They've already said that there currently are no WTO rules specifically for it and that it would need to be agreed upon by the UK and EU markets themselves.What are the WTO’s rules on borders from two different markets? I’m pretty sure they will insist the UK does something, given we are the ones leaving and applying to the WTO??
What are the WTO’s rules on borders from two different markets? I’m pretty sure they will insist the UK does something, given we are the ones leaving and applying to the WTO??
Not really. It's over to us.No.10 has just said that we will never erect a hard border or implement checks but unless the WA is renegotiated then we will leave with no deal.
Over to the EU because Dublin now has to decide if they will erect a hard border to satisfy Brussels?
You're supposed to pretend those WTO rules don't exist and it's only the EU and Dublin imposing borders.What are the WTO’s rules on borders from two different markets? I’m pretty sure they will insist the UK does something, given we are the ones leaving and applying to the WTO??
This is a meaningless argument as we agree but you said referendum, we definitely won’t ever have another referendum on anything, thankfully.
You will get the chance to vote for the BP in future but I agree with you that they won’t get a majority so yes we won’t leave again if we don’t this time.
I am puzzled that Tusk sees no prospect of a backstop solution at all while insisting it is just insurance in the unlikely event one can't be found.
Because there are no WTO rules on enforcing borders.You're supposed to pretend those WTO rules don't exist and it's only the EU and Dublin imposing borders.
No.10 has just said that we will never erect a hard border or implement checks but unless the WA is renegotiated then we will leave with no deal.
Over to the EU because Dublin now has to decide if they will erect a hard border to satisfy Brussels?
No, they've said they won't if we renege on the GFA. We won't renege on the GFA. Balls back in Brussels court (whom they have told the exact same thing)Ok, bankruptcy for the country it is then.
The US won’t trade with us now you know? Congress have confirmed it.
But there are WTO rules on free trade which happens over an open border.Because there are no WTO rules on enforcing borders.
But they are. It seems to be policy.Which means a hard border. Which the U.K. will have to maintain because (drum roll) it’s a U.K. border. And as for ‘not implementing checks’ give over. On the other hand we have the Home Sec salivating at the chance to close our borders on 31st Oct and rolling out tough new (unspecified) criminal checks and making sure no one sneaks or smuggles anything in and on the other we have a policy of ‘after you Claude’ on our only land border with the EU? Come on. No one is buying that.
But there are WTO rules on free trade which happens over an open border.
And the award for stating the bleeding obvious goes to....
Or we accept FoM (something May herself wouldn't) between the UK and EU by retaining a new FTA that means we accept the Four Freedoms, as have Canada and Japan, without being full members. We've already accepted most of the EU's terms by beoing a member for the last 40+ years, it's not like we're trying to sort things out beginning from the position as an outsider like Japan or Canada, are we.
You can cease with the emotive language.
No, they've said they won't if we renege on the GFA. We won't renege on the GFA. Balls back in Brussels court (whom they have told the exact same thing)
Which means a hard border. Which the U.K. will have to maintain because (drum roll) it’s a U.K. border. And as for ‘not implementing checks’ give over. On the other hand we have the Home Sec salivating at the chance to close our borders on 31st Oct and rolling out tough new (unspecified) criminal checks and making sure no one sneaks or smuggles anything in and on the other we have a policy of ‘after you Claude’ on our only land border with the EU? Come on. No one is buying that.
As would I, but May didn't want it.If you offered me that, I’d snap your hand off.
The trouble is the ERG and others won’t accept that. Immigration is too large an issue for too many and the Tories don’t want to disappoint their MP’s or right wing voters.
It’s not emotive, it’s the truth. Brexit is a terrible idea, even the above is worse than what we currently have.
EU desperately wants a trade deal with the US. US tells them "don't fuck with the GFA with the UK or the deal(s) are off".Which both we and Dublin/EU will have to face.
Of course there is always the possibility of a late deal.........
Why are you making it out it was just May. It was the Conservative Party that forced her hand, more specifically the ERG.As would I, but May didn't want it.
Who cares about the ERG, the Tories, May, Parliament. This is about what the infrastructure of the people and businesses of the UK wants, and we want a deal, but our "Parliamentarians" are not listening to us or what we want, because they're too busy playing party politics or obsessing over "powah".
Brexit is not a terrible idea, because you just said "If you offered me that, i'd snap your hand off" That IS a 'brexit', one of many solutions that have been overlooked by May. There was my EFTA preferred option, the ideal "soft brexit" that solved all these raised issues; ignored.
A no deal brexit is a terrible idea, granted, but as has been pointed out, few are or were ever in favour of it and May's WA was supported only by herself and her lackies. Brexit is not worse than we currently have; having an FTA in Europe but being free to create more FTA's with other nations on other continents is "bad"? Remember that the EU only entered into trade deals that IT chose. Surely TTIP should be an example of what happens when you solely allow the EU to "negotiate" on our behalf.