How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 6)
Discussion
youngsyr said:
Seems to me that all the fannying about in Westminster and talk of a second referendum is completely missing the real problem with the Brexit process, which is simply that having an open border in Northern Ireland is not compatible with leaving the EU and having a closed border is not compatible with the Good Friday Agreement.
Doesn't matter who goes into the negotiations, what they ask for or what form of Brexit "the people" want, the problem is fundamentally unsolvable in a way that is acceptable to everyone.
Assuming that's right, my mind turned to how to solve the unsolveable. I wonder if anyone can tell me if the following is not possible (even if it is highly unattractive)?
I was wondering if the UK could simply push the problem onto the EU, as it is after all a border between the UK and the EU. To do this, we would decide unilaterally to leave the EU without a deal and state that we will keep an open border between the Northern Ireland and the ROI.
It will then fall to the ROI to decide whether they want to install border controls between NI and RoI and no doubt the EU will insist that border controls are installed.
This effectively shifts any fallout from installing the border control onto RoI and the EU, with the latter no doubt taking the brunt of the blame. It may even put pressure on RoI to consider leaving the EU.
So, is the above even remotely possible? Do you think even the threat of following that route may put pressure on the EU to soften their side of the divorce deal?
Would be interested to have an informed discussion, as I'm really struggling to see anyway we can achieve any kind of Brexit with the NI/RoI question unresolved.
Already been coveredDoesn't matter who goes into the negotiations, what they ask for or what form of Brexit "the people" want, the problem is fundamentally unsolvable in a way that is acceptable to everyone.
Assuming that's right, my mind turned to how to solve the unsolveable. I wonder if anyone can tell me if the following is not possible (even if it is highly unattractive)?
I was wondering if the UK could simply push the problem onto the EU, as it is after all a border between the UK and the EU. To do this, we would decide unilaterally to leave the EU without a deal and state that we will keep an open border between the Northern Ireland and the ROI.
It will then fall to the ROI to decide whether they want to install border controls between NI and RoI and no doubt the EU will insist that border controls are installed.
This effectively shifts any fallout from installing the border control onto RoI and the EU, with the latter no doubt taking the brunt of the blame. It may even put pressure on RoI to consider leaving the EU.
So, is the above even remotely possible? Do you think even the threat of following that route may put pressure on the EU to soften their side of the divorce deal?
Would be interested to have an informed discussion, as I'm really struggling to see anyway we can achieve any kind of Brexit with the NI/RoI question unresolved.
The controls could be 10-25 miles inside the EU border
However the favoured way around it is to come up with a trade deal so there is no difference between EU and UK so the border isnt necessary
The DUP seem to want a border though, so maybe theyre not keen on the GFA
saaby93 said:
Already been covered
The controls could be 10-25 miles inside the EU border
However the favoured way around it is to come up with a trade deal so there is no difference between EU and UK so the border isnt necessary
The DUP seem to want a border though, so maybe theyre not keen on the GFA
Oh right, didn't realise- could you point me to the page number or at least rough date that it was being discussed as I have several questions with what you suggest, such as:The controls could be 10-25 miles inside the EU border
However the favoured way around it is to come up with a trade deal so there is no difference between EU and UK so the border isnt necessary
The DUP seem to want a border though, so maybe theyre not keen on the GFA
How can you have a border, not at the border - what happens to goods moving into no man's land, but not crossing the border, will be a royal PITA for people who live/work there?
How can we have an equilavence deal with the EU, but reject freedom of movement from the EU - doesn't that mean that we're cherry picking the pillars we want with the EU, which the EU has always maintained they will not accept?
Not sure the DUP do want a border from what I've seen/heard. What gives you that idea?
youngsyr said:
Oh right, didn't realise- could you point me to the page number or at least rough date that it was being discussed as I have several questions with what you suggest, such as:
How can you have a border, not at the border - what happens to goods moving into no man's land, but not crossing the border, will be a royal PITA for people who live/work there?
How can we have an equilavence deal with the EU, but reject freedom of movement from the EU - doesn't that mean that we're cherry picking the pillars we want with the EU, which the EU has always maintained they will not accept?
Not sure the DUP do want a border from what I've seen/heard. What gives you that idea?
There is no, no mans land. This isn't the somme.How can you have a border, not at the border - what happens to goods moving into no man's land, but not crossing the border, will be a royal PITA for people who live/work there?
How can we have an equilavence deal with the EU, but reject freedom of movement from the EU - doesn't that mean that we're cherry picking the pillars we want with the EU, which the EU has always maintained they will not accept?
Not sure the DUP do want a border from what I've seen/heard. What gives you that idea?
The rest of your points, you seem really confused.
youngsyr said:
Seems to me that all the fannying about in Westminster and talk of a second referendum is completely missing the real problem with the Brexit process, which is simply that having an open border in Northern Ireland is not compatible with leaving the EU and having a closed border is not compatible with the Good Friday Agreement.
Doesn't matter who goes into the negotiations, what they ask for or what form of Brexit "the people" want, the problem is fundamentally unsolvable in a way that is acceptable to everyone.
Assuming that's right, my mind turned to how to solve the unsolveable. I wonder if anyone can tell me if the following is not possible (even if it is highly unattractive)?
I was wondering if the UK could simply push the problem onto the EU, as it is after all a border between the UK and the EU. To do this, we would decide unilaterally to leave the EU without a deal and state that we will keep an open border between the Northern Ireland and the ROI.
It will then fall to the ROI to decide whether they want to install border controls between NI and RoI and no doubt the EU will insist that border controls are installed.
This effectively shifts any fallout from installing the border control onto RoI and the EU, with the latter no doubt taking the brunt of the blame. It may even put pressure on RoI to consider leaving the EU.
So, is the above even remotely possible? Do you think even the threat of following that route may put pressure on the EU to soften their side of the divorce deal?
Would be interested to have an informed discussion, as I'm really struggling to see anyway we can achieve any kind of Brexit with the NI/RoI question unresolved.
The above is not only possible but the key players have stated it as a potential outcome.Doesn't matter who goes into the negotiations, what they ask for or what form of Brexit "the people" want, the problem is fundamentally unsolvable in a way that is acceptable to everyone.
Assuming that's right, my mind turned to how to solve the unsolveable. I wonder if anyone can tell me if the following is not possible (even if it is highly unattractive)?
I was wondering if the UK could simply push the problem onto the EU, as it is after all a border between the UK and the EU. To do this, we would decide unilaterally to leave the EU without a deal and state that we will keep an open border between the Northern Ireland and the ROI.
It will then fall to the ROI to decide whether they want to install border controls between NI and RoI and no doubt the EU will insist that border controls are installed.
This effectively shifts any fallout from installing the border control onto RoI and the EU, with the latter no doubt taking the brunt of the blame. It may even put pressure on RoI to consider leaving the EU.
So, is the above even remotely possible? Do you think even the threat of following that route may put pressure on the EU to soften their side of the divorce deal?
Would be interested to have an informed discussion, as I'm really struggling to see anyway we can achieve any kind of Brexit with the NI/RoI question unresolved.
The Irish government has stated categorically they will not put a hard border there under ANY circumstances including No Deal. The UK government the same. The EU obviously hasn't been quite so strident, but then that would utterly undermine the biggest card they have invented.
There is no issue. It's manufactured b
ks. It is a political card and we have allowed ourselves to be played by it.BBC not exactly known to be pro-Leave : https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-46546295
jsf said:
youngsyr said:
Oh right, didn't realise- could you point me to the page number or at least rough date that it was being discussed as I have several questions with what you suggest, such as:
How can you have a border, not at the border - what happens to goods moving into no man's land, but not crossing the border, will be a royal PITA for people who live/work there?
How can we have an equilavence deal with the EU, but reject freedom of movement from the EU - doesn't that mean that we're cherry picking the pillars we want with the EU, which the EU has always maintained they will not accept?
Not sure the DUP do want a border from what I've seen/heard. What gives you that idea?
There is no, no mans land. This isn't the somme.How can you have a border, not at the border - what happens to goods moving into no man's land, but not crossing the border, will be a royal PITA for people who live/work there?
How can we have an equilavence deal with the EU, but reject freedom of movement from the EU - doesn't that mean that we're cherry picking the pillars we want with the EU, which the EU has always maintained they will not accept?
Not sure the DUP do want a border from what I've seen/heard. What gives you that idea?
The rest of your points, you seem really confused.
Can we start with how you have controls 25 miles from the border that somehow can select those who are going to pass the controls and cross the border but ignore those who are going to pass the controls but not cross the border?
What happens if you pass the controls, say you're not going to cross the border and so are waived through with tariffed/banned goods, but then go and cross the border?
Murph7355 said:
The above is not only possible but the key players have stated it as a potential outcome.
The Irish government has stated categorically they will not put a hard border there under ANY circumstances including No Deal. The UK government the same. The EU obviously hasn't been quite so strident, but then that would utterly undermine the biggest card they have invented.
There is no issue. It's manufactured bks. It is a political card and we have allowed ourselves to be played by it.
BBC not exactly known to be pro-Leave : https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-46546295
Haven't heard anyone mention it despite trying to keep up to date with the discussion - who has mentioned it, would like to hear what they think about it.The Irish government has stated categorically they will not put a hard border there under ANY circumstances including No Deal. The UK government the same. The EU obviously hasn't been quite so strident, but then that would utterly undermine the biggest card they have invented.
There is no issue. It's manufactured b
ks. It is a political card and we have allowed ourselves to be played by it.BBC not exactly known to be pro-Leave : https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-46546295
Seems to me that this is where we're going to end up - it can only end in a game of brinksmanship and seeing who blinks first, only the UK can't concede, because there is no consensus on what we want. Any concession is unacceptable to the majority.
That leaves only hard brexit with no deal or a very appealing deal for the UK on the table. Nothing else is acceptable to the UK, not just in the political sense, but in the legal sense. Anything else simply won't get passed into law.
As bad as no deal would be for the UK (and I've no doubt it will be terrible), it will also be very bad for the EU, so they will want to avoid it.
Vanden Saab said:
The DUP have suggested that the 'backstop' be moved from the legal part of the WA into the political aspiration section.... As everyone says there is no intention to enact it that seems like an very sensible suggestion with no downsides.
This is just rearranging the deck chairs though, isn't it?The back stop isn't a solution to the RoI/NI border problem, it's a fudge that means NI doesn't really leave the EU or the UK.
For Brexit to actually happen, as it stands NI has to choose one or the other - either a hard border with RoI (and tear up GFA) or stay on EU trading terms with an open border (no brexit). Neither is acceptable to all parties, hence why in 2 years no solution has been found.
Just for info., because I only read it in the French press so maybe not highlighted in the U.K. yet, 71% of the EU parliament have voted through a resolution demanding that Martin Selmayr resigns. As you are all aware, he was landed in the job of Sec Gen of the EU Commission in a very dodgy way, with Druncker basically pushing his acolyte into place.
The resolution is not binding on the Commission, but does at least show a bit of back bone in the Euro Deputies.
https://www.lemonde.fr/international/article/2018/...
The resolution is not binding on the Commission, but does at least show a bit of back bone in the Euro Deputies.
https://www.lemonde.fr/international/article/2018/...
youngsyr said:
Maybe you could help clarify things for me then, after all this is a discussion forum, isn't it?
Can we start with how you have controls 25 miles from the border that somehow can select those who are going to pass the controls and cross the border but ignore those who are going to pass the controls but not cross the border?
What happens if you pass the controls, say you're not going to cross the border and so are waived through with tariffed/banned goods, but then go and cross the border?
Its been covered literally hundreds of times.Can we start with how you have controls 25 miles from the border that somehow can select those who are going to pass the controls and cross the border but ignore those who are going to pass the controls but not cross the border?
What happens if you pass the controls, say you're not going to cross the border and so are waived through with tariffed/banned goods, but then go and cross the border?
What controls are you talking about?
You seem to think there is a physical post you have to drive through. There won't be one no matter what.
There is already a border in Ireland, it's invisible, but still controls differences in currency, tax, excise, law........
This is a nice illustration of how the world GDP is shifting over time.
That should concentrate the mind to where the UK should be ensuring it is able to trade.
https://youtu.be/O1WC2Sl2jgg
That should concentrate the mind to where the UK should be ensuring it is able to trade.
https://youtu.be/O1WC2Sl2jgg
YankeePorker said:
Just for info., because I only read it in the French press so maybe not highlighted in the U.K. yet, 71% of the EU parliament have voted through a resolution demanding that Martin Selmayr resigns. As you are all aware, he was landed in the job of Sec Gen of the EU Commission in a very dodgy way, with Druncker basically pushing his acolyte into place.
The resolution is not binding on the Commission, but does at least show a bit of back bone in the Euro Deputies.
https://www.lemonde.fr/international/article/2018/...
They are begging him to resign for the image of the EU. The resolution is not binding on the Commission, but does at least show a bit of back bone in the Euro Deputies.
https://www.lemonde.fr/international/article/2018/...
backbone my arse.
jsf said:
This is a nice illustration of how the world GDP is shifting over time.
That should concentrate the mind to where the UK should be ensuring it is able to trade.
https://youtu.be/O1WC2Sl2jgg
Then google RCEP and understand what joining a true FTA would do for the UK… 3.4 billion people, GDP of 50 trillion and 40% of the whole worlds GDP... Australia and New Zealand are already on that boat....That should concentrate the mind to where the UK should be ensuring it is able to trade.
https://youtu.be/O1WC2Sl2jgg
youngsyr said:
Maybe you could help clarify things for me then, after all this is a discussion forum, isn't it?
Can we start with how you have controls 25 miles from the border that somehow can select those who are going to pass the controls and cross the border but ignore those who are going to pass the controls but not cross the border?
What happens if you pass the controls, say you're not going to cross the border and so are waived through with tariffed/banned goods, but then go and cross the border?
Either you'll be detected crossing the border, or nothing will happen at all. At present, nothing happens at all whatever goods you have so this is hardly a disaster. What kind of dangerous substance is going to come across after we've left the EU that doesn't come across now, and won't if NI stays in the EU?Can we start with how you have controls 25 miles from the border that somehow can select those who are going to pass the controls and cross the border but ignore those who are going to pass the controls but not cross the border?
What happens if you pass the controls, say you're not going to cross the border and so are waived through with tariffed/banned goods, but then go and cross the border?
Tony427 said:
"The Common Transit Convention allows a suspension of customs checks and payment of duties until the goods reach the destination country. Its signatories include the EU member states, the European Economic Area (EEA) states, Macedonia, Serbia and Turkey.
It’s not just the agreement that matters but the technology that underpins it. The New Computerised Transit system (NCTS) is only open to members of the Convention. For both exporters and authorities, it increases the efficiency and security of the procedure.
Article 55 of the Convention also provides for transit simplifications. The simplifications make it possible for a trader to receive goods at an authorised place without the need to present the goods at the port. However the trader would need to be approved as an “authorised consignee” which only applies if they regularly receive goods placed under the procedure and also have the appropriate premises approved as a “Temporary Storage facility.” There are host of strict conditions attached to qualify and the approvals process can take many months."
Lots more at uktradeforum.net/2018/04/24/securing-european-transit-for-uk-trade-post-brexit/
Seems like there are ways to have customs checks etc done remotely ie not at a border post, and imports and exports can be tracked and processes electronically without any pesky rubber stamps and reams of paper. .
Who'd a thunk it.
Cheers,
Tony
You mean we don't need to construct a new berlin wall at the Irish border to perform customs checks It’s not just the agreement that matters but the technology that underpins it. The New Computerised Transit system (NCTS) is only open to members of the Convention. For both exporters and authorities, it increases the efficiency and security of the procedure.
Article 55 of the Convention also provides for transit simplifications. The simplifications make it possible for a trader to receive goods at an authorised place without the need to present the goods at the port. However the trader would need to be approved as an “authorised consignee” which only applies if they regularly receive goods placed under the procedure and also have the appropriate premises approved as a “Temporary Storage facility.” There are host of strict conditions attached to qualify and the approvals process can take many months."
Lots more at uktradeforum.net/2018/04/24/securing-european-transit-for-uk-trade-post-brexit/
Seems like there are ways to have customs checks etc done remotely ie not at a border post, and imports and exports can be tracked and processes electronically without any pesky rubber stamps and reams of paper. .
Who'd a thunk it.
Cheers,
Tony
jsf said:
YankeePorker said:
Just for info., because I only read it in the French press so maybe not highlighted in the U.K. yet, 71% of the EU parliament have voted through a resolution demanding that Martin Selmayr resigns. As you are all aware, he was landed in the job of Sec Gen of the EU Commission in a very dodgy way, with Druncker basically pushing his acolyte into place.
The resolution is not binding on the Commission, but does at least show a bit of back bone in the Euro Deputies.
https://www.lemonde.fr/international/article/2018/...
They are begging him to resign for the image of the EU. The resolution is not binding on the Commission, but does at least show a bit of back bone in the Euro Deputies.
https://www.lemonde.fr/international/article/2018/...
backbone my arse.
Selmayr is going nowhere. Why would he
JCJ staggers around drunk on a seemingly daily basis - nobody gives a f
k. They actually speak out in his defence EU bigwigs reactions to this story said:
ash73 said:
Norway already has a virtual land border with the EU (Sweden)
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-41412561
It’s not quite fully virtual or frictionless though is it? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-41412561
For now, there is still plenty of paper to be processed, first with the customs agents, then at the customs office. At 3pm, a big crowd of drivers has built up. They take a ticket and wait to hand over their documents.
I would also imagine that agricultural products would cause an issue at the Irish border, especially given the requirement for vetinary checks on all livestock entering (or leaving, can’t remember which it was!) the EU.
Eh, and given how different NI is to mainland in things like abortion and same sex marriage laws, but DUP don’t complain about that, don’t see why have different customs to the mainland is any worse - so a sea border makes sense
There is precedent - HK has different customs regime to mainland China, but is a sovereign part of China.
There is precedent - HK has different customs regime to mainland China, but is a sovereign part of China.
ITP said:
Crackie said:
Helicopter123 said:
I speak the truth, The status quo is an option.
Please, please, please answer this question.What, in your view, is the status quo?
Whatever you like.....?
I used to like the old status quo but I'm not so keen on what on what the status quo change in to
What the ever closer union status quo will look like, who knows? I'd still be interested to hear what Helicopter123 thinks the EU status quo is? He usually responds to every question asked of hum
but I'm not expecting a reply this time...….Edited by Crackie on Tuesday 18th December 08:58
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff