I missed this with how quick the page jumps are going on this thread.

I don’t agree at all.

The NIP is what you get when you’re prepared to offer a sacrificial lamb to get your objectives. An internal UK border, if only that wasn’t predictable.

The single thing that annoys me more than anything about the NIP [that I reluctantly support) is the uk’s willingness to stir tensions and obsolve themselves of blaim due to an uneducated and compliant media.

[Oilchange]

Have to say that the 'border' between NI and GB is a trap the EU were hoping we'd fall into so they could leverage us apart. I think it should not even have been on the table but it seems Boris had to do something for a deal, rightly or wrongly.

[roger.mellie]

Oilchange said:

Have to say that the 'border' between NI and GB is a trap the EU were hoping we'd fall into so they could leverage us apart. I think it should not even have been on the table but it seems Boris had to do something for a deal, rightly or wrongly.

Hoping? Boris stuck his size 10 straight in and is now trying to blame the eu for the st on his shoe

Rightly or wrongly you don’t get to set the terms to the exclusion of the issues involved.

[Oilchange]

Hi Rog.

[sunbeam alpine]

Earthdweller said:

This is a bad and bitter divorce

It strikes me that one party approached it with a “let’s be fair” and the other with “fk you, how dare you leave me” approach

It seems to me that the only sensible thing to do now is to sever all ties and for both parties to go their separate ways

Continually sitting in front of the divorce lawyers with he said/she said .. yes you did/no I didn’t on an endless loop is pointless

Most countries in the world can trade quite happily on WTO and not bother about what country X is doing internally

It surely must be getting to the point of the U.K. saying fk it we’re better off having naff all to do with you

Today it’s sausages .. next week it will be lifesaving medicines the NHS can use everywhere in the country except NI

I could be wrong, but I don't see how this will help the NI question in any way. It will just make all other aspects of UK-EU trade much worse.

[Oilchange]

Which is why I think Boris is keeping his powder dry

[Condi]

Vanden Saab said:

It is about whether NI is part of the UK... The EU seem to think this is not the case and that they have somehow taken it over and are trying to impose their rules on part of the UK. The protocol was always about allowing goods to flow freely between the UK and NI while respecting that there is no border in Ireland so some extra checks might be required.
The EU are now trying to stop certain products from flowing at all which is totally against both the letter and the purpose of the protocol. They seem to think that by doing this the UK will agree to follow all their rules in the whole of the UK forever. By trying to do this they either do not understand the UK mentality or completely stupid or both.
Some EU supporters suggest we agreed to this idea but cannot provide even a scintilla of where it says anything of the sort in the agreement.

It's not at all.

The sovereignty of NI has never been questioned, but in order to avoid a economic border between NI and Eire Boris agreed that NI would remain part of the EU trade area, so goods could flow easily around all of Ireland, but would be restricted between NI and GB. It was accepted that a border across Ireland, with the return of checkpoints and controls would cause problems for the Good Friday agreement, and so the priority was to avoid this at all costs.

The DUP objected to the arrangement at the time as the consequences we are now seeing were obvious, but Boris didn't need the DUP in the same way Theresa May did and so those objections were not listened to.

The "extra checks" you so easily dismiss were checks to ensure that products didn't get into the EU via a back-door. It was always known that there would be restrictions on what could travel between GB and NI, post the 1st Jan, that is why the grace periods were put in place, to allow the NI supply chains to work round the problems.

Boris is now trying to unilaterally renegade on the agreement he made just 6 months ago, because the public are now seeing the consequences of his deal. The Command Paper even acknowledges that there will be difficulties and says that hopefully a free trade agreement will mitigate them. As the UK has already said it wishes to move away from EU rules around food and farming, why on earth would the EU want to open a back-door to Europe for food stuff which don't have to comply with EU standards?! Once goods are in NI then they can move freely across the EU with no checks at all, and so the EU standards "border" is now in the Irish Sea. The whole point of the NI Protocol from the EU's perspective was to keep those goods outside the EU totally. They are never going to agree to letting them in, if Boris thinks they are he's totally misunderstood their position.

Edited by Condi on Sunday 13th June 14:16

[Vanden Saab]

Condi said:

Vanden Saab said:

It is about whether NI is part of the UK... The EU seem to think this is not the case and that they have somehow taken it over and are trying to impose their rules on part of the UK. The protocol was always about allowing goods to flow freely between the UK and NI while respecting that there is no border in Ireland so some extra checks might be required.
The EU are now trying to stop certain products from flowing at all which is totally against both the letter and the purpose of the protocol. They seem to think that by doing this the UK will agree to follow all their rules in the whole of the UK forever. By trying to do this they either do not understand the UK mentality or completely stupid or both.
Some EU supporters suggest we agreed to this idea but cannot provide even a scintilla of where it says anything of the sort in the agreement.

It's not at all.

The sovereignty of NI has never been questioned, but in order to avoid a economic border between NI and Eire Boris agreed that NI would remain part of the EU trade area, so goods could flow easily around all of Ireland, but would be restricted between NI and GB. It was accepted that a border across Ireland, with the return of checkpoints and controls would cause problems for the Good Friday agreement, and so the priority was to avoid this at all costs.

The DUP objected to the arrangement at the time as the consequences we are now seeing were obvious, but Boris didn't need the DUP in the same way Theresa May did and so those objections were not listened to.

The "extra checks" you so easily dismiss were checks to ensure that products didn't get into the EU via a back-door. It was always known that there would be restrictions on what could travel between GB and NI, post the 1st Jan, that is why the grace periods were put in place, to allow the NI supply chains to work round the problems.

Boris is now trying to unilaterally renegade on the agreement he made just 6 months ago, because the public are now seeing the consequences of his deal. The Command Paper even acknowledges that there will be difficulties and says that hopefully a free trade agreement will mitigate them. As the UK has already said it wishes to move away from EU rules around food and farming, why on earth would the EU want to open a back-door to Europe for food stuff which don't have to comply with EU standards?!

In that case you will be able to point out the part of the NI protocol that makes this clear...

[roger.mellie]

psgcarey said:

Not having read every part of this long thread, help please.

I was only joking, the more repeat the point the merrier.

[Jazzer77]

Tuna said:

Mrr T said:

Once again you are just making things up.

Remind me again when planes are all going to be grounded?

..and how is the mass exodus of jobs from the City progressing?

- You don't seem to be very self aware.

Remind us again Tuna about the JCBs buried in London basements?

Lack of self awareness is up to Trumpian levels.

[crankedup5]

Oilchange said:

Agreed, I am hoping that Boris is simply keeping his powder dry because if it were me I'd be much less accommodating.
Starting with excluding hangers on from the G7 conference...

Perhaps Boris sees the G7 as a good politically educational opportunity that may benefit our European friends. Although it’s noticed that already that Macron, who ever he is representing, has managed to put his foot in it already

[roger.mellie]

Vanden Saab said:

In that case you will be able to point out the part of the NI protocol that makes this clear...

False challenge and have you read the NIP? (I have, I’m not a lawyer, and it’s full of legalese references to prior agreements). Asking for a specific clause is something that even as a non lawyer I know is a bullst challenge, may as well ask for a specific ingredient in a recipe as proof of the pudding.

[Jazzer77]

Earthdweller said:

This is a bad and bitter divorce

It strikes me that one party approached it with a “let’s be fair” and the other with “fk you, how dare you leave me” approach

...

Only one party was acting with a bad attitude.

[roger.mellie]

Oilchange said:

Hi Rog.

Herro!

[JeffreyD]

Vanden Saab said:

In that case you will be able to point out the part of the NI protocol that makes this clear...

The institute for government says the following

Regulations
Annex 2 of the protocol lists the body of EU legislation that will continue to apply
in Northern Ireland even after the end of the transition period. It includes virtually
the entirety of the EU acquis on product requirements. Any goods entering Northern
Ireland from Great Britain will therefore need to comply with EU standards. To ensure
that they do, additional certifications, controls and inspections will be required. The
nature of these processes will depend on the type of good.



That's pretty clear cut.


What's less clear cut is how to go about changing it. That seems like the usual fudge.
I don't think it's even clear that we can invoke article 16 over it, as I am not convinced this would qualify.

I'd say we could certainly invoke article 16 over other issue though.

[Condi]

Vanden Saab said:

In that case you will be able to point out the part of the NI protocol that makes this clear...

Unsurprisingly it is not written in black and white, but references existing EU laws and articles which work to the same effect.

Tellingly, while a lot is mentioned of goods moving from NI to GB, less is mentioned of goods moving in the opposite direction.

Maybe you'd like to point out the bit in the WA which says that the UK can move whatever goods it likes between GB and NI? I'll help you out, the complete text is below, you want Articles 5 and 6, and I think the EU article it references coving the Customs Union is linked to below as well.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/governmen...

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/eur/2013/952

Meanwhile, here a load of links which suggest than my understanding is correct;

Government Policy Paper The Customs (Northern Ireland) (EU Exit) Regulations 2020 "The purpose is to ensure UK customs legislation can operate alongside the EU customs legislation that will also apply in respect of Northern Ireland." https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-cus...

European Union Protocol page "Alignment with EU rules: as of the end of the transition period, Northern Ireland is subject to a limited set of EU rules related to the Single Market for goods and the Customs Union. The Union's Customs Code, for example, applies to all goods entering or exiting Northern Ireland." https://ec.europa.eu/info/relations-united-kingdom...

Wikipedia; "Unlike Great Britain, Northern Ireland continues to adopt EU Single Market regulations on goods and electricity (including the EU VAT) and remains an entry point into the EU Customs Union" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Ireland_Protocol)

BBC "Northern Ireland will be aligned to the EU single market" - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-50079385



I can of course go on, but when both United Kingdom government and EU Commission official pages say that NI will continue to adopt EU customs rules then BBC or Wikipedia articles are poor sources.

[Vanden Saab]

roger.mellie said:

Vanden Saab said:

In that case you will be able to point out the part of the NI protocol that makes this clear...

False challenge and have you read the NIP? (I have, I’m not a lawyer, and it’s full of legalese references to prior agreements). Asking for a specific clause is something that even as a non lawyer I know is a bullst challenge, may as well ask for a specific ingredient in a recipe as proof of the pudding.

Oh I have and the joint committee one too, the exact agreement wrt processed meat is there in black and white which is why I asked you to quote the part that backs up your opinion. I can understand why you are reluctant to do so...

[Condi]

Vanden Saab said:

Oh I have and the joint committee one too, the exact agreement wrt processed meat is there in black and white which is why I asked you to quote the part that backs up your opinion. I can understand why you are reluctant to do so...

Processed meat is different to chilled meat, in the regulations. As I understand it, the "chilled meat" is the problem as the EU do not allow chilled meat into the Block from any country. Frozen sausages are not a problem, but unfrozen sausages fall foul of the rules.