[Politics] Brexit

[Herr Tubthumper]

I agree that breaking the Northern Ireland protocol for the sake of EU trade was a mistake, a bad mistake, but it needn't have been a consequence of Brexit. It would have been far better, and perfectly practicable, to have trade between the North and the Republic on the same terms as the rest of the UK/EU trade

But the Republic is in the trading block? What are you suggesting here? The UK adopts EU terms, or ROI severes its deal with the EU to trade on UK terms?

 

[WATFORD zero]

I agree that breaking the Northern Ireland protocol for the sake of EU trade was a mistake, a bad mistake, but it needn't have been a consequence of Brexit. It would have been far better, and perfectly practicable, to have trade between the North and the Republic on the same terms as the rest of the UK/EU trade, and they got so tied up in knots about placating the Republicans in the north that they forgot that the Unionists were part of this agreement too.

Are you suggesting a border between the North and the republic to allow the same terms as the rest of the UK/EU trade

It's almost as if you have no understanding of what Brexit entails whatsoever

 

[dsr-burnley]

But the Republic is in the trading block? What are you suggesting here? The UK adopts EU terms, or ROI severes its deal with the EU to trade on UK terms?

No, neither of those things. I apologise if what I said wasn'rt clear enough, tohugh I suspect that a large part of you is so determined to assume I am wrong that you didn't read it properly.

What I am suggesting is that post-Brexit, Northern Ireland should be treated the same as the rest of the UK. Northern Ireland's trade with the Republic should be on the same terms as, say, England's trade with Poland. This hybrid agreement with the pseudo-border in the Irish Sea, imposed on NI without their consent, is clearly against the principles of the Good Friday agreement and should never have been offered as a negotiating tool with the EU.

 

[dsr-burnley]

Are you suggesting a border between the North and the republic to allow the same terms as the rest of the UK/EU trade

It's almost as if you have no understanding of what Brexit entails whatsoever

There is already a border between the North and the Republic, and has been for over 100 years. All that is in question is how the paperwork is administered.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

There is already a border between the North and the Republic, and has been for over 100 years. All that is in question is how the paperwork is administered.

No it isn’t just about paper work. You clearly have very little, if any, understanding how a customs border works.

 

[AmexRuislip]

No it isn’t just about paper work. You clearly have very little, if any, understanding how a customs border works.

I bet you didn't know there's secret tunnels that go under the West and East Sussex county border.
It was set up in the early 60's for all the poor sods escaping into the east of the county from the tyrannical west.

 

[rogersix]

UK = United Kingdom. It's not a federation of 4 states where no action can be taken unless all 4 agree; it's a single political entity.

If there aren't enough Scottish votes for the majority of Scots to overrule the rest of the UK, that's just tough. Lancashire (traditional county) has about the same population as Scotland, and has the same right of veto as Scotland does over other parts of the UK - ie. none.

There has only been one vote on membership of the EU, and the vote was against. There is no democratic deficit.

are we living the dream now?

 

[WATFORD zero]

No, neither of those things. I apologise if what I said wasn'rt clear enough, tohugh I suspect that a large part of you is so determined to assume I am wrong that you didn't read it properly.

What I am suggesting is that post-Brexit, Northern Ireland should be treated the same as the rest of the UK. Northern Ireland's trade with the Republic should be on the same terms as, say, England's trade with Poland. This hybrid agreement with the pseudo-border in the Irish Sea, imposed on NI without their consent, is clearly against the principles of the Good Friday agreement and should never have been offered as a negotiating tool with the EU.

If you are suggesting a Customs border on the Island of Ireland, you are also destroying the Good Friday Agreement

Maybe you could explain how goods are going to be recorded, checked and undertake the necessary customs requirements each time they cross the Ireland/NI (or EU/British) border and where that border will be ?

I'll make it simple for you, you have the following choices,

Operate NI under EU Rules and have border in the Irish Sea
Operate Ireland under GB Rules and have border in the Irish Sea
Have the border on the Island of Ireland

exactly the same options that were available back in 2016, all other options having been proven to be complete fantasy in the intervening years. Which option did you think you were voting for back then ?

And it's worth remembering that this will become an ever increasing issue as we now flex our new found independence and start to diverge from the thousands of EU Customs and regulations that we copy and pasted into British law, each change increasing the checking, regulations and costs of moving goods across that border

 

[dsr-burnley]

If you are suggesting a Customs border on the Island of Ireland, you are also destroying the Good Friday Agreement

Maybe you could explain how goods are going to be recorded, checked and undertake the necessary customs requirements each time they cross the Ireland/NI (or EU/British) border and where that border will be ?

I'll make it simple for you, you have the following choices,

Operate NI under EU Rules and have border in the Irish Sea
Operate Ireland under GB Rules and have border in the Irish Sea
Have the border on the Island of Ireland

exactly the same options that were available back in 2016, all other options having been proven to be complete fantasy in the intervening years. Which option did you think you were voting for back then ?

And it's worth remembering that this will become an ever increasing issue as we now flex our new found independence and start to diverge from the thousands of EU Customs and regulations that we copy and pasted into British law, each change increasing the checking, regulations and costs of moving goods across that border

Goods sold from Northern Ireland to the Republic of Ireland (and vice versa) would be recorded in exactly the same way as they have been for years. Businesses have always had to keep and report VAT transactions between EU states, that would not change. Large businesses always keep very detailed records (have you heard of Intrastat? You might not believe the level of detail needed) and anyone big enough to be VAT registered has to keep ordinarily detailed records.

As for checking, they could assess the seriousness of any possible breaches of rules and make standard checks as needed. With the advent of computerisation, especially Making Tax Digital, I'm sure they could work out suitable methods of checking goods without physically counting them at the border. They manage with VAT, they could manage with Customs.

Incidentally, a border in the Irish Sea certainly breaches the Good Friday agreement because it imposes different rules on Northern Ireland from the rest of the UK. A border between Northern Ireland and the Republic, even a customs border, probably does not because the Good Friday agreement wasn't big on trade. If you can find the clause that says it is a breach, please let me know.

https://factcheckni.org/topics/euro...riday-agreement-forbid-cross-border-barriers/

 

[WATFORD zero]

Goods sold from Northern Ireland to the Republic of Ireland (and vice versa) would be recorded in exactly the same way as they have been for years. Businesses have always had to keep and report VAT transactions between EU states, that would not change. Large businesses always keep very detailed records (have you heard of Intrastat? You might not believe the level of detail needed) and anyone big enough to be VAT registered has to keep ordinarily detailed records.

As for checking, they could assess the seriousness of any possible breaches of rules and make standard checks as needed. With the advent of computerisation, especially Making Tax Digital, I'm sure they could work out suitable methods of checking goods without physically counting them at the border. They manage with VAT, they could manage with Customs.

Incidentally, a border in the Irish Sea certainly breaches the Good Friday agreement because it imposes different rules on Northern Ireland from the rest of the UK. A border between Northern Ireland and the Republic, even a customs border, probably does not because the Good Friday agreement wasn't big on trade. If you can find the clause that says it is a breach, please let me know.

https://factcheckni.org/topics/euro...riday-agreement-forbid-cross-border-barriers/

So you believe that using the same process that was used to report VAT between members of the same trading bloc is sufficient to operate a full customs border on ever diverging rules and regulations. Other than that, the two trading entities should trust one another, and investigate any breaches when they arise, a bit like they would if they were part of the same trading bloc. And this can all be sorted by the advent of computerisation (which I assume is a recent development that will enable computerised veterinary checks) ?

I can't imagine why your simple proposal wasn't taken on board rather than all these years wasted on the Northern Ireland backstop, The Northern Ireland protocol, suspending the Northern Ireland protocol breaking International law, the current threats to trigger Article 16, etc etc when it was staring them in the face that none of this was actually needed.

Maybe you should e-mail Liz and explain how it can all be done and also explain to her that installing a customs border on the island doesn't constitute a breach of the Good Friday Agreement while you're at it

 

[dsr-burnley]

So you believe that using the same process that was used to report VAT between members of the same trading bloc is sufficient to operate a full customs border on ever diverging rules and regulations. Other than that, the two trading entities should trust one another, and investigate any breaches when they arise, a bit like they would if they were part of the same trading bloc. And this can all be sorted by the advent of computerisation (which I assume is a recent development that will enable computerised veterinary checks) ?

I can't imagine why your simple proposal wasn't taken on board rather than all these years wasted on the Northern Ireland backstop, The Northern Ireland protocol, suspending the Northern Ireland protocol breaking International law, the current threats to trigger Article 16, etc etc when it was staring them in the face that none of this was actually needed.

Maybe you should e-mail Liz and explain how it can all be done and also explain to her that installing a customs border on the island doesn't constitute a breach of the Good Friday Agreement while you're at it

Why are you so fussed about the customs border being a breach of the agreement? Even if it were, your preferred solution of a de facto border down the Irish Sea is at least as much of a breach, so there's no moral high ground in claiming your breach is better than mine.

Veterinary checks is a total red herring. The risk of disease transmission and so forth is no different now than it has ever been, so there is no reason why there should be new and obstructive rules about vet checks unless one party likes having new and obstructive rules.

I've worked for a company that exported both the the EU and outside the EU. Their system worked for both.

 

[WATFORD zero]

Why are you so fussed about the customs border being a breach of the agreement? Even if it were, your preferred solution of a de facto border down the Irish Sea is at least as much of a breach, so there's no moral high ground in claiming your breach is better than mine.

Veterinary checks is a total red herring. The risk of disease transmission and so forth is no different now than it has ever been, so there is no reason why there should be new and obstructive rules about vet checks unless one party likes having new and obstructive rules.

I've worked for a company that exported both the the EU and outside the EU. Their system worked for both.

It's not my preferred 'solution' FFS, I've always said that there is no solution to the NI border issue within the framework of the GFA and it's one the myriad of reasons why Brexit was stupid in concept, stupid as a plan and stupid in execution

And yes of course there was no need for veterinary checks (or any other) we were all working to the same rules and regulations. This has now changed with our new found independence from the EU rules and regulations (which we have copied and pasted in their entirety into British Law) from the moment we started changing them. It is completely and utterly different to the last 40 odd years because you campaigned and voted for it to be different.

This thread contains hundreds of posts, all claiming that the NI border wouldn't be a problem, the Government would come up with a resolution, technology will fix it, we don't need a border or customs and various other fantasies all taken apart in detail, some 6 years ago.

Hence why we are in the completely idiotic situation we now find ourselves in with a completely unimplementable NIP 'solution'

It's got nothing to do with 'Unionist' or 'Republican' either, that is certainly a red herring. It's just very simple logic.

I'm sorry if I appear a little rude, but explaining that if A=B and B=C then A=C can become somewhat frustrating after over 6 years of it

 

[dsr-burnley]

It's not my preferred 'solution' FFS, I've always said that there is no solution to the NI border issue within the framework of the GFA and it's one the myriad of reasons why Brexit was stupid in concept, stupid as a plan and stupid in execution

And yes of course there was no need for veterinary checks (or any other) we were all working to the same rules and regulations. This has now changed with our new found independence from the EU rules and regulations (which we have copied and pasted in their entirety into British Law) from the moment we started changing them. It is completely and utterly different to the last 40 odd years because you campaigned and voted for it to be different.

This thread contains hundreds of posts, all claiming that the NI border wouldn't be a problem, the Government would come up with a resolution, technology will fix it, we don't need a border or customs and various other fantasies all taken apart in detail, some 6 years ago.

Hence why we are in the completely idiotic situation we now find ourselves in with a completely unimplementable NIP 'solution'

It's got nothing to do with 'Unionist' or 'Republican' either, that is certainly a red herring. It's just very simple logic.

I'm sorry if I appear a little rude, but explaining that if A=B and B=C then A=C can become somewhat frustrating after over 6 years of it

I agree the solution is idiotic. So we need to try a different solution, and it ought to be based on the idea of Northern Ireland being in the UK and the Republic being in the EU. Wouldn't you agree?

So we have a border just like all other land borders between EU and non-EU. But, just like all other land borders in the EU, we make special local regulations. This is of course easier in Ireland than in mainland Europe because neither the UK nor Ireland are part of the Schengen area, so there are already physical borders between Ireland and the rest of the EU. So there is no additional danger of the effects of local relaxations "leaking" through into the rest of the EU.

The UK has always been consistent in claiming that no hard border would be needed to enforce Britain's interests. Immigration is not an issue because of Schengen, and presumably the UK would be willing to risk the animal movements and the increased risk of smuggling caused by the lack of a border.

The Irish Republic is less confident, but they of course would be entitled (if they deem it necessary) to have checkpoints on the border or even to build a big wall. I doubt, if push came to shove, they would deem it necessary.

 

[WATFORD zero]

I agree the solution is idiotic. So we need to try a different solution, and it ought to be based on the idea of Northern Ireland being in the UK and the Republic being in the EU. Wouldn't you agree?

So we have a border just like all other land borders between EU and non-EU. But, just like all other land borders in the EU, we make special local regulations. This is of course easier in Ireland than in mainland Europe because neither the UK nor Ireland are part of the Schengen area, so there are already physical borders between Ireland and the rest of the EU. So there is no additional danger of the effects of local relaxations "leaking" through into the rest of the EU.

The UK has always been consistent in claiming that no hard border would be needed to enforce Britain's interests. Immigration is not an issue because of Schengen, and presumably the UK would be willing to risk the animal movements and the increased risk of smuggling caused by the lack of a border.

The Irish Republic is less confident, but they of course would be entitled (if they deem it necessary) to have checkpoints on the border or even to build a big wall. I doubt, if push came to shove, they would deem it necessary.

I will explain one last time .....very slowly

Everything has changed (and continues to change at an increasing pace) because that was what you voted for. As a result GB and the EU no longer have to operate the same rules for VAT or any other taxes, Veterinary rules governing livestock, additives, preservatives etc governing foodstuffs, crop fertilizers and various controls, rules of origin etc etc etc (and any resulting smuggling and tax fraud between the two entities). Taking Back Control - remember ?

You cannot do this without a significant border somewhere. The overheads and costs of the land border controls between the mainland and EU (which you seem to think are insignificant and can be implemented without a hard border) have resulted in over 30% of British companies exporting to the EU being wiped out in the last year

And with that I will leave the resolution of this problem to the instigators of it, yourself, Farage, Johnson and the one who was ardently against it but has now embraced it whole heartedly, Truss

 

[dsr-burnley]

I will explain one last time .....very slowly

Everything has changed (and continues to change at an increasing pace) because that was what you voted for. As a result GB and the EU no longer have to operate the same rules for VAT or any other taxes, Veterinary rules governing livestock, additives, preservatives etc governing foodstuffs, crop fertilizers and various controls, rules of origin etc etc etc (and any resulting smuggling and tax fraud between the two entities). Taking Back Control - remember ?

You cannot do this without a significant border somewhere. The overheads and costs of the land border controls between the mainland and EU (which you seem to think are insignificant and can be implemented without a hard border) have resulted in over 30% of British companies exporting to the EU being wiped out in the last year

And with that I will leave the resolution of this problem to the instigators of it, yourself, Farage, Johnson and the one who was ardently against it but has now embraced it whole heartedly, Truss

When you say "30% of of British companies exporting to the EU being wiped out in the last year", is that saying that these businesses have closed since September 2021, or is it saying that the HMRC figures for numbers of companies exporting to the EU have dropped by 30% between 2020 and 2021? Because if it's the latter, this is largely explained by the difference in how they count them. I'm sure the alteration to what goes in box 2 of the VAT returns is a big driver to this change. EU exports used to be easily measured by the entries in box 2; now, they must have a different system that accounts for the difference, according to HMRC.

https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-...EU-Vanish-Due-To-Brexit-Related-Red-Tape.html

 

[WATFORD zero]

When you say "30% of of British companies exporting to the EU being wiped out in the last year", is that saying that these businesses have closed since September 2021, or is it saying that the HMRC figures for numbers of companies exporting to the EU have dropped by 30% between 2020 and 2021? Because if it's the latter, this is largely explained by the difference in how they count them. I'm sure the alteration to what goes in box 2 of the VAT returns is a big driver to this change. EU exports used to be easily measured by the entries in box 2; now, they must have a different system that accounts for the difference, according to HMRC.

https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-...EU-Vanish-Due-To-Brexit-Related-Red-Tape.html

Nice bit of whataboutism, but I think the discussion that we have had regarding the NIP over the last couple of days has simply proven that you didn't have any idea what you were voting for and still don't. Don't worry you are certainly not alone in that

Anyway I have wasted enough time explaining the situation regarding Ireland/NI in increasingly simple terms. Have a nice rest of the day

 

[Springal]

Recap on what the charlatans said when they sold this country a pup

[tweet]1572913426858491909[/tweet]

 

[cunning fergus]

Recap on what the charlatans said when they sold this country a pup

[tweet]1572913426858491909[/tweet]

Yep, we waiting for a few other things to happen aren’t we?

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/may/20/eu-referendum-george-osborne-house-prices-brexit

I reckon if mine dropped 18% I would still be ahead from 2016.

Swings and roundabouts innit

 

[Lever]

Recap on what the charlatans said when they sold this country a pup

[tweet]1572913426858491909[/tweet]

It's only a bunch of Tory and UKIP politicians lying about Brexit....

... nothing to see here.

 

[WATFORD zero]

Yep, we waiting for a few other things to happen aren’t we?

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/may/20/eu-referendum-george-osborne-house-prices-brexit

I reckon if mine dropped 18% I would still be ahead from 2016.

Swings and roundabouts innit

From that article that you managed to dig out from over 6 years ago

The chancellor said house prices would be lower by at least 10% and up to 18% compared with what is expected if Britain remains in the EU and there will be an “economic shock” that will increase the cost of mortgages.

Well we've only been out the transition period a little over 20 months and the cost of mortgages is increasing hugely, inflation is spiralling, GDP is dropping, the cost of living is rising but you are totally convinced none of this will effect the price of your property

After your prediction that Brexit would be a great victory for the British working classes you can see how I may remain less than entirely convinced by your latest prediction