Northern Ireland

[soupdragon1]

Abdul Abulbul Amir said:

soupdragon1 said:

Abdul Abulbul Amir said:

soupdragon1 said:

Abdul Abulbul Amir said:

soupdragon1 said:

John Major and Tony Blair joined up to articulate the risk. Seemed nobody wanted to listen.

So let the guys with the semtex dictate the will of the population?

I'm not sure how you've come to that conclusion, but its not correct.

The context of the 'risk' word in reference to Blair and Major was primarily due to upsetting the balance of the hard gained peace in NI which then leads to unknown consequences. Eg, the end of the Union/public disorder/return to violence. Ie, the word risk relates to 'unknown consequences'

The crux of the message was that Brexit and the NI status quo were incompatible with each other.

You've answered it in your own reply.

Well that's quite the leap but, yeah, ok then.

Not really, you've stated that a return to violence is a consequence as some form of justification of a change in behaviour.

I didn't say that.

I'm unpicking what you said, which to paraphrase:

'any concerns about the Brexit impact in NI should be cast aside as all you are doing is pandering to the IRA'

[Abdul Abulbul Amir]

soupdragon1 said:

Abdul Abulbul Amir said:

soupdragon1 said:

Abdul Abulbul Amir said:

soupdragon1 said:

Abdul Abulbul Amir said:

soupdragon1 said:

John Major and Tony Blair joined up to articulate the risk. Seemed nobody wanted to listen.

So let the guys with the semtex dictate the will of the population?

I'm not sure how you've come to that conclusion, but its not correct.

The context of the 'risk' word in reference to Blair and Major was primarily due to upsetting the balance of the hard gained peace in NI which then leads to unknown consequences. Eg, the end of the Union/public disorder/return to violence. Ie, the word risk relates to 'unknown consequences'

The crux of the message was that Brexit and the NI status quo were incompatible with each other.

You've answered it in your own reply.

Well that's quite the leap but, yeah, ok then.

Not really, you've stated that a return to violence is a consequence as some form of justification of a change in behaviour.

I didn't say that.

I'm unpicking what you said, which to paraphrase:

'any concerns about the Brexit impact in NI should be cast aside as all you are doing is pandering to the IRA'

..and you're saying they should dictate proceedings...

[Mortarboard]

Abdul Abulbul Amir said:

..and you're saying they should dictate proceedings...

But you've no problems with the LCC dictating proceedings.

M.

[Abdul Abulbul Amir]

Mortarboard said:

Abdul Abulbul Amir said:

..and you're saying they should dictate proceedings...

But you've no problems with the LCC dictating proceedings.

M.

Can you quote where I have said that?

[Mortarboard]

Abdul Abulbul Amir said:

Can you quote where I have said that?

You've only mentioned the IRA. Who haven't met with anyone in relation to the NIP.
UK government has met repeatedly with the LCC.

So explain yourself.

M.

[Abdul Abulbul Amir]

Mortarboard said:

Abdul Abulbul Amir said:

Can you quote where I have said that?

You've only mentioned the IRA. Who haven't met with anyone in relation to the NIP.
UK government has met repeatedly with the LCC.

So explain yourself.

M.

I haven't mentioned anyone specifically, or indeed excluded anyone specifically.

You can apologise and we can move on.

[ArmaghMan]

So the deal is dead.
Ian junior is saying it's a no go and others seem to be wading in behind him.
If its dead where now. Stormont is dead. Power sharing is finished for the foreseeable future.

Direct rule will be totally unacceptable to nationalists.

Does Rishi have the balls to go for joint authority?
Personally I don't think so BUT he is a lame duck PM so maybe he can get it through.

Interesting times ahead.

[Mortarboard]

Abdul Abulbul Amir said:

I haven't mentioned anyone specifically, or indeed excluded anyone specifically.

You can apologise and we can move on.

Yes, you did. We can see your game playing. Troll elsewhere.

M.

[Abdul Abulbul Amir]

Mortarboard said:

Abdul Abulbul Amir said:

I haven't mentioned anyone specifically, or indeed excluded anyone specifically.

You can apologise and we can move on.

Yes, you did. We can see your game playing. Troll elsewhere.

M.

I note you haven't been able to quote me.

It would appear that you're the troll rather than I.

[JNW1]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

JNW1 said:

Roderick Spode said:

This is the bit that gets me. Northern Irish born and raised, but I've lived in Scotland since 2000.

Why should NI be treated any differently to Scotland, England or Wales? It's a Sovereign part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

Okay, it shares a land border with "The EU" under the guise of the Irish Free State, but why should the United Kingdom endure internal borders between it's constituent parts merely to appease the European Union demands? This is madness in my mind. Any border should be between the United Kingdom as a complete entity and the European Union, in whatever form that may present itself. Why should trade between GB and NI be subject to separate terms, simply to appease the EU and Eire?

I agree with you and have never understood why the EU couldn't just undertake any custom checks in the ROI (i.e. on the ROI side of the NI/ROI border). That would still protect the integrity of their single market (which is supposedly their concern) whilst also avoiding either a hard border on the island of Ireland .

How does it avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland? How do you know on what to do customs checks on unless you're doing border checks. Someone has to be on the border asking vehicles to pull over in order to do the check. That's basically a hard border.

There are 208 road crossings between NI & ROI. Can you explain to me how this is going to work?

What do you think would be moving across the road crossings between NI and the ROI that would compromise the EU single market significantly?

I'll be happy to stand corrected but I'm starting from the premise the EU single market cannot be compromised materially simply by goods moving to the ROI from NI. To fundamentally undermine the single market goods would have to move in significant quantities from the ROI to mainland Europe and, if that was to suddenly start to happen on a larger scale than seen historically, it would be very easy to spot and could surely be mitigated by checks at the ports of exit in the ROI? No idea how many of those there are but I'm guessing it's rather less than 208 and most if not all will already be set-up to perform checks.

That would of course leave an open border between NI and the ROI but I don't see the issue with that. There's no way the EU single market could be compromised in any significant way by goods moving from NI to the ROI - and remaining in the ROI - and I don't think the UK has ever raised concerns about goods continuing to move from the ROI to NI? So leave the island of Ireland as it was and mitigate any risk to the EU single market by (if necessary) checking movements from the ROI to the rest of the EU.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

JNW1 said:

TwigtheWonderkid said:

JNW1 said:

Roderick Spode said:

This is the bit that gets me. Northern Irish born and raised, but I've lived in Scotland since 2000.

Why should NI be treated any differently to Scotland, England or Wales? It's a Sovereign part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

Okay, it shares a land border with "The EU" under the guise of the Irish Free State, but why should the United Kingdom endure internal borders between it's constituent parts merely to appease the European Union demands? This is madness in my mind. Any border should be between the United Kingdom as a complete entity and the European Union, in whatever form that may present itself. Why should trade between GB and NI be subject to separate terms, simply to appease the EU and Eire?

I agree with you and have never understood why the EU couldn't just undertake any custom checks in the ROI (i.e. on the ROI side of the NI/ROI border). That would still protect the integrity of their single market (which is supposedly their concern) whilst also avoiding either a hard border on the island of Ireland .

How does it avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland? How do you know on what to do customs checks on unless you're doing border checks. Someone has to be on the border asking vehicles to pull over in order to do the check. That's basically a hard border.

There are 208 road crossings between NI & ROI. Can you explain to me how this is going to work?

What do you think would be moving across the road crossings between NI and the ROI that would compromise the EU single market significantly?

No idea, until they check it. The ROI are part of the EU and are entitled to ensure goods aren't entering their country that shouldn't be. Kind of, let me think of a phrase they might use to to describe it....errr....taking back control of our borders. Although I think I might have heard that tagline used somewhere else.

Who the hell are we to say to ROI " just let our stuff in unhindered, we're all above board gov". The arrogance is remarkable.

The other EU member states are entitled to be sure that stuff flowing into France, Germany, Spain et al from ROI hasn't first entered from a non EU country when it shouldn't have.

This is absolutely basic stuff, and was highlighted by many in the referendum, only for them to be mocked for "project fear". Project fact as it turns out.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

JNW1 said:

There's no way the EU single market could be compromised in any significant way by goods moving from NI to the ROI - and remaining in the ROI

How do you know it'll remain in ROI? A UK firm wants to export widgets to Spain, but can't, as the widgets don't meet EU safety standards, or some other issue with them. So UK firm sells them into a firm in ROI without checks. ROI firm then exports them to Spain, one EU country to another, within the single market.

Come on, you know there's no way the EU can allow that possibility to exist.

[Abdul Abulbul Amir]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

How do you know it'll remain in ROI? A UK firm wants to export widgets to Spain, but can't, as the widgets don't meet EU safety standards, or some other issue with them. So UK firm sells them into a firm in ROI without checks. ROI firm then exports them to Spain, one EU country to another, within the single market.

Come on, you know there's no way the EU can allow that possibility to exist.

ROI would need to declare them if they came from NI when exporting them to Spain.

[Ian Geary]

Abdul Abulbul Amir said:

TwigtheWonderkid said:

How do you know it'll remain in ROI? A UK firm wants to export widgets to Spain, but can't, as the widgets don't meet EU safety standards, or some other issue with them. So UK firm sells them into a firm in ROI without checks. ROI firm then exports them to Spain, one EU country to another, within the single market.

Come on, you know there's no way the EU can allow that possibility to exist.

ROI would need to declare them if they came from NI when exporting them to Spain.

But...


There's free movement within the EU - that's the point

This suggestion (of putting checks on movements within the EU) now needs mechanisms set up to a) declare what's being moved within member states and b) to check on it

I have no practical experience of cross boarder trade regulation, but as pointed out: this was the UK's Brexit.

I can see why the EU don't want to let the UK's problem become their problem (though they did negotiated a series of compromises to try and minimise the problem the UK created)

[Abdul Abulbul Amir]

Ian Geary said:

But...


There's free movement within the EU - that's the point

This suggestion (of putting checks on movements within the EU) now needs mechanisms set up to a) declare what's being moved within member states and b) to check on it

I have no practical experience of cross boarder trade regulation, but as pointed out: this was the UK's Brexit.

I can see why the EU don't want to let the UK's problem become their problem (though they did negotiated a series of compromises to try and minimise the problem the UK created)

The right to leave the EU is an agreement between the EU and member states. If a member state wish to leave it's up to both parties to ensure workable solutions are achieved.

It's only a "UKs Brexit" to children and those still bitter on the result.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

Abdul Abulbul Amir said:

Ian Geary said:

But...


There's free movement within the EU - that's the point

This suggestion (of putting checks on movements within the EU) now needs mechanisms set up to a) declare what's being moved within member states and b) to check on it

I have no practical experience of cross boarder trade regulation, but as pointed out: this was the UK's Brexit.

I can see why the EU don't want to let the UK's problem become their problem (though they did negotiated a series of compromises to try and minimise the problem the UK created)

The right to leave the EU is an agreement between the EU and member states. If a member state wish to leave it's up to both parties to ensure workable solutions are achieved.

It's only a "UKs Brexit" to children and those still bitter on the result.

The EU have a workable solution, the usual border checks (hard border) between the EU and the non EU bordering country. The fact that we have the GFA to bring peace to a part of the UK (not EU) is NOT THEIR fkING PROBLEM.

Of for your ludicrous "It's only a "UKs Brexit" to children and those still bitter on the result", remind me again what the Br in Brexit stands for?

This whole issue was entirely predictable, and indeed predicted by those who were mocked about project fear. The arrogance of Brexiteers continuing to blame the EU for not solving a problem that isn't their problem to solve, and blaming them for all our own Brexit fails and problems, is just breathtaking.

[JNW1]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

JNW1 said:

There's no way the EU single market could be compromised in any significant way by goods moving from NI to the ROI - and remaining in the ROI

How do you know it'll remain in ROI? A UK firm wants to export widgets to Spain, but can't, as the widgets don't meet EU safety standards, or some other issue with them. So UK firm sells them into a firm in ROI without checks. ROI firm then exports them to Spain, one EU country to another, within the single market.

Come on, you know there's no way the EU can allow that possibility to exist.

I'm sure there are people on here with far more experience of this than me but I'm guessing a sudden increase in the volume of widgets (or anything else) moving between the ROI and the mainland EU would be very easy to spot? So, while I accept there's a theoretical threat, in practice I just don't see an open border on the island of Ireland resulting in the ROI becoming a backdoor for lots of non-compliant goods entering the EU single market - I think it would be obvious if that was happening and if necessary checks could be put in place to control it.

Why should it be the EU's responsibility to check what's going between two of their member states? Ordinarily I'd agree it shouldn't but the politics around Ireland is unique and it's the EU who's continually emphasising the need to protect their single market. So if they want to do that whilst also respecting the Good Friday Agreement (by avoiding a hard border) then yes, in this case maybe they have to do checks on goods moving between the ROI and the rest of the EU. That's no different from expecting the UK to do checks on goods moving between NI and the rest of the UK but the difference is the politics associated with doing it would be far less sensitive and inflammatory.

Or better still perhaps both sides could adopt a more positive and pro-active approach to using technology to eliminate the need for physical checks in the first place (or at least reduce them to an absolute minimum). Back in 2020 at least some experts in the field were suggesting a suitable system could be up and running in three years but here we are in 2023 and it doesn't feel like we're any further forward; maybe the apparent improvement in relations between the UK government and the EU will facilitate some much needed (and long overdue) co-operation in this area...

[Abdul Abulbul Amir]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

Abdul Abulbul Amir said:

Ian Geary said:

But...


There's free movement within the EU - that's the point

This suggestion (of putting checks on movements within the EU) now needs mechanisms set up to a) declare what's being moved within member states and b) to check on it

I have no practical experience of cross boarder trade regulation, but as pointed out: this was the UK's Brexit.

I can see why the EU don't want to let the UK's problem become their problem (though they did negotiated a series of compromises to try and minimise the problem the UK created)

The right to leave the EU is an agreement between the EU and member states. If a member state wish to leave it's up to both parties to ensure workable solutions are achieved.

It's only a "UKs Brexit" to children and those still bitter on the result.

The EU have a workable solution, the usual border checks (hard border) between the EU and the non EU bordering country. The fact that we have the GFA to bring peace to a part of the UK (not EU) is NOT THEIR fkING PROBLEM.

Of for your ludicrous "It's only a "UKs Brexit" to children and those still bitter on the result", remind me again what the Br in Brexit stands for?

This whole issue was entirely predictable, and indeed predicted by those who were mocked about project fear. The arrogance of Brexiteers continuing to blame the EU for not solving a problem that isn't their problem to solve, and blaming them for all our own Brexit fails and problems, is just breathtaking.

Nope, try again. ROI are a signatory to the GFA so have an obligation for no hard border on the island, and as such it is equally an EU problem.

[Abdul Abulbul Amir]

JNW1 said:

I'm sure there are people on here with far more experience of this than me but I'm guessing a sudden increase in the volume of widgets (or anything else) moving between the ROI and the mainland EU would be very easy to spot? So, while I accept there's a theoretical threat, in practice I just don't see an open border on the island of Ireland resulting in the ROI becoming a backdoor for lots of non-compliant goods entering the EU single market - I think it would be obvious if that was happening and if necessary checks could be put in place to control it.

Why should it be the EU's responsibility to check what's going between two of their member states? Ordinarily I'd agree it shouldn't but the politics around Ireland is unique and it's the EU who's continually emphasising the need to protect their single market. So if they want to do that whilst also respecting the Good Friday Agreement (by avoiding a hard border) then yes, in this case maybe they have to do checks on goods moving between the ROI and the rest of the EU. That's no different from expecting the UK to do checks on goods moving between NI and the rest of the UK but the difference is the politics associated with doing it would be far less sensitive and inflammatory.

Or better still perhaps both sides could adopt a more positive and pro-active approach to using technology to eliminate the need for physical checks in the first place (or at least reduce them to an absolute minimum). Back in 2020 at least some experts in the field were suggesting a suitable system could be up and running in three years but here we are in 2023 and it doesn't feel like we're any further forward; maybe the apparent improvement in relations between the UK government and the EU will facilitate some much needed (and long overdue) co-operation in this area...

Spot on. Most of this can be blamed on Barnier using the issues in Ireland as some form of negotiating strategy.

If it all kicks off again Brussels is to blame.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

Abdul Abulbul Amir said:

Spot on. Most of this can be blamed on Barnier using the issues in Ireland as some form of negotiating strategy.

If it all kicks off again Brussels is to blame.

When was it, 1990, when Geoffrey Howe signalled the beginning of the end for Thatcher when he stood up in parliament and told her that her mindset of ill intentioned evil Europeans always working against the UK was a delusion. Here we are 33 years later, and a new generation of the deluded continue to believe that all our problems are caused by Europe.

It's a bit like the Tories still blaming Labour for all our problems, having been in power for 13 years. How long will we need to be out of the EU before we stop blaming them for our own idiocy.