[EU] Brexit negotiations at a standstill

[ranzino]

...

Yes, because it would just be the UK that would have to deal with that border wouldn't it. Who would pay for the border on Ireland's side?

Nope, it's bilateral. But guess who will get the blame...
Dunno how border protection is paid for on EU's outer borders. my guess: as it is in EU's interest, the fiscal burden is not on Poblacht na h'Eireann only.

[Rockyreg]

Nope, it's bilateral. But gues who will get the blame...
Dunno how border protection is paid for on EU's outer borders. my guess: as it is in EU's interest, the fiscal burden is not on Poblacht na h'Eireann only.

But what if the UK decided to implement a zero tariff regime on the entire world and put no border up?

I'd say it would be funded by the EU also, it would be pretty expensive though with 200+ crossing points.

[ranzino]

But what if the UK decided to implement a zero tariff regime on the entire world and put no border up?

I'd say it would be funded by the EU also, it would be pretty expensive though with 200+ crossing points.

Brexit was about border control, so what ? UK will have to man their side of border too to fend off all the nasty migrants crossing sides and stealing jobs in UK
Nobody says we would maintain 200+ points; UK would also object. it is in the best interest of UK to maintain an open border.

[Dizzeeyooo]

But what if the UK decided to implement a zero tariff regime on the entire world and put no border up

is the UK choosing to completely destroy UK agriculture and manufacturing really a realistic scenario?

[Rockyreg]

Brexit was about border control, so what ? UK will have to man their side of border too to fend off all the nasty migrants crossing sides and stealing jobs in UK
Nobody says we would maintain 200+ points; UK would also object. it is in the best interest of UK to maintain an open border.

UK wouldn't need to change anything as a non-UK citizen couldn't just waltz through on a flight from Northern Ireland to the rest of the UK, just as they cannot do that now.

Its in the best interests of everyone to maintain an open border.

[Deleted]

'ever closer union' has only dawned on the UK citizens since Maastrict which is when the Eurosceptic movement really started in the UK. Just look at the net contributions by a similar economy such as France compared to the UK and you will see it was also quite poisonous for the UK too. Blair gave away half our rebate on the premise that the single market in services would be progressed, how did that end up?

No he gave away half of it to get the EU expansion.

[Rockyreg]

is the UK choosing to completely destroy UK agriculture and manufacturing really a realistic scenario?

Probably not, and I certainly wouldn't be for it. But if the EU uses the GFA to try and force the UK into a deal it doesn't find acceptable who knows what they will do.

[ranzino]

Some things cannot be taken back. The EU now clearly knows that nothing Davis agrees on the table is in any way binding and if they want anything to hold, it has to pass through parliament.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...ys-verhofstadt

oh, EU waggles the finger already. May will be in Brussels tomorrow and for sure will be told to stick to agreements or GTFO

- - - Updated - - -

Probably not, and I certainly wouldn't be for it. But if the EU uses the GFA to try and force the UK into a deal it doesn't find acceptable who knows what they will do.

UK is adamant about GFA and wants NI threated the same as if merry old England would have been on the other side of the border in question.
To keep their side of promises UK will have to swallow a soft brexit, period. Or they change the stance and shift the actual "out of EU" border into the Irish Sea and tell DUP to shut up.

[Rockyreg]

No he gave away half of it to get the EU expansion.

Apologies it wasn't services although it was for some type of reform that never really happened, possibly changes to the CAP?

- - - Updated - - -

Some things cannot be taken back. The EU now clearly knows that nothing Davis agrees on the table is in any way binding and if they want anything to hold, it has to pass through parliament.

Who was it that first came up with the phrase 'nothing is agreed until everything is agreed'? Does one side saying this give the other side confidence in phased negotiations?

[Noradin]

I'm not misleading anybody, its there in your own quote from the article. The options on the table are either Norway (favoured) or a CETA like deal.

Again you are all missing my original point, which is how is either the Norway or Canada model consistent with having no border in Ireland.

The Norway model would allow for no border with just minor adjustments, the Canada model would require quite a bit extra (such as turning it de facto into the Norway model).

- - - Updated - - -

Yes, because it would just be the UK that would have to deal with that border wouldn't it. Who would pay for the border on Ireland's side?

It's Ireland's responsibility.

[Deleted]

Apologies it wasn't services although it was for some type of reform that never really happened, possibly changes to the CAP?

There was some CAP changes, (that i'm not sure got done or whatever) - But the eastern expansion did happen.

[Slant]

I'm not misleading anybody, its there in your own quote from the article. The options on the table are either Norway (favoured) or a CETA like deal.

Again you are all missing my original point, which is how is either the Norway or Canada model consistent with having no border in Ireland.

Yes, either EEA or CETA. Why would you ask if Canada got the same style conditions that Norway had if you didn't want to make the implication that those were similar? They're not. Not even remotely similar.

- - - Updated - - -

Excuse me?

Vetos aren't going to be a thing of the past very soon. The core principles and fundamental rules of the EU can still be vetoed.

[Mormolyce]

The Norway model would allow for no border with just minor adjustments, the Canada model would require quite a bit extra (such as turning it de facto into the Norway model).

Wouldn't a Norway model mean compromising heavily on the sovereignty argument (since access to the single market requires adopting all its rules), and the cost argument (since Norway pays almost as much as the UK does to the EU) so you get almost all the "down sides" of being in the EU but you have no say on EU laws?

Surely that wouldn't satisfy anyone.

[Dhrizzle]

Wouldn't a Norway model mean compromising heavily on the sovereignty argument (since access to the single market requires adopting all its rules), and the cost argument (since Norway pays almost as much as the UK does to the EU) so you get almost all the "down sides" of being in the EU but you have no say on EU laws?

Surely that wouldn't satisfy anyone.

Pretty much, we've reached the ridiculous point where the "best" option is one that leaves us only slightly worse off, with slightly less say in EU matters and almost everyone a little disappointed.

[Slant]

Wouldn't a Norway model mean compromising heavily on the sovereignty argument (since access to the single market requires adopting all its rules), and the cost argument (since Norway pays almost as much as the UK does to the EU) so you get almost all the "down sides" of being in the EU but you have no say on EU laws?

Surely that wouldn't satisfy anyone.

Yes, that's what we keep telling the Brexiteers for one and a half year now. They don't believe us.

[Graeham]

The entire situation has been a complete mess. It's a real shame - since both sides have valid concerns and the focus really should have revolved around compromising and discussing the problems that exist. The European Union has been changing over time and it was originally painted as being solely related to mutually beneficial trade based arrangements. The tipping point for a lot of people losing faith in the EU has been the somewhat overbearing and biased political stances pushed on other countries. The refugee crisis certainly did not help either.

No matter how it turns out it's going to leave a lot of people with a sour taste in their mouths. Sadly it's obvious from some of the replies within this very thread that some people really only care about seeing one side fall even though both bring valid concerns to the table. It's a little more baffling given that some of the posters involved aren't even intimately familiar with either European or British politics but it is what it is I suppose.

[Mormolyce]

It's kind of like the climate change debate - this is actually a complex technical issue that absolutely should not be partisan in any way. It should be something you recruit a panel of experts to make recommendations on, not stir up random people on the street, feed them propaganda and make them think it's something that it isn't.

[Elegiac]

It's kind of like the climate change debate - this is actually a complex technical issue that absolutely should not be partisan in any way. It should be something you recruit a panel of experts to make recommendations on, not stir up random people on the street, feed them propaganda and make them think it's something that it isn't.

If we're going with 'shoulds', the referendum never should have happened. Cameron took a stupid gamble to try and discredit the crazies in his camp and ended up shooting himself and the country in the foot.

[Mormolyce]

If we're going with 'shoulds', the referendum never should have happened. Cameron took a stupid gamble to try and discredit the crazies in his camp and ended up shooting himself and the country in the foot.

Yeah, he fucked the UK harder than a dead pig's mouth.

[Graeham]

One of the biggest problems is that politicians can make some very dubious decisions and never be held accountable for their actions. More often than not they can simply resign if things get too heated and gradually fade into obscurity. Most seem to be fairly well off, too - and some even go on to work in a different job that pays them a considerable amount of coin.

I think a lot of the concerns regarding Brexit are very valid and that there are some hard questions that needed to be asked, preferably before deciding to exit the European Union. There was a lot of misinformation flooding in from both sides of the argument - and that's still very true in the present day.