Backstops and hard borders

[Old Greg]

Jeeses, Dhooooog is displaying oPM/Vetran levels of non-understanding.

He's down to 1.2 yorkies.

[d000hg]

No, I was trying to have a grown up conversation about the realities. If the only feasible options you can come up with are those that are effectively impossible (it's been made clear the backstop is unpalatable, and cancelling Brexit is more so) they what do you actually think is a workable solution? Note, I'm not asking what you WANT to happen to satisfy whichever partisan feelings you have, but what realistically COULD happen?

We can leave under A50 but only in such a way we are bound by EU laws indefinitely (backstop), or that we renege on the GFA (no deal). It seems the UK doesn't have the authority to make all these decisions because Eire is under EU rule... we can't just say "we're leaving and the border remains open" because we don't control the other side of the border.

I've not seen a feasible solution suggested at all so far. The politicians keep saying "we need to negotiate" but if the other side won't, then what? Remainer/Brexiteer aside, what are some options that could actually work i.e. would ever get voted through and are legal?

[meridian]

We can leave under A50 but only in such a way we are bound by EU laws indefinitely (backstop), or that we renege on the GFA (no deal).

Not true. The UK will be in a transition arrangement for two years (as requested by the UK). The UK has those two years to provide the promised solution to the conundrum of being out of the EU yet having an open border. Many UK politicians and leading Brexiters have said that there are solutions and/or the border is not a problem, so they have two years to provide those solutions in detail.

Once those solutions are provided and there is legal certainty that there is an invisible border, then the joint agreement is that the backstop will not apply.

If there is no agreement, the UK can seek arbitration.

It seems the UK doesn't have the authority to make all these decisions because Eire is under EU rule... we can't just say "we're leaving and the border remains open" because we don't control the other side of the border.

That's the nature of borders, it takes two to have one.

Ireland is not "under EU rule". Like all member states, including the UK for the next two months, they help to make the rules.

I've not seen a feasible solution suggested at all so far. The politicians keep saying "we need to negotiate" but if the other side won't, then what? Remainer/Brexiteer aside, what are some options that could actually work i.e. would ever get voted through and are legal?

The politicians keep saying "we need to negotiate". Bu negotiate what? What does the UK actually want, in detail and written down, not generalised waffle?

[Old Greg]

No, I was trying to have a grown up conversation about the realities. If the only feasible options you can come up with are those that are effectively impossible (it's been made clear the backstop is unpalatable, and cancelling Brexit is more so) they what do you actually think is a workable solution? Note, I'm not asking what you WANT to happen to satisfy whichever partisan feelings you have, but what realistically COULD happen?

We can leave under A50 but only in such a way we are bound by EU laws indefinitely (backstop), or that we renege on the GFA (no deal). It seems the UK doesn't have the authority to make all these decisions because Eire is under EU rule... we can't just say "we're leaving and the border remains open" because we don't control the other side of the border.

I've not seen a feasible solution suggested at all so far. The politicians keep saying "we need to negotiate" but if the other side won't, then what? Remainer/Brexiteer aside, what are some options that could actually work i.e. would ever get voted through and are legal?

The withdrawal agreement is not effectively impossible. It is unpalatable as you say. Parliament has every ability to direct the UK to leave the EU in a way that is compatible with the obligations of the GFA that the UK signed up to.

Do you mean the EU won't negotiate? If so, the Withdrawal Agreement has been negotiated between the UK government and the EU. If you think there is an alternative plan that is compatible with the GFA, what is it? Maybe it can for the basis for further negotiations.

[shaunbhoy]

BTW, I am English born and bred so not attacking the English from the outside.

Indeed, you are attacking them from within due to your pompous over-developed guilt complex. And that makes it perfectly alright.

I am embarrassed and ashamed by Little Englanders though who still think we're fighting WW2. They really need to get over themselves.

I am sure those sentiments are entirely mutual. I'm sure they don't mean to offend you, that is just a bonus,

[Cirrus]

I've not seen a feasible solution suggested at all so far. The politicians keep saying "we need to negotiate" but if the other side won't, then what? Remainer/Brexiteer aside, what are some options that could actually work i.e. would ever get voted through and are legal?

Don't you understand what this game is all about? There are no solutions that can work. That's why the Tories and the Labour Party keep clinging onto the impossible pie-in-the-sky cake-and-eat-it. It's a train crash and we're all supposed to keep rearranging the deck chairs.

[Yorkie62]

Don't you understand what this game is all about? There are no solutions that can work. That's why the Tories and the Labour Party keep clinging onto the impossible pie-in-the-sky cake-and-eat-it. It's a train crash and we're all supposed to keep rearranging the deck chairs.

There are always solutions. The issue is that those who are charged with choosing a solution are either too scared of making the wrong decision or it suits there purpose to claim there are no solutions thereby enabling them to maintain the status quo. With regard to the Irish border issue I suspect there is a little of both. Even the EU, I can't remember which of the two it was Barnier of Junker, has said this week that in the event of no deal trade will be able to move across the Irish border. So if we can have a trading border with Ireland, and hence the EU, under a no deal scenario what is the point of the backstop. It's not needed, the EU have already made that clear.

[WTFH]

There are always solutions.

So, please share some of them!

The issue is that those who are charged with choosing a solution are either too scared of making the wrong decision or it suits there purpose to claim there are no solutions thereby enabling them to maintain the status quo.

No, the issue is that those who pushed for us to leave have not proposed any viable solutions yet. There is nothing for anyone to choose between. Stop living in the fantasy world where everything is the fault of those who were dumped on to deliver something because those that wanted it were too scared or confused to stand up and be counted.

With regard to the Irish border issue I suspect there is a little of both. Even the EU, I can't remember which of the two it was Barnier of Junker, has said this week that in the event of no deal trade will be able to move across the Irish border. So if we can have a trading border with Ireland, and hence the EU, under a no deal scenario what is the point of the backstop. It's not needed, the EU have already made that clear.

What the EU have made clear is that if the UK stays within the SM & CU, then there is no need for a border.
The point of a backstop is to give the UK leave group to come up with workable solutions that allow the UK to leave the SM & CU.
So far the UK leave mob have had 3 years and come up with zilch.

[Old Greg]

So, please share some of them!



No, the issue is that those who pushed for us to leave have not proposed any viable solutions yet. There is nothing for anyone to choose between. Stop living in the fantasy world where everything is the fault of those who were dumped on to deliver something because those that wanted it were too scared or confused to stand up and be counted.



What the EU have made clear is that if the UK stays within the SM & CU, then there is no need for a border.
The point of a backstop is to give the UK leave group to come up with workable solutions that allow the UK to leave the SM & CU.
So far the UK leave mob have had 3 years and come up with zilch.

To be fair, they have proposed the max fac solution that keeps the border open between Narnia and Archenland.

[Yorkie62]

So, please share some of them!



No, the issue is that those who pushed for us to leave have not proposed any viable solutions yet. There is nothing for anyone to choose between. Stop living in the fantasy world where everything is the fault of those who were dumped on to deliver something because those that wanted it were too scared or confused to stand up and be counted.



What the EU have made clear is that if the UK stays within the SM & CU, then there is no need for a border.
The point of a backstop is to give the UK leave group to come up with workable solutions that allow the UK to leave the SM & CU.
So far the UK leave mob have had 3 years and come up with zilch.

Either Barnier or Junker, can't remember which has already stated that there is a workable solution in the case of a no deal exit.

Every lorry that crosses a border carries with a manifest detailing what it is carrying and what the point of destination is. It has to. This manifest is generated at its point of departure electronically, it is held electronically. It is therefore not that difficult to implement cross border tariffs at the point of departure, arrival, or any point in between. This is done currently between the EU and third countries. How the hell do you think the EU trades with the rest of the world. The hard borders that the EU has with the rest of the world I including the border checks that are currently performed between the EU and the UK) is more about checking people that it is about checking goods and services. This isn't rocket science, but it suits to keep stating its impossible and if that is said enough times people will start to believe it, without questioning why, and without you having to put up any evidence to demonstrate why it is impossible.