Greenwood2
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,252
Likes: 2,695
|
Post by Greenwood2 on Jun 22, 2021 17:31:45 GMT
But if this agreement was meant to keep both parts of Ireland happy it fails to do so if NI cannot trade properly with the rest of the UK. The obvious place for a UK/EU border is between NI and SI, creating a false border between the rest of the UK and NI is a disaster waiting to happen. NI being a quasi part of the EU is a hopeless concept. The NI/SI border could be as soft as the EU allow. A combined Ireland inside or outside the EU would be the best solution, but that has always been a problem!
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Jun 22, 2021 20:26:52 GMT
In terms of the language within the GFA, I'm sure you are correct that there is no statement that the GFA only holds as long as both sides are in the EU. Quite possibly it doesn't mention it at all. Nonetheless the GFA was of course crafted and signed while both countries were in the EU, so it is not unreasonable to refer to it as 'assuming' that both countries are in the EU, since they were. The issue isn't so much EU membership per se, but SM/CU membership. The CTA covers personal movement across the border. Of course, Dublin may decide that Schengen makes more sense than the CTA now... Quite: but simultaneous joining of the EU = superset of simultaneous joining of the SM. The UK leaving without retaining/entering the SM creates the problem (on goods). As you clearly are well aware.
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 9,045
Likes: 4,841
|
Post by adrianc on Jun 22, 2021 20:32:07 GMT
The issue isn't so much EU membership per se, but SM/CU membership. The CTA covers personal movement across the border. Of course, Dublin may decide that Schengen makes more sense than the CTA now... Quite: but simultaneous joining of the EU = superset of simultaneous joining of the SM. The UK leaving without retaining/entering the SM creates the problem (on goods). As you clearly are well aware. Oh, indeed. The UK could have left the EU without leaving the SM/CU... In fact, isn't that pretty much what we were promised? Assured faithfully would happen...?
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Jun 22, 2021 20:34:13 GMT
But if this agreement was meant to keep both parts of Ireland happy it fails to do so if NI cannot trade properly with the rest of the UK. The obvious place for a UK/EU border is between NI and SI, creating a false border between the rest of the UK and NI is a disaster waiting to happen. NI being a quasi part of the EU is a hopeless concept. The NI/SI border could be as soft as the EU allow. A combined Ireland inside or outside the EU would be the best solution, but that has always been a problem! Umm. Well I'm not really sure of that. Of course it could be, contingent on the UK agreeing to requisite checks in place on trade between the rest of the UK and NI. Otherwise, this amounts to being a simple route for UK<-> EU free tradce without being part of EFTA and without any adherence to EU regulation which goes along with a single market. But then you know this, so no idea what point you are making. Sounds like it comes from the same quantum supersition / schrodinger's cat cool aid that the likes of Frost, Bojo and Gove are drinking at.
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 9,045
Likes: 4,841
|
Post by adrianc on Jun 22, 2021 21:37:01 GMT
"SI"? "Southern Ireland"...?
Dear lawd!
Ireland is the island. Northern Ireland is one small part of that island, just over 15% of the land area. The Republic of Ireland is the rest of that island. If you want to shorten it, call it "Ireland".
"Southern Ireland"...?!?
And NI/RoI is the UK/EU border. It's just that the SM/CU border isn't at the same place... Lots of places are within either the SM or CU, but outside the EU. Turkey's inside the CU, not the SM. Switzerland's inside the SM, not the CU.
And NI can "trade properly" with GB... It trades with GB on the same terms as the rest of the continent does. Isn't that "properly"...? If not, whose fault is that?
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 10,906
Likes: 11,127
|
Post by ilmoro on Jun 22, 2021 22:07:57 GMT
Turkey is not inside the CU, it is in a customs union via bilateral agreement, excludes agricultural products.
Switzerland is not in the SM, it participates partially via the Bilaterals
|
|
|
Post by bernythedolt on Jun 22, 2021 22:58:11 GMT
Label the packets of sausages, and all goods crossing from GB into NI, with "Not for sale in the EU".
Sorted.
|
|
|
Post by bernythedolt on Jun 23, 2021 0:10:25 GMT
Mind blowing. Just mind blowing. Personally I would have gone with "enraging". EDIT: I mean he negotiated the bloody thing in the first place . I understand the agreement is sprinkled liberally with clauses requiring "best endeavours" from both sides to ease friction and smooth trade across our GB-NI internal divide, but it does seem the EU is instead intent on making mountains out of molehills. Kicking off about a few sausages and meat products.... destined for NI supermarkets only.... Is this really implementing the spirit of the Protocol? The EU needs to grow up or risk the return of Irish terrorism when we are forced to abandon it, which is looking a distinct possibility. We obviously cannot be held over a terrorist barrel like this. I reckon Lord Frost knows exactly what he negotiated and signed up to, but expected somewhat less intransigence and somewhat more "best endeavours" from the other signatory, given what's at stake.
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 9,045
Likes: 4,841
|
Post by adrianc on Jun 23, 2021 7:04:43 GMT
...but it does seem the EU is instead intent on making mountains out of molehills. No, the EU implemented the inbound checks that the UK have delayed... again... because we simply aren't ready to implement them. Not just NI-GB, but all EU-UK. Brexit apparently came as a surprise to the UK... www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/mar/11/uk-forced-to-delay-import-checks-on-eu-goods-by-six-months-2022-border-post-not-readySo he knew exactly what he was signing up for, but didn't actually believe it would happen...? He thought the EU would just look at what had been agreed and laugh it off, "Nah, just joking. Business as normal."British Exceptionalism, again? Or naivety? Or simple mendacity? Kicking off about a few sausages and meat products.... destined for NI supermarkets only.... Is this really implementing the spirit of the Protocol? Yes, it is. It's putting the SM/CU border exactly where we wanted it to be - in the Irish Sea. It's more than that - it's implementing the whole spirit of Brexit. It's giving the UK EXACTLY what we asked for... Third country status. Outside the EU, outside the SM, outside the CU. It's giving the UK EXACTLY what was shouted down as "project fear".
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Jun 23, 2021 7:33:41 GMT
Turkey is not inside the CU, it is in a customs union via bilateral agreement, excludes agricultural products. Switzerland is not in the SM, it participates partially via the Bilaterals I think that is not factually correct. Clearly it is not in the EU or the EEA, but it is within EFTA and hence within the Single Market. This is as you note achieved via its bilateral agreements.
|
|
Greenwood2
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,252
Likes: 2,695
|
Post by Greenwood2 on Jun 23, 2021 7:43:02 GMT
But if this agreement was meant to keep both parts of Ireland happy it fails to do so if NI cannot trade properly with the rest of the UK. The obvious place for a UK/EU border is between NI and SI, creating a false border between the rest of the UK and NI is a disaster waiting to happen. NI being a quasi part of the EU is a hopeless concept. The NI/SI border could be as soft as the EU allow. A combined Ireland inside or outside the EU would be the best solution, but that has always been a problem! Umm. Well I'm not really sure of that. Of course it could be, contingent on the UK agreeing to requisite checks in place on trade between the rest of the UK and NI. Otherwise, this amounts to being a simple route for UK<-> EU free tradce without being part of EFTA and without any adherence to EU regulation which goes along with a single market. But then you know this, so no idea what point you are making. Sounds like it comes from the same quantum supersition / schrodinger's cat cool aid that the likes of Frost, Bojo and Gove are drinking at. Looking at it from the point of view of NI residents who believe they are part of the UK (and there has been 'trouble' over generations to preserve that position), but now find they are not being treated the same as the rest of the UK having to jump through hoops to 'import' from the rest of the UK and feeling they are being abandoned for the sake of an agreement with the EU, that just glossed over their situation. No problem looming here! Put the border where it is on the NI/SI border and the EU can decide how hard a border they want, large scale abuse could be targeted, not for sale outside the EU, not for sale outside the UK, there must be more reasonable options. The current position is ridiculous and I don't care who got us here or how we got here, put the blame wherever you like, it doesn't make it any more sensible, although sensible and politics rarely go together. You can keep the Kool Aid for yourself, I don't like sugary drinks.
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 9,045
Likes: 4,841
|
Post by adrianc on Jun 23, 2021 7:46:29 GMT
Turkey is not inside the CU, it is in a customs union via bilateral agreement, excludes agricultural products. Switzerland is not in the SM, it participates partially via the Bilaterals I think that is not factually correct. Clearly it is not in the EU or the EEA, but it is within EFTA and hence within the Single Market. This is as you note achieved via its bilateral agreements. A customs union with a customs union is a customs union... www.gov.uk/eu-eea"Switzerland is not an EU or EEA member but is part of the single market."
It's not quite as straightforward as EEA members such as... Norway... but to all intents and purposes, it's functionally a SM member. The UK chose to be outside of both of those. The consequences of that were perfectly obvious to anybody with a basic working knowledge of how the structures worked and how international trade works. You would like to think that includes the government and their negotiating team, but... <shrug>
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 9,045
Likes: 4,841
|
Post by adrianc on Jun 23, 2021 7:52:43 GMT
Looking at it from the point of view of NI residents who believe they are part of the UK (and there has been 'trouble' over generations to preserve that position) I hope we can agree that the Good Friday Agreement is important in the ongoing preservation of that? It may be ridiculous, but it's an inevitable part of the UK choosing to leave the SM/CU. It was perfectly predictable before the referendum - in fact, it was predicted... and shouted down. Sensible certainly doesn't go together with Brexit, and we are now reaping the rewards of that. Just as there were only three options for how to deal with the problem in the first place, I can only see three options going forward... 1. Status quo, and accept it. 2. UK rejoins SM and/or CU. 3. NI chooses to leave the UK and become part of the RoI, reuniting Ireland. The only real wiggle room is on something that looks and smells an awful lot like 2 but is spun as not really being, honest. You simply cannot have no trade barriers between RoI and GB but still have trade barriers between the rest of the EU and the UK. Not unless there are parallel trade barriers between RoI and the rest of the EU, and that's not something that's any of our business...
|
|
ptr120
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,198
Likes: 1,346
|
Post by ptr120 on Jun 23, 2021 8:27:56 GMT
Label the packets of sausages, and all goods crossing from GB into NI, with "Not for sale in the EU". Sorted. If only things were that simple. Your suggestion would add extra costs for products destined for sale in NI. Compliance with the labeling regulation you suggest would also need to be checked. Checks would also be required to ensure that such products were indeed only sold in NI, and not in the EU - in order to ensure the safety of goods available in the EU to EU consumers.
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,233
Likes: 6,038
|
Post by registerme on Jun 23, 2021 8:38:08 GMT
Personally I would have gone with "enraging". EDIT: I mean he negotiated the bloody thing in the first place . I understand the agreement is sprinkled liberally with clauses requiring "best endeavours" from both sides to ease friction and smooth trade across our GB-NI internal divide, but it does seem the EU is instead intent on making mountains out of molehills. Kicking off about a few sausages and meat products.... destined for NI supermarkets only.... Is this really implementing the spirit of the Protocol? The EU needs to grow up or risk the return of Irish terrorism when we are forced to abandon it, which is looking a distinct possibility. We obviously cannot be held over a terrorist barrel like this. I reckon Lord Frost knows exactly what he negotiated and signed up to, but expected somewhat less intransigence and somewhat more "best endeavours" from the other signatory, given what's at stake. The word "endeavours" occurs seven times in the 240 odd page document ( Brexit withdrawal agreement), most of which concern acting in good faith (which the UK is failing to do) and working cooperatively etc. The relevant section on Northern Ireland (which does employ the word endeavours) is:- " Having regard to Northern Ireland's integral place in the United Kingdom's internal market, the Union and the United Kingdom shall use their best endeavours to facilitate the trade between Northern Ireland and other parts of the United Kingdom, in accordance with applicable legislation and taking into account their respective regulatory regimes as well as the implementation thereof. The Joint Committee shall keep the application of this paragraph under constant review and shall adopt appropriate recommendations with a view to avoiding controls at the ports and airports of Northern Ireland to the extent possible". (My emphasis). I'm sorry, but I completely disagree with you when you say "... but it does seem the EU is instead intent on making mountains out of molehills". The EU is doing exactly what it said it would, and exactly what was laid out in the Withdrawal Agreement. The risk of a return to men of violence (on both sides) was inherent in the UK's approach to Brexit. This was obvious ahead of time. Lord Frost is at best wilfully ignorant and at worst outright duplicitous.
|
|