Brexit: Now What? Part IV

[Andy_Ross]

I also "appreciate" how the Express sometimes manages to get its headline to imply something different to the words in the story, which is good for what people remember.

This example, where the quote looks to be being applied to the wrong person.

https://www.google.com/search?q=spe...nt+express&client=ms-opera-mobile&channel=new

'Tell the truth!' Speaker stuns Labour MP during ferocious anti-Brexit Commons rant

I saw that one on the BBC news channel. The Speaker suggested that calling a fellow member of the house a liar wasn't the thing to do.

This is a good one as well

PMQs: Moment speaker forced to intervene as Corbyn's Brexit claim prompts ROAR of laughter

Seems to imply the laughter was aimed at Corbyn rather than being a general uproar as is usual at PMQs

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/8...-May-Prime-Minister-Question-Jeremy-Corbyn-UK

 

[ddt]

Not even that, just being a member of the EEA is enough, or in the process of applying to become a member (as in the case of Turkey, although that train has long since stalled in the Anatolyan highlands).

The EEA could be described as "member light", and the others are applying to become a member. Those are at least countries that want a strong connection with the EU. The UK, on the other hand, wants out of the EU, and also out of the EEA, so it's only logical this perk is being withheld.

They should rename it EU city of culture.

Why don't you star your own "Insular European City of Culture" if you have a beef with the name?

 

[ddt]

Theresa May is not the first PM to find herself in a situation where the only sensible policy forces her into a showdown with the NI unionists. Margaret Thatcher had to do it with the Anglo-Irish Agreement, John Major and Tony Blair had to do it at various stages of the peace process.

None of those PMs, however, relied on the NI unionists for a majority. The last time they could have saved a government was in March 1979, but Jim Callaghan refused to bribe them.

Either that or she'll have to upset Brexiters all over the UK by keeping the entire country in the customs union.

Are we only talking about the customs border or also about the passport checks? You can rely on May not to do the latter; no way she'll give a backdoor to filthy Poles and Romanians to get into fair England.

Yes it's a given that the DUP can't get their mutually contradictory demands so will be upset (but that's a very minor upside to the whole fiasco).

There's one very simple solution to the DUP's demands of a free border with the Republic as well as with Britain (the isle): an independent Northern Ireland. Then they are free to negotiate themselves on an open border with the UK and with the EU/Ireland. That solution would have the added advantage that they get to realize the responsibilities of government, and that you can't just stop having a government. And to May, it has the advantage that she can govern with an equally comfortable majority without a toxic support party.

 

[The Don]

There's one very simple solution to the DUP's demands of a free border with the Republic as well as with Britain (the isle): an independent Northern Ireland. Then they are free to negotiate themselves on an open border with the UK and with the EU/Ireland. That solution would have the added advantage that they get to realize the responsibilities of government, and that you can't just stop having a government. And to May, it has the advantage that she can govern with an equally comfortable majority without a toxic support party.

Can't see the DUP being happy with that given the second word of their party name.

 

[Craig B]

There's one very simple solution to the DUP's demands of a free border with the Republic as well as with Britain (the isle): an independent Northern Ireland.

They'd have to jettison many important principles and declarations about fighting to reject Home Rule and remain British The DUP would find hard to dump the Ulster Covenant^WP. Would a government of the Netherlands chuck out the Act of Abjuration?

Poor NI, fated either to be part of the UK or of the Republic of Ireland. It's not a country in its own right, and has never claimed to be one. (It's not even a whole Irish Province.)

Will the Ulster Unionists now permit themselves to become unmindful of the stirring words of Rudyard Kipling "Ulster 1912"?

What answer from the North?
One Law, One Land, One Throne!
If England drives us forth
We shall not fall alone.​

 

[Strawberry]

None of those PMs, however, relied on the NI unionists for a majority. The last time they could have saved a government was in March 1979, but Jim Callaghan refused to bribe them.


Are we only talking about the customs border or also about the passport checks? You can rely on May not to do the latter; no way she'll give a backdoor to filthy Poles and Romanians to get into fair England.


There's one very simple solution to the DUP's demands of a free border with the Republic as well as with Britain (the isle): an independent Northern Ireland. Then they are free to negotiate themselves on an open border with the UK and with the EU/Ireland. That solution would have the added advantage that they get to realize the responsibilities of government, and that you can't just stop having a government. And to May, it has the advantage that she can govern with an equally comfortable majority without a toxic support party.

There will never be an independent NI. The Unionists don't want it, the Nationalists don't want it and neither of the two governments wants it. Its the type of thing that crops up on internet discussions on NI but its not the type of thing that anybody in real life wants, apart from a few loyalist psychopaths, and they only want it because they think it would give them free rein to go on a Rwandan style rampage against Catholics.

 

[ddt]

Can't see the DUP being happy with that given the second word of their party name.

They'd have to jettison many important principles and declarations about fighting to reject Home Rule and remain British The DUP would find hard to dump the Ulster Covenant^WP.

The designer's holy triangle reads: Fast, good or cheap - pick two.
The choice for the DUP is as simple. Open border with the Irish Republic, open border with Britain, part of the UK - pick two.

Would a government of the Netherlands chuck out the Act of Abjuration?

We've gone through various other incarnations of the country, but yeah, when in 1964, princess Irene married with Spanish pretender Carlos Hugo de Bourbon Parma, that was one consideration not to give the marriage parliamentary consent (and thus throw her out of the royal succession).

Poor NI, fated either to be part of the UK or of the Republic of Ireland. It's not a country in its own right, and has never claimed to be one. (It's not even a whole Irish Province.)

But could they be? And I mean that as a serious question. There's gotta come some solution for NI in the context of Brexit. We may all laugh at May's incompetence or inability in coming up with a decent proposal, but what are your thoughts on what would be the best solution?

Will the Ulster Unionists now permit themselves to become unmindful of the stirring words of Rudyard Kipling "Ulster 1912"?

What answer from the North?
One Law, One Land, One Throne!
If England drives us forth
We shall not fall alone.​

I'm confused as to Kipling's intended meaning with those last lines, in the context of Westminster's "betrayal" in giving Home Rule in 1912 to Ireland. But one interpretation could fit with the London saying to Belfast to fend for itself. They're in fact already doing so, taking no interest at all in the ongoing Stormont government crisis. I suggest BoJo for giving that message, I hear he's good at reciting Kipling poems.

Also a serious question: has it ever happened in modern times (say, after 410AD) that a state told a region to go it alone? Is it even possible?

 

[ddt]

There will never be an independent NI. The Unionists don't want it, the Nationalists don't want it and neither of the two governments wants it. Its the type of thing that crops up on internet discussions on NI but its not the type of thing that anybody in real life wants, apart from a few loyalist psychopaths, and they only want it because they think it would give them free rein to go on a Rwandan style rampage against Catholics.

Sometimes things happen that nobody wants; see the Prisoner's Dilemma. Come March 2019, there has to be some solution. What happens then if there's no significant progress from the current positions?

 

[Craig B]

But could they be [an independent state]? And I mean that as a serious question. There's gotta come some solution for NI in the context of Brexit. We may all laugh at May's incompetence or inability in coming up with a decent proposal, but what are your thoughts on what would be the best solution?

I have given this much thought and I can say that there is no solution. There will be a Border. Without a Border, enforcement of migration and economic rules will not be possible. The DUP, UK and RoI say no to "hardening" the present border line. Very well, put NI into the EU de facto and have a "Border" in British Ports. That is anathema to Ulster Unionists. It is effectively a United Ireland and a divided U.K. They will have none of it.

How could even the Common Travel Area survive? It depends on RoI and UK coordinating their immigration regulations, so that entry into one country implies approval to enter the other. But there can be no such coordination of immigration after Brexit. The Brexiteers' primary motive was to inhibit immigration from the EU.

Even if NI became independent these problems would not disappear. The independent statelet, rather than Westminster, would have to deal with them. Any move in any of these directions would incur the wrath of the DUP, on whom May's administration depends to control Parliament.

May is committed to Brexit, and the Orange unionists are enthusiasts for it. But how did NI vote in the EU referendum? 56% Remain to 44% Leave. Look at these maps. The unionist right is barely in control of the area, and Brexiteers are in a minority. An "independent NI" would at once split into two fragments, East and West of Lough Neagh, and the Western part would soon join the Republic. If a six county state is barely viable, what would a two county state be like? One moreover containing a large hostile enclave in W Belfast.

No, I have no solution to these conundrums. I can't even propose one as a starting point for further meditation. All I can hope is that despair at the insolubility of the present crisis will not provoke another round of violence.

 

[ceptimus]

Come March 2019, there has to be some solution. What happens then if there's no significant progress from the current positions?

What are the current positions?

We should consider the UK, Northern Ireland, The Republic of Ireland, the EU.

What does each of those four parties want concerning the Irish border? All I've seen is that none of those groups wants a hard border, but the EU and the Republic keep insisting that the UK, "make progress" or "offer suggestions".

What do the EU and the Republic want those suggestions to target? Are they ruling out a hard border or do they want the UK to suggest a hard border even though no group says they want one?

 

[Craig B]

What are the current positions?

We should consider the UK, Northern Ireland, The Republic of Ireland, the EU.

What does each of those four parties want concerning the Irish border? All I've seen is that none of those groups wants a hard border, but the EU and the Republic keep insisting that the UK, "make progress" or "offer suggestions".

What do the EU and the Republic want those suggestions to target? Are they ruling out a hard border or do they want the UK to suggest a hard border even though no group says they want one?

I think you're adopting a too superficial view of what people want. Do Brexiteers want to limit EU immigration? If they do, they implicitly want a hard Border, regardless of what they say when asked specifically about the Border. Does the EU want to exclude the U.K. from the single market area? Then it wants a hard border.

Some things imply others whether you want them or not. You can't say: I want to jump out of the window, but I don't want to land on the pavement. Wanting one means getting the other.

 

[ceptimus]

I think you're adopting a too superficial view of what people want.

No. I'm genuinely interested in what the EU and perhaps the Republic are trying to achieve. They're asking for "progress" or "suggestions"

1. What are the problems or issues that they want the suggestions to address?

2. Is there any conceivable suggestion that they would be happy with?

3. If there are any such suggestions, why don't they put them forwards themselves?

 

[jimbob]

No. I'm genuinely interested in what the EU and perhaps the Republic are trying to achieve. They're asking for "progress" or "suggestions"

1. What are the problems or issues that they want the suggestions to address?

2. Is there any conceivable suggestion that they would be happy with?

3. If there are any such suggestions, why don't they put them forwards themselves?

1. If you don't have a hard border between Northern Ireland and Ireland, you can't control the flow of goods and people across the border.

If you have Ireland within the Customs Union and Northern Ireland outside the customs union, that means that it would be possible to trade between the UK and EU with no controls simply by shipping goods through Ireland and Northern Ireland.

This is fine as long as the UK and EU are in the Customs Union, but it can't work if it isn't*.

2a) That means that the only solution is for Northern Ireland to remain in the customs union. If the UK is outside the Customs Union, that requires a hard border between Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK.


The DUP has ruled that out.

2b) Given that the UK would be better off within the Customs Union, where we'd actually be able to fill our vacant NHS posts, and get our crops picked, for example, the logical solution would be for the whole UK to remain in the Customs Union.

But Theresa May has ruled that out because Brexit means Brexit.

3) see above


*ETA: Any difference in tariffs or standards between the UK and EU would mean that people could just import into the easier entity and drive them across the Irish border.

Smuggling would be rife.

Also, anyone in the EU could travel to Ireland and hop across the border and not worry about the UK's harsher immigration controls at Dover.

 

[ceptimus]

What if the UK doesn't remain in the customs union, but there are no tariffs?

This is what both the UK and Northern Ireland want, but the EU isn't prepared to discuss until the "problem of the border" is resolved satisfactorily.

 

[jimbob]

What if the UK doesn't remain in the customs union, but there are no tariffs?

This is what both the UK and Northern Ireland want, but the EU isn't prepared to discuss until the "problem of the border" is resolved satisfactorily.

How does that work?

What happens the first time that UK and EU standards diverge for anything?

How do you prevent traders shipping non-compliant parts across the border without any border controls?

 

[ceptimus]

How do you prevent traders shipping non-compliant parts across the border without any border controls?

How do you stop that at present?

 

[jimbob]

How do you stop that at present?

Well, the UK has customs controls for trade from outside the Customs Union

It doesn't have customs controls for EU-trade as we are currently in the Customs Union (and indeed the EU).

 

[ceptimus]

Let's say that standards do diverge, but the UK is happy to accept any goods that meet EU standards AND / OR meet its own UK standards.

Now I assume that for the EU, the reverse would not apply - they would always insist on all imported goods meeting EU standards.

In that scenario, whose responsibility would it be to build / pay for / staff the border posts?

 

[fagin]

How do you stop that at present?

By having controls on imports. Why is that even a question?

 

[ceptimus]

By having controls on imports. Why is that even a question?

If a rogue trader based, say, in Northern Ireland, manufactures or illicitly imports non-EU compliant goods, say from China, then there are currently no border posts that would catch these goods being transported to the Republic of Ireland for sale.

Of course, this kind of thing is happening all the time - and between any number of EU countries, not just Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland.

My point is that there are already means of detecting, confiscating, and preventing non-compliant goods - and these means don't occur at border posts within the EU for the simple reason that there aren't any.