Article 50/Brexit Negotiations

[cibaman]

Has anyone yet come up with a workable solution for Ireland? One that works for both trade between NI and ROI and also NI and GB? One that would be acceptable to both sides of the political divide?

 

[cibaman]

According to Tom Newton Dunn on Sky paper review tonight there is a meeting of the Brexit cabinet sub committee tomorrow when the gloves will be off.
Apparently spreadsheet Phil is going to press for membership of the customs union ( which means foxy Liam is out of a job).
May is reportedly out of it at the moment on Brexit and is just a figurehead.
Three months gone of the allotted 18 months ( two years less six months for the EU 27 to ratify the deal) and we still haven't even got the basics of a plan agreed.
YCNMIU Jeff.

Its the two year timetable where the madness lies. We've had 40 years of economic integration with Europe and now we're trying to replace it within two years.

I could perhaps live with a "hard Brexit", providing it were phased in over a minimum of 7 years. Time to sort out the trading and cutoms issues. Time to adapt. The thought of what might happen if we stick to the current timetable horrifies me.

For me, one of the most valid arguments raised by Leave during the referendum campaign was over how the EU might develop. "Ever increasing union", further enlargement, an EU army, the potential for meltdown in the Eurozone etc did seem to me to be valid concerns. If we legally leave the EU in March 2019 we wouldn't become immunised from those developments because they would still affect the UK, but we would have massively distanced ourselves from them. Massively reduced our risk. Even if nothing else changed on day one.

A legally binding transition plan whereby we gradually "take control" over immigration, gradually extricate ourselves from the single market is essential. If the UK and EU could agree that, I think the debate over hard v soft brexit would become much less divisive.

 

[vonkeynotvenky]

A legally binding transition plan whereby we gradually "take control" over immigration, gradually extricate ourselves from the single market is essential. If the UK and EU could agree that, I think the debate over hard v soft brexit would become much less divisive.

I would definitely agree with that,

 

[CitizenTID]

People with an ounce of compassion?

That is out of the question. Opening the doors to millions of people coming from a war zone (many jumping on the bandwagon from perfectly stable places) is not a sustainable solution - there are always world conflicts, commonly in Africa/Middle East. Permanent residency is not a solution to an issue of requiring temporary safety. I've said on here before the UN need to back a proper, long-term solution for these temporary matters. If large numbers of people from poorer countries constantly move to the richer countries, it will eventually cause serious problems for that country and collapse infrastructure to support that many people - turning a well performing country into a shithole those immigrants wouldn't chose to live in.

Besides all that - legally speaking (as long as they haven't agreed prior), there is zero right for people to demand a country they are not from or have citizenship in to take in any immigrants. Those are matters of sovereignty to decide what's best for their own people, unlike international humane laws against chemical weapons and the like that require external pressures to ensure basic human rights.

I'm not saying don't help refugees, I'm saying do it sensibly in everyone's interests. It's in the interests of those refugees to be helped to live in their own country and build that country into a good place to live. There are other complex issues then though such as exterior countries meddling for their own gains without conscience for the people there - these types of countries need to be held to account.

 

[BobKowalski]

Its the two year timetable where the madness lies. We've had 40 years of economic integration with Europe and now we're trying to replace it within two years.

I could perhaps live with a "hard Brexit", providing it were phased in over a minimum of 7 years. Time to sort out the trading and cutoms issues. Time to adapt. The thought of what might happen if we stick to the current timetable horrifies me.

For me, one of the most valid arguments raised by Leave during the referendum campaign was over how the EU might develop. "Ever increasing union", further enlargement, an EU army, the potential for meltdown in the Eurozone etc did seem to me to be valid concerns. If we legally leave the EU in March 2019 we wouldn't become immunised from those developments because they would still affect the UK, but we would have massively distanced ourselves from them. Massively reduced our risk. Even if nothing else changed on day one.

A legally binding transition plan whereby we gradually "take control" over immigration, gradually extricate ourselves from the single market is essential. If the UK and EU could agree that, I think the debate over hard v soft brexit would become much less divisive.

I never understand how quitting the EU distances ourselves from the 'much anticipated yet never quite arrives' Eurozone collapse. I mean we are not even in the Eurozone so nothing changes there whether we are in or out of the EU and if it did collapse then we are fucked anyway given the biggest trading bloc 20 miles away just went tits. And if the world's largest trading bloc goes tits I suggest it is going to have world wide ramifications.

Also given we make a stonking wedge out of Eurozone trading wouldn't it be prudent to work with it and ensure it doesn't go tits?

 

[The Light Was Yellow Sir]

Think we should cancel Brexit tomorrow. I'm off to Spain on Saturday and I want a lot more Euros for my quids than are currently on offer!

 

[Vic]

Euro heading for parity with the pound. Someone will say it's good for exports.

 

[CitizenTID]

Has anyone yet come up with a workable solution for Ireland? One that works for both trade between NI and ROI and also NI and GB? One that would be acceptable to both sides of the political divide?

I only see it working as effectively keeping NI within the single market with freedom of movement. There'd have to be harder checks between the island of Ireland and Britain.

 

[Gareth Barry Conlon]

I only see it working as effectively keeping NI within the single market with freedom of movement. There'd have to be harder checks between the island of Ireland and Britain.

The nationalists would love that wouldn't they? There is no solution other than stay in the EU.

 

[cibaman]

I only see it working as effectively keeping NI within the single market with freedom of movement. There'd have to be harder checks between the island of Ireland and Britain.

Aren't the DUP opposed to that? It might solve the NI-ROI issue but creates similar problems between NI and GB. Wouldn't it mean tariffs on NI "exports" to GB, border checks on NI citizens? And, of course, the DUP see it as a first step to unification.