More post brexit referendum good news!!!!

[Spiral]

But we don't have that at the minute? I don't understand your point.

Correct me if I'm wrong but a passport check at the UK/ROI border is highly undesirable for both the ROI and NI parties. It seems impossible to reconcile UK immigration control (post Brexit) and an invisible north/south border in Ireland.

[nil_desperandum]

But we don't have that at the minute? I don't understand your point.

It's really not difficult.
We don't need border controls at the moment because we are in the EU and people can travel freely from one country to another, but a lot of people voted for Brexit because they want an end to free movement thus giving the UK control of its own borders. (It's supposedly one of Theresa May's "red lines".) [You know - the Blue Passport thing].
Now fast-forward to the end of March 2019. How can you have control of your borders if there actually isn't a border there?
The only way we could prevent free movement into the UK from the the EU (i.e. the ROI) after that date is by erecting a border.
Now consider the difficulties this presents. There are some farmers (e.g.) whose property is one side of the border, but whose land is on the other side. Some people cross the "border" several times a day.
The British Govt. has a commitment to ensure that there is an open border between north and South, but also has a commitment to ending free movement from the EU.
The situation is further complicated because the DUP are totally opposed to having border controls between NI and mainland UK.
If there was a simple fix for this then someone would have come up with it by now.

[thatdberight]

It's really not difficult.
We don't need border controls at the moment because we are in the EU and people can travel freely from one country to another, but a lot of people voted for Brexit because they want an end to free movement thus giving the UK control of its own borders. (It's supposedly one of Theresa May's "red lines".) [You know - the Blue Passport thing].
Now fast-forward to the end of March 2019. How can you have control of your borders if there actually isn't a border there?
The only way we could prevent free movement into the UK from the the EU (i.e. the ROI) after that date is by erecting a border.
Now consider the difficulties this presents. There are some farmers (e.g.) whose property is one side of the border, but whose land is on the other side. Some people cross the "border" several times a day.
The British Govt. has a commitment to ensure that there is an open border between north and South, but also has a commitment to ending free movement from the EU.
The situation is further complicated because the DUP are totally opposed to having border controls between NI and mainland UK.
If there was a simple fix for this then someone would have come up with it by now.

I'm not stupid. You're trying to make a point that doesn't exist. As it currently stands, people who are legitimately in the RoI are welcome in the UK. That doesn't need to change post-Brexit. Your sarcastic"blue passport" jibe shows you're not actually considering this properly but making the usual thinly-veiled "Little Englander" jibes.
It's not me who can't see that "freedom of movement" is short for "freedom of movement of labour" and entirely separate to visa and other visitor regimes. You deliberately conflate the concepts to make issues that don't exist appear.
Don't bother replying unless it's preceded by a penny dropping.

[thatdberight]

Correct me if I'm wrong but a passport check at the UK/ROI border is highly undesirable for both the ROI and NI parties. It seems impossible to reconcile UK immigration control (post Brexit) and an invisible north/south border in Ireland.

What immigration control? Who has said that the UK / RoI border needs immigration control? As it currently stands anyone in the RoI is welcome to cross the border. That, unless RoI joins Schengen say, should remain the case afterwards. The border is about goods, not people.

[Darthlaw]

If I was a Frenchman, I'd want shut of us by now, even if there was a significant cost to the French economy.

The Irony.

[JohnMcGreal]

The border is about goods, not people.

You do realise that goods don't move from one place to another all by themselves, right? Goods are transported by people. So when people are travelling from the EU to a third country, they and their vehicles will need to be checked by customs officials to ensure they aren't trying to move goods from one customs area to another.

And in an area as politically sensitive as Ireland, that option is unacceptable, to the Republic and the North. When the UK government signed up to the Good Friday Agreement and had it ratified in International law, they effectively gave up any future option of leaving the single market and customs union, unless the ROI leave as well. It just isn't possible.

The lack of understanding on this issue from the UK side is absolutely embarrassing.

[Lancasterclaret]

I think we all get your point Itberight, but you are seriously claiming that what you propose will satisfy a substantial chunk of the Brexiteers?

They want border controls for anyone who isn't British, and worry about people on holiday/students etc coming here illegally to work. That isn't going to satisfy them.

As has been said, its because its so complicated (bit like the Good Friday agreement, which took decades to agree on) its going to be a pretty big sticking point. Certainly yet another argument for a lengthy transitional period so this is done right.

[thatdberight]

You do realise that goods don't move from one place to another all by themselves, right? Goods are transported by people. So when people are travelling from the EU to a third country, they and their vehicles will need to be checked by customs officials to ensure they aren't trying to move goods from one customs area to another.

And in an area as politically sensitive as Ireland, that option is unacceptable, to the Republic and the North. When the UK government signed up to the Good Friday Agreement and had it ratified in International law, they effectively gave up any future option of leaving the single market and customs union, unless the ROI leave as well. It just isn't possible.

The lack of understanding on this issue from the UK side is absolutely embarrassing.

That's nonsense. It's the EU's requirements that are putting paid to an arrangement. The common travel area and all other rights have been guaranteed by the UK government from day 1. Nothing in the GFA is tied to the Customs status either explicitly or de facto.
The proposal of the UK government was for a soft border with (implicitly) more of the burden of enforcement falling within the UK. It's the EU that has the issue. Unless RoI joins Schengen, the UK is still offering that. Of course, the fact we're looking less likely now to reach a trade deal doesn't help that but it hasn't been taken off the table. That's how "imaginative" the UK side is being; a light-touch border with a country which is not in your Customs union. Where's the inflexibility? The capital of the RoI - Brussels...

[Lancasterclaret]

What proposals are these thatdberight?

There isn't anything concrete*

*because it wasn't considered to be worth looking at

This might help explain the EU position if it helps

"If UK leaves single market and customs union it automatically makes NI-ROI the external border of EU. Ireland is then bound by its treaties to enforce that border. So for Kate Hoey, Rees-Mogg et al to say UK not choosing a border is deeply dishonest."

[nil_desperandum]

What immigration control? Who has said that the UK / RoI border needs immigration control? As it currently stands anyone in the RoI is welcome to cross the border. That, unless RoI joins Schengen say, should remain the case afterwards. The border is about goods, not people.

Ok. Let's try one last time.
Post-Brexit, the ROI will still be part of the EU, so Roumanians, Bulgarians etc.will still legitimately be able to travel in and out of ROI, live there and work there. (It's nothing to do with Schengen whatsoever).
In your scenario - with no border checks, what's to stop me bringing a truck over from the ROI which has 50 Roumanians or Bulgarians in it rather than say 50 sacks of vegetables?
And if we can't prevent this happening then - as Lancaster just pointed out, Brexit will have failed in the eyes of many leave voters.

[thatdberight]

Ok. Let's try one last time.
Post-Brexit, the ROI will still be part of the EU, so Roumanians, Bulgarians etc.will still legitimately be able to travel in and out of ROI, live there and work there. (It's nothing to do with Schengen whatsoever).
In your scenario - with no border checks, what's to stop me bringing a truck over from the ROI which has 50 Roumanians or Bulgarians in it rather than say 50 sacks of vegetables?
And if we can't prevent this happening then - as Lancaster just pointed out, Brexit will have failed in the eyes of many leavers.

And let's try this one more time.

Nothing is to stop you. Nothing. No-one cares. You'd be daft doing it because the UK is going to having visa free travel for EU citizens so no need to hide your theoretical Bulgars in your theoretical potato bags.

It is to do with Schengen by the way. Given the collapse of the EU's external borders, what would not be acceptable is that anyone who has managed to get in the EU can travel to the UK without further checks. We currently have a two-way relationship with RoI that ensures that for the integrity of the common travel area. Only if RoI changes that, would the UK requirements change.

You continue to flip between ability to travel to and ability to work in the UK to try and make your case and you purport to believe, somehow, that the people of Boston voted to leave because of the hordes of French tourists visiting Buckingham Palace or the number of Spaniards enjoying the Lake District. They didn't. That, I can guarantee.

[thatdberight]

What proposals are these thatdberight?

There isn't anything concrete*

*because it wasn't considered to be worth looking at

This might help explain the EU position if it helps

"If UK leaves single market and customs union it automatically makes NI-ROI the external border of EU. Ireland is then bound by its treaties to enforce that border. So for Kate Hoey, Rees-Mogg et al to say UK not choosing a border is deeply dishonest."

The "technological border" proposal was completely insubstantial and not a solution. But it was a start point and an indication of 'direction of travel'. But at least we agree (although who you're quoting isn't clear); it's the RoI's choice, through its commitments to its EU partners, that would necessitate the border. The UK would, guess what, be free to make its own choice.

[nil_desperandum]

So basically you're saying that free movement of people will continue as before?
How can we ascertain whether someone is coming over here for 2 weeks holiday or to try and find work and accommodation, if we don't check?
Once someone is over the border it's very difficult to track them. Our current record at managing immigration from outside the EU tends to support my point.

[Lancasterclaret]

UK is going to having visa free travel for EU citizens

I have to admit not to being 100% sure about this, but if we get a "No deal" (which we will if there is no movement on sorting out the non-problem (from your point of view)) of the Irish border then that is not the case.

[Lancasterclaret]

And I have to be honest, that is just one problem of the Irish border. Its not just about immigration and trade. Which is understood by Eire and Northern Ireland, but not by the rest of the UK.

[thatdberight]

So basically you're saying that free movement of people will continue as before?
How can we ascertain whether someone is coming over here for 2 weeks holiday or to try and find work and accommodation, if we don't check?
Once someone is over the border it's very difficult to track them. Our current record at managing immigration from outside the EU tends to support my point.

Yes. That's always been the offer.

Your point entirely applies now. If, post-Brexit, there's an increasing problem with EU-country illegal workers (and there might well be) that's for the UK to manage with its own laws. I don't disagree this isn't done as well as it should be currently but that's a matter of execution, not principle.

[thatdberight]

I have to admit not to being 100% sure about this, but if we get a "No deal" (which we will if there is no movement on sorting out the non-problem (from your point of view)) of the Irish border then that is not the case.

Why's it not the case? Where is that a UK policy on this?

Andorra, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Australia, Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Costa Rica, Dominica, East Timor, El Salvador, Grenada, Guatemala, Honduras, Hong Kong, Israel, Japan, Kiribati, Macau, Malaysia, Maldives, Marshall Islands, Mauritius, Mexico, Monaco, Micronesia, Namibia, Nauru, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Palau, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, San Marino, Seychelles, Singapore, Solomon Islands, South Korea, Taiwan, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Tuvalu, United States of America, Uruguay, Vanuatu, Vatican City...

[nil_desperandum]

Yes. That's always been the offer.

Your point entirely applies now. If, post-Brexit, there's an increasing problem with EU-country illegal workers (and there might well be) that's for the UK to manage with its own laws. I don't disagree this isn't done as well as it should be currently but that's a matter of execution, not principle.

So actually, we are not so far apart on this as it seemed, but I maintain my position, that this is not the view of a post-Brexit Britain that many leave voters envisaged. There will be posters on this forum who voted leave because they thought it would close our borders.

[Lancasterclaret]

Like I said, I'm not 100% sure but it is one of the concerns of a "No deal" brexit about Visas.

Fascinating finding out stuff like this btw. Immigration obsessed Brexiteers would have heart failure if they knew how easy it was to get in from so many countries

[RingoMcCartney]

Well I actually asked a question. I'm not quite sure asking a question is the same thing as making a logical argument, but whatever. I assumed you were doing this for the reaction. Are you doing this for the reaction?

It's a message board.

I'm airing my optimistic opinions by posting messages.

Is this another area where the voice deniers want to slam down opinions that aren't in line with their "enlightened" views?

Are you really against free speech.?

[Lancasterclaret]

There will be posters on this forum who voted leave because they thought it would close our borders.

And a sizeable % of the leave voting population (and the remain part as well if we are being fair) of the UK.

[thatdberight]

And a sizeable % of the leave voting population (and the remain part as well if we are being fair) of the UK.

I think you have watched, and taken as true, a few too many vox pops where the scrotiest excuse for a human being that Sky/BBC could find in Burnley/Rotherham/South Shields said "F***ing foreigners, kick them all out". That's not reality. Even if it is, a quick follow-up of, "Should foreign tourists still be allowed?" would, in all but a very few instances of gibbering idiots, clarify things. But that doesn't make good TV or good polarisation allowing the "enlightened" to shake their heads.

[Lancasterclaret]

I think we agree roughly on that, but I think far more are concerned enough to vote like a gibbering racist loon, while maintaining zen like calm when questioned about it.

[thatdberight]

There will be posters on this forum who voted leave because they thought it would close our borders.

Really? You really think there are posters on here who thought they were voting for the UK's own Sakoku Edict?

I don't think there's anyone here or anywhere else that thought that. Equally, I don't think Remain voters thought they were voting for #NoBorders. You're just not thinking this through and allowing yourself to think the very worst of people who voted the other way on this.

[thatdberight]

I think we agree roughly on that, but I think far more are concerned enough to vote like a gibbering racist loon, while maintaining zen like calm when questioned about it.

So, just to be clear, to vote 'Leave' was to be a 'gibbering, racist loon'?

[Lancasterclaret]

No! (well, not really, but I'm sure some did and then said to the Poles at school "its terrible what happened in the referendum)

I'm thinking more along the lines of people voting but keeping it to themselves when asked about it (which would explain polls being wrong)*

[Lancasterclaret]

I think this pic sums up the issue quite well btw

[nil_desperandum]

Really? You really think there are posters on here who thought they were voting for the UK's own Sakoku Edict?

I don't think there's anyone here or anywhere else that thought that. Equally, I don't think Remain voters thought they were voting for #NoBorders. You're just not thinking this through and allowing yourself to think the very worst of people who voted the other way on this.

I had to google the Sakoku Edict, so at least I've learnt something new today.
But no, I I don't think and didn't imply this.
What I am suggesting is that all surveys suggest that "taking back control" was the principle reason why people voted leave, and even many who voted remain would like to see it happen. Being able to control our borders is constantly stressed by Brexiteers when asked how Brexit will benefit the UK. Indeed many say that they would be prepared to take a financial hit in order to control our borders and thus reduce immigration.
If there's no border between the UK and the EU, then a significant proportion of Brexiteers, (and indeed "remainers") would argue that we can't take back control.

[RingoMcCartney]

So, just to be clear, to vote 'Leave' was to be a 'gibbering, racist loon'?

Nobody's saying that at all mate. And you know it.

What reasonable people who voted Remain are saying is that, to vote Leave was to be a, " xenophobic, knuckle dragging, uneducated, gullible, uninformed, swivel-eyed, daily mail brain washed, little Englander, gibbering, racist loon"

Don't try and tar 'em all with the same brush.

[HatfieldClaret]

I think this pic sums up the issue quite well btw

We could dig a moat between A and D....

[Lancasterclaret]

"Finally, and I will explore this properly soon, I cannot find a single MP or minister who sees how Brexit can transpire without political, social and constitutional crisis in relations between Northern Ireland and the Republic."

Robert Peston today

He's very gloomy as well about progress in everything else as well.

[RingoMcCartney]

Some classic "Bring out yer deadery" there Lancs!

Don't fret. Im listening to talkradio and it's been said that within the small print of the Good Friday Agreement. There is a specific part that says the EU can give some form of special status.

Your bible agrees.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... tus-brexit" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

So do try not to give to much weight to what arch Remoaner, fierce Anglophobe and economic masochist, Peston spews.

Anyway ill let you crack on. No doubt you'll have some poor soul to prepare!

[Lancasterclaret]

"this article in three months old"

[JohnMcGreal]

That's nonsense. It's the EU's requirements that are putting paid to an arrangement. The common travel area and all other rights have been guaranteed by the UK government from day 1. Nothing in the GFA is tied to the Customs status either explicitly or de facto.
The proposal of the UK government was for a soft border with (implicitly) more of the burden of enforcement falling within the UK. It's the EU that has the issue. Unless RoI joins Schengen, the UK is still offering that. Of course, the fact we're looking less likely now to reach a trade deal doesn't help that but it hasn't been taken off the table. That's how "imaginative" the UK side is being; a light-touch border with a country which is not in your Customs union. Where's the inflexibility? The capital of the RoI - Brussels...

The EU aren't the ones making incompatible pledges. The UK government has pledged that:

1. There will be no hard border in Northern Ireland
2. The UK will leave the single market
3. The UK will leave the customs union

Pledge number 1 is totally incompatible with pledges 2 and 3. It is not possible.

The common travel area and all other rights guaranteed by the UK government from day 1 of the GFA are now sitting on the Brexit bonfire while May and Davis pour fuel all over them. If they really do insist on leaving the single market and the customs union, then that bonfire will be lit in March 2018.

It's high time our government starts facing up to reality and starts making decisions that don't harm the economy and don't undermine the peace process in Ireland.

But I won't be holding my breath, because up to now they've proven themselves to be just that stupid.

[UpTheBeehole]

And let's try this one more time.

Nothing is to stop you. Nothing. No-one cares. You'd be daft doing it because the UK is going to having visa free travel for EU citizens so no need to hide your theoretical Bulgars in your theoretical potato bags.

It is to do with Schengen by the way. Given the collapse of the EU's external borders, what would not be acceptable is that anyone who has managed to get in the EU can travel to the UK without further checks. We currently have a two-way relationship with RoI that ensures that for the integrity of the common travel area. Only if RoI changes that, would the UK requirements change.

You continue to flip between ability to travel to and ability to work in the UK to try and make your case and you purport to believe, somehow, that the people of Boston voted to leave because of the hordes of French tourists visiting Buckingham Palace or the number of Spaniards enjoying the Lake District. They didn't. That, I can guarantee.

Hang on, so actually all those EU citizens working cash in hand on farms and car washes, and not on HMRC or anyone else's radar, are ok to stay?

Aren't they the types of Europeans that Brexiters wanted rid of, to allow unskilled and barely educated Brits to do the same menial jobs?

[thatdberight]

Hang on, so actually all those EU citizens working cash in hand on farms and car washes, and not on HMRC or anyone else's radar, are ok to stay?

Aren't they the types of Europeans that Brexiters wanted rid of, to allow unskilled and barely educated Brits to do the same menial jobs?

No. It's not OK now, it's not OK then. That was easy. It was so easy I already answered it in another post but never mind - keep looking for the monsters under your bed even with the light switched on.

Edit : That's not very clear above. It is, of course, OK for those EU citizens to work here currently (and those who are here now are going to be given the right to stay) - just not in the grey/black/hidden economy.

[Lancasterclaret]

To be fair, I think he's saying that the procedures in place we have now will used against that (if there is no deal, because under a deal the existing EU citizens will be allowed to live and work here)

[thatdberight]

The EU aren't the ones making incompatible pledges. The UK government has pledged that:

1. There will be no hard border in Northern Ireland
2. The UK will leave the single market
3. The UK will leave the customs union

Pledge number 1 is totally incompatible with pledges 2 and 3. It is not possible.

They're not incompatible at all. Do 2 and 3 and tell RoI there'll be no hard border if they don't want one. Simple as that.

Of course, to protect NI, the UK would advise it will reciprocate any new arrangements the RoI (or more specifically those who call the tune for them) put in place. So, if they put in place a hard border-style arrangement for traffic from NI, that would be reciprocated. If they don't, it won't. If they change their immigration policies, that would result in changes to the UK's policies. If they don't, no change in the UK.

[RingoMcCartney]

"this article in three months old"

So What?

The Good Friday Agreement is even older. Doesn't make the small print held within, or the view expressed by the guardian, any less relevant.

Like I say Peston craves negativity. He needy for process undermining . He adores what he sees as potential obstruction.

If the UK, the ROI and tne EU all want the same thing. And special status is written in the the Good Friday Agreement. Then that's what will eventually happen. When all the posturing has gone, business will step up and say to the democratically elected politicians, and the unelected eurocrats. Sort your **** out. And they will!

We're not, despite what old misery monger Peston says. Going to hell in a hand cart!

Stop getting your mourning suit in a twist!

[UpTheBeehole]

No. It's not OK now, it's not OK then. That was easy. It was so easy I already answered it in another post but never mind - keep looking for the monsters under your bed even with the light switched on.

But I thought that's where all the illegal immigrants worked?

[Lancasterclaret]

Though Ringos info is a bit out of date in relation to recent developments, the fundamental premise is that the EU is willing to allow special rules for the Eire/UK border.

So there is hope there but we haven't seen enough from our side to see if its valid or not. "Imaginative solutions" is the best I can find, with nothing to back it up.

Still time yet, but time is getting short and again you can't help thinking that its just something that was thought enough about and certainly the argument "well, this is a shock" just doesn't wash.

[Bacchus]

I'm certainly not an expert on these matters but assuming we leave the EU without an ongoing FTA (which looks likely right now) wouldn't a hard border with Ireland be essential if we were to trade under WTO rules? Failure to have one would essentially leave us open to accusations of not applying tariffs (i.e. - applying zero tariffs) and under most preferred nation rulings we'd then have to drop all of our tariffs with every other nation (thereby flooding the UK with cheap foreign imports and devastating our industries.)

Maybe someone who is more familiar with WTO rules could correct me, but it does seem like the key point is hiding behind all the hullabaloo about the Good Friday Agreement and whether or not Romanians can go shopping in Belfast (and the cynic in me suspects that Brexiters are happy to leave it hiding there for as long as possible because they know that the no hard border pledge cannot be delivered.)

[thatdberight]

To be fair, I think he's saying that the procedures in place we have now will used against that (if there is no deal, because under a deal the existing EU citizens will be allowed to live and work here)

However bad it gets (and I do think the 'no deal' scenario has risen from an outside bet to a reasonable punt), I do not foresee any way the existing people who have already been here - certainly those who were here before June last year - will be forced to leave. The government has done absolutely the right thing on that - signalling clearly that it wished this to happen but ensuring that is reciprocated before committing.

[Lancasterclaret]

More on the border, this time from the Deputy editor of the Economist

"I'm SICK of BS about Irish border. Outside single market, UK is OBLIGED under WTO most-favoured nation rules to have controls at ALL border crossings, except with countries it has free-trade deals with. NOT A MATTER OF 'WE DON'T WANT THEM, UP TO EU/ROI'. YOU HAVE TO HAVE THEM"

Edit - Bacchus posts as well on this

[Lancasterclaret]

I fully agree thatberight, but again the UK is implying that the 3 million citizens of the EU already here is up for "negotiation"

And again, you and me will differ here but my guess is that I think the % of leave voters who want them gone as well is higher than what you think it is!

[Bacchus]

More on the border, this time from the Deputy editor of the Economist

"I'm SICK of BS about Irish border. Outside single market, UK is OBLIGED under WTO most-favoured nation rules to have controls at ALL border crossings, except with countries it has free-trade deals with. NOT A MATTER OF 'WE DON'T WANT THEM, UP TO EU/ROI'. YOU HAVE TO HAVE THEM"

Edit - Bacchus posts as well on this

Happy to accept that the deputy editor of the Economist falls into the category of "people who know more about this stuff than I do" and proves I hadn't just dreamt it.

[UpTheBeehole]

The simplest solution is to give Northern Ireland back to the country it rightfully belongs to, Eire, and have the Irish Sea as the border.

If any Northern Irish Unionists don't like it, they can come and move to the proper United Kingdom and love the Queen and do their silly marches right outside Buckingham Palace, or they could go all the way back and move back to their spiritual home of middle ages Holland.

[Lancasterclaret]

The Brexit impact statements are out.......in two lever arch files. Two.

I'm not making this up, but I wish I was.

We are so ******.

[Lancasterclaret]

I promoted her by mistake Bacchus, she's international editor, not deputy editor. Probably even more knowledgeable about it!

[thatdberight]

Happy to accept that the deputy editor of the Economist falls into the category of "people who know more about this stuff than I do" and proves I hadn't just dreamt it.

I take that position too. If the "technological border" (and I already said I think it's currently little more than a two-word policy) isn't acceptable to WTO then, as I said in a post earlier in this thread, hard border it is. That would concentrate minds quickly on a solution.