[Kaiserschmarrn]

Okay, if you know it then is it not a valid point to value position of a member state higher than a soon not to be member? How would you sort it out then? Should we disregard a position of a member state in favor of the UK?

Before you say that we can change the position of ireland then think of this:
1) With no deal -> there is a hard border.
2) With no promise -> there is a hard border for a very long time.(Very likely)
3) With the promise -> there is a chance of no border but only if a deal is struck.

So Ireland doesn't have much of a choice here: Either insist on this or basically have a hard border. If they don't insist then a hard border is almost certain and for a very long time. It is an existential question for them so they won't change their mind.

Ireland would only have no choice if the EU demanded a hard border. For what it's worth, Varadkar is on record saying that the EU has assured him that it won't. Moreover, the border issue is complicated by the fact that the EU insists nothing trade related can be discussed at this stage. So the idea that the EU is this benign actor who is just going along with Ireland because it is a member state doesn't hold up.

Any checks at the border is a hard border FYI.

There are already sporadic checks as far as I know. It's about permanent infrastructure.

[Decky]

Do you fancy filling in forms every foreign holiday you take? And paying for the privilege as well?

This is the thing you remainer quislings don't understand. You people might go on holiday to Europe every couple of weeks but normal people don't. People go on holiday to Skegness, or Great Yarmouth, or Blackpool or Hastings, if we want to go to a foreign country with funny ways and an odd language we can go to Aberystwyth.

Your scaremongering will not work, even if any of it was true it would only inconvenience the rich. Brextiers are working class. A trip to the seaside or a camp site is excitement enough for us. Going on holiday to Europe is just taking money out of the British economy to give Germany money to rearm. It is morally wrong.

[Rugoz]

Brextiers are working class. A trip to the seaside or a camp site is excitement enough for us. Going on holiday to Europe is just taking money out of the British economy to give Germany money to rearm. It is morally wrong.

Never change, Decky.

[JohnRawls]

Ireland would only have no choice if the EU demanded a hard border. For what it's worth, Varadkar is on record saying that the EU has assured him that it won't. Moreover, the border issue is complicated by the fact that the EU insists nothing trade related can be discussed at this stage. So the idea that the EU is this benign actor who is just going along with Ireland because it is a member state doesn't hold up.


There are already sporadic checks as far as I know. It's about permanent infrastructure.

Why is the EU evil for trying to protect its core interests? I do not get this. It does not make the life the of the UK easier but we have some issues we can't compromise on. This has been discussed AD Nuseum already. UK was the instigator of Brexit and the break down of the current socio-economic relations between UK and the EU, also between Northern Ireland and Ireland. EU is not violating the good Friday agreements nor is Ireland. It is the UK who is going to violate them if this continues.

As to what is the solution, god knows. You can't have fully friction less trade and travel with the EU without being in the EU with the 4 fundamental freedoms. UK doesn't want to have those freedoms because it makes it more independent. It considers it to be more of a drain on the UK to be a member compared to them not being one.

As for Europe, it can't allow a 3rd party state to have benefits of the EU member. Because that would make other countries renegotiate their current 3rd party deals and some of the EU members will also want membership without the obligations.

You will say that "hey, some countries have something like this" but i can assure you, they do not have any of the 4 freedoms in full. Nor do they have anything close to what the UK wants without any obligations.

[Decky]

You have some pretty odd ideas about what the UK wants, we want to be out with no relationship with the fascist neonazis of the EU whatsoever, it is the Tory party that wants remain in all but name not the British people.

[JohnRawls]

You have some pretty odd ideas about what the UK wants, we want to be out with no relationship with the fascist neonazis of the EU whatsoever, it is the Tory party that wants remain in all but name not the British people.

Then do it but stop complaining to the EU about weird things that we have discussed 100 times already both here and between our politicians.

It is like the UK wants to sit on 2 chairs. UK wants out but doesn't want to hurt its economy short term at the least. UK people want to have a functioning health system etc but keep voting for the party that wants to cut taxes and continue austerity....

In this kind of cases, i am usually of the opinion that the people actually like what is happening but with the UK nowadays, who knows...

[Beren]

Never change, Decky.

How could he sell Brexit as a hardcore leftist working class movement or agenda if he changed or got out of character?

[layman]

@JohnRawls ”what the uk wants” is meaningless.

There is no will if the people. There are millions of conflicting opinions that can be roughly grouped up. These groups are balancing out any decisive path.

The obvious answer is that there should be no drastic actions when there is no decisive majority on something. Not just crude voting but via specialist representatives.

Wait! We invented that already and it’s called parliamentary, representative democracy. Maybe we should have not abused it....

[Kaiserschmarrn]

Why is the EU evil for trying to protect its core interests? I do not get this. It does not make the life the of the UK easier but we have some issues we can't compromise on. This has been discussed AD Nuseum already. UK was the instigator of Brexit and the break down of the current socio-economic relations between UK and the EU, also between Northern Ireland and Ireland. EU is not violating the good Friday agreements nor is Ireland. It is the UK who is going to violate them if this continues.

Now we went from the EU just going along with Ireland because it is a member state to the EU is protecting its core interests. It has yet to be explained how creating a regulatory and customs border within the UK, thereby no doubt giving NI unionists the impression that this is the beginning of a breakup from the UK, and furthermore making any further negotiation dependent on it is a core interest of the EU. It's simply a negotiation position, which in my opinion is misguided and unreasonable. You can of course disagree with my view on this and I may even be wrong about this being unacceptable to the UK - May might well fold on this issue as well. I'd just prefer not having to respond to meaningless EU talking points.

Re the GFA, there's nothing in the agreement that requires an invisible border, much less that NI stay in the EU customs union and aligned with respect to EU regulations. If the EU demands a hard border in the absence of a deal, it's going to be a hard sell for Irish politicians domestically and will make the NI situation more difficult for the UK, however, the UK would not be in violation of the GFA. Moreover, it would be in nobody's interest and the EU would arguably be violating its own principles and laws with respect to its commitment of fostering good and friendly relations with neighbouring countries which aren't EU members. Making the politically sensitive NI situation the central focus and assuming an uncompromising negotiation position, thereby risking the alienation of unionists, is the exact opposite. People also seem to forget that the IRA was not the only terrorist organisation in NI.

As for the UK being "the instigator", that just sounds butt-hurt and childish to me. So what?

As to what is the solution, god knows. You can't have fully friction less trade and travel with the EU without being in the EU with the 4 fundamental freedoms. UK doesn't want to have those freedoms because it makes it more independent. It considers it to be more of a drain on the UK to be a member compared to them not being one.

As for Europe, it can't allow a 3rd party state to have benefits of the EU member. Because that would make other countries renegotiate their current 3rd party deals and some of the EU members will also want membership without the obligations.

You will say that "hey, some countries have something like this" but i can assure you, they do not have any of the 4 freedoms in full. Nor do they have anything close to what the UK wants without any obligations.

As I mentioned in my first post, even if the UK and EU could agree on something and made some aspirational statements, however vague, it's irrelevant at this point. The only legally binding document will be the withdrawal agreement and the only important issue in that agreement is the NI backstop.

[Rugoz]

If the UK/NI are outside the EU's customs union there will be some kind of border control. I don't see a way around that. It's an easy problem to solve technically anyway.

[B0ycey]

If the UK/NI are outside the EU's customs union there will be some kind of border control. I don't see a way around that. It's an easy problem to solve technically anyway.

There be customs checks of goods to fulfil WTO rules which will be directed to specific areas near the border to restrict hold ups. But the border will be open and will be frictionless for the vast majority who cross it. There be no passport controls or guards or anything. Why? Because there is no desire on both sides for a hard border.

The only reason we have an issue over this today is because there is strategic interest on both sides to do so. The EUs goal is to maintain the UK upholds their standards in trade and the UKs interest is to use NI as an accuse to why a deal needs to be made to the hardliners at home who don't want to compromise at all.

But ultimately the solution is simple whatever the outcome of negotiations.

[Beren]

DUP threatens to vote down budget if May breaches its 'red line' on Irish backstop

EU’s chief Brexit negotiator Barnier with the DUP's Diane Dodds and Arlene Foster in Brussels. Photograph:
POOL/Reuters

Barnier is the prettiest of them.

Also:

Brexit makes Scottish independence more likely, Sturgeon tells SNP

Senior Tories launch concerted attack on May's Brexit plan

Brexit-era British politics is as much turbulent as a Cambrian sea may have been.

Before the Cambrian explosion, most organisms were simple, composed of individual cells occasionally organized into colonies. Over the following 70 to 80 million years, the rate of diversification accelerated, and the variety of life began to resemble that of today. Almost all present animal phyla appeared during this period.

The Cambrian explosion has generated extensive scientific debate.

[Beren]

The Dutch foreign minister, Stef Blok, told the Guardian he believed the British position was confused and that the EU was united around a proposal put forward by Barnier for Northern Ireland alone to stay in the customs union.

Stef Blok. Photograph: EPA

“I understood that the UK until now has used as a red line that it does not want a customs union,” Blok said. “This is one of the parts, from the EU side, where the difficulty often is that the UK either has red lines or is not very clear about its position. We are completely on the Irish side. We don’t want a hard border and there should be a backstop.”

He said the Chequers proposals to seek frictionless trade with the EU were “not good enough”.

“I think we have to be realistic,” he said. “Exiting the union, the common market, will mean there will be differences between the current situation and the future situation.”

Blok said a number of financial services firms had made public that they would transfer at least part of their operations to continental Europe in light of the Brexit uncertainty. “I understand that Amsterdam will host quite a lot of specialised trading companies.”

Dutch and DUP strike double blow to May's Brexit plans

[B0ycey]

...and back to no deal again...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45853384

Just do another referendum May. You can't get out of the hole by continuing to dig downwards unless you want to get burnt.

[JohnRawls]

I think i posted this here but whatever. UK going at it again, while the queen be like:

[youtube]1kYoVRAioHg[/youtube]

[Rugoz]

May must get rid of the DUP.

[B0ycey]

May must get rid of the DUP.

Then she must call for another election. Although many share their opinion on NI not being treated differently from the rest of the UK. So I suspect that won't solve anything actually.

May has just one day to decide which market is more valuble to her. Europe or the rest of the world. Our economy relies more on Europe so it should be a no brainer. But remaining in the Customs union will struggle to get though parliament. But it is the best (and only) chance there is of a deal. Otherwise time to concede and just go for no deal... or another referendum to stay in the EU of course.

[Rugoz]

Then she must call for another election. Although many share their opinion on NI not being treated differently from the rest of the UK. So I suspect that won't solve anything actually.

May has just one day to decide which market is more valuble to her. Europe or the rest of the world. Our economy relies more on Europe so it should be a no brainer. But remaining in the Customs union will struggle to get though parliament. But it is the best (and only) chance there is of a deal. Otherwise time to concede and just go for no deal... or another referendum to stay in the EU of course.

The DUP rejects border controls in general, which is not realistic. Remaining in the customs union is kind of pointless without a seat at the table when it comes to trade negotiations, so it's at best a temporary solution.

[B0ycey]

The DUP rejects border controls in general, which is not realistic. Remaining in the customs union is kind of pointless without a seat at the table when it comes to trade negotiations, so it's at best a temporary solution.

A temporary solution is fine to stop chao for a few year but all it does is delay the inevitable I guess. At some point you need to address what you want. So wouldn't it be wise to just ask the public what they want before leaving a club you'd be better off staying in? At the moment nothing can get through parliament because parliament wants opposite things.

[Rich]

If the UK want's to protect its borders and the EU wants to protect the integrity of its single market they should both support building a wall,