Blow me for €4 billion

[Bean]

The UK may want the border to remain open (meaning invisible I guess - assuming hte border won't be closed!) but is not prepared to make the compromises required to keep the border open within the framework of long-standing EU principles. If the UK wants to stay in the customs union, then the border can stay as is. If the UK as a whole doesn't want to stay in the customs union, then NI could stay within and the border can stay as it is.

But the UK doesn't want these things, so the onus really is on the UK to provide a solution for an invisible borde. Or realistically, to accept that such a thing is impossible and then work constructively to manage the physical infrastructure and checks required at the 275 land border crossings.

But as you've previously described the suggestion of NI within the CU as 'Unacceptable' - do you believe the EU already know this or going to have to be brought up to speed?

If they know, shouldn't they at least try and provide a credible alternative for a 'strong Europe' and because the EU apparently said the CTA and GFA have to be respected?

[northernladyuk]

I sincerely hope the UK Brexit negotiators want the same thing, but as yet they aren’t saying so.

As your esteemed colleague puts it, the UK doesn’t want to reveal its hand.

The UK government puts itself forward as representing the will of the people, as expressed in the referendum, in negotiations - controlling immigration which therefore requires withdrawal from EEA and similar arrangements. Fair enough. But the elephant in the room is that the will of the people, as expressed in the referendum, is not to give a damn NI or the border - the UK electorate as a whole don't care. Fair enough, I guess.

The border issue is not solvable without physical infrastructure and checks, and that does not contravene the will of the people. If it hadn't been for the election, it could have been safely ignored by the UK, after a few of the right noises were made. But with the DUP having a bit of power, it's all a bit awkward, and the DUP are considerably more populist and pragmatic than the 'Ulster says No' bible bashing image that is portrayed would suggest.

The obvious solution is of course the EEA or a similar arrangement, but the Tories don't seem to be there yet.

[WTFH]

Blow me for €4 billion

Can lead you to water, but can't make you drink;

https://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=e...ive&gws_rd=ssl


Edit: Thanks WTFH, I had no idea I was esteemed, in your opinion

Can lead a dunce to knowledge but can’t make you think.

And that proposal paper goes 100% against your earlier post which said “no customs union”

You’re tying yourself in knots.

For the Irish border issue to go away, the UK will have to enter into some kind of customs union, even if it is only with Ireland. That union may be along the lines as described in the proposal paper, which said small and medium sized businesses would be exempt, but it still requires a customs union, even though you have done an Ian Paisley on it and said “NO”, “NEVER, NEVER NEVER”.

Take your pick - no customs union, or some form of (limited) customs union?

[northernladyuk]

But as you've previously described the suggestion of NI within the CU as 'Unacceptable' - do you believe the EU already know this or going to have to be brought up to speed?

If they know, shouldn't they at least try and provide a credible alternative for a 'strong Europe' and because the EU apparently said the CTA and GFA have to be respected?

Why are you bringing up CTA. That is about movement of people. It is movement of goods which is the problem.

We currently have a completely workable solution. If the border is to be unchanged then NI must remain within the customs union, with or without GB. I am sure the EU knows that a special status for NI is unacceptable, but it is presenting one of three logical options:

1. Invisible borders cease and infrastructure and checks are required on 275 land borders.
2. NI remains within the CU with a special status and has a sea border with GB.
3. UK remains within the CU.

There really is no other way. So it is for the UK to decide on whether 2 or 3 are more palatable than 1 (despite currently seen as unacceptable). If they are not (as I suspect is the case) then how 1 can be implemented needs to be proposed.

[northernladyuk]

Can lead a dunce to knowledge but can’t make you think.

And that proposal paper goes 100% against your earlier post which said “no customs union”

You’re tying yourself in knots.

For the Irish border issue to go away, the UK will have to enter into some kind of customs union, even if it is only with Ireland. That union may be along the lines as described in the proposal paper, which said small and medium sized businesses would be exempt, but it still requires a customs union, even though you have done an Ian Paisley on it and said “NO”, “NEVER, NEVER NEVER”.

Take your pick - no customs union, or some form of (limited) customs union?

The UK cannot enter a customs union with Ireland while Ireland is within the EU, without the UK entering a customs union with the EU.

[Bean]

Can lead a dunce to knowledge but can’t make you think.

And that proposal paper goes 100% against your earlier post which said “no customs union”

You’re tying yourself in knots.

For the Irish border issue to go away, the UK will have to enter into some kind of customs union, even if it is only with Ireland. That union may be along the lines as described in the proposal paper, which said small and medium sized businesses would be exempt, but it still requires a customs union, even though you have done an Ian Paisley on it and said “NO”, “NEVER, NEVER NEVER”.

Take your pick - no customs union, or some form of (limited) customs union?

Not agreeing with you is not the same as not thinking. HTH

I'm not negotiating, however let's try and see if we can lead you to water again;
https://www.theguardian.com/politics...in-brexit-plan

"In a separate paper published on Tuesday, the government moots two proposals: either a “streamlined” border managed by the UK, or a customs partnership in which the UK so closely mirrors the EU’s approach that no border at all would be necessary.

It acknowledges that the second option would require “facilitations reflecting the unique circumstances of Northern Ireland” – such as “new trusted trader arrangements” for large firms, which business groups are likely to fear could impose new administrative burdens."

Do you see the word 'union' in the above, or in fact any article with any member of negotiating team etc saying they want a union or to stay in the union? A unique partnership (note, not staying in current union) yes, but that's not the same thing is it? You know the UK can't be in the current CU AND make it's own trade deals, ergo we won't be in the current CU

Some kind of agreement, that enables a streamlined border would be great, let's see if the EU is willing - because the UK are willing and eager, as are NI & RoI (I believe)

[Bean]

Why are you bringing up CTA. That is about movement of people. It is movement of goods which is the problem.

so you believe if there are to be a ceasing of invisible borders, movement of people will be unaffected? I don't, which is why everyone is against your option #1 below isn't it?

We currently have a completely workable solution. If the border is to be unchanged then NI must remain within the customs union, with or without GB. I am sure the EU knows that a special status for NI is unacceptable, but it is presenting one of three logical options:

1. Invisible borders cease and infrastructure and checks are required on 275 land borders.

nobody wants this AFAIK

2. NI remains within the CU with a special status and has a sea border with GB.

I think you've already stated why this is v.unlikely

3. UK remains within the CU.

couldn't make it's own trade deals so won't/can't happen

There really is no other way. So it is for the UK to decide on whether 2 or 3 are more palatable than 1 (despite currently seen as unacceptable). If they are not (as I suspect is the case) then how 1 can be implemented needs to be proposed.

Or, the UK/EU will have to propose a completely novel approach, due to the unique circumstances and precedent of both Brexit and NI

[northernladyuk]

Not agreeing with you is not the same as not thinking. HTH

I'm not negotiating, however let's try and see if we can lead you to water again;
https://www.theguardian.com/politics...in-brexit-plan

"In a separate paper published on Tuesday, the government moots two proposals: either a “streamlined” border managed by the UK, or a customs partnership in which the UK so closely mirrors the EU’s approach that no border at all would be necessary.

It acknowledges that the second option would require “facilitations reflecting the unique circumstances of Northern Ireland” – such as “new trusted trader arrangements” for large firms, which business groups are likely to fear could impose new administrative burdens."

Do you see the word 'union' in the above, or in fact any article with any member of negotiating team etc saying they want a union or to stay in the union? A unique partnership (note, not staying in current union) yes, but that's not the same thing is it? You know the UK can't be in the current CU AND make it's own trade deals, ergo we won't be in the current CU

Some kind of agreement, that enables a streamlined border would be great, let's see if the EU is willing - because the UK are willing and eager, as are NI & RoI (I believe)

There are twice as many land border crossing points between RoI and NI as there are along the entire eastern boundary of the EU. There are twice as many land border crossing points as there are between the USA and Canada. There are six times as many as there are between Norway and Sweden.

And the UK is looking to leave the customs union and enter into external trading deals that may allow into the UK items that do not meet UK standards for goods. Help us out here. How might that work out?

[Bean]

There are twice as many land border crossing points between RoI and NI as there are along the entire eastern boundary of the EU. There are twice as many land border crossing points as there are between the USA and Canada. There are six times as many as there are between Norway and Sweden.

And the UK is looking to leave the customs union and enter into external trading deals that may allow into the UK items that do not meet UK standards for goods. Help us out here. How might that work out?

I have no access to any information other than the public information, of which you are also able to access.

The government & EU are the people that need to think of and propose this, for the negotiating teams to then finalise.

Also, couldn't the UK have minimum standards as part of our own deals, therefore bypassing your second paragraph - just for example, off the top of my head.

Just because you, WTFH and/or others can't or won't think of alternatives doesn't preclude others from doing so does it?

[WTFH]

"In a separate paper published on Tuesday, the government moots two proposals: either a “streamlined” border managed by the UK, or a customs partnership in which the UK so closely mirrors the EU’s approach that no border at all would be necessary.


Do you see the word 'union' in the above, or in fact any article with any member of negotiating team etc saying they want a union or to stay in the union? A unique partnership (note, not staying in current union) yes, but that's not the same thing is it? You know the UK can't be in the current CU AND make it's own trade deals, ergo we won't be in the current CU

Some kind of agreement, that enables a streamlined border would be great, let's see if the EU is willing - because the UK are willing and eager, as are NI & RoI (I believe)

Ah, so nothing like a union at all, completely the opposite of a union, because if it was a union, then the Brexit camp would be 100% against it. No, not a union, a “partnership”, a bit like a husband and wife, partners., but not like a husband and wife who enter into the union of marriage, because that’s a union.

Both sides would be united in the “partnership” in an effort to maintain united cooperation, united business opportunities, united trade flows, united customs deals, but agreed at different times, just in case anyone thought that the agreement was made in union.

In other words, someone is playing with semantics to try to get themselves out of the hole.
I wonder what the Democratic Partnership Party make of all this.