# Brexit and the Border



## cremeegg

As it becomes more and more apparent that Brexit will being back a hard border, it is time for the Irish government to put the UK and the rest of the EU that we will veto any Brexit deal that involves a return of the border.


----------



## dub_nerd

This is a tough one. If the UK is outside the customs union then a soft border is nigh on impossible. Let's assume that their fantastical idea of using technology -- with the corresponding imposition of costly tech requirements on other EU member states -- is never going to fly with anyone. But our veto on a hard Brexit deal, while it sounds satisfyingly like sticking two fingers up to them, cannot improve things. The default WTO rules leaves them outside the customs union and we get the hard border anyway. 

Basically, the hard border is the inevitable consequence of Britain leaving the EU. The only alternative is the one that Labour have had their recent epiphany about. But it is only temporary, and essentially amounts to pretending to leave the EU without actually doing so. Everyone is going through contortions to pretend that Cameron's gamble (and its outcome) wasn't the most monumentally stupid decision ever. But we probably have to face that reality.


----------



## cremeegg

If we make it clear at this stage in the negotiations to the UK and indeed the other EU members that the only alternative to the WTO rules is no return to the border it should serve to concentrate minds.

The EU had agreed that the Irish question needs to be addressed before trade negotiations begin. We should use that support our fellow EU members have given us.


----------



## dub_nerd

But what does "no return to the border" even mean? Certain elements of the British establishment believe that they are mandated -- indeed, _required_ by the results of their referendum --  to leave the customs union. Are we going to tell them they can't? Or are we just going to have no border even if the UK is outside the customs union? Clearly the EU can't let us do that.

If you're going to insist on no border you have to start by putting forward a proposal where that's possible.


----------



## cremeegg

dub_nerd said:


> If you're going to insist on no border you have to start by putting forward a proposal where that's possible.



That is looking at Brexit the wrong way around. The British have decided that they want to leave the EU. They want to negotiate a deal on their relationship with the EU post Brexit. 

Ireland will have some input into this deal as a member of the EU. However when (if) a deal is reached by the negotiators it will be put to the EU council for approval, at that point Ireland will have a veto. I am suggesting that Ireland should make clear now and not at the last minute that we will veto any deal which involves a return to a hard border. The EU has accepted that progress in relation to Ireland is one of the three pre-conditions for talks on a post Brexit trade deal. We should use this support from our EU colleagues to indicate our position now. 

It would not be appreciated if ireland were to say nothing at this stage and then object to a deal at the end stages.


----------



## dub_nerd

What scenarios are possible that don't involve a hard border?


----------



## Purple

dub_nerd said:


> What scenarios are possible that don't involve a hard border?


None, other than the UK reversing their decision.

What we really have to avoid is being foisted with the utterly dysfunctional State-let that is Northern Ireland; the poorest region of the UK which, without the subsidy it gets from London, would be running a budget deficit of 25%. The gap in GDP per person between here and there is similar to West and East Germany in 1990. They have no functioning private sector economy. Partition has been an economic and social disaster for Northern Ireland. We shouldn't be left to foot the bill, socially or economically. 

Brexit was just that; Britain wanting to leave the EU. They didn't even spare a thought for Northern Ireland because to most people in the UK Northern Ireland is not really part of their country.


----------



## dub_nerd

Purple said:


> None, other than the UK reversing their decision.



That was my impression too. Which is why I can't really fathom what the OP is getting at. There's no point threatening to veto a Brexit deal if all options lead to the same result, _vis-à-vis_ the border. We can't veto Brexit itself.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

Purple said:


> Partition has been an economic and social disaster for Northern Ireland. We shouldn't be left to foot the bill, socially or economically.


That's a tad revisionist.  For the greater part of this State's existence we have been chronically poor and disadvantaged compared to the six counties.  What changed all that was our joining the common market in 1973.  Picture the scenario, a group of eight of the richest nations on earth plus a ninth peripheral but tiny basket case.  We were lavished with what amounted to charity.  Add to that a good bit of cute hoorism, bending the single market rules on taxation for example, inspired by the likes of CJH and Larry G and we rose to the top of the prosperity league.

I read in today's IT that Prof Kinsella is urging that we join our neighbour in pursuing Irexit.  Part of his case is how the EU abused us over the bail out.  Irexit means a return to the pre 1973 norms.  By the way I remember the Hard Border pre 1973.  The customs checks were all on the Southern side.  Latterly the security checks were on the Northern side, but it was the South that was most exposed to a customs free border.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

We have no veto on the terms of Brexit.  That will be subject to qualified majority rules.  We do have a veto on any postponement of Brexit or allowing a transition period.  Fintan O'Toole has suggested that like OP we should use this veto to get what we want on a seamless Border. 

That's fine in principle but in a scenario where the UK and the rest of the EU 26 were happy with a transition that included keeping current Border arrangements  do we really think we could use that Nuke to have the Border thing sorted out up front. Especially since ever before we joined the EU it was us who were mainly responsible for the hard customs Border (see above). It wouldn't work anyway, we would be the biggest victims in the fall out - just about as useful as that guy Kim's nuke.


----------



## Firefly

Duke of Marmalade said:


> We have no veto on the terms of Brexit.



I believe any trade agreement between the EU and any other country (including the UK) needs to be ratified by all members of the EU (which will be a major hurdle for the UK). So we could technically veto any trade agreement put forward unless the border issue is resolved...


----------



## Purple

Duke of Marmalade said:


> That's a tad revisionist.  For the greater part of this State's existence we have been chronically poor and disadvantaged compared to the six counties.  What changed all that was our joining the common market in 1973.  Picture the scenario, a group of eight of the richest nations on earth plus a ninth peripheral but tiny basket case.  We were lavished with what amounted to charity.  Add to that a good bit of cute hoorism, bending the single market rules on taxation for example, inspired by the likes of CJH and Larry G and we rose to the top of the prosperity league.


Loath that I am to quote your favourite ginger economist [broken link removed] is interesting reading. 
Your presentation of how things went before and after we joined the EEC and what caused our economy to grow sounds like the sort of thing a bitter-orange man would say and ignores the main factors in our growth; tax competition (within the EEC and EU rules) which drew in FDI, location, access to markets and a low wage moderately educated English speaking population. The low wage thing is well gone and we are slipping back on the education front but we got here on more than corruption and handout's.



Duke of Marmalade said:


> I read in today's IT that Prof Kinsella is urging that we join our neighbour in pursuing Irexit.  Part of his case is how the EU abused us over the bail out.  Irexit means a return to the pre 1973 norms.  By the way I remember the Hard Border pre 1973.  The customs checks were all on the Southern side.  Latterly the security checks were on the Northern side, but it was the South that was most exposed to a customs free border.


I wasn't born when we joined the EEC so that bits all before my time.
What is the case is that the Northern economy has been in decline since partition and that since the late 50's ours has been getting better. It is the unwanted member of the family that nobody wants.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

_Purple_, I have to say that is an excellent article by Him, if his statistics are correct which they often aren't.  I must say that I expected Him to be a contrarian Irexit chap but it seems Prof Ray Kinsella is alone in that.


----------



## cremeegg

Duke of Marmalade said:


> We have no veto on the terms of Brexit.



As I understand it we have a veto on the final deal. Not on the terms of the deal. I.e. we can say no to the package presented, we cannot pick and choose within the package.




Duke of Marmalade said:


> do we really think we could use that Nuke to have the Border thing sorted out up front.



Probably not, that is why we should announce as loudly as possible and as soon as possible that we will.

That would increase the pressure on both the UK and the EU negotiators to do a deal that avoids a return to a hard border. We can climb down if necessary later but we should be as vociferous as possible now. After all how to define a hard border.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

cremeegg said:


> As I understand it we have a veto on the final deal. Not on the terms of the deal. I.e. we can say no to the package presented, we cannot pick and choose within the package.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Probably not, that is why we should announce as loudly as possible and as soon as possible that we will.
> 
> That would increase the pressure on both the UK and the EU negotiators to do a deal that avoids a return to a hard border. We can climb down if necessary later but we should be as vociferous as possible now. After all how to define a hard border.


I suppose.  It's the equivalent to firing missiles over Japan without actually deploying them.  I see your point,


----------



## cremeegg

This Brexit thing is getting more serious by the day.

It has now been decided that Irish people will be able to travel freely to Britain after Brexit, it has not been decided that Irish people will be able to work there. Excellent news, this according to the IT is a "Major Breakthrough"
_
"At the end of the third round of talks in Brussels, Mr Barnier and his UK counterpart [broken link removed] articulated a mutual understanding that the British-Irish Common Travel Area would remain largely unchanged after Brexit, allowing EU citizens to travel – *but not necessarily work* – within both jurisdictions."_

I am overjoyed.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/wor...ugh-in-irish-strand-of-brexit-talks-1.3205341


----------



## cremeegg

Delighted to see the FG are on the ball with this. Coveney tried to explain in diplomatic terms to Boris Johnston, but Leo has laid it out clearly.

Whatever veto we will be able to, or want to, effect at the eleventh hour, now is the time to push for a no border situation.

Well done Leo.

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...king-politicians-did-not-think-things-through


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

It is clever politicking by FG but they are seeking the commitment from the wrong source.  The UK has been very clear from the outset that they want the continuation of full free trade with the EU so they have been quite genuine that they don't want a hard border albeit admittedly this would not be primarily driven by concern for Ireland North or South.  It is the EU who do not want the UK to have their cake and eat it and who will impose tariffs on UK exports to the EU.  It is the EU who will force Ireland to implement a hard border.

Everybody knows this and last week we were let into the plan to square all these circles - an EU/UK border in the Irish Sea.  FG are playing the SF/IRA card and it will backfire.


----------



## Purple

Duke of Marmalade said:


> It is clever politicking by FG but they are seeking the commitment from the wrong source.  The UK has been very clear from the outset that they want the continuation of full free trade with the EU so they have been quite genuine that they don't want a hard border albeit admittedly this would not be primarily driven by concern for Ireland North or South.  It is the EU who do not want the UK to have their cake and eat it and who will impose tariffs on UK exports to the EU.  It is the EU who will force Ireland to implement a hard border.
> 
> Everybody knows this and last week we were let into the plan to square all these circles - an EU/UK border in the Irish Sea.  FG are playing the SF/IRA card and it will backfire.


The EU are saying that they want the UK to work within the same framework as every other country which has free trade with the EU. The UK does indeed want it all in their favour. To suggest that it is the EU who are being difficult, or to suggest that the UK is being genuine by an reasonable measure, is erroneous.

Politics on the "little englander" wing of the Tory Party is driving the UK's narrative, not reason or the UK's broader self interest.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

Purple said:


> The EU are saying that they want the UK to work within the same framework as every other country which has free trade with the EU. The UK does indeed want it all in their favour. To suggest that it is the EU who are being difficult, or to suggest that the UK is being genuine by an reasonable measure, is erroneous.
> 
> Politics on the "little englander" wing of the Tory Party is driving the UK's narrative, not reason or the UK's broader self interest.


I agree with all that.  Dan O'Brien had a good article in the _Sindo_.  He observes that Leo is playing a very high stakes game.  There is nothing the little englanders would like better than to throw the toys out of the pram and as a bonus be able to blame Ireland.  On the other hand if we get what we ask for our position is weakened with our EU partners the next time we try and veto progress on corporation tax.  

We need to start evaluating all the various possibilities and prioritise them.  Is it really a red line that there should be no border frictions, Sweden/Norway manage fine?  

Whilst the IRA in us all would love to stuff it to the DUP and have a border in the Irish sea, how important is that really?  

Our corporate tax regime advantage trumps all these factors.  If it really does look like coming to the UK throwing the toys out, Leo should concede; think of the brownie points that would give us on the CT thing.  It would be the end of Leo domestically of course, won't happen.


----------



## Purple

Duke of Marmalade said:


> Our corporate tax regime advantage trumps all these factors. If it really does look like coming to the UK throwing the toys out, Leo should concede; think of the brownie points that would give us on the CT thing. It would be the end of Leo domestically of course, won't happen.


The border with Northern Ireland doesn't matter from an economic perspective. What this is really about is the massive proportion of our trade which passes through the UK to the mainland. Trade with the UK, obviously including NI, accounts for 16% of our total trade. Our trade with the mainland (EU excluding UK) accounts for 34% of our total trade. It is the free movement of that which we must protect as a large proportion of it currently moves through Britain.


----------



## cremeegg

Britain now has a new wheeze to get over the border issue.

U.K. officials tried to accelerate Brexit negotiations by suggesting that rather than wielding its veto next month, Ireland could hold fire and block a final accord if it wished, three people familiar with the talks said. see here https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...open-ended-irish-veto-to-break-brexit-impasse

Fortunately I dont think Simon will fall for that.


----------



## cremeegg

What a day. I haven't had so much fun listening to the news in years.

So a deal was agreed by all sides. Barnier telephoned Varadkar to confirm that it met Irelands expectations, Leo said yes, then Theresa backed out. Unbelievable.

Tomorrow in London will be even more fascinating. Will tabloid ranting against Ireland win the day? Will a backlash grow against the DUP?

Now that the possibility of a separate deal has been conceded in principle by Theresa, what about Scotland, or even London having their own deal. Why not, unlike the NI situation their political leaders actually *want *a separate deal.

The reality is that the whole thing is not about Ireland at all. The issues here are the same as the issues for the UK as a whole. If Theresa cannot do a deal for Ni she cannot do a deal for the UK.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

This is the truly best moment in sport since Denis Taylor beat Steve Davis in the final ball of the final game.

Even I have my rebel  instincts roused, no way should we cave in to the DUP.


----------



## Purple

Duke of Marmalade said:


> Even I have by rebel instincts roused, no way should we cave in to the DUP.


I have read that a few times and still find it hard to believe


----------



## odyssey06

How did anyone think this would be acceptable to the DUP? How can Leo be surprised they objected to it? 
Was Leo unaware of the existence of the DUP before today? Come off it.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

odyssey06 said:


> How did anyone think this would be acceptable to the DUP? How can Leo be surprised they objected to it?
> Was Leo unaware of the existence of the DUP before today? Come off it.


Agree entirely.  What the DUP and the Brexiteers were suggesting on this seemed entirely reasonable to me, it seemed to involve the most minimal of customs clearance, not much greater than existing excise clearance on alcohol and cigs.  But, possibly with the mischievous connivance of the EU, we had persuaded the British into an acceptance of this "NI in GB out" solution.  She obviously didn't even run it past the DUP.  But the DUP veto is about to be shown up as a complete delusion.  If JC (traditionally a SF/IRA supporter) proposed a motion of no confidence in May, would the DUP support it, No Way.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

Purple said:


> I have read that a few times and still find it hard to believe


_Purple_ there is a saying in the North that if you scratch a catholic you will find a rebel.  I hate to admit it but the latest episode shows that I am not immune from the syndrome.


----------



## cremeegg

odyssey06 said:


> How did anyone think this would be acceptable to the DUP? How can Leo be surprised they objected to it?
> Was Leo unaware of the existence of the DUP before today? Come off it.



No one thought it would be acceptable to the DUP, but that is Theresa's issue not Leo's. She should have either persuaded or coerced the DUP before telling Barnier she was ready to go ahead.


----------



## Betsy Og

I see no reason to take the pressure of Theresa, whats the worst that could happen?, she can't please both, the UK deal is bigger fish, DUP bluff will be called, they will walk, another election and with any luck the DUP will fall back into the abyss. 

I suppose too much to hope that Labour would replace Tories...


----------



## Purple

cremeegg said:


> No one thought it would be acceptable to the DUP, but that is Theresa's issue not Leo's. She should have either persuaded or coerced the DUP before telling Barnier she was ready to go ahead.


I think the mistake Leo made was forgetting that Mrs May is way out of her depth and the job is intellectually beyond her.


----------



## odyssey06

cremeegg said:


> No one thought it would be acceptable to the DUP, but that is Theresa's issue not Leo's. She should have either persuaded or coerced the DUP before telling Barnier she was ready to go ahead.



Taking Unionist sentiment into account is Leo's issue too though... to say that he is 'surprised' is a blatant lie.


----------



## cremeegg

odyssey06 said:


> Taking Unionist sentiment into account is Leo's issue too though... to say that he is 'surprised' is a blatant lie.



He was surprised that Theresa was not in a position to sign. He was not the only one. She gave Michel Barnier to understand that she was ready to sign the draft agreement.


----------



## cremeegg

NI already has "regulatory divergence" from the rest of the UK in matters of Education, Abortion, and Gay Rights, mostly at Unionist urging. The Unionist opposition to extending this to agriculture, medicines and product safety, is pure hypocrisy.


----------



## Dan Murray

odyssey06 said:


> Taking Unionist sentiment into account is Leo's issue too though... to say that he is 'surprised' is a blatant lie.


 
I get Odyssey's point - I'm surprised that folk are surprised that ULSTER SAYS NO


----------



## Dan Murray

Purple said:


> I think the mistake Leo made was forgetting that Mrs May is way out of her depth and the job is intellectually beyond her.



When she became leader, I taught Theresa or may not be a good PM. Surely, at this stage, any fair-minded jury would have returned its unanimous verdict.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

The very, very worst case scenario is that the Brexit talks crash and burn now and that the UK blames Ireland.  Even the CTA would be under huge threat; after all it benefits us proportionately far more than it does the UK.  I don't think people in the UK would scapegoat the DUP; even Labour spokespersons are backing their assertion that there can be no divergence within the UK albeit they argue that implies the whole of the UK staying in.

Leo & Simon have played a blinder till now and scored a tremendous goal in injury time just to have it disallowed by the DUP referee.  But they must have the courage, if this goes to the very brink, to back off.  Given Leo's recent humiliation that would be a very difficult pill to swallow.  He would certainly have to make sure that he had MM fully on his side but I would think that MM's backwoodsmen would prevent him from endorsing such a capitulation to the old enemy.

Exciting times but the stakes are getting very high.


----------



## cremeegg

Duke of Marmalade said:


> Leo & Simon have played a blinder till now and scored a tremendous goal in injury time just to have it disallowed by the DUP referee.  But they must have the courage, if this goes to the very brink, to back off.



They have indeed played a blinder so far. All they need now is the courage to hold the course.

They have the backing of the EU, which will hold, not because the EU loves Ireland but because and at the end of the day the issue of the Irish border is no different from the issue of the border between the UK and the rest of the EU.

What is going on at the moment is just a dry run for the real Brexit/trade deal talks. If the Brexiteer ultras and their DUP colleagues are allowed to bluff Ireland/The EU now, they will come to believe they can do the same again in the second phase.


----------



## Delboy

I agree with you fully Cremeegg except for the 'backing of the EU'. We may have it now but I don't doubt they'll throw us into oncoming traffic if the situation demands it.

I also have a feeling we'll pay for this strong EU support in the years to come through our corporate tax policy.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

I agree with you both up to a point.  But there is a real appetite in the UK to throw the toys out of the pram, and the first toys to be thrown out will have Made in Ireland stamped on them.

The disappointing thing is that the DUP are not being pilloried today in the GB even by the good guys.  There is a general sympathy for their stand that they should not be treated differently from the rest of the UK. There also seems to be a feeling that we are overegging this border thing, that it could be very manageable with a bit of creativity.  And I am not sure this Peace Process (end of) threat carries much weight across the water.  

All sides are bluffing here or at least I hope they are.  The DUP are certainly bluffing for the last thing they want is JC as PM.  Theresa can't call that bluff though for the DUP has considerable sympathy within her own cabinet.  Theresa is bluffing when she says No Deal is better than a Bad Deal.  Let's hope that Leo/Simon is bluffing that they have currently reached the frontier of their red  line on the border issue.


----------



## odyssey06

Stephen Collins in The Irish Times sums up quite well for me the dangerous game the Irish government have been playing:
https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/irish-government-is-partly-to-blame-for-brexit-shambles-1.3317855

_The fact that the DUP didn’t get the message may partly have been a failure by the British to keep the party in the loop, but it also reflects the way hardline sectarian politics in Northern Ireland works. If one side is happy the other assumes they have lost and tries to scupper whatever deal is on offer... The way Tánaiste Simon Coveney jumped the gun with a premature radio interview on Monday morning and the subsequent mood music suggesting that the Irish side had got what it wanted, even before Theresa May met Jean Claude Juncker, was tempting fate. It didn’t take a genius to know that the one sure way to frighten the already nervous horses in the DUP and the loony Tory right was to put on a display of Green triumphalism.

Ireland more than any other country needs Britain to exit the EU on the best possible terms, but the approach adopted in Dublin has the potential to push our neighbours in the other direction._


----------



## Betsy Og

It seems its fixed - and this is from DUP sources ....not that I have any, but RTE News quoting them. Guaranteed access to Britain for Nordy goods is confirmed (not that I would have thought there was ever a doubt about that). So with an invisible border I'm presuming, de facto, the 'keep em out' policy will be left to the ports and airports of NI to implement. Can we expect "the jungle" from Calais to re-locate to the Titanic Quarter ?! (I jest).

So all's well that ends well it looks like - a feather in the collective cap of Leo & Simon....


----------



## Betsy Og

Hmmm, dunno. Seems we're very much where we were, bar a guarantee...

So it's to be a magical border after all, "technological solution", or it'll be alright on the night. If there's hard Brexit how does this work...

Maybe it'll put another incentive on TM to soften the whole leaving single mkt & customs union - what, pray, is the prize in such an exit...


----------



## odyssey06

Good summary here on what was actually agreed...
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/dec/08/main-points-of-agreement-uk-eu-brexit-deal


----------



## Firefly

odyssey06 said:


> Good summary here on what was actually agreed...
> https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/dec/08/main-points-of-agreement-uk-eu-brexit-deal



From your article:

_It leaves unclear how an open border will be achieved but says in the absence of a later agreement, *the UK will ensure “full alignment” with the rules of the customs union and single market that uphold the Good Friday agreement. *_

Does this mean that NI will remain within the customs union? If so, does this not represent a potentially massive opportunity for companies based in NI? They may now trade fully and freely with both the UK and EU and will be the only jurisdiction to do so???


----------



## odyssey06

Firefly said:


> From your article:
> _It leaves unclear how an open border will be achieved but says in the absence of a later agreement, *the UK will ensure “full alignment” with the rules of the customs union and single market that uphold the Good Friday agreement. *_
> Does this mean that NI will remain within the customs union? If so, does this not represent a potentially massive opportunity for companies based in NI? They may now trade fully and freely with both the UK and EU and will be the only jurisdiction to do so???



I think more likely it means that the UK as a whole will undertake to align with those specific rules of the customs union and single market that are part of the Good Friday agreement? Whatever they are!

I would not interpret it to mean that NI, or the UK as a whole, will be in full compliance with the customs union and single market.


----------



## Purple

It mean Soft Brexit; you still have to obey the rules but now you don't get a say in making them.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

Hotel EU: You can check out any time you want but you can never leave


----------



## Betsy Og

Continuing the Eagles analogy - I guess the UK wants to use the amenities and eat the food, without actually staying there.

Poor Theresa has hit a parlimentary setback, dear oh dear for her. For everyone else it seems the Brexit deal will have more scrutiny in each sub-aspect, which cannot be bad, since it give Labour and others a chance to put pressure on.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

Davis describes the deal as aspirational.  Well the EU will make sure that is not the case so far as the hard border is concerned.  But if I were the DUP  I would regard any assurances they have as not worth the paper it is written on.  The EU won’t give a damn about any backtracking on internal UK commitments.


----------



## cremeegg

Duke of Marmalade said:


> Davis describes the deal as aspirational.  Well the EU will make sure that is not the case so far as the hard border is concerned.  But if I were the DUP  I would regard any assurances they have as not worth the paper it is written on.  The EU won’t give a damn about any backtracking on internal UK commitments.



WOW. Bang on the money. Can I borrow your crystal ball.


----------



## cremeegg

I am concerned that the Irish border is taking too much prominence at this stage of the Brexit negotiations.

There is nothing special about the Irish border except to those of us on this Island. The economic issues apply equally in the Channel.

It would be better if our border had a lower profile. We don't want to be blamed for the mess.

After all its all just talk.

The City is a truly remarkable industry, worth billions to the UK, it employed over 3% of all British workers and pays about 12% of all UK tax. The Brexiteers think that EU businesses wont want to be cut off from access to the services of this wonderful business. The French Government thinks that they can help reproduce the business in France and collect all that tax, and have all that employment.

When the City realises that Financial Services are not going to be included in any deal, Brexit will be called off.


----------



## odyssey06

cremeegg said:


> I am concerned that the Irish border is taking too much prominence at this stage of the Brexit negotiations.
> There is nothing special about the Irish border except to those of us on this Island. The economic issues apply equally in the Channel.



It's not even that special to us, the vast majority of our UK trade is with Great Britain not Northern Ireland. 
Obviously, we would to avoid it, but I don't think a hard border would be disastrous, either economically or in terms of political situation in NI.
What would be disastrous if loss of free trade with our major trading partner.
We seem to be risking that with our focus on a soft border.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

odyssey06 said:


> It's not even that special to us, the vast majority of our UK trade is with Great Britain not Northern Ireland.
> Obviously, we would to avoid it, but I don't think a hard border would be disastrous, either economically or in terms of political situation in NI.
> What would be disastrous if loss of free trade with our major trading partner.
> We seem to be risking that with our focus on a soft border.


Couldn’t agree more.  Excellent article in yesterday’s IT making this very point.  It argued that Leo and Simon have boxed themselves in.  It doesn’t help that Leo’s popularity is soaring on the back of him flying the green flag. Very hard to make the necessary compromises on a soft border from where he is now.

Hard not to suspect that the EU are playing the Irish border thing somewhat cynically.  Then we have the May-DUP deal.  This will all end very badly unless - there is a sea change in UK political situation, possibly with JC in charge.


----------



## Firefly

I agree. I think the border issue is over-played. Signage will be very important. Rather than having "Ireland" / "UK" at the checkpoints it could just as easily be "EU" / "Northern Ireland". Instead of armoured cars & soldiers they could build playgrounds. etc etc

I would be very concerned if NI stayed within the customs union though - they would be the only jurisdiction with free trade with both the EU and the UK. Their wages are lower so it would be very tempting for a lot of companies based here to move up the road.


----------



## Betsy Og

Of course the EU is playing hardball, why wouldn't it. It's only slowly dawning on the UK that they dont have much ammo, and there's hardly any upside in this impending Brexit and plenty of downside. If they could get over their pride they'd do the sensible thing and re-run the referendum, at which point I dont think there's any doubt but that the result would be reversed.

So the incompetence/hoped-for-fudge on the border is coming home to roost, let the Tories stew, they made the mess I'm in no rush to fix it for them. Irish sea border always seemed the easiest solution and I think we'll end up there in the end. As regards US investment, the one thing they value is certainty. NI and the chaotic 'UK' are anything but certain, so I wouldn't have any great fears there.

I do think the border is slightly over-egged in terms of return to the troubles, but I dont see them putting magic cameras on all 300ish crossings, and I dont think closing roads is on the cards at all. So to the sea we go !! It'll make United Ireland more seamless in the long run too - not that I'm in any rush there but I do think it is a creeping inevitability as the UK disintegrates.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

I think the EU and certainly Ireland are still hoping that with the fluidity of UK politics Brexit may still not happen.  This explains the EU hardball attitude.  We seem to be a pawn in this and we are playing along with the strategy.  If it works that's fine but the stakes are being pushed very high. Unless the UK political scene dramatically changes this hardball attitude will backfire and we will have no deal.  RoI will be by far the biggest losers.  Not only do we trade much more with GB than with NI but also GB is a vital landbridge in our trade with the continent.

There are not going to be customs checks on the M1 but a modest extension to existing arrangements around our different VAT would be a small price to pay to avoid no deal.  We are talking ourselves into believing that any increased complication at all in RoI/NI trade would cause Patrick Pearse to spin his grave.  Ironic since whenever we did have a very hard customs border this was almost entirely to protect the newly independent state.


----------



## Betsy Og

I dont really see a no-deal Brexit happening. However bad it would be for us it would surely be so strikingly bad for the UK that they would see sense. Would the Commons vote for a no-deal Brexit? - they have been given a vote after all. In such a scenario I think we should be pressuring SF to turn up and vote, in the interest of their voters who voted remain. Sure twould be great craic if nothing else.....


----------



## TheBigShort

While I respect the right of the British to leave the EU, and can understand the sentiment to a certain degree, the manner in which they are doing so is farcical. 

Two of the primary drivers of Brexit are the objectives of the UK being able to negotiate their own trade deals, and taking back control of borders. 

As far as negotiating trade deals, they already had one within the EU and are in danger of ending up with less favourable terms after Brexit. 
As far as controlling borders, all the emphasis has been on the potential impact of trade even though Brexit is supposed to herald 'the best deal possible with EU'. And as far as controlling immigration, unless barb wire fences are erected all along the border (wont happen) then anyone can simply get bus (or Dublin to Belfast train?)to the border, find a rural road, cross a field, and hey presto - they are in UK. 

Deal or no deal, Brexit is a political quagmire, the impact of which will reverberate for a long time afterwards.


----------



## Vanessa

Just prepare for Germany/France to sell us out. This so called deal before Christmas is pure propagnda and of no use. Varadkar and co just used it to fool the public at the behest of their European masters.
Germany doesnt want to lose the UK markets for its Mercs, BMWs etc


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

Vanessa said:


> Just prepare for Germany/France to sell us out. This so called deal before Christmas is pure propagnda and of no use. Varadkar and co just used it to fool the public at the behest of their European masters.
> Germany doesnt want to lose the UK markets for its Mercs, BMWs etc


This doesn't make sense.  The issue is how frictionless will the EU/UK trade relationship be.  Brexiteers use the Mercs/BMW argument to claim that the EU are just as keen as the UK for it to be as frictionless as possible, which suits Ireland just fine.  The fear is that the EU will want to punish the UK and then indeed Ireland may find itself stabbed in the back(stop).


----------



## TheBigShort

Vanessa said:


> Just prepare for Germany/France to sell us out. This so called deal before Christmas is pure propagnda and of no use. Varadkar and co just used it to fool the public at the behest of their European masters.
> Germany doesnt want to lose the UK markets for its Mercs, BMWs etc



I dont buy into that. My own view is that there wont be a Brexit, or at least what Farage & co thought Brexit to be.
We have already seen the deadline extended to facilitate the 'transition period'.
I expect the UK simply to transpose all existing EU legislation and ECJ judgements into UK law and carry on from there.
That is more or less what we did when we left the UK. I reckon the UK will simply continue to engage with the EU as it already does with regard to trade and immigration, but without a say on how the rules are determined.
If UK politicians try to ban Polish or Romanian, or whoever, from entering UK then the EU will reciprocate in kind with UK citizens entering EU. Its no benefit to anybody.

The Y2K bug comes to mind. In the end, come Brexit day, nothing will happen. The changes will occur in the years ahead.


----------



## joe sod

TheBigShort said:


> I dont buy into that. My own view is that there wont be a Brexit, or at least what Farage & co thought Brexit to be.



I agree I think it will all be diluted to be meaningless, the brexiteers dont have the whiphand like they did after the referendum. However I also think that Brussels also is not in a strong position as shown by the election results and the rise of euro skepticism throughout europe. There will also have to be big changes in Brussels and the thorny issue of migration will also have to be properly addressed. There are simply too many countries in eastern europe and even italy and greece not prepared to be dictated to by Brussels. If Brussels had of given Cameron the concessions on migration that he was looking for, Brexit would not have happened. Brussels is as much to blame for this mess as the brexiteers


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

The bit that is going to be hard to gloss over is Britain’s contribution to EU budget.  I don’t think UK will get a no change situation except they are spared the contribution.
.


----------



## TheBigShort

Duke of Marmalade said:


> The bit that is going to be hard to gloss over is Britain’s contribution to EU budget.  I don’t think UK will get a no change situation except they are spared the contribution.
> .



Thats a good point. But I would imagine the cost of that from the UK side is no seat at the decision making table. The cost of that becoming more apparent as time moves on. Although if the UK transposes ECJ judgements onto its statute books, as I suspect will happen, then the ECJ may remain the de facto final arbitrator in many UK constitutional issues.

However, as you have pointed out, a no-change in the status of UK/EU relations will hardly be facilitated without cost.


----------



## Purple

It looks like Borris has thrown the whole border question into chaos again.


----------



## Ceist Beag

Once again Boris blowing off as if it has absolutely nothing to do with him, he's some spoofer!


----------



## TheBigShort

Purple said:


> It looks like Borris has thrown the whole border question into chaos again.



A few obs on that article;



Johnson considers a Trump like approach to be more effective in getting deals done quick and fast. He is probably correct in that. What he is not correct in, or what he does not observe of Trumps tactics is, the unknown consequences or unknown impacts of the Trump approach – or effectively, the unwinding of international diplomacy.

International diplomacy in which protocols and procedures have built up over the centuries between countries around the world to try eliminate the unknown effects causing conflict at later dates which would, could, otherwise be avoidable.



Johnson is acknowledging that there is a chance Brexit could fall short of the type of Brexit he, and his like-minded supporters want. This presumably is a clean break, with or without a deal. A no-deal Brexit he acknowledges could lead to a meltdown, initially – but that it’ll be alright on the night! 



Johnson highlights the British Treasury as the ‘heart of Remain’. Whether accurate or not, it is evidence that powerful interests in the British establishment are at work at thwarting Brexit. Probably goes someway to explaining why his private comments are being leaked like a sieve every week.



He may have been reading my comments from April last? 



TheBigShort said:


> The Y2K bug comes to mind. In the end, come Brexit day, nothing will happen. The changes will occur in the years ahead.



Although my reference of 'Y2K' was in the context that Brexit will, if not overturned, be nothing like what Johnson & farage pine for.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

He is of course right that the border thing is being completely over-egged but this is terrible diplomacy.  Even less likely now that Simon Varadkar will make the pragmatic compromise on this.  Even Boris knows the leak is damaging.


----------



## Purple

Duke of Marmalade said:


> Simon Varadkar


----------



## Betsy Og

Duke of Marmalade said:


> He is of course right that the border thing is being completely over-egged but this is terrible diplomacy.



For right or wrong it looks likely that the 'head the ball' element will wreck 'frictionless' infrastructure - cameras and the like. Anyway, they are not going to put cameras on every back road. Do we close border roads - IMHO we don't, why should border communities suffer. Attempts to close would again become a dissidents disneyland.

The obvious solution has always been an Irish Sea border, DUP are the only ones pushing the point with their narrow agenda (NI can't be different from the rest of the UK....except where it suits us). So Irish Govt should continue to hammer in the wedge of the border, it may eventually cause the DUP to split off, an election and maybe a Brexit call off. I'm loving the current impasse, bring it on, the DUP and Tories are looking worse by the day, its gone so bad the folk in the North are considering voting for a United Ireland, Scotland is pretty much on the road for Indy2. End of days for the UK, and they know who to blame. NI (or rather the DUP) are turning their back on a nice opportunity, the only part of the UK with full access to the EU - there's surely jobs in that - if they weren't so blinded by yesteryear's issues they could see that.


----------



## TheBigShort

Duke of Marmalade said:


> He is of course right that the border thing is being completely over-egged but this is terrible diplomacy.  Even less likely now that Simon Varadkar will make the pragmatic compromise on this.  Even Boris knows the leak is damaging.



I’m not so sure.

In terms of it being a source of a return to violence by republicans then I agree. Whilst apart from the stupidity of offering dissidents a target, a return to hostilities is very remote. However, an economic recession, jobs losses, etc and automatically the Brexit border will be to the fore for taking the blame.

Johnsons dismissiveness of extent of trade across the border is another factor. It may be chicken feed in grand scheme of British trade, but any disruption to that trade is a disruption and a disadvantage to the business people operating in the region.

Or to put it another way, Johnson and his grand scheme of international free trade deals means sod all to the farmers and towns people of Strabane, Enniskillen, Bundoran, Cavan, Monaghan, Newry, Dundalk etc. If ever there was evidence that Johnsons vision of Brexit means zip-all for Ireland, north & south, then his leaked comments are evidence of that.

The lunacy of Brexit is the mantra of it opening Britain to international free trade deals while simultaneously jeopardising the biggest free trade that it already has with the EU. The mantra of taking back control of its borders while its only land border will still remain open for any EU citizen to waltz their way across in or out of the UK.

Brexit, as visioned by Johnsons and Farage is a sorry joke.


----------



## TheBigShort

Back to you Mrs May....

https://www.rte.ie/news/2018/0608/969190-barnier-brexit-uk/


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

This certainly is great entertainment.  The EU are bouncing the Brits for fun.  They are using Ireland as their patsy and Leo Coveney is playing right along as of course is Mary Lou and practically the whole political/commentariat class.  

This is going to go pear shaped.  Nominally Ireland will be the biggest loser in a Brexit meltdown.  I say nominally because in reality we need a dose of economic cooling down.  House prices and rental levels are going bananas again.  A Brexit correction might set us back on a sustainable track.


----------



## TheBigShort

In terms of political theatre, Brexit is a blockbuster no doubt.
As for the EU using Ireland as its patsy, there is an element of truth in that. But I think the stakes are high, Ireland has rolled over often enough - Nice, Lisbon, private bank debt. We like Europe, and want to be European, but I think we will cash in our chips on this. Either Brussels backs us to the hilt on an open border or its another nail in the EU coffin, which, let alone Brexit, is also facing political pressures in Greece, Hungary, Poland and now Italy.
Domestically, FG are in the ascendancy. For the first time since partition (or their foundation) they have a real window of opportunity to eclipse FF and for the foreseeable future.
Leo has already trotted the "you will never again be left behind by an Irish government" to Nationalists.
Today he is the OOrder top guest while simultaneously promoting West Belfast culture in Féile na bPobail. 
The Shinners are also in the ascendancy and MLou has seamlessly taken the reigns from a giant of Irish political leadership.
Add to that, same sex marriage, repeal of the 8th, where does FF find itself today?
I have great respect for MMartin as a person and a political leader, but his days are numbered I think. He is of an older generation, it is he that now carries the baggage. If not a resignation soon, I would expect a heave in the autumn.


----------



## Betsy Og

Not sure re a FF heave, the one enduring characteristic of FF is populism, and they have a few chameleon tricks in their bag. I suggest they would not wish for the electoral wilderness of turning themselves into a craw thumping ROI version of the DUP, there isn't the tribalism to support it. I think they'll row in with 'winner' Micheal Martin and sure before you know it they're all about liberation of women and progressive social policy. Agree though that good times at the moment for FG but it'll soon be back down the pit to homelessness and health so wouldn't be getting carried away either.


----------



## joe sod

TheBigShort said:


> Although if the UK transposes ECJ judgements onto its statute books, as I suspect will happen, then the ECJ may remain the de facto final arbitrator in many UK constitutional issues.



While I agree with much of your analysis in relation to brexit not really happening, I do not agree with the above. The brexiteers and many more than that have a pathological hatred of the ECJ and that is one area they wont compromise on , they may decide to adopt ECJ rulings but only in relation to trade. The brexiteers will have to get something in order to claim that they have achieved brexit. However there are also big changes and reforms happening in the EU now, other countries in the bloc are also strenuously voicing the same concerns and demanding changes to how things are done. These changes in relation to immigration and the reach of Brussels in relation to social issues are the same issues that resulted in brexit. Therefore in a few years time the EU may not be the same organization the brits voted to leave . Therefore there may not be the same urgency in pulling the plug completely


----------



## TheBigShort

Betsy Og said:


> Agree though that good times at the moment for FG but it'll soon be back down the pit to homelessness and health so wouldn't be getting carried away either.



Fair point, but its the confidence and supply agreement that is effectively rendering FF rudderless. How much longer can FF support the government while purporting to be in opposition?
As such, I make an amendment to my call above - an Autumn election, if not, a heave against Martin.


----------



## TheBigShort

Looking increasingly likely a leadership contest / snap election in UK.
A de facto Brexit II referendum perhaps?


----------



## Betsy Og

TheBigShort said:


> Looking increasingly likely a leadership contest / snap election in UK.
> A de facto Brexit II referendum perhaps?


I'd love to think so but it seems that the (probably >50%) remainer vote has no-one to vote for, except the Lib Dems. Labour are, as far as I can tell, still more or less pro-Brexit - whether you're a Corbyn fan or not I think its fair to say he didn't but his heart into a Remain vote, and seemed happy enough with the Leave outcome.

It would be fantastic to get the DUP dislodged, we could then move towards an Irish sea border (if a border is needed at all). So while there may well be a leadership push against May ..... the longest flagged knifing since...I dunno.... but she's been Dead Woman Walking ever since the last election - I think it would be suicidal (even by Tory standards) to have an election at this juncture. So unless some Tory souls are willing to sacrifice themselves/the party by voting the government down I don't see an election coming.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

The Irish stance should be four square behind the latest British position.  It avoids a North/South border but far more importantly it leaves East/West trade unaffected.
The EU will probably reject it but Simon Varadkar should be unequivocally saying it meets Ireland’s requirements so that Ireland will not be blamed for the final no deal.
But there seems to be a sort of death wish on the part of the Irish electorate which doesn’t mind the disaster that a no deal would mean for us so long as we can gloat at the UK’s predicament.
Simon Varadkar realizes the populist dividend from continuing to be a thorn in the Brits’ side but they are not doing the country any favors if they go along with an EU rejection of this position.


----------



## cremeegg

Duke of Marmalade said:


> part of the Irish electorate which doesn’t mind the disaster that a no deal would mean for us so long as we can gloat at the UK’s predicament.



Loving it. Brexit is funnier than Dara O Briain

However 



Duke of Marmalade said:


> The Irish stance should be four square behind the latest British position.  It avoids a North/South border but far more importantly it leaves East/West trade unaffected.
> The EU will probably reject it but Simon Varadkar should be unequivocally saying it meets Ireland’s requirements so that Ireland will not be blamed for the final no deal.



This is absolutely right. The Irish government position should be to support the British position. The east west trade issue is hugely important for Ireland.


----------



## Betsy Og

I agree we should be seen to support the latest proposal. However I think we are overestimating our voice on this. We have may an unofficial/de facto "veto" as regards a hard border, but after that we're back into the pack of 28 or however many. 

From the EU's point of view I can see why they wouldn't want the a la carte/cherry picking sought by the UK, I think the UK needs to find out if its pregnant or not, this 'little bit pregnant' is not cutting it, you're either in or you're out. I'd prefer if they were in, or even if they get away with the latest proposal (can't see it). V little sympathy for their 'predicament', can't imagine there's much of the feet left at this stage they've been shot so much.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

Boris gone.  This is better than the WC


----------



## TheBigShort

I agree to a large extent. But Davis is obviously not a lone-wolf. Ultimatums are now the order. 
Either you are in the 'No deal is better than any deal' camp or, 'some deal is better than no deal' camp.


----------



## TheBigShort

Duke of Marmalade said:


> Boris gone.  This is better than the WC



Wow, crossed posts. 
Showdown time!


----------



## TarfHead

In the voice of Malcolm Tucker ..

.. _see you, you're the ****ing omnishambles

_


----------



## TheBigShort

cremeegg said:


> Loving it. Brexit is funnier than Dara O Briain
> 
> However
> 
> 
> 
> This is absolutely right. The Irish government position should be to support the British position. The east west trade issue is hugely important for Ireland.


 
Whilst I understand the importance of Irish/British trade, the actual British position is pure fantasy.
For the EU to agree would in effect an abandonment of EU rules as set under Treaties.
I have no issue with Ireland supporting Britain's latest proposals, but as we seeing they are crumbling apart as we speak. 
There is simply no way the EU will be able to take any of this seriously. 
Best Ireland sticks with EU side until Brits proposal has a chance of political support from its own parliament.


----------



## joe sod

Duke of Marmalade said:


> The Irish stance should be four square behind the latest British position. It avoids a North/South border but far more importantly it leaves East/West trade unaffected.
> The EU will probably reject it but Simon Varadkar should be unequivocally saying it meets Ireland’s requirements so that Ireland will not be blamed for the final no deal.



fully agree, by being difficult we are playing into the hard brexiteers narrative that we are just the patsies of the EU and dont have any independent position on brexit ourselves. As for Boris johnson he is the biggest buffoon going , at least David davis made up his own mind and resigned , boris just jumped after davis went. Remember after the brexit referendum , johnson went to ground and avoided the media for days, he did not know what to do. He also chickened out of the tory leadership because he knew he could not beat theresa may. He is a laughing stock all over the world except in UK, like the british version of the healy raes.


----------



## TheBigShort

joe sod said:


> by being difficult we are playing into the hard brexiteers narrative that we are just the patsies of the EU and dont have any independent position on brexit ourselves



The question I would have is, so what? 

The three most influential Brexit politicians are 1) Farage - a symbolic mouthpiece with zero input on negotiations
2) Davis - now in political wilderness, for now.
3) Johnson



joe sod said:


> the biggest buffoon going ,



As it stands, from my perspective at least, hard-core Brexiteers are heading for the wilderness. 
I don't think Ireland would be wise to hitch its wagon to this bunch of donkeys.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

TheBigShort said:


> Best Ireland sticks with EU side until Brits proposal has a chance of political support from its own parliament.


 I’m not suggesting at all that Ireland should take the UK side against the EU.  But we should make it clear that what they have put on the table satisfies the border issue.  It is vital that if this thing goes belly up Ireland is not in the firing line of British recrimination.


----------



## Firefly

TheBigShort said:


> The question I would have is, so what?


Exactly what I was thinking. So bloody what!



TheBigShort said:


> As it stands, from my perspective at least, hard-core Brexiteers are heading for the wilderness.
> I don't think Ireland would be wise to hitch its wagon to this bunch of donkeys.


Yip. We need to do what's best for us.


----------



## Seagull

The one thing I don't understand is why nobody on the remain side brought up the issue of the Irish border ahead of the vote. Surely they should have been hitting the point hard that it was going to cause them issues, and they wouldn't be able to have a clean cut, but would basically have to comply with loads of EU regulations while reaping no benefits.


----------



## TarfHead

Seagull said:


> The one thing I don't understand is why nobody on the remain side brought up the issue of the Irish border ahead of the vote.



Because no-one in England, and it was primarily England that swung the Leave vote, knows or cares about Ireland.  The Remain campaign lost by trying to counter fear and mistruths with logic and reason.  The referendum and the Trump campaign have demonstrated that the rules of engagement have changed.  Populism and demagoguery will win out over truth.


----------



## TheBigShort

Duke of Marmalade said:


> I’m not suggesting at all that Ireland should take the UK side against the EU.  But we should make it clear that what they have put on the table satisfies the border issue.  It is vital that if this thing goes belly up Ireland is not in the firing line of British recrimination.



That's fair enough, I suppose at this point when someone says that Ireland should stand behind the British position it needs to be clarified which British position we are talking about - TM soft Brexit with open Irish border or Davis, Johnson, Farage calamity hard Brexit. 
Its great stuff though, proper political box office.


----------



## joe sod

TarfHead said:


> Because no-one in England, and it was primarily England that swung the Leave vote, knows or cares about Ireland.  The Remain campaign lost by trying to counter fear and mistruths with logic and reason.  The referendum and the Trump campaign have demonstrated that the rules of engagement have changed.  Populism and demagoguery will win out over truth.



the remain side lost because they refused to address the migration issue honestly, they skirted around the issue of migration preferring to concentrate on economic issues. You could say that the remain side exagerrated the effects of brexit on the economy ( so far it has not been that bad but the full effects are not factored in and it could get much worse). Now the migration issue is central to the EU talks with other nations like Italy refusing to allow any progress until migration is properly addressed. Therefore migration was a valid concern by many people throughout europe and should have been dealt with properly by the EU before the brexit vote.


----------



## TheBigShort

joe sod said:


> the remain side lost because they refused to address the migration issue honestly,



I think you make a fair point, but as is typical with politics, perception and idealism often falls short of realism.

Immigration, and the ability of the UK to negotiate its own trade deals are cornerstones of the (hard) Brexiteer mindset.

To date, they have produced absolutely zero in terms, less than zero in fact, on how to achieve those ideals while simultaneously being able to crack a deal with the EU to which they (apparently) aspire to do.

The soft-Brexiteers, another bunch of British Empire idealists,  are at least trying to face some pragmatic realities.

The first of which is free-trade.

The UK has a free-trade with 27 other European countries. Some of whom are the biggest economies in the world, France, Italy, Spain and of course Germany.

Some of whom are not, Ireland for example or Poland or Denmark.

Despite this the Brexiteers believe it can, and should be able to agree its own free trade agreements with whoever it wants. I can only assume that would include both large and small economies like France, Italy, Spain and Germany and Ireland, Poland  and Denmark.

The answer is, of course it can and should be able to negotiate its own trade deals.
But on better terms than those countries have agreed amongst themselves? I don't think so.

That is just delusional to the point of demanding a break up of EU.

***

Immigration and control of borders.

The UK has one land border, in NI. Short of putting barb wire across 300+km (?) then trying to police immigration is utterly futile.
Instead, ironically, the Farage Brexiteers are jeopardizing the very thing they set out to achieve - free frictionless trade!


----------



## Firefly

TheBigShort said:


> Despite this the Brexiteers believe it can, and should be able to agree its own free trade agreements with whoever it wants. I can only assume that would include both large and small economies like France, Italy, Spain and Germany and Ireland, Poland  and Denmark.
> 
> The answer is, of course it can and should be able to negotiate its own trade deals.



Is that true though? I wasn't aware that EU member states can negotiate bilateral trade agreements with non EU countries individually, rather the trade deal is with the EU itself. Hence the pain Canada had to go though. For the UK then surely, it will have to have a binding trade agreement with the EU which will apply to all member states.


----------



## TheBigShort

Firefly said:


> Is that true though?



I meant of course it should be able to negotiate its own trade deals upon leaving the EU. 
I assume it would wants a trade deal with other 26 EU states (which it already has). So for the Brits to assume it can negotiate more favourable terms with some of the biggest economies of the world, like France, Germany on better terms than it has now is delusional to the point of demanding that the EU breaks-up.


----------



## odyssey06

TheBigShort said:


> I meant of course it should be able to negotiate its own trade deals upon leaving the EU.
> I assume it would wants a trade deal with other 26 EU states (which it already has). So for the Brits to assume it can negotiate more favourable terms with some of the biggest economies of the world, like France, Germany on better terms than it has now is delusional to the point of demanding that the EU breaks-up.



Certainly when it comes to the US, Canada, Australia, China, India, Brazil etc that was the claim.
I'm not aware of any Tory Brexiteer who claimed they could negotiate a more favourable bilateral trading agreement with an EU member state such France or Germany directly. If you can find a single reference to back that up, I'm all ears.


----------



## TheBigShort

odyssey06 said:


> I'm not aware of any Tory Brexiteer who claimed they could negotiate a more favourable bilateral trading agreement with an EU member state such France or Germany directly. If you can find a single reference to back that up, I'm all ears.



That's exactly the point. It cant negotiate bilateral trade agreement with France, Germany etc short of EU breaking up. 
So in order to pursue its ambition of negotiation 'better' trade deals with the rest of the world it is jeopardizing its current free frictionless trade deals with some of the world's biggest economies in the EU. 
The stupidity of all this is while the Brexiteers fashion notions of negotiating better deals it fails to consider that the EU can also negotiate 'better' deals too. 
So there is no guarantee that the UK will be able to negotiate any better deals with US, Canada, Australia etc than the EU can negotiate with same.


----------



## odyssey06

TheBigShort said:


> That's exactly the point. It cant negotiate bilateral trade agreement with France, Germany etc short of EU breaking up.
> So in order to pursue its ambition of negotiation 'better' trade deals with the rest of the world it is jeopardizing its current free frictionless trade deals with some of the world's biggest economies in the EU.
> The stupidity of all this is while the Brexiteers fashion notions of negotiating better deals it fails to consider that the EU can also negotiate 'better' deals too.
> So there is no guarantee that the UK will be able to negotiate any better deals with US, Canada, Australia etc than the EU can negotiate with same.



Yes but what Tory Brexiteer or who exactly claimed they could negotiate a bilateral trade deal with France? Your phrasing strongly implies that it was claimed.

It took the EU 7 years to negotiate a deal with Canada and it was still nearly derailed by a Belgian province. If it took the EU that long to negotiate a trade deal with the non-EU country probably most like itself in terms of global perspective, I wouldn't hold my breath on the next ones.

There's no guarantees that the UK will be able to, but nor are there any guarantees to assume that they cannot. The US is already lining up with one.

It's also stupid of the EU to not have some sort of free trade deal with the UK given the amount the EU exports to it, but the EU seems spectacularly unconcerned about the fate of Irish farmers, Spanish produce growers, French wine makers, German car makers etc. Perhaps it was stupid or naive of the UK to assume the EU wouldn't cut off its nose to spite its face and would actually take its citizens concerns into account rather than what is best for the EU 'project'.


----------



## TheBigShort

odyssey06 said:


> Yes but what Tory Brexiteer or who exactly claimed they could negotiate a bilateral trade deal with France? Your phrasing strongly implies that it was claimed.



Does it? I wouldn't have thought so myself. I never mentioned bilateral trades. I mentioned a trade deal with the EU that consists of some the biggest economies in the world. I gave examples of those large economies such as France  and Germany. I also gave other examples of smaller economies like Ireland.



odyssey06 said:


> It took the EU 7 years to negotiate a deal with Canada and it was still nearly derailed by a Belgian province. If it took the EU that long to negotiate a trade deal with the non-EU country probably most like itself in terms of global perspective, I wouldn't hold my breath on the next ones.



Yes, I would imagine international trade deals can be quite complex. I'm not sure of the in's and out's of that deal, but presumably it could be said that Canada took 7 yrs to negotiate a deal with the EU?
Canada is apparently one of the Brexiteers obvious targets I would have thought. I read somewhere that Farage wants Britain to take back control of British waters so that it can export its fish to Canada. I read elsewhere that Canada already has its own fish.



odyssey06 said:


> There's no guarantees that the UK will be able to, but nor are there any guarantees to assume that they cannot. The US is already lining up with one.



That's true, but what is also true is that the UK already has a free trade deal with 26 other EU countries, that includes some of the biggest economies in the world, like France and Germany as examples.



odyssey06 said:


> It's also stupid of the EU to not have some sort of free trade deal with the UK given the amount the EU exports to it, but the EU seems spectacularly unconcerned about the fate of Irish farmers, Spanish produce growers, French wine makers, German car makers etc.



I agree, but I think the point that you appear to be missing is that the UK _already has a free trade deal_ with 26 other EU countries, that includes some of the biggest economies in the world, like France and Germany as examples.
What it appears to want is better terms and conditions for itself over and above the t&c applicable to the other 26 EU states while simultaneously not being 'burdened' with the t&c it doesn't like that are applicable to the other 26 countries.


----------



## Sophrosyne

http://ukandeu.ac.uk/explainers/trade-deals-with-third-countries/

This is a good article on the UK negotiating trade deals with Third Countries and the possible outcomes.

The UK is interested in trade agreements with the US, China, Canada, Australia & New Zealand. The article goes on to say:

"Free trade agreements (FTAs) are associated with increases in bilateral trade: so, while it would obviously depend on the terms of specific deals, it is probable that UK trade deals with third countries would increase UK trade. 
However, since tariff rates are already low, there is limited potential for tariff reductions to increase trade flows – tariffs between the US and the EU average about 1.6%. 
Non-tariff barriers (NTBs), such as regulatory differences, are much more important. The estimated cost of NTBs on goods is 12.9% to 13.7% between the EU and the US, and on services (which make up 80% of the UK economy), sectors such as business services and financial
services face NTBs worth on average around 30% in trade costs.

There are some simple solutions to reducing these costs, such as through mutual recognition of technical standards and expanded labelling for food products. However, many of these costs reflect regulations arising from differences in preferences. For example, if UK citizens do not wish to have chlorinated chicken or genetically modified food in the country, then there is not much expansion in trade that can be expected without seriously undermining the wishes of the public.

But even the most ambitious set of FTAs is unlikely to replace the trade lost as a result of leaving the EU. For example, the National Institute of Economic and Social Research (NIESR) estimate that concluding FTAs with all of the above countries, and more, would only boost UK total trade by about 5%, while Brexit will reduce it by more than 20%."


----------



## odyssey06

TheBigShort said:


> Does it? I wouldn't have thought so myself. I never mentioned bilateral trades. I mentioned a trade deal with the EU that consists of some the biggest economies in the world. I gave examples of those large economies such as France  and Germany. I also gave other examples of smaller economies like Ireland.



In your post #97 in this thread you accuse Brexiteers of a delusion without any reference or justification whatsoever. It is something you appear to have invented out of thin air. Do you withdraw your remarks or can you please provide something to justify them?
"Agree its own free trade agreements with whoever it wants. I can only assume that would include both large and small economies like France, Italy, Spain and Germany and Ireland, Poland and Denmark."

By naming the states directly it is implicit you are talking about bilateral trade deals.



> Yes, I would imagine international trade deals can be quite complex. I'm not sure of the in's and out's of that deal, but presumably it could be said that Canada took 7 yrs to negotiate a deal with the EU?
> Canada is apparently one of the Brexiteers obvious targets I would have thought. I read somewhere that Farage wants Britain to take back control of British waters so that it can export its fish to Canada. I read elsewhere that Canada already has its own fish.



What do you think is more complex? Negotiating a trade deal with a confederation of 27 states? Or negotiating a bilateral deal between 2 states?
It didn't take Canada 7 years, it took the EU 7 years, to suggest otherwise is absurd. Canada nearly walked away from the deal several times because of EU delays.



> That's true, but what is also true is that the UK already has a free trade deal with 26 other EU countries, that includes some of the biggest economies in the world, like France and Germany as examples.



The UK doesn't have a free trade *deal *with 26 other EU countries. It is a member of a customs union with 26 other member states, a union which brings which it many other costs (contributions to budget) and obligations.


----------



## TheBigShort

odyssey06 said:


> In your post #97 in this thread you accuse Brexiteers of a delusion without any reference or justification whatsoever. It is something you appear to have invented out of thin air. Do you withdraw your remarks



Do I withdraw my remarks?

No. 

Its my opinion. Im happy to be proven wrong if that is the case. But from where im standing, the British want to leave the EU to get rid of all the constraints of its membership, but retain all the benefits of free trade in EU economies.
I think that is a delusional aspiration. Im not saying its impossible, but if they were to succeed I would suggest that that would be the demise of the EU.
But considering some of the most foremost Brexiteers are currently facing into the political wilderness, the reality of a Brexit that facilitates better t&c for the UK after leaving is delusional.



odyssey06 said:


> Agree its own free trade agreements with whoever it wants. I can only assume that would include both large and small economies like France, Italy, Spain and Germany and Ireland, Poland and Denmark."
> 
> By naming the states directly it is implicit you are talking about bilateral trade deals.



Yes, and I explained that I was simply using the countries as examples.



odyssey06 said:


> What do you think is more complex? Negotiating a trade deal with a confederation of 27 states? Or negotiating a bilateral deal between 2 states?
> It didn't take Canada 7 years, it took the EU 7 years, to suggest otherwise is absurd. Canada nearly walked away from the deal several times because of EU delays.



I would suggest the former to be more complex. So what?
As I said, im not familiar with the in and outs of that deal so I will take your word for it.
So what if Canada 'nearly walked away'? That would have been absurd of them to do that.



odyssey06 said:


> The UK doesn't have a free trade *deal *with 26 other EU countries. It is a member of a customs union with 26 other member states, a union which brings which it many other costs (contributions to budget) and obligations.



It is a member of a customs union and single market which permits the free movement of capital and labour - in ordinary parlance, it is free trade.
The same rules apply to all members. The UK wants different rules for itself. It wants a separate free trade agreement that facilitates the movement of capital, goods and services but limits the movement of labour.

Instead, the whole Brexit saga is about how to limit the damage to trade between EU and UK and not one reasonable proposal on how to control immigration across the Irish border - you do accept that 'taking control of borders' to stop immigration is an aim of the Brexiteers.


----------



## TheBigShort

BREXIT WhitePaper: Free movement of people will end.

Short of putting check points and barbwire along border in NI how on earth, in real terms, will this work?

More delusion.

****

Im watching Sky News report with incredulity.

The reporter has stated, in light of the above, that when it comes to UK citizens visiting the EU for business or travel that the government will seek 'visa-free travel'.

Not only that, it wants to keep Irish border open - while simultaneously stopping free movement of people between UK and EU!

What am I missing here?


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

TheBigShort said:


> BREXIT WhitePaper: Free movement of people will end.
> 
> Short of putting check points and barbwire along border in NI how on earth, in real terms, will this work?
> 
> More delusion.
> 
> ****
> 
> Im watching Sky News report with incredulity.
> 
> The reporter has stated, in light of the above, that when it comes to UK citizens visiting the EU for business or travel that the government will seek 'visa-free travel'.
> 
> Not only that, it wants to keep Irish border open - while simultaneously stopping free movement of people between UK and EU!
> 
> What am I missing here?


What’s your difficulty B/S?  The UK has forever had a common travel area with ROI.  Long before the EU Ireland had a different immigration policy to the UK.  So people could legally enter ROI and then easily  illegally enter the UK.  But as an illegal immigrant they would not have access to social welfare, the NHS, or be able to work etc.


----------



## TheBigShort

Duke of Marmalade said:


> What’s your difficulty B/S?  The UK has forever had a common travel area with ROI.  Long before the EU Ireland had a different immigration policy to the UK.  So people could legally enter ROI and then easily  illegally enter the UK.  But as an illegal immigrant they would not have access to social welfare, the NHS, or be able to work etc.



No problem at all Duke, now that you have explained matters. 
Im just wondering however, as an EU citizen will I be barred from working in the North, but as an Irish citizen I would be allowed? 
And I presume that if UK stops EU citizens from UK services, then UK citizens can expect not to be able to use EU services?


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

An EU citizen will need a visa to work in UK but an Irish citizen will not need a visa.

I am not sure what will be involved in services but taking my own area of experience I guess that EU life companies will not be able to sell to UK citizens and vice versa, as it was in the beginning


----------



## TheBigShort

Duke of Marmalade said:


> An EU citizen will need a visa to work in UK but an Irish citizen will not need a visa.



So not all EU citizens will require a visa then?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...ention-on-human-rights-tory-mps-a8444386.html

Im reading some of this stuff about 'free visa-travel' for business people, students and young travel. Then im reading about the UK being bound to European Human rights convention.

Then im reading this article about 'very similar' free movement.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...immigration-free-movement-offer-a8326101.html

All in the hope of trashing out a customs union deal for trade (even though it already has one).

I must look up Nigel Farages Twitter account, he is hardly a happy camper? 
If this is 'Brexit means Brexit', what a joke!


----------



## RETIRED2017

If you were born in  Austria and you parents come from another EU Country I belive you can choose any of your parents EU Country to be a citizen of you will not become a an Austrian Citizen I suspect Ireland Will have Problems other Countrys will not have at present when you look at immigrant .free.movement offer and we are next door to the only land Border after the UK leaves the EU, The fun for Ireland is only starting when you look at the Irish citizen having free movement to the UK I suspect the TDs are going to have a shorter holiday this year,


----------



## TheBigShort

odyssey06 said:


> The US is already lining up with one





https://news.sky.com/story/donald-trump-theresa-mays-brexit-plan-will-kill-us-trade-deal-11435355


----------



## Betsy Og

They're at it again (in the Commons), as far as I can tell backtracking on their recent white paper. A bit confusing at the minute but Irish sea border getting an outing, talks of new legislation would make it illegal for HMRC to fulfil white paper. Basically they're on track to crash out with no deal, another Minster resigned and voted against.

I cant understand why Theresa May is hanging around, I don't believe her heart is in this shambles. Why not let the hard Brexiteers take control of the ship and be the ones who sink it. Surely to God Labour would win in an election, just on a "at least we're not them" ticket. If Commons go for an Irish sea border maybe the DUP would pull the plug (the North is moving even more remain from recent polls), I'm not sure their bribe will get paid anyway at this stage - the tribal nature of NI should mean they cope ok in an election - haven't heard much of UUP in a long time.

Anyway, more watching from behind the couch.......


----------



## Firefly

Betsy Og said:


> I cant understand why Theresa May is hanging around, I don't believe her heart is in this shambles.



I agree. She must be thinking of an exit strategy.

I would also expect Labour to win in a re-election.


----------



## RETIRED2017

Firefly said:


> I agree. She must be thinking of an exit strategy.
> 
> I would also expect Labour to win in a re-election.


Looks like she is going to lead from the front after outmanoeuvre  the no deal boys out of there job I think she will out manoeuvred them again when the time comes,
By By David and Boris Ben Maria ,  Interesting to watch Jacob Rees-Mogg towing the line from now on, I suspect he is just after doing Boris out of the top  job long term,


----------



## TheBigShort

RETIRED2017 said:


> Looks like she is going to lead from the front after outmanoeuvre  the no deal boys out of there job I think she will out manoeuvre them again when the time comes,
> By By David and Boris Ben Maria ,  Interesting to watch Jacob Rees-Mogg towing the line from now on, I suspect he is just after doing Boris out of the top  job long term,



Indeed. An assertive move by May today. This surely throws down the gauntlet to Boris, Davis et al - put up or shut up!


----------



## TheBigShort

https://www.independent.co.uk/voice...te-paper-will-of-british-people-a8461331.html

The Independent in the UK throwing its weight behind another referendum on Brexit.


----------



## Betsy Og

More important though, Gary Lineker wants another referendum. I know ye think I'm joking or being sarcastic, but Brexit needs to be...errr... 'fought' at the chip shop, not over afternoon tea. While the leading Brexiteers are public school toffs, the vote to leave came mainly from 'rustbelt' type towns in the North. So we need to meet those folks on their own territory, and how better than through the medium of football. It should be a no-brainer if it happens - even with all the shocks of the first vote and Trump etc there'd want to be a frightfully (word chosen especially) fatalistic tone in the country for it to vote for Brexit a second time given what they now know.


----------



## RETIRED2017

Betsy Og said:


> More important though, Gary Lineker wants another referendum. I know ye think I'm joking or being sarcastic, but Brexit needs to be...errr... 'fought' at the chip shop, not over afternoon tea. While the leading Brexiteers are public school toffs, the vote to leave came mainly from 'rustbelt' type towns in the North. So we need to meet those folks on their own territory, and how better than through the medium of football. It should be a no-brainer if it happens - even with all the shocks of the first vote and Trump etc there'd want to be a frightfully (word chosen especially) fatalistic tone in the country for it to vote for Brexit a second time given what they now know.


I see Boris Jonson held secret talks with Steve Bannon in the last few days `the likes of Bannon drums up support in the same places  you expect Gary Lineker to,

I do not think it will work  look at sites like this to see the disconnection that has developed between sections of the population who are struggling  and the resentment  bubbling just below the surface from people doing well,
It is the people who are showing resentment that need to be worked on to get it through,
I think the word rustbelt speakes for itself and the people who use that term,


----------



## Betsy Og

'Rust belt' to my knowledge, is not a pejorative term, its mainly used about Pennsylvania & around which were industrial powerhouses but are now in decline. The same could be said of much of the North East. It's not a taunt, its shorthand.

I don't demean their struggle, but if their vote was in protest then by all accounts they will be the ones to suffer, they were misled by Brexiteers and their blatant lies. If anyone seriously tells me the hard bexiteers give  a fig about the people of the North East then I'll stand on a football terrace with no shirt on in the middle of winter....


----------



## Sunny

RETIRED2017 said:


> It is the people who are showing resentment that need to be worked on to get it through,
> I think the word rustbelt speakes for itself and the people who use that term,



Rust Belt is not offensive. It is just a term that describes an important industrialised part of the US. And there are a lot of similarities with the North of England where both regions suffered huge unemployment in the 1970's and 1980's when entire industries collapsed.


----------



## RETIRED2017

Betsy Og said:


> 'Rust belt' to my knowledge, is not a pejorative term, its mainly used about Pennsylvania & around which were industrial powerhouses but are now in decline. The same could be said of much of the North East. It's not a taunt, its shorthand.
> 
> I don't demean their struggle, but if their vote was in protest then by all accounts they will be the ones to suffer, they were misled by Brexiteers and their blatant lies. If anyone seriously tells me the hard bexiteers give  a fig about the people of the North East then I'll stand on a football terrace with no shirt on in the middle of winter....


Betsy og / sunny
Yes I am aware when it was first used and possibly still is not offensive ,but if you look at the people who use it in most cases  from time to time it is for the worst kind of reasons,

You are correct  the hard bexiteers do not give a fig about these  people weather they are in or out of the EU and these people no longer give a fig about them ,


They may well feel that out of the EU the UK may  copy Germany and start supporting the people you live in these areas I would say the powers who are in control at present will have to start looking after these areas or there will be major unrest unless they get a bigger slice of what is left after brexit,

In fact voting for Brxit is the start of the unrest,

the Government in the country i already mentioned are afraid  if you do not keep them working the will start marching. the people from these areas of the UK will become power full not power less as you suggested after brexit,


----------



## cremeegg

Now that the UK parliament is on its summer holidays what developments can we expect on the Brexit front.

Mrs May is travelling about Europe to meet fellow heads of government to see if she can go behind Barnier's back. That does not seem to be working for her. She doesn't understand that most EU countries simply don't care. 

The UK decided to leave, that's a pity, given all the difficulties that face Europe it is unfortunate that the UK is walking away, but life goes on. M Barnier has been given the job of dealing with the process. 

Summer hopefully will bring a period of real negotiation out of the spotlight, at official rather that political level. There may be something looking like a proposal for a withdrawal agreement by the end of Summer. Lots of joy at the prospect of an orderly Brexit. But that may be the high point for common sense.

Then parliament resumes 5th September, with the Tory party conference at the end of Sept. Time for a savaging of whatever deal is outlined. JRM et al. in full flow. Whatever is on the table on 5th Sept will be broken by the conference if not earlier. Joy in different quarters.

If there is a proposal from the UK available for the EU summit in Oct to approve I would be surprised. The headlines in the UK papers about stockpiling food and medicine are in danger of becoming a self fulfilling prophecy. They also serve to sour the UK public mood against the EU. I cannot help thinking that they serve the needs of the Brexit extremists.

After that the boat will sail. Industry will make its choices, a December deal even if it happened would play to a departed audience. 

Still, Limerick might win the McCarthy cup, that would be nice.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade




----------



## cremeegg

cremeegg said:


> Summer hopefully will bring a period of real negotiation out of the spotlight, at official rather that political level. There may be something looking like a proposal for a withdrawal agreement by the end of Summer. Lots of joy at the prospect of an orderly Brexit. But that may be the high point for common sense.



Chequers



cremeegg said:


> Then parliament resumes 5th September, with the Tory party conference at the end of Sept. Time for a savaging of whatever deal is outlined. JRM et al. in full flow. Whatever is on the table on 5th Sept will be broken by the conference if not earlier. Joy in different quarters.



Chuck Chequers



cremeegg said:


> If there is a proposal from the UK available for the EU summit in Oct to approve I would be surprised.







cremeegg said:


> Still, Limerick might win the McCarthy cup, that would be nice.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

Good calls _cremeegg_.  £ doing surprisingly well just lately. Something seems to be stirring.  If May pulls this one off she will go down as the most wily politician since Machiavelli.


----------



## dub_nerd

Duke of Marmalade said:


> Good calls _cremeegg_.  £ doing surprisingly well just lately. Something seems to be stirring.  If May pulls this one off she will go down as the most wily politician since Machiavelli.


That Sterling bounce seemed to coincide with Dominic Raab announcing a deal likely by 21-Nov. He had to backpedal within hours but the news doesn't seem to have filtered through to the market yet.


----------



## john luc

as the saying goes, be careful watch you wish for. I fear that this attempt to talk this up is all flannel and that the British will crash out as the brexiteers plan it. They are truly driven by ideologue and know that chaos is a ladder.


----------



## cremeegg

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ire...ackstop-deal-set-to-cover-all-of-uk-1.3686240

The current speculation is that the NI issue will be dealt with by keeping the entire UK in a type of customs union.

Interesting that neither the EU (for the Republic) nor Britain (for NI) has thrown Ireland under the bus.

The proposal can be viewed as a concession by the EU in that it allows the UK to operate within the customs union without having to implement EU legislation in full.

Or viewed as a concession by the UK in that Britain has to continue to abide by some EU legislation and pay ongoing contributions.

Whatever way it is viewed Ireland north or south has not been sacrificed. Interesting. Of course its only speculation so far.

"Unless and until" remains to be agreed. If it is accepted that is a win for Leo, if it is rejected a win for Theresa (or Boris).


----------



## Purple

The more I see and hear Mrs. Foster the more I think she's happily go back to the "good old days" of bombs if it restored Ulster as a Protestant country for a Protestant people. I hope I'm wrong.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

Purple said:


> The more I see and hear Mrs. Foster the more I think she's happily go back to the "good old days" of bombs if it restored Ulster as a Protestant country for a Protestant people. I hope I'm wrong.


I don't agree with you there, _Purple_.  It is the pan-nationalist front from Simon Varadkar to Mary Lou McNugget to Howling Brendan that have their undergarments in a right twist over this backstop thing.  Jayz if they are so concerned about the visibility of the border why did they needlessly split the currency in 1979 and then even more needlessly and wastefully in 2004 introduce possibly the most visible aspect of the border - the different speed and distance measures?


----------



## Purple

Duke of Marmalade said:


> I don't agree with you there, _Purple_.  It is the pan-nationalist front from Simon Varadkar to Mary Lou McNugget to Howling Brendan that have their undergarments in a right twist over this backstop thing.  Jayz if they are so concerned about the visibility of the border why did they needlessly split the currency in 1979 and then even more needlessly and wastefully in 2004 introduce possibly the most visible aspect of the border - the different speed and distance measures?



I don't think it was Leo that did those things.

If we are listing historical reasons why we find ourselves dealing with this issue we'll be here a long time. 
We broke with Sterling to join the EMS because of the economic and political decision that our economic future lay with Europe and not with the UK. 
Given that we have reduced our relative reliance on the UK as an export market since then it has been shown to be a generally good decision. 

We moved to Km because that's what the rest of Europe used.
The question is why didn't the UK move, not why did we. 

Leo and Mary Lou aren't exactly buddies and it's hard to see the moderation in the DUP tail wagging the Tory/ Little Englander dog.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

Purple said:


> I don't think it was Leo that did those things.


The Pan Nationalist front did those things.  There wasn't the slightest whimper that the examples I cite would introduce very visible aspects to crossing the border.  The prospect of distancing themselves more from the Brits easily overrode any squeamishness about aggravating partition.


Purple said:


> We broke with Sterling to join the EMS because of the economic and political decision that our economic future lay with Europe and not with the UK.


And who gave a fig about the North and the border.  Talk about having cake and gobbling it.  The UK sees its future outside the EU and we elevate the cause borderi to the apogee of human rights.  When we saw our future with Europe and not with the UK the implications for the border and the North were totally irrelevant.


Purple said:


> We moved to Km because that's what the rest of Europe used.


Now I could debate the economic pros and cons of the break with sterling with you on a separate thread but really I can see absolutely no reason for the move to kilometres leaving aside the wasted cost of the exercise and the danger to road safety brought about by the confusion on speed limits.  Tourists from the US and the UK (including NI) vastly outnumber those from kilometre speaking countries.  No, this was another dash to cut the umbilical cord with Britain and again good riddance to NI.  To heck we have partition, let's wallow in it seemed to be the Pan Nationalist mindset.


Purple said:


> Leo and Mary Lou aren't exactly buddies.


Exactly and that's why I call it a Pan Nationalist front.


----------



## Leo

Duke of Marmalade said:


> I can see absolutely no reason for the move to kilometres



The move to km was initiated in Europe alongside the move to metric weights system in an attempt to align all members to the same standards. The UK just refused to cooperate.

Maybe suggesting Ireland changed just to spite the UK/NI is more of the Brexiteer mindset where some believe the UK has a larger influence over the world than is the case in reality.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

Leo said:


> The move to km was initiated in Europe alongside the move to metric weights system in an attempt to align all members to the same standards. The UK just refused to cooperate.


Okay _Leo_, it might be argued that Ireland were just behaving like good EU citizens and the Brits were the bad guys.  All the same we would not be best in class when it comes to our approach to corporation tax, for example.  The point I am making is that the visibility of the border seems to now be a "die in the ditch" issue.  I don't remember it even being discussed either here or up North when we went the extra kilometre for Brussels.

As for the DUP it is a bit of a case of "cried wolf".  They are so often (always?) unreasonable that sensible folk like _Purple _seem to think "ah there they go again".  Yeah sure there is an element of Paisleyism to their stance but they are right to point out that the East/West economic relationship is much more important than the North/South one and it is at least understandable that they are deeply suspicious of the Pan Nationalist front.

Anyway, leave aside the DUP, reasonable unionists  (they do exist) like Nobel Peace prize winner DT agree with the DUP on this.

Leo V saying that this time round the South would not desert northern nationalists was an unbelievable error.


----------



## Purple

Duke of Marmalade said:


> Okay _Leo_, it might be argued that Ireland were just behaving like good EU members and the Brits were the bad guys.  All the same we would not be best in class when it comes to our approach to corporation tax, for example.  The point I am making is that the visibility of the border seems to now be a "die in the ditch" issue.  I don't remember it even being discussed either here or up North when we went the extra kilometre for Brussels.
> 
> As for the DUP it is a bit of a case of "cried wolf".  They are so often (always?) unreasonable that sensible folk like _Purple _seem to think "ah there they go again".  Yeah sure there is an element of Paisleyism to their stance but they are right to point out that teh East/West economic relationship is much more important than the North/South one and it is at least understandable that they are deeply suspicious of the Pan Nationalist front.


The East/West trade relationship is far more important here as well. Nobody really gives a damn about the North, least of all the British Government. Conor Cruise O'Brien was right when he said that the only way Unionism will be able to protect its identity in the future will be within a united Ireland. Personally I hope it's a long way off.


----------



## cremeegg

Duke of Marmalade said:


> reasonable unionists  (they do exist) like Nobel Peace prize winner DT



Ah bless !

https://goo.gl/images/BVnUKd

https://goo.gl/images/jfhxXp


----------



## odyssey06

There seems to be some language drift going on. Leo seems to be using 'hard border' and 'border' as synonymous. Is there a nuance escaping me?


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

cremeegg said:


> Ah bless !
> 
> https://goo.gl/images/BVnUKd
> 
> https://goo.gl/images/jfhxXp


I was being a bit tongue in cheek about DT.  I deserved that
What we need now is a true statesman like Garret the Good. And I don't care if you show a picture of him in odd socks.


----------



## odyssey06

Duke of Marmalade said:


> I was being a bit tongue in cheek about DT.  I deserved that
> What we need now is a true statesman like Garret the Good. And I don't care if you show a picture of him in odd socks.



I dreamt that Mr. Haughey had recaptured Crossmaglen ... Then Garret got re-elected and gave it back again.


----------



## john luc

Northern Ireland's economy is heavily dependent on it public sector income and its this that needs to be protected by them should a united Ireland raise as a possibility. The average UK citizen is not aware just how much the North costs Britain to keep and so if a future UKIP decides to raise this issue as a reason to drop the north it could get traction with the voters. The North is in a very dangerous position at the moment because I believe Brexiteers would happily dump the north but only hold back because it would precipitate Scotland and even Wales looking to leave.


----------



## Purple

It looks like there is an agreement although it probably won't make it through the Commons.
If passed the Brits keep the North and we don't have to take on that social and economic basket case.

We may have dodged a bullet there and avoided the whole thing blowing up in our faces.


----------



## john luc

This saga is going to run for a long while yet methinks. Confucius had his tongue in his cheek when he said,"may you live in interesting times". As a history buff I'd say "may you live in boring times and read about interesting times".


----------



## cremeegg

I am very puzzled by Domnic Raab's resignation.

Boris Johnson fits the stereotype of the upperclass buffoon well. The most expensive education, Eton and Oxford, utterly self absorbed, everything he says is for effect. He has never shown any talent or effort at anything except self -promotion and entertainment. A man to be ignored, and not really a reflection on modern England, every society produces its own type of buffoon.

Raab should be a very different person. Again the best education, though grammar school rather than Eton, a degree from Oxford and a post graduate degree from Cambridge. His father is Jewish, Raab worked for the Palestinian negotiators in the Oslo accords. Impressive. A good career in a large law firm before entering politics. That doesn't come without effort and talent.

Then he comes out to admit he didn't know the importance of Dover as a port. The ignorance is mind boggling and the fact that he admitted it perhaps more so. Cabinet ministers really should at least pretend they know what they are talking about.

Now he has resigned from the cabinet over the Brexit deal. Duh, who was the cabinet secretary responsible for negotiating with the EU.

Angela Leadsome is obviously too stupid for school, but Raab was supposed to be capable. England's problem is that no one with any ability is in Cabinet.


----------



## odyssey06

cremeegg said:


> Then he comes out to admit he didn't know the importance of Dover as a port. The ignorance is mind boggling and the fact that he admitted it perhaps more so. Cabinet ministers really should at least pretend they know what they are talking about.
> Now he has resigned from the cabinet over the Brexit deal. Duh, who was the cabinet secretary responsible for negotiating with the EU.



I'd disagree entirely about Rabb.

I'd much rather someone show honesty than the type of bluffer we have all too many of over here who give long speeches, using 'in' phrases and say nothing in the end, and do nothing. Just make more speeches and commission more reports and fudge more figures and corrupt language & statistics until they are devoid of all meaning.

He was responsible for the negotiations but he was working within the bounds set by his PM and Cabinet. He was not solely responsible.
He was given a job to do, he didn't resign in a huff in the middle of it, he carried out his duties and then having completed the job to the best of his capabilities and brought it to the Cabinet said that he could not support it. The easy thing to do would have been to not walk away.


----------



## john luc

in my view then on balance Theresa May has done the only thing she could do and sign up for the deal at hand. Only other choice was not to leave the EU. The irresponsible Tory right are prepared to wreck the economy so they can turn back the clock 40 years and have total power again.


----------



## Betsy Og

I find it very hard to accept at face value any concerns the Tories express about a difference in NI's status. Maybe they're brainwashed by the DUP, but the minute the DUP are out of the equation I dont honestly believe they give a fiddlers. 

Objectively no-one wants a hard border and the risks that poses. The deal potentially gives NI the best of both worlds. The majority who wanted to remain should be happy. Even those of the unionist persuasion must be wondering where is the real problem with the backstop - they still part of the UK until a vote otherwise, & now that the notions of Britania rules the waves have died they must wonder what's the upside of Brexit. Indy polls in Scotland are now in Yes territory - ok if Brexit settles down that may recede a little - but suffice to say that's a tide that is inevitably coming in. When it does then NI will look like a total outlier, cut off from their historical base, a base that will re-join the EU (if dragged out by then). So the long term is starting to look like a United Ireland .....I don't say that with any great relish, but 'leaving well enough alone' seems to sliding off the table at this stage - though I am still quietly confident of a peoples vote to remain. 

What of Brexit? A monument to British arrogance, they honestly thought the EU would crumble when the Brits banged the table. They thought Ireland would follow them out (FFS!). Totally misunderstood their relative importance and power in the world. Now they have the deal they could only have gotten - i.e. if you want all the benefits you have to play by the rules. If you don't want the benefits then by all means be "soverign", "take back control", but just have a think about where that leaves you in trading terms. The biggest "suck in" to Britain since the empire crumbled. They're back where they were, but now they're desparately unhappy about it, I find it hard to generate any sympathy. So is it to be a no deal crash out?? - I seriously doubt it. Dover chaos, food and medicine issues. More likely a peoples vote to Remain. If not then maybe a general election - if Corbyn could be sidelined then labour should romp home and I doubt they'll run on a no deal Brexit ticket. Probably on a remain. 

Theresa May should never have taken the job, if you were genuinely a remainer I dont see how you could carry out "the will of the people" stocially if convinced they'd made a terrible mistake - let those who were 'mad for it' get their hands dirty & take the flak. Now they just blame her - worst of all worlds.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

Lots of pan Nationalist gloating this morning. But this is in great danger of being a Pyrrhic victory.  Ireland is an even bigger loser than the UK if there is a No Deal.  Also how many diplomatic credits have we left in the EU bank.  How long will we be allowed to maintain our idiosyncratic approach to Corporation Tax?


----------



## cremeegg

Duke of Marmalade said:


> But this is in great danger of being a Pyrrhic victory.  Ireland is an even bigger loser than the UK if there is a No Deal.



That is true, however Ireland can start to recover from that point, by building new markets and attracting investment that might otherwise have gone to the UK. Indeed that process has begun already. 

England on the other hand will only be starting its downward journey on Brexit day.


----------



## cremeegg

Duke of Marmalade said:


> How long will we be allowed to maintain our idiosyncratic approach to Corporation Tax?



Until the EU develops a coherent approach that addresses the changed nature of the multi-national corporation. When the EU develops a plan, we will have to fall into line. And while that will end Ireland's niche in tax planning it is overall to be welcomed, governments have been too slow to develop new models of taxation for multi (or non) -national corporations.

And that has nothing much to do with Brexit.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

cremeegg said:


> And that has nothing much to do with Brexit.


My point is that we probably have nothing left in our EU deposit bank of diplomatic credits. Let's face it we have been getting away with outright piracy on our multi national tax policy.  When the EU get their act together in this area there is no way IMHO of us negotiating any  special opt out.

There was never going to be a hard border.  I remain deeply suspicious that the EU have used the border issue as a lever to get the Brits exactly where they want them.


----------



## Purple

Duke of Marmalade said:


> Lots of pan Nationalist gloating this morning. But this is in great danger of being a Pyrrhic victory.  Ireland is an even bigger loser than the UK if there is a No Deal.  Also how many diplomatic credits have we left in the EU bank.  How long will we be allowed to maintain our idiosyncratic approach to Corporation Tax?


I don't see any pan-Nationalist gloating, not here anyway. Nationalism is a poison. I despise it. It is the reason for Brexit and it was the reason for so much death and suffering in Europe over the last 100 years. 
The Tories are a disgrace and Brexit is a knife in the heart of the moderation which has been at the heart of Britain as a nation for hundreds of years and allowed them to avoid fascism and revolutions which tore Europe apart during that time.


----------



## RETIRED2017

cremeegg said:


> That is true, however Ireland can start to recover from that point, by building new markets and attracting investment that might otherwise have gone to the UK. Indeed that process has begun already.
> 
> England on the other hand will only be starting its downward journey on Brexit day.


English and UK business people are away better at holding on to Existing business than Irish business people are,I can see most if not all existing day to day business exporting from the uk to Ireland will still be done with  no deal, Cant see the same happening with existing business going from Ireland to the Uk if no deal, British business people offer exceptional customer service best in the World by far the always think long term  which will stand to them if no deal,


----------



## Purple

RETIRED2017 said:


> British business people offer exceptional customer service best in the World by far the always think long term  which will stand to them if no deal,


That's not my experience.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

Purple said:


> I don't see any pan-Nationalist gloating, not here anyway.


I wasn't talking about firework celebrations.  But when Sinn Fein state that the Government has achieved a good result that to me is pan Nationalist gloating.


----------



## Leo

RETIRED2017 said:


> English and UK business people are away better at holding on to Existing business than Irish business people are,I can see most if not all existing day to day business exporting from the uk to Ireland will still be done with  no deal, Cant see the same happening with existing business going from Ireland to the Uk if no deal,



What facts are you basing any of that on? If goods from the UK are going to cost significantly more, why are you so confident no Irish business will seek out cheaper alternative sources within the EU?



RETIRED2017 said:


> British business people offer exceptional customer service best in the World by far the always think long term  which will stand to them if no deal,



If that were the case why are programs such as Watchdog and Rogue Traders so full of examples of appalling customer service and online forums so full of complaints? Zendesk who study international standard of customer satisfaction rank the UK 4th on 96.2%, behind Belgium, Norway, & New Zealand. Ireland ranks 11th on 94.7%. There are a number of other industry bodies that publish such reports, I don't see a single one that puts the UK first, they do pretty consistenly rank the UK ahead of Ireland, but only by a very small margin. So best in the world by far??? 

It's quite naive to think businesses by and large can overcome price increases based on goodwill built up through good customer service. Carrillion with their 20,000 UK staff were winning awards for customer service and hitting targets for net promoter scores right up to their collapse.


----------



## odyssey06

Purple said:


> The Tories are a disgrace and Brexit is a knife in the heart of the moderation which has been at the heart of Britain as a nation for hundreds of years and allowed them to avoid fascism and revolutions which tore Europe apart during that time.



One could argue that maintaining a sense of distance from Europe also played a part in helping Britain avoid those events, no?
Is this government really less moderate than that of say Lord Salisbury??? Churchill's second term?

The disgrace was probably getting Britain into an arrangement that it would be impossible to cleanly escape, given the half-hearted nature of UK support for it. I think the mistake was Maastricht. That brought the UK deeper into the EU and it did not have popular support - any referendum on the issue would have been rejected.


----------



## john luc

The true ugly side of the Tory is also being exposed here. They have always paid lip service to the notion that they were really a UK national party but in reality they were really an English party first. I find it musing to hear Rees Mogg talk of vessel state and dominion when they have treated Wales,Scotland and N. Ireland pretty much like this. It was a Tory government that imposed poll tax on Scotland first to see if it would work or not. The upshot of this dropping the pretence could in fact do the one thing they feared most, the dissolution of the United kingdom


----------



## Purple

Mrs. May and the British negotiating team see to have agreed to a deal which honours the commitments that they made at the time of the Brexit referendum. I’m pleasantly surprised but I think it is doomed as Corbyn  is a Brexiteer, the DUP will NEVER... NEVER... NEVER support this and the little-englanders high-Tories who pull the strings in the Conservative Party are aghast  at the idea that the British actually keep their promises.

 They are 'little England' incarnate. History, law and international politics aren't complex phenomena requiring deep and subtle understanding, they are a series of cartoonish anecdotes or sound bites where the lesson is always 'England is right, everyone else is wrong or stupid'. It is no wonder such people take shelter in the comforting myths of 'Churchill saves civilization' and live on a diet of angry, middle aged men reading the gutter press and posting support online for racist criminals with multiple pseudonyms. Those are the intellectual borders of their universe. All wisdom comes from mirrors. To expect more would almost be cruel.


----------



## Sunny

Someone sent me on the daily mail editorial for today. It's very funny. The daily mail is actually backing the agreement. We are now at whole new levels of farce!

My favourite bit.

_'Having toiled for more than two years against daunting odds to secure a __Brexit__ deal which honoured the referendum result, __Theresa May__ might at least have hoped for the support of her own side for her Stakhanovite efforts — possibly even an ounce or two of gratitude.'
_
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/...s-appalled-fractious-fighting-Tory-Party.html


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

Sunny that was a really heartening read from what I was brought up to believe was a Tory rag.  I liked this quote in particuar;





			
				Daily Mail said:
			
		

> And who are they, these self-appointed guardians of the Brexit flame — a loose affiliation of backbench zealots, failed ministers and serial show-offs, who claim to represent Britain’s best interests, but risk destroying their party and the nation’s prosperity.


I wouldn't be too sure that this will in the end be rejected by the Commons.  If the British Tory press who effectively won the referendum were to follow the lead of the DM things could change.


----------



## Sunny

Duke of Marmalade said:


> Sunny that was a really heartening read from what I was brought up to believe was a Tory rag.  I liked this quote in particuar;
> I wouldn't be too sure that this will in the end be rejected by the Commons.  If the British Tory press who effectively won the referendum were to follow the lead of the DM things could change.



Some turnaround for the mail isn't it The best bit is the comments under it. They are hilarious.

I agree with you about the Commons. If you had asked me yesterday morning, I would have said no chance. But now..... If there wasn't a leadership challenge yesterday, there won't be. I don't think any of them REALLY want the job right now. The DUP will be bought off (If Sinn Fein had any sense, they would be taking their seats in Westminister to negate their bargaining power) and I reckon there are more than a few labour supporters who would be more than willing to support it even if a few conservatives walk.


----------



## elacsaplau

Sunny said:


> If Sinn Fein had any sense, they would be taking their seats in Westminister to negate their bargaining power



It is simply not certain (and arguably not even probable) that Sinn Fein taking their seats in Westminster will be a net positive in support of the deal. I am persuaded by Sinn Fein's interpretation in this regard - i.e. that their "presenteeism" would only serve to generate additional support to the anti-dealers.

Not everything the Sinners say is nonsense!


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

_Sunny, _watching Politics programme on BBC 2.  Steve Baker (Rees Mogg friend)  was asked what he thought of DM editorial. He blamed it on a change of editor


----------



## Sunny

elacsaplau said:


> It is simply not certain (and arguably not even probable) that Sinn Fein taking their seats in Westminster will be a net positive in support of the deal. I am persuaded by Sinn Fein's interpretation in this regard - i.e. that their "presenteeism" would only serve to generate additional support to the anti-dealers.
> 
> Not everything the Sinners say is nonsense!



I know it won't make any difference but their absence from Parliment while collecting allowances makes a complete mockery of them standing on the sidelines moaning about the DUP and their deals with the Conservative party. Get in the game. There is no Government in Belfast where they can represent their communities and they refuse to go to 'Westminister'. So what do they do apart from press conferences?


----------



## cremeegg

The odds of the present Brexit deal getting through parliament seem low.

The Tories with the DUP have a majority of 7. While the number of die harder Brexiteers who will vote against has probably been exaggerated (since John Major's day), it may be at least 30. There may even be some remain Tories voting against.

Labour, SNP and the rest are set to vote against.

Theresa May will look for some Labour MPs to support the deal on the basis that a no-deal Brexit would be a disaster. However these would have to ignore BOTH the Labour whip and the Labour for a Peoples Vote group, the main remainer Labour group, who are calling for a no vote.

And Yet. I think it has a better chance to pass than any analysis would suggest. MPs have a few more weeks to realise that if it does not pass Britains future will be bleaker than before.

From an Irish point of view, the current deal is the bet of all possible Brexits. Having the entire UK in the "sort of" customs union not just the North, is a big step forward for Irish trading interests.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

cremeegg said:


> From an Irish point of view, the current deal is the bet of all possible Brexits.


It is certainly a huge bet.  If there is agreement we seem to be preserving the status quo. If there isn't potential chaos with Ireland not only the biggest loser but will bear most of the blame from our neighbour.


----------



## Sophrosyne

I have been watching the debate on the draft agreement.

I have to say I have some sympathy with Teresa May.

It is difficult to negotiate on behalf of a bunch of politicians of all hues who are completely conflicted in their aspirations.

Certain Tories cannot accept the draft agreement but offer no alternative other than delusional bluster and playing up to the cameras.

In addition, several politicians seem to imply that the draft document is too complex for them. It seems they would require a Ladybird version!

Let's hope the adults take over in the UK.


----------



## Purple

The excellent Tommie Gorman has an excellent article on the RTE website about the current situation (sit-ye-ation on Norn-ireland speak) titled "Brexit - can you fix stupid?" It is well worth a read.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

The Governor of the Bank of England has evaluated a scenario where the EU immediately apply tarifs the day after B-Day and refuse to grandfather British goods as meeting EU standards.  If the EU were to take such a bloody minded approach Ireland would have to disobey.


----------



## john luc

for all our sakes I hope there are enough level headed people in positions of power to be intolerant of the intolerant and kick some posteriors


----------



## Purple

In a battle between reason and nationalistic emotion reason usually loses.


----------



## Purple

So the Brits can reverse article 50. That's interesting.


----------



## Delboy

Purple said:


> So the Brits can reverse article 50. That's interesting.


What amazing timing!


----------



## Betsy Og

With the DUP already a write off shouldn't she go for the deal she probably wanted all along, i.e. a border in the Irish sea, no hated backstop holding back Britain. I think that's what's bothering the Tories whining about the backstop, its not a sudden concern about NI and the integrity of the 'precious union'....they could barely find NI on a map before all this kicked off.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

Absolutely right, Betsy.  And what is going to happen is that the negotiations will lead to exactly that.  Problem is the DUP know that and they currently call the shots.


----------



## RETIRED2017

should they ask the people of NI to vote on a border in the Irish sea after all the people of Britain did not get to vote on the GFA agreement ,


----------



## odyssey06

Dan O'Brien in The Independent this morning sums it up perfectly for me:  'The backstop demand could end up bringing about that which it was designed to prevent'.
https://www.independent.ie/opinion/...hich-it-was-designed-to-prevent-37622042.html

I think somehow there needs to be a back down on the EU courts having the final say on it. 
If it went to independent arbitration then I think May could get it through the Commons.
A no deal scenario would probably be even worse for Ireland than UK.


----------



## john luc

contagion is what is probably stopping the Tory brexiteers from coming out and admitting they really don't give a toss about the north. If they come out and finally say that they would be prepared to drop the north then it would cause Scotland and Wales to start a rethink of their positions. This would truly be a frightening prospect for Rees Mogg and co as they would be losing their Vassel states that allows them to call Great.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

odyssey06 said:


> Dan O'Brien in The Independent this morning sums it up perfectly for me:  'The backstop demand could end up bringing about that which it was designed to prevent'.
> https://www.independent.ie/opinion/...hich-it-was-designed-to-prevent-37622042.html


I agree with DOB's article I said much the same myself in November.





Duke of Marmalade said:


> Lots of pan Nationalist gloating this morning. But this is in great danger of being a Pyrrhic victory.  Ireland is an even bigger loser than the UK if there is a No Deal.  Also how many diplomatic credits have we left in the EU bank.  How long will we be allowed to maintain our idiosyncratic approach to Corporation Tax?


The problem is that we can't back down now.  Besides the fact that Simon Varadkar have ensured that such a climbdown would be a domestic electoral disaster, our EU colleagues would say "WTF?".  Some on the basis that they thought they truly were helping Ireland in what it was claiming was a desperate desire to preserve peace but others like France who have been using the Irish issue to put the Brits in a negotiating corner.
Anyway. if there is a"no deal" and if a hard border is such a threat to peace I presume Ireland will immediately dump the EU and join the UK Customs Union.


----------



## Leo

Duke of Marmalade said:


> if there is a"no deal" and if a hard border is such a threat to peace I presume Ireland will immediately dump the EU and join the UK Customs Union.



Ireland followed into Europe on the UK's coat tails,  it would be economic suicide to leave the EU and follow them this time.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

Leo said:


> Ireland followed into Europe on the UK's coat tails,  it would be economic suicide to leave the EU and follow them this time.


Leo,  Simon Varadkar have never made the "no hard border" an economic argument.  How could they?  East West trade and indeed the Landbridge to the Continent completely dwarfs any North South economic aspect.

For them and indeed for everybody else in pan Natonalism the "not an extra lumen of border visibility" has been ostensibly about protecting the "peace process" (though probably mainly for the sake of rubbing Orange noses in it).

A no deal would involve the EU demanding a very hard border indeed.  If we are to be consistent and if we really do believe that this would rattle the IRA's cages (those that haven't gone away, you know) then we would have to refuse to meet the EU's demands.


----------



## Leo

Duke of Marmalade said:


> For them and indeed for everybody else in pan Natonalism the "not an extra lumen of border visibility" has been ostensibly about protecting the "peace process" (though probably mainly for the sake of rubbing Orange noses in it).



I don't really buy that either, it seems like more a useful tool in bringing others in to back the cause of no hard border on the island.



Duke of Marmalade said:


> A no deal would involve the EU demanding a very hard border indeed.  If we are to be consistent and if we really do believe that this would rattle the IRA's cages (those that haven't gone away, you know) then we would have to refuse to meet the EU's demands.



Only if the UK backtracks on their commitments. Regardless of the ultimate nature of the border though, it would still be madness for Ireland to follow the UK out of the EU.


----------



## john luc

Leo said:


> Ireland followed into Europe on the UK's coat tails,  it would be economic suicide to leave the EU and follow them this time.


different times. We were near totally dependent on trade with the UK back then and our currency was pegged to sterling. Our goal was to loosen that stranglehold and open up to European markets and reduce our dependence on UK only trade. We still do a lot of trade with the UK now but we are not as dependent as back then.


----------



## john luc

The pan nationalist argument is a bit of a red herring thing for me. No doubt we have a few Boris and Rees mouths about but like them they are fringe. Most normal people are grounded in seeing how personal impacts this is going to have and so are egging for a commonsence answer. I have friends in the North who come from both sides and they despair at the lack of leadership in politics that is normal for lazy northern politicians.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

Leo said:


> Only if the UK backtracks on their commitments.


If there is No Deal there is no backstop.  It would not be the UK who would be insisting on a hard border, it would be the EU.


----------



## Leo

Duke of Marmalade said:


> If there is No Deal there is no backstop.



No, the commitment made on the backstop includes the no deal scenario.  



Duke of Marmalade said:


> It would not be the UK who would be insisting on a hard border, it would be the EU.



I'd imagine both parties are as likely as each other, and with the DUP's posturing, it might be more in their interest to push that agenda to allay their fears of anything that might increase the chances of any move towards a united Ireland.


----------



## cremeegg

Duke of Marmalade said:


> If there is No Deal there is no backstop.



Theresa May has said that Britain is committed to no hard border. Those who want a hard border, the DUP and the ERG believe her. Those who don't want a hard border don't believe her and that is why we have the backstop.



Duke of Marmalade said:


> It would not be the UK who would be insisting on a hard border, it would be the EU.



This is baloney and you know it. If the UK leaves the (a) customs union, it is the UK who is creating the need for a hard border. Passing off the consequences of their decisions onto others is just childish word games. This fools no one, including you.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

cremeegg said:


> This is baloney and you know it. If the UK leaves the (a) customs union, it is the UK who is creating the need for a hard border. Passing off the consequences of their decisions onto others is just childish word games. This fools no one, including you.





Leo said:


> No, the commitment made on the backstop includes the no deal scenario.
> I'd imagine both parties are as likely as each other, and with the DUP's posturing, it might be more in their interest to push that agenda to allay their fears of anything that might increase the chances of any move towards a united Ireland.


I am obviously a very bad communicator as my point is being missed completely.  For avoidance of all doubt of course I accept that the Brits are to blame for Brexit and if there is a hard border then again the Brits are to blame for starting this whole thing.

Now I will try and make my point again.  If there is No Deal by B-day then there is very likely to be tariffs imposed if not immediately then very soon.  For the sake of my point I don't care who starts that (most likely the EU but yeah the Brits started it all in the first place, so what?)

Now my point.  Given that we have made such a play that the slightest increase in visibility of the border is a serious threat to peace then the government should avoid what would be the hardest of borders by joining the UK customs area.  This is the logic of their position if peace is at such risk.  It is unclear whether such a course might also be in our economic interest.

They say they are planning for No Deal.  I think that means more customs officers.  So they are preparing for a hard border.  Its not customs officers they should be recruiting but security forces if the peace is under such threat.


----------



## Purple

The Backstop and all the stuff about the North-South border was only ever a cover to protect the East-West trade and access to the Mainland through Enger-land and her hinterlands of Wales and Scotland.
Teresa made the mistake of accepting that the UK should honour aan existing international agreement, brokered with the help of the USA, EU and Ireland, which ended the 30 year UK civil war. Maybe the same parties could help the Tories end their civil war but I doubt it. Integrity and Tories are like oil and water; you can stir them up all like but try as you might they just don't mix.

The reason the UK is having such difficulty with the Backstop is that they fundamentally don't trust anyone else in a negotiation. There is a very good reason for this; they don't behave with integrity so they don't expect anyone else to either. If they did then the Backstop wouldn't be an issue. What sort of people call a commitment to honour an existing international agreement a trap?

The other factor driving Brexit is that they used to have an Empire. An Empire is when you invade another country, murder and pillage your way through it, kill or subjugate the leaders and seek to rule it for the sole purpose of your economic enrichment, almost always to the detriment of the people who live there. If that is your preferred method of interaction with other countries is it not surprising that you may have trouble being comfortable in a Union of equals.


----------



## Leo

Duke of Marmalade said:


> It is unclear whether such a course might also be in our economic interest.



I think it's as close you get to a certainty that any such move would be economic suicide.


----------



## odyssey06

Purple said:


> The reason the UK is having such difficulty with the Backstop is that they fundamentally don't trust anyone else in a negotiation. There is a very good reason for this; they don't behave with integrity so they don't expect anyone else to either. If they did then the Backstop wouldn't be an issue. What sort of people call a commitment to honour an existing international agreement a trap?



Nothing Varadkar, Coveney, Merkel & Barnier say or do can be trusted so if the UK are acting that way they have good reason to.
After all the fobbing off of Ireland on bail out deal anyone who trusts a promise from Merkel would be a fool.
All the guff about a hard border and jeopardising the peace from Varadkar-Coveney is nonsense as @Duke of Marmalade has shown.
Barnier was deposed as Luxembourg PM for corruption.
Why can't an international agreement ever be changed as circumstances change?

France, Portugal, Spain, Netherlands, Belgium, Austria, Germany, Italy ALL had empires. So I guess we shouldn't be in an association with a bunch of imperialists?
There was many an Irishman, north and south, in the vanguard of the British empire. Maybe we should not be in an association with anyone either?
Can you cut out the anti-British racist nonsense? 

The Backstop should be overseen by an independent body, not the EU courts. If you want a deal to happen, in any negotiation, you have to a deal the other side can sell to their side (whether that side is a board, or a cabinet or a parliament). If we want a deal, we need to come up with one the UK can sell.


----------



## Leo

odyssey06 said:


> If you want a deal to happen, in any negotiation, you have to a deal the other side can sell to their side (whether that side is a board, or a cabinet or a parliament). If we want a deal, we need to come up with one the UK can sell.



That only works where there is still mutual benefit in such a deal, and both sides enter negotiations with realistic expectations. Media reporting suggests that the UK are holding out for the kind of deal the EU simply cannot offer.


----------



## odyssey06

Leo said:


> That only works where there is still mutual benefit in such a deal, and both sides enter negotiations with realistic expectations. Media reporting suggests that the UK are holding out for the kind of deal the EU simply cannot offer.



I don't think any of the things May is looking for right now are things the EU cannot offer.
And I'm not sure if it is Ireland or EU insisting on clauses such as Backstop overseen by EU courts, but it is not realistic for anyone to think that could be sold in UK and it is very much to our mutual benefit to have a deal.

I could be wrong on this, but I think if she got something along the lines of Backstop overseen by neutral body OR time limit on new relationship, she could sell that to a majority of her party & DUP and get it through a vote in parliament.


----------



## elacsaplau

odyssey06 said:


> Barnier was deposed as Luxembourg PM for corruption.



News to me. Will probably come as a surprise to him also.


----------



## odyssey06

elacsaplau said:


> News to me. Will probably come as a surprise to him also.


Oops that was Juncker..


----------



## Purple

The Backstop is an agreement that there will be no change to the border between Ireland and Northern Ireland until there is a final withdrawal agreement between the EU and the UK and that when that agreement is in place there is no hard border. It was agreed between the UK and the EU last month based on a commitment which the British Prime Minister gave last year.  It is not something which is being imposed unilaterally by the EU and it is not something which is adjudicated upon by EU courts.

The Good Friday Agreement stipulated that all legislation passed in Northern Ireland will conform to the requirements of the European Declaration of Human Rights, as adjudicated upon by the European Court of Justice. The ECJ is not an EU body. It is this agreement that is being honoured with the Backstop.


----------



## Purple

odyssey06 said:


> Nothing Varadkar, Coveney, Merkel & Barnier say or do can be trusted so if the UK are acting that way they have good reason to.
> After all the fobbing off of Ireland on bail out deal anyone who trusts a promise from Merkel would be a fool.
> All the guff about a hard border and jeopardising the peace from Varadkar-Coveney is nonsense as @Duke of Marmalade has shown.
> Barnier was deposed as Luxembourg PM for corruption.
> Why can't an international agreement ever be changed as circumstances change?
> 
> France, Portugal, Spain, Netherlands, Belgium, Austria, Germany, Italy ALL had empires. So I guess we shouldn't be in an association with a bunch of imperialists?
> There was many an Irishman, north and south, in the vanguard of the British empire. Maybe we should not be in an association with anyone either?
> Can you cut out the anti-British racist nonsense?
> 
> The Backstop should be overseen by an independent body, not the EU courts. If you want a deal to happen, in any negotiation, you have to a deal the other side can sell to their side (whether that side is a board, or a cabinet or a parliament). If we want a deal, we need to come up with one the UK can sell.



The bailout was a massive success for us (well for our pension funds and depositors anyway) so can you cut out all the anti-German and anti-EU racist nonsense?
That said I should have been clearer; it is the Tory establishment that can't be trusted. Thankfully many British people are ashamed of their imperialist past. There were indeed many Irishmen who were part of the British forces and committed imperialists and they weren't shy about spilling blood for the crown, a point I have made on these forums many times. That doesn't negate the long history of dishonesty, duplicity and crass ignorance by the Tory establishment, especially in their dealings with this country.


----------



## Leo

odyssey06 said:


> I don't think any of the things May is looking for right now are things the EU cannot offer.



I said the UK. There appears to be quite a gap between what May agreed to in the recent negotiations and what the wider UK are demanding from Brexit.


----------



## Betsy Og

Lads, Theresa cannot sell anything to the House of Commons, it is pointless trying to appease her with woolly language about what this means and that means. You either have a backstop or you dont, but the backstop should only really be relevant to Ireland, no-one wants it for the rest of the UK. 

The people of NI voted remain, the backstop is an economic opportunity, best of both worlds. It is only the DUP who are the outliers - they do not represent the views of the people of NI particularly on this issue. Other than them I havent seen a single person from NI interviewed who bemoaned the backstop or the idea of best of both worlds. 

On the "contaigon" point - in 1990 Peter Brooke says the UK had "no selfish, strategic or economic interest in remaining in Northern Ireland",  it has long been seen as a special case. Scotland is already revving up for Indy2, dismayed at how they have been ignored and disrespected at every turn, wanting to Remain.

Lets assume TM waits until the last moment (late January) to go with her deal, she's banking on the fear of crash out no deal making people vote Yes out of desparation... BUT the SNP have helpfully taken the EU case to show the UK can withdraw Article 50, unilaterally, whenever it wants. So the threat of abyss subsides, the deal fails in the Commons. Staring down the barrell of a crash out no deal within weeks and no prep for same, Article 50 notice is withdrawn, or deferred for say a year. By that time we'll either have a people vote (which will go Remain) or an election which may well see the DUP sidelined. If the Remain case fails then the Irish sea border is the agreement (I think enough Labour would vote for that if the Remain case has been abandoned by then).

So my money is on a peoples vote to Remain, and failing that a sea border whereby backstop is no more. So I'm not wringing my hands about what TM wants/needs blah blah, was hoping she'd lose, some Brexiteer would be getting handed his ass in Brussels and the whole thing could be accelerated. I don't think history will be kind to her, if she wasn't a Brexiteer she shouldnt have taken the job, she volunteered to be cannon fodder for Brexiteer element in her own party just for sake of being PM, she fairly got what she signed up for.

Bottom line, UK with blink on a crash out, they're stupid but they're not that stupid.


----------



## Betsy Og

Purple said:


> The bailout was a massive success for us (well for our pension funds and depositors anyway) so can you cut out all the anti-German and anti-EU racist nonsense?.



While I'm pro-EU (but have seen quite enough intergration at this stage), that does not mean we can relax that some benevolent force is minding us. What Ireland wants now aligns with what the EU wants, so we 'win'. When German banks were going to lose, then the FF bank guarantee had to be extended, and we lost....bigly. So we have to "mark our men", so to speak, in the EU but generally we are good at that. As Brexit has shown, there are not many alternatives to being in the EU that arent, effectively, being in the EU. So on a pragmatic level we need to be there, whether we love it and fly blue flags, or see it as a necessary humdrum fact of life, is a matter of personal taste.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

Betsy Og said:


> The people of NI voted remain, the backstop is an economic opportunity, best of both worlds. It is only the DUP who are the outliers - they do not represent the views of the people of NI particularly on this issue. Other than them I havent seen a single person from NI interviewed who bemoaned the backstop or the idea of best of both worlds.


I think you have that badly wrong, Betsy.  The people of Waverley, for example, were more Remain than NI, but no way would they accept being set apart from the rest of England with borders between it and the rest, and they are not even burdened by  the sectarian dimension which has galvanised every unionist if indeed not every protestant in NI to resist at all costs what they perceive as the Simon Varadkar land grab.


----------



## Purple

Duke of Marmalade said:


> I think you have that badly wrong, Betsy.  The people of Waverley, for example, were more Remain than NI, but no way would they accept being set apart from the rest of England with borders between it and the rest, and they are not even burdened by  the sectarian dimension which has galvanised every unionist if indeed not every protestant in NI to resist at all costs what they perceive as the Simon Varadkar land grab.


One in ten Unionists are in favour of a united Ireland in the case of a no-deal Brexit. 
This, along with the resistance by the DUP to the Irish Language Act, has also galvanised middle-class Catholics who were never SF supporters. I understand the stance taken by the DUP. I sympathise with it in some respects, but isn't helping the long term future of the "Precious Union".


----------



## RETIRED2017

Purple said:


> One in ten Unionists are in favour of a united Ireland in the case of a no-deal Brexit.
> This, along with the resistance by the DUP to the Irish Language Act, has also galvanised middle-class Catholics who were never SF supporters. I understand the stance taken by the DUP. I sympathise with it in some respects, but isn't helping the long term future of the "Precious Union".


Do you not understand in  a no- deal Brexit the South will suffer more than the North,


----------



## Sunny

Betsy Og said:


> Bottom line, UK with blink on a crash out, they're stupid but they're not that stupid.



They are not stupid but there are enough people in positions of influence who still believe in the splendour of the British Empire and that Britain can be great again and nobody is going to tell the British what they can and can't do. To be fair to the British people, they have this amazing stubbornness that is really admirable in many ways. I just hope that for their own sake, they don't end up cutting off their noses to spite their face.


----------



## Betsy Og

But the people of Waverley are not operating under the GFA, which puts beyond doubt how, if ever, the constitutional position of the territory will change. I'm not talking about imposing borders I'm talking about avoiding them. Trucks have to go on a ferry to get to the UK, ideal scenario to check them (if they would even need checking ... the admission of defeat that the UK cant strike a future deal for years and years shows their confidence on this point....& these are the lads that said they'd have loads of trade deals done even before March). 

As I've long mentioned the ports & airports of NI will be a de facto people border anyway - even a 'hard border' wouldn't prevent people smuggling of the type on Mexican border. Maybe you could check trucks crossing a hard border border but are there enough border patrolmen to stop the screaming hordes of Baltics scramabling over the bogs of Cyavan to get to Fermanagh? ..... I dont think so.

Did the Ulster Farmers not endorse TM's deal, backstop and all (a group who it is supposed are of good Planter stock)? Loyalty to the half crown rather than the crown was long a taunt labelled at unionists, maybe for once it will lead them to a sensible decision. 

There is no question of a Simon Varadkar land grab, you'd swear they were appearing wrapped in tricolours with the flack they get over this. Their job is to protect the GFA and avoid a hard border, they should make absolutely no apologies for that. They can't deliver a United Ireland through Brexit or backstop, it doesnt move a UI an inch closer. A hard border or a crash out Brexit might, but that is not within their power, they are trying to avoid them.

I credit the people of NI with a bit more intelligence on the facts of the matter (as outlined above) as compared to many of the MPs of England who appear wilfully ignorant on basic facts. I dont see it in sectarian terms, maybe the people of the North do (& they are the ones who count, & you know them better than I) but to do so would be act against your best interests due to a skewed understanding of the position...... but I guess that's Brexit related issues in a nutshell.


----------



## Sunny

RETIRED2017 said:


> Do you not understand in  a no- deal Brexit the South will suffer more than the North,



The South will have the EU who will very happily pump billions into Ireland to support it to show that being part of the EU means something. The North who have a very small private sector will be dependent on every increasing hand outs from London where public finances are stretched and where the majority of the people in the UK will start asking why billions are being sent over to Belfast every year when the political class can't even form a government because of the Irish language and seem more interested in bickering and taking their wages and expenses for no work....


----------



## RETIRED2017

Sunny said:


> They are not stupid but there are enough people in positions of influence who still believe in the splendour of the British Empire and that Britain can be great again and nobody is going to tell the British what they can and can't do. To be fair to the British people, they have this amazing stubbornness that is really admirable in many ways. I just hope that for their own sake, they don't end up cutting off their noses to spite their face.


I have done some work for a Engineering Company To limit the affects of a no deal Brexit I can tell you the british suppliers already have plans in plans to deal with a no Deal Brexit , From what I see I cannot say the same the other way around,


----------



## Betsy Og

Sunny said:


> I just hope that for their own sake, they don't end up cutting off their noses to spite their face.


 Cos that would be well....a bit stupid. There are no yanks coming to invade France for them this time, if they keep it up they'll be needing the Blitz spirit alright.


----------



## Betsy Og

RETIRED2017 said:


> Do you not understand in  a no- deal Brexit the South will suffer more than the North,



Well neither of us have a vote...bar the DUP (cheers for that SF....) so no point in hand wringing, but the ones that will suffer most of all will be Britain. I'll eat my hat if they crash out on a no deal in March.


----------



## RETIRED2017

Sunny said:


> The South will have the EU who will very happily pump billions into Ireland to support it to show that being part of the EU means something. The North who have a very small private sector will be dependent on every increasing hand outs from London where public finances are stretched and where the majority of the people in the UK will start asking why billions are being sent over to Belfast every year when the political class can't even form a government because of the Irish language and seem more interested in bickering and taking their wages and expenses for no work....


 Without strings attached? The bombs will go off in Dublin come to mind if you don't do as I say, They will have there own problems to deal with without throwing more apples into an orchard  there will not be as much money to through around you know
There will be a lot of self interests to be looked after before  the come to Ireland your statement shows how badly prepared we are,


----------



## Sunny

RETIRED2017 said:


> Without strings attached? The bombs will go off in Dublin come to mind if you don't do as I say,



Eh?


----------



## Sunny

Betsy Og said:


> Cos that would be well....a bit stupid. There are no yanks coming to invade France for them this time, if they keep it up they'll be needing the Blitz spirit alright.



You say that now but if Donald eats a bag of dodgy French fries, who knows.......


----------



## RETIRED2017

Sunny said:


> Eh?


The apples are falling a little slower than the used to 
I expect we will have to spend the Apple money we don't want first,
and send them the money and jobs they have being short changed first,


----------



## Purple

RETIRED2017 said:


> Do you not understand in  a no- deal Brexit the South will suffer more than the North,


No, Ireland will not suffer more than Northern Ireland. The relative economic gap between us and the North is already the same as it was between West and East Germany in 1990. They are far poorer than us as it is. They will just get poorer. Our economy is currently at risk of overheating. A bit of a post Brexit cool-down won't do us much harm compared to what will happen to them. We'll then see how much the little-englanders really care about them.


----------



## cremeegg

RETIRED2017 said:


> Do you not understand in  a no- deal Brexit the South will suffer more than the North,



I wonder if that is likely to be true.

A no deal Brexit will be a heavy blow to the south, but we will be well equipped to recover from that blow. Due to the trading opportunities available to us.

The UK in general will suffer a similar blow, but their opportunities for recovery will be delayed until they can repair or rebuild the trading opportunities lost in Brexit.

The North will suffer more than the UK generally due to its proximity to the south. There may also be a backlash against the cost of the North to the English taxpayer. A bit more than the net contribution to the EU.


----------



## RETIRED2017

Purple said:


> No, Ireland will not suffer more than Northern Ireland. The relative economic gap between us and the North is already the same as it was between West and East Germany in 1990. They are far poorer than us as it is. They will just get poorer. Our economy is currently at risk of overheating. A bit of a post Brexit cool-down won't do us much harm compared to what will happen to them. We'll then see how much the little-englanders really care about them.


I hope you are correct but I suspect you are wrong the jobs that will get lost in lots of cases will be low end these people will be staying around to collect from the people still working
The post Brexit cool -down may not work out like you think a bit like the soft landing so called experts were talking about last down turn do you remember  o it will not affect Ireland ,
Sonny said it all expecting others to come to our aid when they will be busy mending fences with the UK,


----------



## odyssey06

cremeegg said:


> I wonder if that is likely to be true.
> 
> A no deal Brexit will be a heavy blow to the south, but we will be well equipped to recover from that blow. Due to the trading opportunities available to us.
> 
> The UK in general will suffer a similar blow, but their opportunities for recovery will be delayed until they can repair or rebuild the trading opportunities lost in Brexit.
> 
> The North will suffer more than the UK generally due to its proximity to the south. There may also be a backlash against the cost of the North to the English taxpayer. A bit more than the net contribution to the EU.



I agree the North is in for a battering, but I'm not totally convinced about your other points.

All those trading opportunities available to us are currently available to us right now.
We're going to have a hard job finding new outlets for our agri-business products, it'll be a lot harder trying to sell those to the French or Italians than the British. 
Same for French winemakers. If they lose the British market, where do they turn?


----------



## Sunny

RETIRED2017 said:


> I hope you are correct but I suspect you are wrong the jobs that will get lost in lots of cases will be low end these people will be staying around to collect from the people still working
> The post Brexit cool -down may not work out like you think a bit like the soft landing so called experts were talking about last down turn do you remember  o it will not affect Ireland ,
> Sonny said it all expecting others to come to our aid when they will be busy mending fences with the UK,



That's not what I said thanks. In no way am I minimising the impact of Brexit. But I also have no time for your anti EU bailout rants. The EU didn't screw Ireland during the financial crisis. If the EU wanted to blackmail us over Apple money or tax base or whatever else you want, they would have done it already. They would have insisted on conditions to make the Irish border a central part of the Brexit negotiations. Instead they are willing to risk a no brexit deal which would impact all of the EU rather than just leave Ireland on it's own to deal with the border issue. Because when it comes down to it, Europe shouldn't really care if there is hard border or not. Read up how much money the EU has pumped into peace process related projects in the North and South. They have been a huge supporter without blackmailing us or putting in conditions for many years. Read the UK's own analysis and see how see much North/South Co-operation is underpinned by EU law and EU support. The EU like every other large political organ is massively inefficient and has many flaws but reading some of the nonsense that people talk about when it comes to the EU and this Country beggers belief.


----------



## RETIRED2017

Sunny said:


> That's not what I said thanks. In no way am I minimising the impact of Brexit. But I also have no time for your anti EU bailout rants. The EU didn't screw Ireland during the financial crisis. If the EU wanted to blackmail us over Apple money or tax base or whatever else you want, they would have done it already. They would have insisted on conditions to make the Irish border a central part of the Brexit negotiations. Instead they are willing to risk a no brexit deal which would impact all of the EU rather than just leave Ireland on it's own to deal with the border issue. Because when it comes down to it, Europe shouldn't really care if there is hard border or not. Read up how much money the EU has pumped into peace process related projects in the North and South. They have been a huge supporter without blackmailing us or putting in conditions for many years. Read the UK's own analysis and see how see much North/South Co-operation is underpinned by EU law and EU support. The EU like every other large political organ is massively inefficient and has many flaws but reading some of the nonsense that people talk about when it comes to the EU and this Country beggers belief.



I am not on a anti EU bailout rant in fact I understand and know the point you have made , From what I have seen the UK Business owners have lots done to continue trading if there is a bad deal ,

To be expecting billions of euro to be poured into Ireland with a no deal or bad deal is just not going to happen without movement on what they see as Irish tax loopholes and unfair advantage being closed first ,


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

Betsy Og said:


> There is no question of a Simon Varadkar land grab, you'd swear they were appearing wrapped in tricolours with the flack they get over this. Their job is to protect the GFA and avoid a hard border, they should make absolutely no apologies for that.


Leo Varadkar very early doors made the most incredibly insensitive promise "this time the Irish Government will not let the Northern Nationalists down".  This time? I presume the last time was the Treaty and him a supposed Blueshirt.  So a hard border in NI is purely a gross affront to nationalists?  There we have it.  Nothing to do with inconvenience across the frontier or folk whose house straddles the border.  Pure and simple this is a symbolic struggle between nationalism and unionism, or so Leo has set out the stall with Simon an enthusiastic cheerleader.  (And both with a view to a future coalition with SF/IRA)


Betsy Og said:


> I'll eat my hat if they crash out on a no deal in March.


I agree with you there.  There will be no crash out.  But there is a probability of No Deal - PaddyPower bets 1/2 there will be No Deal by B-day.  But no, I don't think there will be a cliff edge.  Some sort of transition phasing in period will be cobbled together maybe a statement that WTO will apply from January 2020.  That means a hard border.


----------



## Betsy Og

Dinnae fash yerselves, bascially the UK took a knife to a gunfight, needless to say it didn't go well. They now know where they are in the world order, there is not enough machismo left to voluntarily cut their own throats with a No Deal Brexit - it will not happen - & they will not starve the EU into submission (I shouldn't really go there but it seems its back in vogue....who knew?). Sooner or later they will see sense, or at least enough among them will.

So I wouldn't waste time worrying about No Deal.


----------



## Betsy Og

Duke of Marmalade said:


> Leo Varadkar very early doors made the most incredibly insensitive promise "this time the Irish Government will not let the Northern Nationalists down".  This time? I presume the last time was the Treaty and him a supposed Blueshirt.



Well as I'm sure you know The Treaty was more about accepting a Free State, as opposed to a Republic, and the Oath. Norn Iron was supposed to be dealt with by Boundary Commission - how??, is anyone's guess, and if they did it "right" you'd probably have a smaller more orange NI and maybe an India/Pakistan back your bags mate "solution". The Treaty was accepted by peoples vote (to adopt modern terminology). So a "Blueshirt" does not necessarily need to hang his head as regards Norn Iron..(shhh, dont mention Bruton...).

The Border matters more to Nationalists re A) politically (obv) but B) proximity  - & of course it matters to people in the Border Counties of Ireland too - so that was probably what he meant - he didn't (couldn't) have meant that we're getting the 6 back. 

But back to my point, for peace on this land it is better not to have a hard border.... maybe that's been over-egged ...but it's certainly not irrelevant, and more crucially a hard border or not does not influence the ultimate destination of Norn Iron (though you might speculate that its just timing at this stage....) which is the concern of the other tradition. So it is legitimate for the Irish government to argue on this point, it does preserve the status quo, it does not move NI any closer to UI. If unionists want to get the hump well that's just too bad, I'm not willing to risk the downsides of a hard border to give succour to their insecurities.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

_Betsy _I am still scratching my head as to what Leo meant when he said "this time".  I'm also scratching my head as to why he decided to really up the Orange/Green dimension?  Surely "this time" was not referring to the Treaty. Maybe all those years of Mopery* suffered in the six counties.  Maybe it was Jack Lynch deciding to keep his army in Dundalk in 1969.  Whatever he was referring to it conjured up an image of a people under siege in dire threat of some foreign imposed calamity.  Let's get real,  a bit of extra paperwork or maybe cameras on the M1 are hardly grounds for seeking help from the United Nations. 

_*  MOPE - Most Oppressed People Ever_


----------



## Betsy Og

I agree, I wouldn't have used those words, they don't help, the fact that we're grappling at what he meant is not a great sign BUT their subsequent actions and aims are entirely legitimate. By any objective standard the "ruse" - if we go as far as calling it that - swung a sweet deal for NI, Scotland was saying we want that too. I think we can agree that checking lorry paperwork in a ferry queue (which they do anyway) is even less obtrusive. Cameras on the motorway wouldnt do, and even if they would there's enough 'head the balls' to attack them and then potentially the cycle starts. 

Basically the DUP failed the people of NI by A) voting leave & B) opposing the sweet deal offered to NI. What will the NI farmers make of it all as EU subsidies shut off & now the threat of no market access - I'm hoping they show their dissatisfaction at the ballot box.


----------



## Leo

odyssey06 said:


> We're going to have a hard job finding new outlets for our agri-business products, it'll be a lot harder trying to sell those to the French or Italians than the British.



A 40% increase in exports of dairy products to other EU countries last year suggests otherwise. 

Many in the Irish agri-business might welcome a hard border / trade barriers. North-South milk imports have been increasing significantly over the last few years, even though we produce way more than we need. 2015 imports into Ireland were 500 million litres, this increased to 800m litres in 2016. All this at a time when Glanbia is putting few hundred million into drying plants to satisfy their obligation to take in all milk produced by their coop members. The UK isn't a significant market for those products. 

67% of all UK dairy exports are to Ireland, only 10% go beyond the EU. Although replacing all of that with Irish products still wouldn't cover a full loss of all Irish exports to the UK, growth in sales to China (our second biggest market) will ease that pain.



odyssey06 said:


> Same for French winemakers. If they lose the British market, where do they turn?



There will always be a market for French wine in the UK, even with WTO tariff rates. With the amount of Chinese money flowing into Bordeaux over recent years (they own more than 140 of the major chateaux), the UK, although still the second largest market, is becoming less significant. Sales to China increased 25% in 2016, to just below the level of sales to the UK. Chinese consumption of mid range wine (a segment dominated by the French producers) is showing double digit growth year on year. Sales to their primary market, the US continue to rise as well. I think they'll be OK.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

Betsy Og said:


> Basically the DUP failed the people of NI by A) voting leave & B) opposing the sweet deal offered to NI. What will the NI farmers make of it all as EU subsidies shut off & now the threat of no market access - I'm hoping they show their dissatisfaction at the ballot box.


The Ulster farmers association welcoming the deal made me think along those lines.  I thought the UUP would see the chance to do a Lazarus by rowing in behind the farmers' leaders and isolating the DUP.  But no.  Clearly on touching base with their grass roots they assessed that this has become entirely polarised along sectarian lines and the reasoned arguments of the leaders of Ulster business and agriculture are completely trumped by the SV induced Orange card.
I have a confession to make.  Having been born and reared as a NI nationalist I realise you only have to scratch me to find a rebel.  I have fallen for SV's ruse which has of course been swallowed hook line and sinker by the DUP.  At this stage I don't know what would depress me more, the backstop being binned or diluted to DUP satisfaction or Rangers winning the SPL  Thankfully both look unlikely.


----------



## Sophrosyne

odyssey06 said:


> We're going to have a hard job finding new outlets for our agri-business products



In addition to what Leo has said above, don't forget about the trade deal the EU signed earlier this year with Japan, the world’s largest free trade agreement.

Tariffs on Irish beef exported to Japan could reduce from the current 38.5% down to 9% in addition to an expected increase in exports to that country of 125 million people.

If it leaves the UK as a third country, would not of course be party to that agreement.


----------



## Sunny

Sophrosyne said:


> Tariffs on Irish beef exported to Japan could reduce from the current 38.5% down to 9% in addition to an expected increase in exports to that country of 125 million people.
> .



But where are we going to find 125 million people to send them?!!! I could probably give them my wife if that helps....


----------



## Sophrosyne

Sunny said:


> But where are we going to find 125 million people to send them?!!! I could probably give them my wife if that helps....



I don't understand your point.


----------



## odyssey06

Sunny said:


> But where are we going to find 125 million people to send them?!!! I could probably give them my wife if that helps....



Aha. I see what you did there. I have a few colleagues who I would happily contribute to this worthy export initiative, not to mention most of the Oireachtas and the head of the FAI on a one-way fact finding mission.


----------



## Betsy Og

Seems this Kate Hoey imbecile has gone all 11th bonfire: “we didnt spend 30 years suffering IRA killings of soldiers and civilians in Northern Ireland to see a United Ireland imposed by a few jumped up EU bureaucrats and a complicit prime minister.”

Apart from being inaccurate it is wildly irresponsible, to Dr. Ian levels. From a Labour MP no less, jeez, not sure how much lower this whole thing is going to go.


----------



## john luc

it will go lower before it over


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

john luc said:


> it will go lower before it over


It has just gone lower, much lower
Donal Tusk saying there is a special place in hell for Brexiteers.  But much more worrying is our Teashop caught unawares laughing with Tusk and saying he would get a pasting by the British press but that he was dead right.


----------



## dub_nerd

Tusk and the Teashop doing their best to concede the high ground they had occupied. Eejits.


----------



## Conan

Aghhhh. How dare Tusk and our Taoiseach criticize the Brexiteers. The poor little dears. Rees-Mogg, Fox, Davies etc are such shrinking violets that they will be devestated by such harsh and horrible insults. After all we all know that the Brexiteers had a clear and simple plan for how the UK of Great Britain and Northern Ireland would exit the EU with a deal that the EU  would be desperate to give them. 
So clearly the EU and the Oirish should show more respect for the great UK in view of all they have done for us over the past 800 years.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

Conan said:


> Aghhhh. How dare Tusk and our Taoiseach criticize the Brexiteers. The poor little dears. Rees-Mogg, Fox, Davies etc are such shrinking violets that they will be devestated by such harsh and horrible insults. After all we all know that the Brexiteers had a clear and simple plan for how the UK of Great Britain and Northern Ireland would exit the EU with a deal that the EU  would be desperate to give them.
> So clearly the EU and the Oirish should show more respect for the great UK in view of all they have done for us over the past 800 years.


And the biggest losers in a no deal Brexit?  Make that 801 years with the last year down to the Teashop.


----------



## Conan

Forgive me, I thought the British Government agreed to the deal, including the Backstop? So the UK negotiated a deal with 27 other countries (taking nearly 2 years), and now May wants to tear it up and start again (with 50 days to go). 
So, we just cave in, allow the UK to renege on their promise or allow them to decide unilaterally to cancel the Backstop and then we end up with a hard Border in say two years. Yeah, that sounds like a good strategy? If the Taoiseach caved-in I can imagine the criticism he would be subjected to by the usual suspects.


----------



## dub_nerd

The British Government did not just agree to the deal, including the backstop -- they _proposed_ it. This video from last week of EU deputy chief negotiator Sabine Weyand laying it on the line is well worth the investment of 15 minutes. Brexiteer MPs want to hide behind the fact that Theresa May did not have their backing in the negotiations. According to Sammy Wilson and other intransigents she now "has been given a mandate to change the backstop". Correct me if I'm wrong, but the Brady amendment to replace the backstop "with alternative arrangements to avoid a hard border” was so embarrassingly content free that nobody on the UK side is even able to say what any of the alternative arrangements might be.

EU frustration with the UK's lack of good faith in negotiations is therefore entirely justified, imho. They have wasted two years arriving at the current shambles. Tusk is right that the Brexit hardliners were ideologues without a plan. That doesn't justify the use of language about a "special place in hell". This is diplomacy. The hardliners are not going to won over in any case. But what you risk doing is alienating those who might be wavering, but are affronted by such immoderate language. And we definitely don't need our Teashop to be a giggling schoolboy accomplice to it.


----------



## elacsaplau

Thanks Dub-Nerd,

What an impressive lady! Apart from the logical _tour de force_, the "uninhibited by any knowledge of what is actually in the withdrawal agreement" bit was _le bouquet! _Pure class....


----------



## Sophrosyne

Duke of Marmalade said:


> Donal Tusk saying there is a special place in hell for Brexiteers. But much more worrying is our Teashop caught unawares laughing with Tusk and saying he would get a pasting by the British press but that he was dead right.



How is what the Taoiseach said "much more worrying"?


----------



## dub_nerd

...


----------



## RichInSpirit

War is the thing that has been forgotten in all these negotiations from an EU perspective as well as the UK perspective.
The EU was set up initially to try and prevent wars in Europe. 
A hard brexit may rekindle a war in Northern Ireland.
Also economic stagnation in the UK in the future may also lead to conditions for a war to start.
The EU has a responsibility to try and prevent future wars even if it has to bend a bit from it's tough stance with the UK.


----------



## odyssey06

RichInSpirit said:


> War is the thing that has been forgotten in all these negotiations from an EU perspective as well as the UK perspective.
> The EU was set up initially to try and prevent wars in Europe.
> A hard brexit may rekindle a war in Northern Ireland.
> Also economic stagnation in the UK in the future may also lead to conditions for a war to start.
> The EU has a responsibility to try and prevent future wars even if it has to bend a bit from it's tough stance with the UK.



I would put it a different way in that the EU makes great play out of being there to foster peaceful relations within Europe. There are other ways of doing that without trying to get everyone to actually be in the EU. EU-Turkey relations were damaged by the negotiations for Turkey to join. 
EU-UK relations don't have to be harmed by Brexit. And the UK is important to the EU through NATO even if it isn't in the EU.
Unfortunately as we have seen with the Euro and now with this, the 'project' of EU integration comes first and everything else is secondary.


----------



## Purple

I said it here when this whole thing started (but I can't find where I did, which is really annoying); I don't see any scenario where the UK leaves which does not involve a hard border.


----------



## Ceist Beag

Duke of Marmalade said:


> But much more worrying is our Teashop caught unawares laughing with Tusk and saying he would get a pasting by the British press but that he was dead right.


Where did he add "but that he was dead right" Duke? From what I saw what he said was "you will get into trouble with the British press over that" - also do you think he was really caught unawares? He was still on the stage in front of the cameras! Finally why is that much more worrying from your point of view? Do you disagree with what he said - was it in any way controversial? Certainly not judging by the coverage today - it is only the words of Tusk that concern anyone.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

Ceist Beag said:


> Where did he add "but that he was dead right" Duke? From what I saw what he said was "you will get into trouble with the British press over that" - also do you think he was really caught unawares? He was still on the stage in front of the cameras! Finally why is that much more worrying from your point of view? Do you disagree with what he said - was it in any way controversial? Certainly not judging by the coverage today - it is only the words of Tusk that concern anyone.





Sophrosyne said:


> How is what the Taoiseach said "much more worrying"?


Leo and ex football hooligan acting like schoolboys
Okay maybe "dead" right was an exaggeration.  Also he seems to be getting away with it so far, but if this all goes pear shaped and the blame game begins in earnest, Leo and Simon (goaded by Mary Lou) are putting Ireland right in the cross hairs.


----------



## Purple

Duke of Marmalade said:


> Leo and ex football hooligan acting like schoolboys
> Okay maybe "dead" right was an exaggeration.  Also he seems to be getting away with it so far, but if this all goes pear shaped and the blame game begins in earnest, Leo and Simon (goaded by Mary Lou) are putting Ireland right in the cross hairs.


The funny bit was when Adleen Foster accused Tusk of being "deliberately provocative". She's some neck that woman.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

elacsaplau said:


> Thanks Dub-Nerd,
> 
> What an impressive lady! Apart from the logical _tour de force_, the "uninhibited by any knowledge of what is actually in the withdrawal agreement" bit was _le bouquet! _Pure class....


I wonder how many people on both sides know what is actually in the GFA.  Note this conversation on BBC last week.

Andrew Neal:  What exactly does the GFA say about the border?  (trick question)
Kevin O'Rourke:  Nothing, and you know that Andrew.
AN:  What's the big deal then?
KO'R:  In the GFA we in the south gave up our claim to the six counties of NI.  This was a big blow to nationalists.  Any increase in the visibility of the border would rub salt in the wound, and would be contrary to the spirit of the GFA.

So there we have it,  offending nationalsits with cameras at the border would be in breach of the spirit of the GFA.  Shall I suggest that the imposition of a sea border against the wishes of the majority in NI would be contrary to the spirit of the GFA and possibly even contrary to its letter.

As to the outburst of the self confessed football hooligan, DT, he doesn't give a damn about peace in Ireland.  Ireland is merely a patsy in his pursuit of EU revenge on Britain.


----------



## Purple

Duke of Marmalade said:


> Shall I suggest that the imposition of a sea border against the wishes of the majority in NI would be contrary to the spirit of the GFA and possibly even contrary to its letter.


Absolutely. That's why the backstop prevents the UK from putting up a hard border with the EU. It only applies to Northern Ireland if the UK chooses to apply it that way.


----------



## dub_nerd

I think the idea that the EU is seeking revenge on Britain is too conspiratorial. Donald Tusk doesn't get to make those sorts of decisions anyway, as all of the member states have been kept apprised of the negotiating positions all along and get to ratify the final decision. The problem we have is one of incompatible "red line" issues. My own opinion is that the UK's red lines are by far the most arbitrary, as UK politicians have taken it on themselves to interpret "what the British public voted for", generally to suit their own views.

Apart from the undiplomatic language, Tusk is right in general. How would you feel if you spent two years negotiating a deal only to be told you'd been dealing with the wrong people? That's what Tories told the House of Commons last week. There are a subset of Tories who completely misread the EU position from day one, and trumpeted the fact that they were going to get all the benefits of EU membership without any of the obligations. A week ago when the Commons voted on amendments to the withdrawal agreement, some of the same MPs said that if Britain only threatened to walk away from a deal the EU would have to come to its senses. They are truly delusional.

Whether or not the GFA contains anything specific about the nature of the border in Ireland, it's entirely legitimate for the border to be a included in the negotiations with the UK. It's not like some huge concession is being demanded, it's only the transparent border that the Brits have stated they are committed to anyway. There are just two problems: that statement is incompatible with other British red lines, and the Brits have now proved they are in no position to negotiate anything in good faith with the EU due to their own divisions.

The ball is firmly in the UK court.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

dub_nerd said:


> I think the idea that the EU is seeking revenge on Britain is too conspiratorial.


Michel Barnier stated from the very outset that the aim of the negotiations was to ensure the UK was worse off as a result of Brexit, for the sake of the integrity of the Union.  Maybe not revenge, maybe not a punishment beating (per Sammy Wilson).  But I cannot escape the feeling that the Irish "peace process" has become an expedient device in maximising the EU leverage in the negotiations.  So I agree that Tusk would not on his own be able to indulge his hooligan thirst for revenge but the mask has slipped and we can see exactly where he is coming from.


dub_nerd said:


> The ball is firmly in the UK court.


I don't think so.  It is firmly in Simon Varadkar's or maybe to a lesser extent the DUP's court.  Seems to me that the DUP call the shots at Westminster,  I have heard comments from Brexiteers to the effect that if a revised deal is good enough for the DUP, it would be good enough for them.  On the other hand, Ireland calls the shots with the EU side. This may be resolved at the very last minute by Ireland very "reluctantly" accepting a 5 year time limit to the backstop.  Brexiteers and the DUP would be furious but would be seen as just wreckers if they rejected what would have been positioned as a massive concession from Ireland.

So then we would have 2 years transition, 5 years backstop and we would be 15 years on from the 2011 NI census.  That census showed a thin majority of Protestants over Catholics of just 2%, with crucially at younger ages the gap being Catholics having a 10% lead over Protestants.  Time for a border poll.  Cue a United Ireland.  No need for a hard border, though who would supply the military intervention to quell the open community warfare in Belfast and other places?


----------



## Purple

Duke of Marmalade said:


> So then we would have 2 years transition, 5 years backstop and we would be 15 years on from the 2011 NI census. That census showed a thin majority of Protestants over Catholics of just 2%, with crucially at younger ages the gap being Catholics having a 10% lead over Protestants. Time for a border poll. Cue a United Ireland. No need for a hard border, though who would supply the military intervention to quell the open community warfare in Belfast and other places?


A united Ireland; that's the nightmare scenario for me alright. Two large tribal groups, angry, bigoted, god-bothering, welfare reliant and generally incapable of functioning in the modern world lumped in on top of us. Sweet This post will be deleted if not edited immediately.
The Brits think Brexit will be expensive? They'd have to pay us about €20 billion a year for the next 40 years to take on that dysfunctional basket of deplorables.


----------



## odyssey06

Duke of Marmalade said:


> o then we would have 2 years transition, 5 years backstop and we would be 15 years on from the 2011 NI census.  That census showed a thin majority of Protestants over Catholics of just 2%, with crucially at younger ages the gap being Catholics having a 10% lead over Protestants.  Time for a border poll.  Cue a United Ireland.  No need for a hard border, though who would supply the military intervention to quell the open community warfare in Belfast and other places?



Would a vote in Stormont be needed? And if so, under power sharing rules wouldn't it need votes in Stormont from both sides?


----------



## dub_nerd

Duke of Marmalade said:


> Michel Barnier stated from the very outset that the aim of the negotiations was to ensure the UK was worse off as a result of Brexit, for the sake of the integrity of the Union.



No he didn't, he said the EU was prepared to offer the UK an "unprecedented deal", better than any other non-member. He also said that no country could be better off as a non-member than as a member. That does not mean the _purpose_ of the negotiations was to ensure the UK was worse off, but that such was the simple logic of the situation. Your claim is like saying that someone taking a voluntary severance package is being forced into joblessness. 



odyssey06 said:


> Would a vote in Stormont be needed? And if so, under power sharing rules wouldn't it need votes in Stormont from both sides?



No, a future vote for a united Ireland would take place in the North and the Republic according to the GFA. It needs a majority of citizens' votes in both locales, the politicians don't get a say.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

dub_nerd said:


> Your claim is like saying that someone taking a voluntary severance package is being forced into joblessness.


It's making sure she doesn't think she can continue to come in and get the free lunch after she has left.


----------



## dub_nerd

Duke of Marmalade said:


> It's making sure she doesn't think she can continue to come in and get the free lunch after she has left.



True, it does sometimes seem the Brits need the basics spelled out for them. And some of them _still_ aren't getting it.


----------



## elacsaplau

Duke of Marmalade said:


> I wonder how many people on both sides know what is actually in the GFA.



Not the Brexit Secretary who replaced the first fool (Brexit Secretary One)
_It’s not like a novel, you sit down and say ‘do you know what, over the holidays, this is a cracking read'.
_
As Jennifer Cassidy put it: _I expect my students to read close to 500 pages a week. In order to construct a 2,500 word essay for our weekly tutorial. But Dominic Raab can’t read a 35 page international peace treaty, in order to inform his decisions which affect the future of entire nations._

Have a look at the clip below and do a compare and contrast with the subject mastery of Sabine Weyand in the earlier clip.

https://www.joe.ie/news/former-brex...dmits-never-read-good-friday-agreement-657014


----------



## PMU

Conan said:


> So, we just cave in, allow the UK to renege on their promise or allow them to decide unilaterally to cancel the Backstop and then we end up with a hard Border in say two years.


Why should this happen?   Certain commentators in the UK, particularly those from an economics background, have suggested that the UK need only require by legislation that UK entities that export to the EU must comply with the relevant EU standards and tariffs. Add a certification scheme on top of that and there is no need for any border checking. The goods being exported are certified to EU standards and logistics looks after customs tariffs, etc. If the UK really wants to be out of any dealing with the EU they could just make it illegal for UK entities to trade with Ireland unless they comply with EU norms and tariffs. Management in UK companies can then decide, as good management should do, how much capital is allocated to goods destined for EU and how much to allocate to goods destined to other countries. This is the function of management and market forces would determine if it were worthwhile for a company to export to the EU or seek profit elsewhere. There will always be cheaters but if you lose your certification you won't be able to export.

Of course, Ireland will now have an obligation to defend the EU's external border, but being realistic, I don't think the UK is likely to invade the EU via the boreens of Fermanagh.

The only other area where there are calls (mainly from Hungary and Austria) for hard borders are to establish controls on immigration. I don't see this as a major issue at present. Immigrants are more likely to use Ireland as a backdoor to the UK than vice versa.


----------



## Sophrosyne

But what about third country tariffs?


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

_PMU _that is a heroic attempt, though _Sophrosyne _seems to have spotted an immediate difficulty.  I take the, perhaps naive, view that experts in the field have been negotiating these points for at least a year and they have no magic solution that makes the four red lines join:
Theresa May's red line:  No Customs Union or Single Market
Leo's red line:  no hard land border
DUP's red line:  no sea border in the UK
EU's red line:  single market must be protected, if necessary, by a hard border (e.g. in No Deal as signaled by that Portuguese a few weeks ago).

In logic, at least one of these red lines has to be breached.  Hopefully Theresa May's.  But if she finds that politically impossible, then I'm afraid Leo is next in line.  I can't see the DUP or the EU budging.


----------



## odyssey06

Duke of Marmalade said:


> _PMU _that is a heroic attempt, though _Sophrosyne _seems to have spotted an immediate difficulty.  I take the, perhaps naive, view that experts in the field have been negotiating these points for at least a year and they have no magic solution that makes the four red lines join:
> Theresa May's red line:  No Customs Union or Single Market
> Leo's red line:  no hard land border
> DUP's red line:  no sea border in the UK
> EU's red line:  single market must be protected, if necessary, by a hard border (e.g. in No Deal as signaled by that Portuguese a few weeks ago).
> 
> In logic, at least one of these red lines has to be breached.  Hopefully Theresa May's.  But if she finds that politically impossible, then I'm afraid Leo is next in line.  I can't see the DUP or the EU budging.



I thought the deal that was negotiated didn't cross any of those lines, just it had the permanent backstop?
It takes UK out of customs union, single market, common fisheries and agriculture, ECJ.
Would a 5 year time limit on the backstop mean no red lines crossed?


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

odyssey06 said:


> I thought the deal that was negotiated didn't cross any of those lines, just it had the permanent backstop?
> It takes UK out of customs union, single market, common fisheries and agriculture, ECJ.
> Would a 5 year time limit on the backstop mean no red lines crossed?


It crossed the DUP's red lines in that there was some differentiation between NI and GB in the backstop.
On the face of it a 5 year time limit would be Leo climbing down and Mary Lou would try to bury him.  But Michael Martin in answer to a leading question on RTE did not commit to a time limit being a red line.  MM is a rock of sense and with his backing Leo could carry off this seeming climb down.  But as I said before it would be the DUP and the Brexiteers who would feel really cheated.

A possible solution is that TM sees her chances of winning a GE improving.  The result of the 2017 election which put  the DUP in the driving seat is the real cause of the present impasse.  If TM even got her slim majority back I can see Tory Brexiteers buying into making the backstop NI only.  This was after all the original backstop before the DUP stepped in that week in December 2017 and got TM to add another clause to the joint way forward which they thought ruled out a sea border.  GB politicians could easily justify this position given the support of the NI business and farming community for TM's original deal.

The more you think about it, it is the DUP who have blown this to a crisis of silly proportions.  Simon Varadkar didn't help by winding them up with such talk as "the Dublin government won't desert northern nationalists this time".


----------



## Sophrosyne

The backstop is just _one_ contentious issue, but is being played up. If that didn't exist it would be something else.

One of the problems is over-concentration on the withdrawal agreement, which many UK politicians on their own admission haven't actually read or fully understood.

The future relationship is more important. Solutions could be found based on the nature of this relationship, which is where the meaningful thought should now centre.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

elacsaplau said:


> Thanks Dub-Nerd,
> 
> What an impressive lady! Apart from the logical _tour de force_, the "uninhibited by any knowledge of what is actually in the withdrawal agreement" bit was _le bouquet! _Pure class....


She's not in the same league as TM when it comes to necklace beads.


----------



## elacsaplau

Nice one, Duke

Apparently and on impeachable authority, Sabine's necklace previously had as many beads as Theresa's model. The reduced bead count, as per the image, is consequent to preventative medical advice to the effect that she already had sufficient frontal mass, sometimes questionably referred to as the endowment effect.


----------



## RETIRED2017

Interesting May bringing Olly Robbins To Dublin ,Don't think Brexiteers in the Tory Party will be happy,
Looks like she is working on getting support from Remainers of all parties on her side,


----------



## RETIRED2017

elacsaplau said:


> Nice one, Duke
> 
> Apparently and on impeachable authority, Sabine's necklace previously had as many beads as Theresa's model. The reduced bead count, as per the image, is consequent to preventative medical advice to the effect that she already sufficient frontal mass.


The trouble with the type of beads on a string May is wearing When one slips off all the rest  follow,


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

RETIRED2017 said:


> The trouble with the type of beads on a string May is wearing When one slips off all the rest  follow,


I presume that is intended as a clever allegory


----------



## RETIRED2017

I sent May  a Gold tusk chain choker style necklace  with tusk details from the Missguided Ireland Web site they were 14 euro now down to 5 euro she can count on the vote of  every  MP who admires it,
If the people of Clare can send a Card to Junker , the least we can do is send May a present for looking after all the people In Ireland and getting no thanks ,

To be fair we should be sending her our support and best wishes on getting her deal through,


----------



## cremeegg

A friend is the purchasing manager for a large Irish business. He contacted an important UK supplier to see what preparation they had made to be able to continue supplying him after Brexit.

No problem he was told. They had arranged large warehouses, trucks etc etc everything in hand no matter what happens.

He asked where the warehouses were. In the UK !

Its not just the politicians who don't have a clue.


----------



## RETIRED2017

cremeegg said:


> A friend is the purchasing manager for a large Irish business. He contacted an important UK supplier to see what preparation they had made to be able to continue supplying him after Brexit.
> 
> No problem he was told. They had arranged large warehouses, trucks etc etc everything in hand no matter what happens.
> 
> He asked where the warehouses were. In the UK !
> 
> Its not just the politicians who don't have a clue.


Looks like the the Uk supplier is better organised to supply the important uk suppliers, than the Irish purchasing manager is if he left it this late to make sure he will have supplies , 
I expect the uk will have put in place movement of supplies between UK mainland  and NI ,
I can tell you most UK suppliers have arrangements in place if no deal Brexit once Irish firms engaged in good time,


----------



## RETIRED2017

If most of Ireland's Agricultural products go to uk after Brexit,   EU cap support will finish up putting food on uk tables, Not popular to say I know,What in it for EU long term,


----------



## Leo

RETIRED2017 said:


> If most of Ireland's Agricultural products go to uk after Brexit,   EU cap support will finish up putting food on uk tables, Not popular to say I know,What in it for EU long term,



Not clear what you're trying to say there, but I don't foresee any Brexit scenario that would result in such a significant increase in the portion of our exports going to the UK.


----------



## Conan

It seems the DUP are in discussions with the Chancellor. So nothing has changed, for the DUP is less about the Crown and more about the half-crown. Clearly now about how big the bribe to enable the DUP climb down from their high horse.


----------



## Firefly

I see Searsons are running a Brexit night. If I was in Dublin I think I'd definitely go to this!

https://www.independent.ie/irish-ne...ormances-from-the-backstop-boys-37938482.html


----------



## cremeegg

Angela Merkel is coming to Dublin on Thursday. I have a bad feeling about that.

Why is she coming, is it to tell Leo in person, "look the Brits won't wear the backstop, it will have to go"

I fear the worst. 


Having said that dropping the backstop may be in the Souths best interest at the end of the day.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade

cremeegg said:


> Angela Merkel is coming to Dublin on Thursday. I have a bad feeling about that.
> 
> Why is she coming, is it to tell Leo in person, "look the Brits won't wear the backstop, it will have to go"
> 
> I fear the worst.
> 
> 
> Having said that dropping the backstop may be in the Souths best interest at the end of the day.


I know you predicted Donald Trump winning, but no way is Frau Merkel coming to Dublin to handbag Leo into humiliation.  That would signal the end of the EU as the German Fiefdom narrative would be proven.
No, it is a part bluff, part real, demonstration that the Germans are planning for this No Deal Brexit seriously despite the threat to sales of Mercs to Brits.


----------



## Purple

Is Macron coming too?
We know he's a thing for older women.


----------



## Purple

RETIRED2017 said:


> Leo is going to Paris , leo, 40, Macron, 41, Brigitte, better watch out,


I think she's safe enough from Leo.


----------



## cremeegg

Purple said:


> I think she's safe enough from Leo.



I think you misunderstood Retired's point there


----------



## odyssey06

Martello towers to be re-activated in event of hard border... (note the date!)
http://coastmonkey.ie/martello-towers-lookout-posts/


----------



## Purple

cremeegg said:


> I think you misunderstood Retired's point there


I think you misunderstood mine.


----------



## Purple

Now it's going to all be sorted by October. Yea, right.


----------



## Folsom

I think the border issue should be looked at from a different perspective. Those who argue that there is no need for customs controls and border checks, ie 'hard border' between UK/EU in Ireland, should be asked if there will be customs controls and border checks between UK/EU anywhere else? 
If not, wouldn't that make a mockery of 'taking control of borders'?


----------



## Purple

Folsom said:


> I think the border issue should be looked at from a different perspective. Those who argue that there is no need for customs controls and border checks, ie 'hard border' between UK/EU in Ireland, should be asked if there will be customs controls and border checks between UK/EU anywhere else?
> If not, wouldn't that make a mockery of 'taking control of borders'?



That's the issue the DUP had with the Backstop. May's solution; it now applies to the whole UK. That in turn is the problem many Brexiteers have with May and her revised backstop; it could potentially keep the UK in the EU indefinitely.
Basically the Brexiteers were called our on their nonsense about "Technological solutions" and the United Kingdom Conservative and Unionist Party (Conservatives for short) were happy to screw over the Nordie Unionists as long as "The Mainland" got out of Europe clean.


----------



## Folsom

Absolutely. But I would like some of our (or their) prominent broadcasters to actual put the question to them in that form - if there is no need for customs and immigration controls between UK/EU in Ireland, then why have any customs and immigration controls between UK/EU in Britain? 

I have engaged with plenty of Brexiteers over this and none can return a rational or reasonable answer without 1) showing up the fallacy of their position, as you have pointed out, or 2) exposing the myth of mantra like "taking back control of our borders"


----------



## john luc

I find it amusing that you talked to brexiteers and expected their responses to rational questions to actually be rational. Any I have engaged with have always found their arguments running up cul de sac's. Being thick is an entitlement of many a human.


----------

