Brexit process

[UndercoverElephant]

What Irish border problem? Spell it out please UE.

If the UK leaves the customs union, as repeatedly promised by TM, then there has to be a customs border between the UK and the EU.

Ireland is in the EU. Northern Ireland is in the UK. So by default, there will have to be a customs border between NI and the republic.

Any sort of customs border between NI and the republic is deemed politically unacceptable on both sides of that potential border, and by the EU.

The EU's demand regarding the sequencing of talks, which supposedly is there to ensure there will be no hard border in Ireland, is actually guaranteeing that very outcome. As things stand, if the talks fail then the UK crashes out of the EU with no deal, which would mean a hard border is needed in Ireland. The EU has demanded that before it is willing to talk about anything else, including the UK's future trading relationship with the EU, that the UK agrees to a "backstop" arrangement, which basically means that if talks fail then the UK has agreed to either an internal border within the UK (which the DUP will block, and is about to become illegal anyway) or that the whole of the UK remains in the customs union without specifying a price from the EU.

There's no way the UK can agree to this. At the moment, the default outcome is a messy, bad-tempered no-deal brexit. The EU is demanding that in order to avoid this outcome, the UK must agree that the default outcome is a messy, bad-tempered no-deal brexit, except with some added features which make is even worse than that. The UK would have to be stark raving mad to agree to this.

[Little John]

What Irish border problem? Spell it out please UE.

If the UK leaves the customs union, as repeatedly promised by TM, then there has to be a customs border between the UK and the EU.

Ireland is in the EU. Northern Ireland is in the UK. So by default, there will have to be a customs border between NI and the republic.

Any sort of customs border between NI and the republic is deemed politically unacceptable on both sides of that potential border, and by the EU.

The EU's demand regarding the sequencing of talks, which supposedly is there to ensure there will be no hard border in Ireland, is actually guaranteeing that very outcome. As things stand, if the talks fail then the UK crashes out of the EU with no deal, which would mean a hard border is needed in Ireland. The EU has demanded that before it is willing to talk about anything else, including the UK's future trading relationship with the EU, that the UK agrees to a "backstop" arrangement, which basically means that if talks fail then the UK has agreed to either an internal border within the UK (which the DUP will block, and is about to become illegal anyway) or that the whole of the UK remains in the customs union without specifying a price from the EU.

There's no way the UK can agree to this. At the moment, the default outcome is a messy, bad-tempered no-deal brexit. The EU is demanding that in order to avoid this outcome, the UK must agree that the default outcome is a messy, bad-tempered no-deal brexit, except with either an internal customs border in the UK or an agreement for the whole of the UK to remain in the customs union with the EU offfering nothing in return and able to demand whatever price it likes. The UK would have to be stark raving mad to agree to this.

All you have defined as a "border problem" there is a political one that is largely an EU manufactured political problem at that.

In what way is a border between Northern Ireland (which is part of the UK) and southern Ireland (which is a separate country to the UK) a material problem over and above any border between any two adjacent countries that trade with one another? You have not as yet identified what that special, material problem is or, over and above EU machinations, what the political problem is.

[Lord Beria3]

https://www.eurointelligence.com/public.html

Latest briefing from Eurointelligence is interesting...

As Chris Giles argues in a comment in the FT, there is still a path towards an agreement, despite the amendment that made a customs border inside the UK illegal. His idea is to separate the customs union from the VAT administrative system and the single-market laws. The whole of the UK would piggy-back on the Northern Irish backstop and stay inside the customs union, but the mainland would be opting out of the EU’s VAT system and the single-market laws. This arrangement would technically fulfil the requirement of no customs border inside the Irish Sea. It would push all the border friction on to the Dover/Calais border, which is a big hassle and clearly not sustainable, but a possible stop-gap.

Both sides will revile Simon Jenkins, who writes in his Guardian column this morning that the EEA/customs union is the sane and most probable outcome. A no-deal Brexit is possible but unlikely. And, even if it happens, it would not be the end of the world because a no-deal Brexit would imply deals on customs arrangements and transport. Trade will continue. Airplanes will fly. Ferries will sail. He writes that the most likely outcome is for the UK to head towards a customs union/EEA style agreement. A customs union between the nations of Europe cannot be avoided because of pure trade geography. And yes, Brexit will happen in March next year for a very simple reason: it is the law.

[Little John]

Meanwhile, what, precisely, is the material problem with a border between Northern Ireland and Ireland?

[adam2]

Meanwhile, what, precisely, is the material problem with a border between Northern Ireland and Ireland?

Firstly, the Ulster unionists don't want a border, and at present they have political influence out of all proportion to their numbers as the minority government is very reliant on Ulster unionist support.

Secondly, many people in both Northern Ireland and the Irish republic have become used to an open border and think nothing of crossing the border multiple times a day for employment, shopping or leisure.
A proper border with vehicles and persons liable to search, and a requirement to show documents would be very unpopular.

[UndercoverElephant]

Meanwhile, what, precisely, is the material problem with a border between Northern Ireland and Ireland?

Breaches the GFA. Could only happen in the event of a no-deal brexit, because Ireland would veto any deal that required that border. DUP would probably pull the plug on it too.

[Little John]

From what I have read, the GFA mentions the EU only once and not in a way that is likely to implicate Brexit. Also, if the DUP is forced to choose between an internal border in the irish sea between northern Ireland and the rest of the UK, or leaving without a deal and having a hard border between themselves and Ireland, I bet I know which they will choose. As for what Ireland want; If they don't want a hard border, they know what they need to do. which is leave the Eu. If they want to stay in the EU, then fine. The consequence of that will be a hard border with NI and if they don't like that, they need to take it up with the EU.

Look, borders exists all around the world, including ones with comparable historical problems to the one in Ireland. But, they seem to manage. This is all just whipped up bullshit to stop leaving the EU. The problem is, of course, that the EU could well end up opening old wounds with this bullshit and so the problem become only too real again as a consequence. These fuckers are on the borderline of committing acts of war on this country.

This is WHY we should be completely OUT of the EU.

[Potemkin Villager]

I was lucky enough to avoid the Maybot road show whist visiting my daughter, who is a student studying in Belfast, on Friday. By all reports locally it did not gain many hearts and minds and was conducted much like the lamentable Tory election campaign.

All sides in this affair want to have their particular beloved Pontefract cake and eat it too apparently unconcerned with the consequences.

[Little John]

No, that's Remainer nonsense

The standard Remainer argument is that, with a hard border between NI and Ireland, it would destroy the Good Friday agreement. However, a hard border is only going to happen if the EU imposes it. The UK government has already said they are not interested in a hard border, so the EU is basically threatening to put on in for no reason other than as a bargaining chip. In which case, what the hell does that say about the EU?

In terms of freedom of movement of people, this could easily be solved with something along the lines Irish visa IDs automatically issued from the UK to any Irish citizen who wanted one and vice versa for NI people. All they would need to do would be to present them at the border and they would be waived straight through. So, no different to now in terms of freedom of movement between NI and Ireland. In terms of the free movement of goods, this could happen with no significant problems that could not be solved in the same way they are solved in every other damned country on the world. What "problems" exists are those that are being threatened to be put in place by the EU.

Finally, there is an argument that without EU membership and the (fictitious) breaking of the Good Friday Agreement, the IRA would rear it's ugly head again. But, I was there when the GFA was made and the main reason that the IRA signed up to it was twofold; Firstly that their political wing, Sinn Fein, would be brought into the democratic fold and share power with the DUP. Secondly, that the NI people would be allowed to choose, democratically, to rejoin Ireland any time they wish via a referendum and the UK government would no longer try and impose their remaining in the UK by military force. There is no logical reason why those things should not remain true irrespective of Brexit.

This is all bullshit from start to finish.

[clv101]

However, a hard border is only going to happen if the EU imposes it. The UK government has already said they are not interested in a hard border, so the EU is basically threatening to put on in for no reason other than as a bargaining chip. In which case, what the hell does that say about the EU?

It's a hard boarder just inevitable when two countries have different standards for goods and/or different tariff arrangements? It's not so much a case of who imposes it, it is simply implied by product standards and trade agreements.

If for example, the UK does a trade deal with the US allowing cheap agricultural produce that isn't compliant with EU standards into the UK, then there has to be a hard boarder in Ireland or else those US products have free access not just to the UK but to the EU - which isn't allowed. The same could happen in reverse if there's a product available in the EU that we decide isn't allowed in the UK. On tariffs, if the EU have a 30% (or whatever it is) import tariff on solar panels but the UK decides in some trade deal with China to drop it to zero, there has to be a hard boarder to stop those cheap solar panels entering the EU, and vice versa.

Without a hard boarder neither the EU or the UK are able to actually enforce any differences in standards or tariffs. If there are to be differences, then they need to be enforced and the only way to enforce them is with a proper border. Without the boarder, we're back to May's 'common rulebook'.

[Little John]

No, it will just be a border. Like the "hard" border between, say America and Canada. To any extent it is "harder than that is entirely due to the anti-democratic EU and anti-democratic traitors in this county

[clv101]

Yeah, I think folk are talking about a similar deal as with US and Canada, but without any benefits of NAFTA. Here's some detail on what crossing the board entails:
Tips for Driving Across the Border into Canada

Then sometimes really crazy stuff happens:
Jogger detained for 2 weeks after accidentally crossing US border from Canada

[Potemkin Villager]

The standard Remainer argument is that, with a hard border between NI and Ireland, it would destroy the Good Friday agreement. However, a hard border is only going to happen if the EU imposes it. The UK government has already said they are not interested in a hard border, so the EU is basically threatening to put on in for no reason other than as a bargaining chip. In which case, what the hell does that say about the EU?

A fine piece of sophism but is it not the UK which wishes to erect a border with the EU?

[UndercoverElephant]

No, it will just be a border. Like the "hard" border between, say America and Canada. To any extent it is "harder than that is entirely due to the anti-democratic EU and anti-democratic traitors in this county

The border between the US and Canada is quite hard.

[Little John]

And?