Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Brexit

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Surrey View Post

    More nationalist propaganda that is irrelevant to Brexit.
    Nationalism has nothing to do with Brexit?

    Its the way you tell 'em..............

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Surrey View Post
      Again it would not be the UK's choice to put a hard border in place but rather the Irish governments. The UK does not have to put border controls in place regardless of any or no deal with the EU.
      Per rules affecting international trade (among other things) it does.
      I don't think the GFA mentions what border arrangements there should or shouldn't be and in any case it is the Irish who are threatening to put a hard border in place. Not the UK.
      Hard border is what UK's own demands and decisions require. That you try to place the blame and consequences for your own decisions on others is rather odd. That has nothing to do with the EU or the ROI who are only acting in accordance to what UK chose to do (but apparently the UK didn't realize the consequences of).
      It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion, it is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed. The hands acquire shaking, the shaking becomes a warning. It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Vaeltaja View Post
        Per rules affecting international trade (among other things) it does.
        Oh yeah, show us these rules!

        If the UK decides not to put a hard border in Northern Ireland, the reality is there ain't a damn thing EU or anybody else can do about it.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Gooner View Post
          Oh yeah, show us these rules!

          If the UK decides not to put a hard border in Northern Ireland, the reality is there ain't a damn thing EU or anybody else can do about it.
          WTO - MFN or Most Favoured Nation - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Most_favoured_nation or https://www.investopedia.com/terms/m...orednation.asp

          A most favored nation (MFN) clause requires a country to provide any concessions, privileges, or immunities granted in a trade agreement to one nation to all other World Trade Organization member countries.

          Which in other words means that not observing external border (and hence tariffs, import limitations, regulatory limitations, and such) between ROI and UK requires UK to extend same courtesy to all of the WTO member states. While having a control borders is not a requirement it does however have consequences - hence in practice the rules of the international trade require borders.

          https://tradebetablog.wordpress.com/...their-borders/
          It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion, it is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed. The hands acquire shaking, the shaking becomes a warning. It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Vaeltaja View Post
            While having a control borders is not a requirement
            Thank you

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Gooner View Post
              Thank you
              You really should read the whole post. It is a requirement if you intend to 'take control of your borders'. Or 'prevent uncontrolled immigration'. Or, indeed, want to trade per WTO rules without ending up as a dumping ground.
              It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion, it is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed. The hands acquire shaking, the shaking becomes a warning. It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Vaeltaja View Post
                You really should read the whole post. It is a requirement if you intend to 'take control of your borders'. Or 'prevent uncontrolled immigration'. Or, indeed, want to trade per WTO rules without ending up as a dumping ground.
                Your post was rubbish as indeed is this.

                The WTO will only get involved if somebody else files a complaint about Irish privileges trading into the UK. The WTO will only rule against the UK if 1) Ireland does indeed have those privileges and 2) No exception is made because History.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Gooner View Post

                  Your post was rubbish as indeed is this.

                  The WTO will only get involved if somebody else files a complaint about Irish privileges trading into the UK. The WTO will only rule against the UK if 1) Ireland does indeed have those privileges and 2) No exception is made because History.
                  Which they would. You would have to be utterly delusional to imagine that it wouldn't occur. But i guess you just refuse to face the reality - it doesn't really matter to me one way or the other.
                  It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion, it is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed. The hands acquire shaking, the shaking becomes a warning. It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Vaeltaja View Post
                    .

                    Hard border is what UK's own demands and decisions require. .
                    Up to a point.

                    Seems to be a suggestion from Ireland that only phytosanitary and health checks need to AT the border, and I suspect that could be waived if Northern Ireland agriculture remains aligned.

                    Also a suggestion from Brexiteers that customs checks could be done at UK ports sailing to Belfast.

                    For the first time there seems to be the necessary acceptance of fudge that could lead to a deal on the Irish border, irrespective of what happens with the rest of Brexit.
                    Official queries merits of ‘trusted trader’ status for some sectors after UK quits EU

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Aber View Post

                      Up to a point.

                      Seems to be a suggestion from Ireland that only phytosanitary and health checks need to AT the border, and I suspect that could be waived if Northern Ireland agriculture remains aligned.

                      Also a suggestion from Brexiteers that customs checks could be done at UK ports sailing to Belfast.

                      For the first time there seems to be the necessary acceptance of fudge that could lead to a deal on the Irish border, irrespective of what happens with the rest of Brexit.
                      Interesting. Though it would seem that the UK demand of 'getting back the control over the borders' and quitting the single market (i.e. freedom of movement as one of the four freedoms) would make it somewhat more complicated than that. And for most purposes that would seem to be placing the regulatory border to the Irish Sea - something the UK leadership has stated that they would not accept (and even made a law about it if i understood correctly). But we shall see.
                      It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion, it is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed. The hands acquire shaking, the shaking becomes a warning. It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Vaeltaja View Post
                        Interesting. Though it would seem that the UK demand of 'getting back the control over the borders' and quitting the single market (i.e. freedom of movement as one of the four freedoms) would make it somewhat more complicated than that. And for most purposes that would seem to be placing the regulatory border to the Irish Sea - something the UK leadership has stated that they would not accept (and even made a law about it if i understood correctly). But we shall see.
                        There may be multiple borders in multiple places for multiple reasons:

                        - freedom of movement relates to movement of workers and would be controlled at the workplace, rather than at any Irish border (especially given the Common Travel Area between the UK and Ireland which predates the EU)
                        - customs border (for tariffs etc) would technically be on the North-South border, but would be controlled away from the border (including possibly at UK ports)
                        - phytosanitary border would be in the Irish Sea, but has effectively been so in the past eg during various UK epidemics beef from Northern Ireland was treated separately, and agriculture is controlled on an All-Ireland basis.
                        - some other sectors eg electricity are controlled on an All-Ireland basis now and this might continue, effectively remaining in the Single Market while other things in Northern Ireland remain outside..

                        It would be a complete fudge, but might be workable.

                        EDIT: Missed one

                        - for goods coming to Ireland by road the Irish border would be at Calais, with no further checks and containers sealed for transit across the UK
                        Last edited by Aber; 08 Sep 18, 03:09.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Aber View Post

                          There may be multiple borders in multiple places for multiple reasons:

                          - freedom of movement relates to movement of workers and would be controlled at the workplace, rather than at any Irish border (especially given the Common Travel Area between the UK and Ireland which predates the EU)
                          - customs border (for tariffs etc) would technically be on the North-South border, but would be controlled away from the border (including possibly at UK ports)
                          - phytosanitary border would be in the Irish Sea, but has effectively been so in the past eg during various UK epidemics beef from Northern Ireland was treated separately, and agriculture is controlled on an All-Ireland basis.
                          - some other sectors eg electricity are controlled on an All-Ireland basis now and this might continue, effectively remaining in the Single Market while other things in Northern Ireland remain outside..

                          It would be a complete fudge, but might be workable.

                          EDIT: Missed one

                          - for goods coming to Ireland by road the Irish border would be at Calais, with no further checks and containers sealed for transit across the UK
                          Perhaps, for a certain value of "workable".

                          What do we do fx about imports from third party countries (especially if the UK strikes a number of new trade deals while deviating from EU product standards of various kinds) that can just be shipped to Eire if there are no border checks between the UK and Eire? At least it requires the EU to hand over control of its borders to the UK, which so far is a notion the EU has stated it won't entertain. Not least since once these goods are in Eire further access to the rest of the EU is also unlimited.

                          Effectively this looks like it will work if Eire's border with the EU is also in Calais (Eire de facto leaves the EU Common Market and joins the UK)? Or at least on the basis that the EU give up control of its borders to the UK.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by the ace View Post
                            The UK Government pays state pensions to expatriates all over the world, and is legally obliged to do so. Occupational pensions are a legally-binding contract, even before, "Scotland's Future," pointed out how the Scottish government would abide by its obligations. An independent Scotland wouldn't be, "A tiny nation struggling to survive," but the largest oil producer in the EU - not to mention our other exports. The projected Scottish Navy, while not a major player in global terms, would almost certainly be a US ally, and far more capable than anything in Scottish waters at present (the Trident fleet and a couple of inflatables).

                            In Northern Ireland, the Brits committed as many atrocities as the Irish, and can truthfully be said to have caused many of Ireland's problems, while the current UK government sees the Protestants in NI as little more than an irritant.
                            You cannot commit an atrocity against the Irish.

                            Why would Scotland be a US ally? You've harmed our longest and most reliable ally, the UK, and you're a bunch of leftists. In case you haven't been paying attention, we have reduced our military forces in Europe to next to nothing, and place very little value on NATO.

                            The UK is a major oil producer. Who says you'll get a drop out of the North Sea? Unless you have rigs within three miles of your coast, the determination of who gets the oil will be decided by others. The US has blocked Venezuelan access to Gulf oil; why would we hesitate to do so to another Socialist state who is the enemy of our Ally?

                            Correct me if I'm wrong, but the Trident program is based on US tech and designs contracted between the USA and UK. It can't be transferred to another state.

                            But this all is theoretical, because your predicted margin for success in your latest pleas is so small that it can easily go either way.

                            If you ever actually vote again. Or has a date been set?
                            Any man can hold his place when the bands play and women throw flowers; it is when the enemy presses close and metal shears through the ranks that one can acertain which are soldiers, and which are not.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Arnold J Rimmer View Post
                              Why would Scotland be a US ally? You've harmed our longest and most reliable ally, the UK, and you're a bunch of leftists. In case you haven't been paying attention, we have reduced our military forces in Europe to next to nothing, and place very little value on NATO.

                              The UK is a major oil producer. Who says you'll get a drop out of the North Sea? Unless you have rigs within three miles of your coast, the determination of who gets the oil will be decided by others. The US has blocked Venezuelan access to Gulf oil; why would we hesitate to do so to another Socialist state who is the enemy of our Ally?
                              You're missing the real opportunity here for Trump's US:

                              1.) Break the US alliances, 2.) accept the break-up of the UK, 3.) make the rump-UK a direct US subject state.

                              Trump's US doesn't want allies. It does want relationships where it can simply order other countries around. Considering the hole the UK is digging for itself with Brexit, it is the biggest prize the US can possibly secure from the mess.

                              Job done, the US can go on screwing smaller nations to its heart's content of course. But set your sights on the UK first.

                              What it will do is of course hammer home the messages of safety only through strength (China) or numbers (EU).

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Arnold J Rimmer View Post
                                You've harmed our longest and most reliable ally, the UK, and you're a bunch of leftists. In case you haven't been paying attention, we have reduced our military forces in Europe to next to nothing, and place very little value on NATO.
                                Wrong - it would be just an example of the UK harming itself. Assuming that is it wants to remain as the UK instead of just England.
                                The UK is a major oil producer. Who says you'll get a drop out of the North Sea? Unless you have rigs within three miles of your coast, the determination of who gets the oil will be decided by others.
                                UK is. England is not. Most - estimated IIRC to be around 90% of UK reserves (though i might be mistaken) - are in Scottish waters or in Scottish EEZ - English EEZ ought OTOH have more potential for natural gas. Territorial waters extend 12 nm out - and EEZ grants countries full rights to the oil in their EEZ - and that extends out to 200 nm. So you are quite wrong if you imagine that any one other than the Scotts themselves would determine to whom the oil goes should Scotland separate from the UK.
                                Correct me if I'm wrong, but the Trident program is based on US tech and designs contracted between the USA and UK. It can't be transferred to another state.
                                That is the first thing you got right.
                                It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion, it is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed. The hands acquire shaking, the shaking becomes a warning. It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X