1. Things you need to know about the new ‘Conversations’ PM system:

    a) DO NOT REPLY TO THE NOTIFICATION EMAIL! I get them, not the intended recipient. I get a lot of them and I do not want them! It is just a notification, log into the site and reply from there.

    b) To delete old conversations use the ‘Leave conversation’ option. This is just delete by another name.
    Dismiss Notice

Brexit: give me a positive effect... XIII

Discussion in 'off topic' started by eternumviti, Jun 9, 2021.

  1. tonerei

    tonerei pfm Member

    One of the unworkable parts is the UK have not built any of the infrastructure.
    They haven't recruited staff or put any of arrangements in place. They have just ignored it.

    But that seems to be all they have to do for Brexiteers to get all emotional and cry out that it is unworkable.
    All sounds a bit dim to me.

    One would think somebody who wants a Labour government would want the Tories to be shown up for the deal they have signed up for and the Brexit they have chosen. It might help Labour to victory but he is having none of it. Every straw man possible is thrown up to defend them and what they have done.
    Nick_G, russel and TheDecameron like this.
  2. eternumviti

    eternumviti Bloviating Brexiter

    Yes, you're recycling once again the fact that Johnson signed the NIP. We know that. Together with its subsequent passage through Parliament and the EP, it does make it law, but it doesn't therefore follow that it's workable, which at the moment, it patently isn't. The reason for that is the manner in which the EU has chosen to apply it, which is apparently overzealous and is directly leading to difficulties in NI, and which breaks at least three of its own clauses, which are constitutional rather than necessarily economic. The first (Article 1/1) relates directly to the GFA, and states that the Protocol is 'without prejudice to the provisions of the 1998 Agreement in respect of the constitutional status of Northern Ireland and the principle of consent, which provides that any change in that status can only be made with the consent of a majority of its people.' The unfettered movement of goods between the nations of the Union is written into the Acts of Union of 1709 and 1800, and in fact forms a major element of those Acts.

    The second (Article 6/2) directly addresses the protection of the UK Internal Market, the relevant element of those Acts of Union, and states that 'Having regard to Northern Ireland's integral place in the United Kingdom's internal market, the Union and the United Kingdom shall use their best endeavours to facilitate the trade between Northern Ireland and other parts of the United Kingdom, in accordance with applicable legislation and taking into account their respective regulatory regimes as well as the implementation thereof. The Joint Committee shall keep the application of this paragraph under constant review and shall adopt appropriate recommendations with a view to avoiding controls at the ports and airports of Northern Ireland to the extent possible.'

    The third (16/1) relates to Safeguards, and states that 'if the application of this Protocol leads to serious economic, societal or environmental difficulties that are liable to persist, or to diversion of trade, the Union or the United Kingdom may unilaterally take appropriate safeguard measures...'. It is clear that 'diversion of trade' is already taking place, because UK supermarkets are already sourcing goods for their NI outlets in the EU, and Amazon is now serving NI from a depot in Dublin. It is also clear that there are 'societal' difficulties. It is this final article that the Commission President, von der Leyen, unilaterally invoked in January over the vaccine issue, when she suspended the protocol, thereby both setting precendent, and demonstrating clearly that the EU is not as interested in the NI matter as its virtuous grandstanding would suggest.

    The problem seems to lie in the definition of 'goods at risk', which the EU kept very loose in the NIP, and which the (strangely invisible?) Joint Commitee is required to oversee, as well as in the sphere of SPS checks.
  3. tonerei

    tonerei pfm Member

    No matter how many different ways you present reality it will bounce back as something else.:rolleyes:
    Last edited: Jun 11, 2021
    Graham B and russel like this.
  4. eternumviti

    eternumviti Bloviating Brexiter

    The NIP was designed not to meet the UK's red lines, but the EU's. The border issue was gamed and weaponised by the EC and the Irish government as a means of variously keeping the UK in the EU, keeping it in the EU's legal and technocratic sphere, and ultimately and as a last resort, its marketplace for goods. The issue has been made acutely worse by the EU's intransigent, spiteful and very deliberate refusal to recognise or grant equivalence of UK certifications, inspection regimes and rules, despite the fact that it does so with other countries with which it has FTAs, and even some, such as New Zealand, with which it doesn't, and despite the fact that the starting point is 50 years of precise alignment.

    As regards Johnson signing this NIP, remember that the Protocol was itself the result of a rewriting of the even worse and multiply rejected Backstop, and that it was negotiated against the background of May's having rolled over to each of an increasingly emboldened EU's demands from sequencing onwards, and when the then new PM did not have a majority and was under siege from remainer MPs, the judiciary and a partisan speaker in the HoC, all of whom were bent on undermining the government's negotiating position. It is this to which Allastair Heath was referring to when he wrote that the UK was 'at its weakest' in byline to his excellent article in the DT of this morning.
  5. TheDecameron

    TheDecameron Unicorns fart glitter.

    Expect a face saving ‘form of words’ from Biden and Johnson providing the necessary fig leaf for Johnson that the special relationship is alive and well as Airforce One departs what has now become a minor market and medium sized allie among others for America, one that’s creating more problems than solutions for them.
    russel and SteveS1 like this.
  6. Brian

    Brian Eating fat, staying slim

    If it kicks off in NI then it is unworkable.

    By the way, why the hell should I pick one?
  7. SteveS1

    SteveS1 I heard that, pardon?

    Did he mention the bit where the UK voted for weakness in the form of a reduced economy and less relevance?
  8. PsB

    PsB Citizen of Nowhere™

    No, the NIP was designed to meet the UK's ever shifting red lines (no CU for the UK as a whole, no backstop, no Norway+, etc.) and the EU's (integrity of the SM, ability to control what comes through its borders, etc.). Same as any other negotiation.

    As for the rest, why would the EU trust and agree to recognize UK certifications, rules etc. over, say the next 10 years, when it is patently clear that:
    1) BoJo's government can't be trusted to spontaneously implement an international agreement signed less than a year ago (see previous threats around the UK single market)
    2) one of the main reasons the UK government is putting the country through this misery is precisely because it wants to diverge from previously held EU standards.

    At this stage in the game, the EU would be mad to trust the British government.
    Nick_G, TheDecameron, Kirk and 2 others like this.
  9. eternumviti

    eternumviti Bloviating Brexiter

    Your reply is based on the premise that the UK Govt has somehow failed to implement the agreement before it was actually signed. The refusal to recognise UK rules, certificates etc was in the Trade and (non) Cooperation agreement, not somewhere floating around in the air 6 months later.

    It is also based on the premise that the UK is not within it rights to refuse to implement the agreement when in fact the agreement contains a clause that permits either side to do just that, as already tested in January by the EU.
  10. PsB

    PsB Citizen of Nowhere™

    No, it's not. It's based on the premise that the UK Government has form when it comes to threatening non-compliance. Key words above are "threat" and "trust". "Threat" as in ministers stating they will break the treaty they just signed. "Trust" as in, "why don't you just trust us".
  11. tonerei

    tonerei pfm Member

    @PsB reply is stating reality and the facts. EV you can filibuster to your hearts content on PFM but Bojo has his pants around his ankles and has both the US and EU telling him to get on with implementing what he agreed and what he looked for.

    Word over hear is even Poots head is accepting his faith and the fact that he will lose the support of the fringe loyalists. Farage has the comfort of playing to his audience ad nauseam as he is not in an electable position. NI industry wanted it implemented they never wanted this type of Brexit they wanted a customs union. Bojo and Frost can fart around but it is game over.
    Last edited: Jun 11, 2021
  12. Kirk

    Kirk pfm Member

    Way beyond that now:

    "After President Biden jokes that he and Prime Minister Boris Johnson have in common that they both married up, Johnson says, "I am not going to dissent on that one — or indeed on anything else..."
  13. russel

    russel ./_dazed_and_confused

    Vassalage max.
    Kirk likes this.
  14. eternumviti

    eternumviti Bloviating Brexiter

    The bottom line is that the EC sees the UK not as a partner, but as both apostate and competitor, and it used all of the powers available to it to first hobble the supine May government, and then to try to destroy the UK economy by blocking its exports into the EU, and by imposing its own regulatory regime on the UK, helping itself to the NI goods market en-route.

    This may be seen as all being fair in love and war, but it is incredibly stupid and short sighted. The UK is a European nation, an ally, and a vast market both for EU produced goods, and a country with a substantial comparative advantage in financial services which is unlikely to be replicable in the EU.

    The result is likely to be that the UK will realign to the growth markets beyond the EU, with concomitant regulatory adjustment and both import and export substitution. The financial services industry is very adept at reinventing itself. It may not be a bed of roses for most of rest of us, and it won't be of any advantage at all to the EU, a classic case of cutting off your snout to spite your face.
  15. eternumviti

    eternumviti Bloviating Brexiter

    The UK is not breaking a treaty they've just signed if they suspend all or part of it when they are simply justifiably and legally enacting a clause within that treaty, as the EU itself has already done, albeit without justification and probably illegally.

    The EU is already probably in breach of the Treaty in relation to at least two of its clauses, one of which relates directly to the GFA.
  16. Kirk

    Kirk pfm Member

  17. misterdog

    misterdog Not the canine kind

    So food is available.
    Medicine is more available than in the EU (vaccine).
    House prices have risen 10% (not collapsed).
    The £ is the strongest it has been in 3 years.

    Were we lied to ?

    Oh, the EU is flexing it's economic might by trying to halt sales of sausages to the 1.9 million inhabitants of NI. To show how their burEaUocratic principles are paramount.

    So no great changes as predicted by the remainers, as I thought life carries on.

  18. billo

    billo pfm Member

    Not for much longer, soon the sale of generic medicines made in the UK will be stopped, as signed and agreed to by this government.
  19. eternumviti

    eternumviti Bloviating Brexiter

    You sound positively jubilant.
  20. TheDecameron

    TheDecameron Unicorns fart glitter.

    The U.K. is
    The U.K. has been a net importer of medicines for many years. Ireland dwarfs it as a manufacturing exporter of drugs. Iif you’re claiming drugs are more available because we import them compared with the the EU, that’s also nonsense. The Covid vaccine story was a lucky strike, so your first sentence is either based on ignorance or is UKIP style wilfully misleading.

Share This Page


  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice