How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 6)

[Nickgnome]

Tuna said:

Funnily enough, I do recall my Latin. It doesn't prevent 'copter's post from being fatuous, does it?

Or are you just as immune to the point being made as he is?

So what is your point?

States Quo has a meaning and definition as does Brexit in the OED

[Vanden Saab]

youngsyr said:

You obviously can't be a member of a club and simply disregard all of its rules.

However, holding a position within the club does give you significant influence. Ever noticed that we don't have the Euro and aren't members of the Schengen area?

The EU isn't the British Empire, we don't get to dictate the rules. We do get significant benefits and a significant say in what rules are passed and apply to us though by being members and compromising with other members.

Why not every other EU Country does...

[amusingduck]

Nickgnome said:

Tuna said:

Funnily enough, I do recall my Latin. It doesn't prevent 'copter's post from being fatuous, does it?

Or are you just as immune to the point being made as he is?

So what is your point?

States Quo has a meaning and definition as does Brexit in the OED

Pity chopper doesn't know what that meaning is, his "status quo" is early june 2016

[Helicopter123]

youngsyr said:

The Dangerous Elk said:

Helicopter123 said:

Good post.

You should try making one (even if you cannot recognise this one as completely flawed)

If it's completely flawed, then why don't you respond to it and point them all out?

Seems a bit rich to dismiss it without even replying to it?

I'm simply posting in a genuine attempt to understand the situation amongst all the spin and lies being touted by all sides, as it seems to me that there's a huge amount of distraction going on whilst the real crux of the issue (the ROI/NI border vs the Good Friday Agreement) is being ignored by all parties, because it is, essentially, unsolveable.

There is no pro-brexit response to your challenge though as a satisfactory answer does not exist, even after 2 1/2 years of huffing and puffing, to the RIO/NI border question.

Attempts to simply play down its importance (from some) show a level of breathtaking naivety around Irish history and politics.

Sadly, many are on hear not to debate but rather to reinforce their own narrow prejudices. They become upset when the truth is shown to them.

Edited by Helicopter123 on Tuesday 18th December 12:42

[The Dangerous Elk]

What is the Status Quo ?

I am aware of Irish politics, from a personal family history and when looking at lots of Irish people via a gun sight.

What aspect of this Irish history will cause problems if both the Uk and the Republic do not build a boarder ?

We have aboveTWO questions, do try to answer one maybe ?

[Helicopter123]

The Dangerous Elk said:

What is the Status Quo ?

I am aware of Irish politics, from a personal family history and when looking at lots of Irish people via a gun sight.

What aspect of this Irish history will cause problems if both the Uk and the Republic do not build a boarder ?

We have aboveTWO questions, do try to answer one maybe ?

No Border = GFA Intact = No Problem.

Leave the EU = Border = Problem.

Does that help?

[Dr Jekyll]

What about. Leave the EU, not have a hard border.

Juncker gets upset, but so what?

[amgmcqueen]

Helicopter123 said:

The Dangerous Elk said:

What is the Status Quo ?

I am aware of Irish politics, from a personal family history and when looking at lots of Irish people via a gun sight.

What aspect of this Irish history will cause problems if both the Uk and the Republic do not build a boarder ?

We have aboveTWO questions, do try to answer one maybe ?

No Border = GFA Intact = No Problem.

Leave the EU = Border = Problem.

Does that help?

Who is going to erect said border...?

The UK government won't, the Irish government won't, the EU won't.

So who will?

[pingu393]

Dr Jekyll said:

What about. Leave the EU, not have a hard border.

Juncker gets upset, but so what?

It's probably what will happen.

UK won't put up a hard border and the Irish have said that they won't.

[Vanden Saab]

Helicopter123 said:

No Border = GFA Intact = No Problem.

Leave the EU = Border = Problem.

Does that help?

Perfect just so us idiots understand could you quote the section in the GFA which says that if a border is put in place then the agreement is in any way altered or null and void Thanks

[gooner1]

Helicopter123 said:

No Border = GFA Intact = No Problem.

Leave the EU = Border = Problem.

Does that help?

The EU will be the ones building a hard border, if one is going to be built.

Not the Irish. Not the UK.

[saaby93]

pingu393 said:

Dr Jekyll said:

What about. Leave the EU, not have a hard border.

Juncker gets upset, but so what?

It's probably what will happen.

UK won't put up a hard border and the Irish have said that they won't.

Not at the border at least
So that leaves a border between the rest of the EU and Ireland i..e all of the Btish Isles are one side of the border
Eire may not be happy with that either
Probably a good idea to talk and see if we can come up with a deal

oh look here's one

Groundhog day has nothing on PH

[mattmurdock]

gooner1 said:

The EU will be the ones building a hard border, if one is going to be built.

Not the Irish. Not the UK.

Just like Mexico will be building the wall for Trump, right?

The whole reason the backstop is needed is to stop the EU having to put up a hard border if we won't. Not much point having a customs and regulatory regime if you take no steps to prevent goods moving freely between the EU and the UK.

And the earlier quotes are right, the main way of tackling immigration is to not provide access to work or to government services to those who do not have any right to be here, but that doesn't tally with 'taking control of our borders' if we have no control over one of our borders.

[gooner1]

mattmurdock said:

Just like Mexico will be building the wall for Trump, right?

The whole reason the backstop is needed is to stop the EU having to put up a hard border if we won't. Not much point having a customs and regulatory regime if you take no steps to prevent goods moving freely between the EU and the UK.

And the earlier quotes are right, the main way of tackling immigration is to not provide access to work or to government services to those who do not have any right to be here, but that doesn't tally with 'taking control of our borders' if we have no control over one of our borders.

So the concern over rekindled terrorist action will only become a reality if the UK
builds the border?

[amusingduck]

Vanden Saab said:

Helicopter123 said:

No Border = GFA Intact = No Problem.

Leave the EU = Border = Problem.

Does that help?

Perfect just so us idiots understand could you quote the section in the GFA which says that if a border is put in place then the agreement is in any way altered or null and void Thanks

Also could you please explain what you mean by "No Border", as there is very much a border between ROI and NI right now.

[mattmurdock]

gooner1 said:

So the concern over rekindled terrorist action will only become a reality if the UK
builds the border?

No, the concern is that any border infrastructure will cause people to behave differently in a way that threatens the integrity of the Good Friday Agreement.

The border infrastructure will not really be there to stop movement of people, more movement of goods, but that doesn't alter the fact that some will see it as a return to a state we thought we had moved on from.

[The Dangerous Elk]

One would hope the EU Army alongside the Guarda would take a very firm and aggressive action against a terrorist threat based within its boarders.

Or could it be that the growing activism in support of Irish separatists within the EU has generated a long term plan for re-unification ?
This is NOT about anything other than driving a wedge between the Uk and Nth Island.
Never underestimate the hatred of the "British Way" held by many EU politicians, it goes back many many years (pre war).

Edited by The Dangerous Elk on Tuesday 18th December 13:27

[wc98]

amusingduck said:

youngsyr said:

amusingduck said:

youngsyr said:

How can you control immigration from the EU if you have an open border with no checks for anyone coming from the EU to the UK?

What you are saying is effectively "How can you control immigration if you allow tourists?"

Why fly to ROI and walk into the UK when they can just fly straight here?

Once they're in the UK their circumstances are identical.

Your analogy is completely false.

Tourists (and UK citizens) are currently subject to immigration control at the point of entry to the UK if arriving from outside the EU, including passport checks and having your photographs taken in many cases.

You obviously cannot do that with an open border.

It is absolutely possible to allow tourists and control immigration just as we do now.

This has been done to death. It's even got it's own thread.

https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...

jsf said:

sgtBerbatov said:

So what's to stop Mr.Frenchman flying in to Dublin, driving up to Belfast, getting the boat to Scotland and living in England? The UK don't want free movement of people from the EU, and the only real physical frontier to the EU is the Irish border. So Britain doesn't want free movement from the EU, but don't want a hard border, so how are you meant to stop those from the EU just walking across the border and having a pint in Fermanagh?

It isn't up to Ireland to stop people leaving it's country to another country. It's up to the other country to police the border and stop people entering it. So it very much is Britain's problem if they don't want a free movement of people. You can't think about it any other way, as there is no other way.

And so far as the UK legal position is on anything they have seen fit to repeal any act which stops them doing something. So, like I said, take a huge bag of salt with you when considering what they say.

I read posts like this and then wonder if people like you have ever travelled the world.

You don't control illegal working at the border on any major scale (you get the stories of Calais migrant camps etc, but that's a tiny scale of people that is directly targeted because those people will work in the illegal economy if they get through the border, they are not the people most systems are there to manage), you control it via the systems of local and national government, you do it by requiring people to register for tax and have a national insurance number, you do it by requiring any rent checks include a check on right to work and live. We already have this system in place as we have people from outside the EU visiting us already. Brexit doesn't change this.

Your Frenchman can just jump in his car and cross the channel, passing through the French and UK border control points. That wont change post Brexit. Why would you think it would? We have visa free travel arrangements with large parts of the world, the EU will just become another one of the current blocks, assuming we manage a deal with the EU. If we don't manage a deal with the EU as a block, we will just do it on an individual country basis, as we do with the rest of the world.

I could jump on a plane today and fly to the USA and stay there for 6 months legally, i cant take a job, if i tried the employer would find i am not entitled and so couldn't take me on. The only way i could work there would be to do it illegally, i might get away with it for a while but i wouldn't be building any social security rights and could at any moment be thrown out, as happens daily with the Mexican influx.

This is not rocket science. It's almost like being a member of the EU has fried some peoples brains and they have forgotten how the world works outside EU membership.

Quoted from said thread, thanks jsf

great post .

[gooner1]

mattmurdock said:

gooner1 said:

So the concern over rekindled terrorist action will only become a reality if the UK
builds the border?

No, the concern is that any border infrastructure will cause people to behave differently in a way that threatens the integrity of the Good Friday Agreement.

The border infrastructure will not really be there to stop movement of people, more movement of goods, but that doesn't alter the fact that some will see it as a return to a state we thought we had moved on from.

Then it's probably not a good idea for the EU to install the infrastructure, yes?

Define " behave differently"

[youngsyr]

amusingduck said:

Quoted from said thread, thanks jsf

That argument doesn't stack up though, did it?

You're claiming that illegal immigration is controlled by it being illegal and holding up the US as an example of where this system is effectively controlling illegal immigration.

However, illegal immigration is (at least perceived) to be a huge problem in the Southern United States and in the Southern EU states, routinely making headline news. Do I need to link the stories for you?

The reality is that illegal immigration is a problem even with closed borders in both the EU and the USA. I don't see any reason why it wouldn't be a problem in the UK too.