• Due to a glitch in the old vBulletin software, some users were "banned" when they tried to change their passwords at the end of February. This does not apply after the site was converted to Xenforo. If you were affected by this, please contact us.




Coming up to Backstop "Crunch-Time" Krauts Break Ranks

TheField

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 9, 2012
Messages
3,252
Just maybe this Republic should make it's own interests a priority. We've done more than our bit to help the six counties. Whilst many of their own politicians sit on their hands and do nothing, except lecture us on our responsibilities and throw petrol on the fires by threatening border polls etc. Maybe it's time to cut them adrift and let them sort out their own problems. Yes some of their problems are our problems too but we've lived with that before.
 


livingstone

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 3, 2004
Messages
24,494
Just maybe this Republic should make it's own interests a priority. We've done more than our bit to help the six counties. Whilst many of their own politicians sit on their hands and do nothing, except lecture us on our responsibilities and throw petrol on the fires by threatening border polls etc. Maybe it's time to cut them adrift and let them sort out their own problems. Yes some of their problems are our problems too but we've lived with that before.
Prioritising a frictionless border is in the Republic's interest. You know people live on the Irish side of the border as well as the Northern Irish side - and they would be as affected by a hard border.
 

Titan

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 1, 2015
Messages
1,171
Website
www.forumbox.co.uk
You're just wrong. EU law requires live animal checks to take place at Border Inspection Posts.

You're right that much of manufactured goods can be checked on the market through risk-based market surveillance. But that's not the case for agricultural products, live animals or animal products.
But as UK law and EU is the same at the moment, there is no disparity between the two, so checks could easily happen at source rather than on the border. The argument comes in the future, when/if UK law diverge from EU law in these matters.
 

Titan

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 1, 2015
Messages
1,171
Website
www.forumbox.co.uk
As well as livingstone pointing out one error, you are assuming "regulatory alignment" on both sides of the border.

For example, if the UK changes its regulations to allow chlorinated chicken from the US, the whole regulatory structure will have to change, as vets on both sides of the border will now be working to different standards. You may agree a "trust system" whereby UK veterinary certificates are acceptable, but no trust system can exist without some checks. Even random selection of crates at the border (the only workable system) would demand an infrastructure.

The potential for abuse by smuggling gangs would be enormous, and the return to a criminal-terrorist subculture along the border would be inevitable.
Who in the republic would be importing chlorinated chicken? And what does that have to do with vets and standards? The chickens will be dead by the time they get to the UK, so no need for the involvement of vets at all.

I agree with the wider point that if UK law diverges from EU law, that's a problem. But if the UK imports chicken from the U.S., that's nothing to do with the EU. If the UK changes its food standards in the future on food grown/bred in the UK, that's a different matter entirely.
 

livingstone

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 3, 2004
Messages
24,494
But as UK law and EU is the same at the moment, there is no disparity between the two, so checks could easily happen at source rather than on the border. The argument comes in the future, when/if UK law diverge from EU law in these matters.
Well yes, exactly. Which is exactly why you have the backstop: to guarantee that the rules applying to, say, live animals is the same on both sides of the border, so you don't need to conduct checks at the border.

Without the backstop, checks at the border become necessitated under EU law.
 

livingstone

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 3, 2004
Messages
24,494
Who in the republic would be importing chlorinated chicken? And what does that have to do with vets and standards? The chickens will be dead by the time they get to the UK, so no need for the involvement of vets at all.

I agree with the wider point that if UK law diverges from EU law, that's a problem. But if the UK imports chicken from the U.S., that's nothing to do with the EU. If the UK changes its food standards in the future on food grown/bred in the UK, that's a different matter entirely.
You're right - it's nothing to do with the EU provided the EU has assurance that that US chicken isn't going to get smuggled on to its market. That can be achieved in two ways:

(1) The backstop model - so the chicken isn't allowed in NI or IE; or

(2) The hard border model - so the chicken is allowed in NI, but you then have to check shipments of goods moving across the border to make sure they don't have prohibited chicken (or any other prohibited goods).
 

Ireniall

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 7, 2011
Messages
8,278
I wouldn’t say total BS.

I have worked in the UK for the past 25 years. I think rather than an anti Irish sentiment there is a certain amount of resentment and a feeling of betrayal. Betrayal based on an ignorant and patronising notion that the Irish are ‘not really proper foreigners’. I have had people say this to me many times over the years....much to my anyonance but I generally passed it off as a kind of postive ignorance rather than anything malign.

Most brexiteers that I have come across express general sympathy about the negative impact for Ireland, however their attitude is that it’s just unfortunate collateral damage. In their minds their democratic decision is paramount above all and the wider consequences are not their problem. IMO an attitude based on the deluded notion of British exceptionalism and national pride based on their various stands over the centuries against continental consolidation. Hence this low grade sense of grievance at what they see as our betrayal.
I've always viewed the attitude that we were not proper foreigners as a sort of a nice thing rather than having the more excluding thing of them viewing us as outsiders. I cannot bring myself to view the Scottish and Welsh as proper foreigners and sure what's the point in excluding the English whose language we speak and whose genes have been passed on to 20% of our own people. What gets my goat entirely though is the attitude that they don't know anything about Ireland and don't have to bother themselves about it but are still convinced that we should simply fall in behind their decisions and put what they see as their national interests(highly dubious at the moment) first. Worse is to see Irish people saying that they're right. What is it with the journalists on some of our papers just waiting, it seems ,to announce that the EU have stabbed us in the back-almost willing it on. Do nations have to simply carry such yokes. Is it not possible to ensure that these types are given work more befitting their abilities and inclinations.
 

yosef shompeter

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 4, 2011
Messages
2,808
Very simple. The Germans didn't break ranks - as was pointed out to you already, Merkel also said there'll be no renegotiation of the withdrawal agreement. All she said was something about creativity in finding solutions - something also said by Varadkar.
A bit of perspective here: This backstop is our insurance policy... Our insurance policy for peace on this island-- and economic well-being. Talk to any insurance broker, but I'm sure you must know this already: It's the small print at the back that matters. Not the common-sense obvious stuff upfront. I'm sure that Leo and Theresa May got on swimmingly at their meeting in Farmleigh house. She's a nice old lady and seems to operate on gaining consensus all round. But once the S hits the fan that's when it's no more mister nice guy -- or gal. We have to think of what's going to happen five or ten years down the road when Theresa My and possibly Leo Varadkar are both distant memories or elder statesmen/women. The British side of course will straight away point out to the small print.
Now for Angela Merkel to intervene. And for Leo to reply as he did... that we had done our compromising all along it's up to the other side. I don't like the way things are panning out. No one knows what Leo and Theresa May said at the meeting this weekend. It hasn't been published and probably won't be. I can imagine it's something in the same vein as Winston Churchill and Rosevelt sketching their idea of the new map of Europe on the back of an envelope.
I'm amazed at how complacent you are coming up to a critical time like this.
The strength of the backtstop agreement is its simplicity and its obvious nature. I can't see myself how it can be improved upon. Feel free to post your ideas on this... or what Theresa may and her parliament think the way it should be.
 

yosef shompeter

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 4, 2011
Messages
2,808
Originally Posted by Dame_Enda View Post

In an age where mobiles can be tracked through GPS, I don't accept we can't do the same with hauliers to police non-EEA trade coming in through the UK
Care to explain how a mobile phone GPS will conduct inspections on livestock, plants, vegetables, etc.?

A few words on a technical subject that I know next to nothing about. If you want to avoid being tracked by your mobile. Don't just turn it off. Remove the batteries too. And even then it's not 100% untrackable -- or so I've been told.

And this border lark. It's as old as time. It's a game of cat & mouse. As to who the cat is and who the mouse is ? It depends on the technology available and how its (mis) used. We are now in an age of drones, sensors, dna testing, infra-red night vision goggles.
Is that going to stop the smugglers?
It sure hasn't stopped the drug smugglers
or the people smugglers.

Chlorinated chicken tastes quite exquisite with some baked marijuana cakes
and a good snort helps the digestion.:tongue:
 
Last edited:

Nebuchadnezzar

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 15, 2011
Messages
10,859
I've always viewed the attitude that we were not proper foreigners as a sort of a nice thing rather than having the more excluding thing of them viewing us as outsiders. I cannot bring myself to view the Scottish and Welsh as proper foreigners and sure what's the point in excluding the English whose language we speak and whose genes have been passed on to 20% of our own people. What gets my goat entirely though is the attitude that they don't know anything about Ireland and don't have to bother themselves about it but are still convinced that we should simply fall in behind their decisions and put what they see as their national interests(highly dubious at the moment) first. Worse is to see Irish people saying that they're right. What is it with the journalists on some of our papers just waiting, it seems ,to announce that the EU have stabbed us in the back-almost willing it on. Do nations have to simply carry such yokes. Is it not possible to ensure that these types are given work more befitting their abilities and inclinations.
The fact that there is an element of truth behind their notion makes it all the more annoying. However, you could make the same point about shared heritage, ancestry and even language (although to a lesser degree than with ourselves) about all the nations with Germanic origins of which England is one.
 

yosef shompeter

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 4, 2011
Messages
2,808
Prioritising a frictionless border is in the Republic's interest. You know people live on the Irish side of the border as well as the Northern Irish side - and they would be as affected by a hard border.
Some sort of referendum or election would be very revealing. What interests me is people's attitude to the Backstop. In my view there may we some major or minor re-alignment on this one issue which is a very "bread & butter" thing rather than identity politics
The trouble though is that people in the wee north tend to vote either "Orange" or "Green" or not at all.
Perhaps ... if the wee north can get their act together in the Assembly, it might be a good idea to organize a referendum on the backstop itself. Gotto do it reel softly-softly though, and present it as a purely economic matter and aloof from Orange & Green.
Would Arlene and the DUP consider this an outrage? Well to get the referendum bill through the Assembly it would need the consent of the DUP.
Certainly if the North voted to reject the backstop... on Arlene's urging... it would massively strengthen her hand and put the matter to bed.
Would she be prepared to take that risk?
 

Dame_Enda

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2011
Messages
53,184
The backstop effectively means NI remaining in the Customs Union and Single Market while the UK leaves. There isn't a majority in the House of Commons for that. Question is is there a majority for a no deal Brexit if a deal proves impossible by March 29. The recent close vote against leaving without a deal 318-310 suggests that could again be close and maybe by pushing things to the cliff edge that will make up the difference.

I think May gave away her Trump card by agreeing to the backstop in the first place. But then again, theoretically the backstop is only supposed to be there until alternative arrangements are agreed. So the concept of alternative arrangements on my opinion should be brought forward, which likely would require a extension to Article 50.
 

Strawberry

Moderator
Joined
Jul 13, 2014
Messages
16,497
The backstop effectively means NI remaining in the Customs Union and Single Market while the UK leaves. There isn't a majority in the House of Commons for that. Question is is there a majority for a no deal Brexit if a deal proves impossible by March 29. The recent close vote against leaving without a deal 318-310 suggests that could again be close and maybe by pushing things to the cliff edge that will make up the difference.

I think May gave away her Trump card by agreeing to the backstop in the first place. But then again, theoretically the backstop is only supposed to be there until alternative arrangements are agreed. So the concept of alternative arrangements on my opinion should be brought forward, which likely would require a extension to Article 50.
No it doesn't. Why do you post such arrant nonsense? The backstop means the whole UK staying in the customs union and NI remaining aligned to SM rules on goods.
 

Nebuchadnezzar

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 15, 2011
Messages
10,859
The backstop effectively means NI remaining in the Customs Union and Single Market while the UK leaves. There isn't a majority in the House of Commons for that. Question is is there a majority for a no deal Brexit if a deal proves impossible by March 29. The recent close vote against leaving without a deal 318-310 suggests that could again be close and maybe by pushing things to the cliff edge that will make up the difference.

I think May gave away her Trump card by agreeing to the backstop in the first place. But then again, theoretically the backstop is only supposed to be there until alternative arrangements are agreed. So the concept of alternative arrangements on my opinion should be brought forward, which likely would require a extension to Article 50.

That’s what it should have been........... but then they tied themselves into ”this precious union” etc
 

seanof

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 31, 2017
Messages
1,528
The backstop effectively means NI remaining in the Customs Union and Single Market while the UK leaves. There isn't a majority in the House of Commons for that. Question is is there a majority for a no deal Brexit if a deal proves impossible by March 29. The recent close vote against leaving without a deal 318-310 suggests that could again be close and maybe by pushing things to the cliff edge that will make up the difference.

I think May gave away her Trump card by agreeing to the backstop in the first place. But then again, theoretically the backstop is only supposed to be there until alternative arrangements are agreed. So the concept of alternative arrangements on my opinion should be brought forward, which likely would require a extension to Article 50.
The British put forward alternative arrangements to prevent a hard border in Ireland during the course of negotiations on the Withdrawal Agreement. None of these was considered operable by the EU, hence the inclusion of the backstop in the WA. The EU have made it crystal clear that the backstop will remain in the WA. The Brits are wasting their own time more than anyone else's while they continue to deny reality and witter on about it.

It's looking increasingly like an extension to A50 would be pointless. Neither a general election nor a second referendum are likely to change anything. Britain is a deeply divided society with a disfunctional political system. Most senior politicians in both main parties are low calibre, poorly informed and lacking in leadership skills. It's virtually impossible to negotiate and reach agreement with such a State.

The "United" Kingdom seems to be hell-bent on self destruction. That's a shame, but all that other countries can do is to look after their own interests and attempt to ameliorate the effects of the fallout. In Ireland's case, that means no hard border on the island by one means or another. If the Brits crash out with no deal, so be it. Ireland will suffer somewhat in the short run but a united Ireland will be inevitable within a few years. The abscess of Irish unionism needs to be lanced for once and for all.
 

Lumpy Talbot

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 30, 2015
Messages
26,660
Twitter
No
John Bruton would be inconsolable. Which would be cool.
 

livingstone

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 3, 2004
Messages
24,494
Some sort of referendum or election would be very revealing. What interests me is people's attitude to the Backstop. In my view there may we some major or minor re-alignment on this one issue which is a very "bread & butter" thing rather than identity politics
The trouble though is that people in the wee north tend to vote either "Orange" or "Green" or not at all.
Perhaps ... if the wee north can get their act together in the Assembly, it might be a good idea to organize a referendum on the backstop itself. Gotto do it reel softly-softly though, and present it as a purely economic matter and aloof from Orange & Green.
Would Arlene and the DUP consider this an outrage? Well to get the referendum bill through the Assembly it would need the consent of the DUP.
Certainly if the North voted to reject the backstop... on Arlene's urging... it would massively strengthen her hand and put the matter to bed.
Would she be prepared to take that risk?
Not possible in the time available. First, there is no functioning assembly. Second, it's not clear that it would be within the competence of the NI Assembly to hold a referendum on a question of international treaties, which is a reserved matter. Third, even ifit was, referendums take time: to legislate for, to hold etc.
 

livingstone

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 3, 2004
Messages
24,494
The backstop effectively means NI remaining in the Customs Union and Single Market while the UK leaves.
Look, you were already called out on your GPS BS and then ran away.

Now some more BS you have to be called out on. The backstop means the WHOLE UK remaining in a customs union with the EU, not just NI.

There isn't a majority in the House of Commons for that.
Yes there is. 202 MPs voted for the deal as it stands - most of them Tories. Labour voted against, but not because of the backstop. If the Political Declaration were adapted to broadly meet Corbyn's demands, there would be a majority in the Commons for that if the Government backed it.

I think May gave away her Trump card by agreeing to the backstop in the first place. But then again, theoretically the backstop is only supposed to be there until alternative arrangements are agreed. So the concept of alternative arrangements on my opinion should be brought forward, which likely would require a extension to Article 50.
The EU will not agree to an extension of Article 50 so that the unicorn hunters in the Conservative party have more time to fail to identify any alternatives. The EU has said they are open to replacing the backstop with alternative arrangements if and when they become available. That's a sop to the unicorn hunters - because the EU knows full well that those alternative arrangements will never be available.

Now - why don't you answer the question you ran away from previously. You think GPS is the solution: how does GPS tell you what's in the back of a truck? How does it test a live cow? Or a packet of sausages?
 

New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top