• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Brexit: Now What? Part IV

Status
Not open for further replies.
Information Analyst said:
It was more the case that Ceptimus didn't seem bothered about the loss of the EAW, citing the supposed imbalance as to who benefited from it.............
Click to expand...

..............as an incentive to organise a replacement. Don't misrepresent your interlocutor's posts so blatantly.
 
Lothian said:
Yes the current transition agreements and no deal, each require a border

No deal means a hard border between NI and Eire; the current transition agreement means a hard border between NI and rUK.
Click to expand...

The EU's position, as I understand it, is that the backstop position (ie until a further agreement is reached, if at all) is that Northern Ireland maintains full EU regulatory alignment as well as customs union.

Which is nice and easy for the Republic (and the EU), but not a good way to ensure the continuance of the Good Friday agreement.

If there's no progress soon, then the only sensible backstop would be a border poll.
 
Can’t really see the EU compelling the UK to have a NIGB border.

Can’t see any player building or operating one in Ireland either.
 
Aber said:
The EU's position, as I understand it, is that the backstop position (ie until a further agreement is reached, if at all) is that Northern Ireland maintains full EU regulatory alignment as well as customs union.

Which is nice and easy for the Republic (and the EU), but not a good way to ensure the continuance of the Good Friday agreement.

If there's no progress soon, then the only sensible backstop would be a border poll.
Click to expand...
That is not the EU's backstop. It is the backstop agreed by the UK and EU signed by May. It is for NI to effectively remain in the EU while the rest of the UK leaves . I am sure Dublin were involved. It is a step closer to a united Ireland
 
Captain_Swoop said:
It's the unskilled fruit and veg pickers that we need. The seasonal workers who come over, do the work and then go home again.
No one else wants to do it.
Click to expand...

True.

We also want the skilled EU citizens as well. About a quarter of my immediate colleagues are EU nationals - slightly more than half are immigrants (with various levels of higher degree and experience) and we have lots of hassle getting the non EU citizens work visas, even after posting the vacancies on the local jobcentre (there are few candidates with a PhD and ten years of experience there, but that is one of the hoops we need to jump through).

It's almost as if we need free movement of people to keep industry and essential services running.
 
quadraginta said:
Anyone who thinks that picking fruits and vegetables is "unskilled" has never done it.

If they were to try they'd be in for a very rude awakening.
Click to expand...


As a student I did apple picking, which was piecework. It was unskilled, but technique made it far better - I was getting about £10 an hour in the early 1990s, which was a good amount.

Some of my friends were getting quite a bit less, maybe down to £5 an hour, which was still a reasonable wage.
 
Francesca R said:
Can’t really see the EU compelling the UK to have a NIGB border.

Can’t see any player building or operating one in Ireland either.
Click to expand...

And yet Theresa May has already agreed to exactly that as the backstop solution. Sooner or later reality is going to have to crash in.
 
The Don said:
Strawberry said:
Off topic, but I'm surprised the w word is allowed on here when the n word isn't. Arent' they basically the same?
Click to expand...

MikeG said:
It's standard fare for The Don. See the link in my signature.
Click to expand...

Yep, and looking at the current Conservative Party, I stand by that comment.
Click to expand...

There are plenty of leavers who don't think like that. For example, I wouldn't think that Gove is - Johnson, however with his "piccaninnies" comment seems like a "soft" racist at least.

My dad and my brother's parents in law were and are firm remainers, but most of their peers are firm leavers - which again isn't racism, but comfortable, middle-class, rural professionals who'd worked in businesses that were local and insulated from the EU (unlike Dad, who'd worked with the Ministry of Agriculture - or my brother's father in law who had been a bank manager).

My dad and I get the impression that it was basically a bit of a yearning for the certainties of the 1950's, when of course, they were also young and fit. There was a jingoistic attitude that I detected, though.

Saying that - my kids also know a fair number of farmers from school and their reasoning was explicitly xenophobic*. And a belief that the EU was shafting them and that Britain will give them far better subsidies... several have realised their mistake on that now.

*Fear of many different immigrants (Eastern Europeans and Muslims, according to my kids) in a highly homogeneous society - my son did ruefully state that one of his friends was about 10% of the ethnic minorities in the school. He's now at a large college in Greater Manchester, so with an ethnic mix more akin to my work environment.
 
What do you think the probability is of that backstop arrangement?

What the blazes do you think it does for the peace agreement? Which is the reason there is all the kerfuffle about Ireland's border in the first place
 
Francesca R said:
What do you think is the probability of that backstop arrangement?

What the blazes do you think it does for the peace agreement? Which is the universal reason for all the kerfuffle about Ireland's border in the first place.
Click to expand...

It would do absolutely no harm to the peace process, or the GFA. A land border, otoh, would create merry hell.

None of which changes the point that if Theresa May signed up to that backstop with her fingers crossed behind her back, as you say, then there is no point in negotiating anything with her. She's clearly a liar who is negotiating in bad faith.
 
Oh well I suppose I couldn't disagree more about that (harming the peace agreement)

That's why I don't think any of the players would countenance it.

That's why we get soft Brexit.
 
Lothian said:
That is not the EU's backstop. It is the backstop agreed by the UK and EU signed by May. It is for NI to effectively remain in the EU while the rest of the UK leaves .
Click to expand...

As I understand it, it is the EU's interpretation of the December agreement, and not one that the UK government agrees with.

The EU draft IIRC includes "full regulatory alignment", while the December agreement has some heavy qualifications around it to make it palatable to the DUP. If the UK government actually went further in private than they told the DUP, then we'll see if May will survive a vote of confidence.

Full text from December, with caveats bolded:

49. The United Kingdom remains committed to protecting North-South cooperation and to its guarantee of avoiding a hard border. Any future arrangements must be compatible with these overarching requirements. The United Kingdom's intention is to achieve these objectives through the overall EU-UK relationship. Should this not be possible, the United Kingdom will propose specific solutions to address the unique circumstances of the island of Ireland. In the absence of agreed solutions, the United Kingdom will maintain full alignment with those rules of the Internal Market and the Customs Union which, now or in the future, support North-South cooperation, the all island economy and the protection of the 1998 Agreement.

50. In the absence of agreed solutions, as set out in the previous paragraph, the United Kingdom will ensure that no new regulatory barriers develop between Northern Ireland and the rest of the United Kingdom, unless, consistent with the 1998 Agreement, the Northern Ireland Executive and Assembly agree that distinct arrangements are appropriate for Northern Ireland. In all circumstances, the United Kingdom will continue to ensure the same unfettered access for Northern Ireland's businesses to the whole of the United Kingdom internal market.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Francesca R said:
Oh well I suppose I couldn't disagree more about that (harming the peace agreement)

That's why I don't think any of the players would countenance it.

That's why we get soft Brexit.
Click to expand...

You couldn't be more wrong then. A sea border would, at most, result in a similar response to the removal of the flag from Belfast City Hall, ie a response that's easily controlled by the normal police force.

A land border would almost certainly result in having to send the British Army back in to NI. And sooner or later probably bombs going off in England too.
 
Don't forget that Ireland does more trade with the UK alone than it does with the entire remainder of the EU. Ireland doesn't really want a border that makes trade more difficult either, no matter where it's physically located.

From a trade point of view, it would make more sense for any trade border to be located between Ireland and mainland Europe - but of course that won't happen as it would effectively mean that Ireland would also leave the EU - and that would be politically unacceptable both to Ireland and every other remaining EU country.


ETA: I was wrong about the amount of trade anyway: http://www.finfacts.ie/irishfinancenews/article_1028937.shtml
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom