Brexit - or Article 50: the Phoenix!

Status
Not open for further replies.
drdel said:
I think its to be read as two examples.
Click to expand...
But Estonia has a hard border with Russia with checks and soldiers etc and Norway is part of European Economic Area, so totally different scenario to what would be if the UK exited without a deal?

Where can I learn more about this sensor solution?
 
Oops - took opportunity to watch an interview this morning of Johnson for the Sun - in which he stated that the talk of the border control centres were 'stuff that went in previously' and that he hasn't yet presented our final proposed solution. Though he does start to talk at one point as if discussions on the proposal have been underway before quickly adding about future discussions on our proposal once submitted, and I'll not read too much into that or pretend it was a slippo-tongue.

And so we shall see. An electronic and process-based solution that is in place and used for border control elsewhere - or a solution that has to include border trade management offices.

One we know the details of the solution we can make a judgement on any decision the EU make on it. And if ur solution seems reasonable and workable, given the constraints of the GFA and the Leave promise of frictionless trade, then if the EU reject it I will accept that they really don't want UK to leave (and we know of course that they don't) and that they will do whatever they can to keep us in - even if that 'whatever' is unreasonable.
 
Last edited:
Lord Tyrion said:
Hopefully not wasting my typing fingers here. As I read it currently the proposal is:

Goods into and out of the EU generally will be split into exempt and non exempt goods. Non exempt are likely to be alcohol, cigarettes, oil, as examples. There will be others of course. The exempt items will declare before setting off from the factory, let's say in Cork, and will drive straight through to, say, Belfast without being stopped. There may be some form of tracker on the vehicle or device that triggers when it crosses the border, similar to pre-pay discs that you can use to go through the Tyne Tunnel, Mersey Tunnel, and I would guess Dartford Crossing. The bulk of items crossing back and forth will be classed as exempt and there will be no checks other than random ones in either the factory of origin or the destination. No physical border checks.

For exempt items it becomes more sensitive so the proposal is for there to be no actual checks on the border, too problematic in Ireland sad to say. They are talking about specific clearance centres away from the actual border. No passport checks, no barriers to be lifted and put down, but centres that drivers will go to and their vehicles checked there. As I mentioned in a previous post, if you drive through the Tyne Tunnel lorries are pulled over randomly and are checked to make sure the contents and paperwork match and are safe to go through. This will be a similar set up. No physical border but buildings, warehouses that drivers will go to well inside N. Ireland for checks.

If I am reading it incorrectly I am sure someone will correct me. It seems a pretty reasonable proposal. It just needs to be agreed in principle for the whole deal to go through. They then have the transition period in which to build the centres, put this in place.
Click to expand...

If that is what s proposed, how are border trade management centres situated away from the border not still border control - and it is border control that is the issue as I understand it; and how can they not impede flow of trade across the border - thereby not delivering the frictionless trade that was promised and assured.

The very existence of border trade control centres - no matter where they are situated - are manifestations of a divided Ireland, and no matter what you or I might think about that there are some on the island of Ireland who will view these buildings as unacceptable and legitimate targets. Further - will these centres operate 24x365? If not then queues?

But I will wait to hear from the government.
 
SwingsitlikeHogan said:
If that is what s proposed, how are border trade management centres situated away from the border not still border control - and it is border control that is the issue as I understand it; and how can they not impede flow of trade across the border - thereby not delivering the frictionless trade that was promised and assured.

The very existence of border trade control centres - no matter where they are situated - are manifestations of a divided Ireland, and no matter what you or I might think about that there are some on the island of Ireland who will view these buildings as unacceptable and legitimate targets. Further - will these centres operate 24x365? If not then queues?

But I will wait to hear from the government.
Click to expand...
SwingsitlikeHogan said:
If that is what s proposed, how are border trade management centres situated away from the border not still border control - and it is border control that is the issue as I understand it; and how can they not impede flow of trade across the border - thereby not delivering the frictionless trade that was promised and assured.

The very existence of border trade control centres - no matter where they are situated - are manifestations of a divided Ireland, and no matter what you or I might think about that there are some on the island of Ireland who will view these buildings as unacceptable and legitimate targets. Further - will these centres operate 24x365? If not then queues?

But I will wait to hear from the government.
Click to expand...

This type of 'inland' infrastructure has been around for donkeys' years - bonded warehouses (Whisky, tobacco etc), FreePorts...
 
SwingsitlikeHogan said:
If that is what s proposed, how are border trade management centres situated away from the border not still border control - and it is border control that is the issue as I understand it; and how can they not impede flow of trade across the border - thereby not delivering the frictionless trade that was promised and assured.

The very existence of border trade control centres - no matter where they are situated - are manifestations of a divided Ireland, and no matter what you or I might think about that there are some on the island of Ireland who will view these buildings as unacceptable and legitimate targets. Further - will these centres operate 24x365? If not then queues?

But I will wait to hear from the government.
Click to expand...
For starters Ireland is divided already, north and south. If it wasn't we would not be having this whole issue.

The sensitivity is about being on the actual border, being a barrier. These are not borders or barriers, they are as drdel has perfectly described them. The majority of goods will not go into these centres, they will flow normally. People will flow normally. People will not be stopped going about their day to day business, it is commerical freight companies only that will be affected and most are used to doing this type of thing.

What hours will they be open? No idea, it depends on how much trade will be non exempt, how much trade is going through. I suspect enough money will be thrown at this that lorries will not be backed up, not here of all places.
 
SwingsitlikeHogan said:
If that is what s proposed, how are border trade management centres situated away from the border not still border control - and it is border control that is the issue as I understand it; and how can they not impede flow of trade across the border - thereby not delivering the frictionless trade that was promised and assured.

The very existence of border trade control centres - no matter where they are situated - are manifestations of a divided Ireland, and no matter what you or I might think about that there are some on the island of Ireland who will view these buildings as unacceptable and legitimate targets. Further - will these centres operate 24x365? If not then queues?

But I will wait to hear from the government.
Click to expand...
Do You have a direct line with Boris?

From som elf your quotes I gained that impression or perhaps the remain side although I have not yet worked out whether you want to stay or remain!!
 
Comedy hour

Diane Abbott will do #PMQs tomorrow, Labour has announced. So not Thornberry, but not potential leadership successor Becky Long-Bailey either...
 
the border between the USA and Canada is about 5000 miles (Inc Alaska) - it seems to work !!

IMO the EU are simply digging in more out of the stubborn dogma of 'winning' the argument than any logic that benefits the r27 and UK, while also using juvenile 'leaks' to deflect blame and get the upper hand. How can anyone have sensitive discussions with people who continually run off at the mouth?

"Loose lips, sink ships" WW2
 
Last edited:
drdel said:
the border between the USA and Canada is about 5000 miles (Inc Alaska) - it seems to work !!

IMO the EU are simply digging in more out of the stubborn dogma of 'winning' the argument than any logic that benefits the r27 and UK, while also using juvenile 'leaks' to deflect blame and get the upper hand. How can anyone have sensitive discussions with people who continually run off at the mouth?

"Loose lips, sink ships" WW2
Click to expand...
This is correct!
Plus the opposition changing the law ( Benn act) after three years of getting nowhere.
This weakens our negotiations as you must be able to say no and walk away from a bad deal.
 
drdel said:
This type of 'inland' infrastructure has been around for donkeys' years - bonded warehouses (Whisky, tobacco etc), FreePorts...
Click to expand...

In which case I await Johnson’s plan to roll that out for the EU/NI border. If it will work Johnson will suggest something like it. And no need for physical infrastructure which would be great.
 
clubchamp98 said:
This is correct!
Plus the opposition changing the law ( Benn act) after three years of getting nowhere.
This weakens our negotiations as you must be able to say no and walk away from a bad deal.
Click to expand...

The Benn Act is a new law - it does not change an existing law as far as I am aware. The new law was not an opposition law - it was a law made by parliament.
 
SwingsitlikeHogan said:
The Supreme Court did not change the law.

The Supreme Court interpreted and ruled on the basis of the existing law, in the context of the Johnson Prorogation - of which there had not been a precedent of anything similar - indeed I am not aware that any previous prorogation had been subject of judicial review. That being the case it is not known whether judicial review of a previous prorogation might have had the same outcome as this one. It might have - it might not have. We don’t and can never know.
Click to expand...

He didn't mention the Supreme Court he mentioned the Benn Act which effectively took No Deal off the table and handed the initiative back to the EU.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Tashyboy
Party holes at golf comps.
2
Replies
34
Views
1K
Pin-seeker
Pin-seeker
Don Barzini
Christmas 2025
14 15 16
Replies
319
Views
9K
kp17
kp17
Lucifer MorningStar
Best clubs of all time (Probably)
2 3
Replies
41
Views
2K
srixon 1
srixon 1
B
Ping 7 wood head shortage.
2
Replies
20
Views
2K
KenL
KenL
VVega
What age is your Seniors?
2
Replies
21
Views
1K
Arthur Wedge
Arthur Wedge
Top