5 ms·

"UKGov claimed that this frictionless trade technology/mechanism exists and can be made to work, but in the months (or years) couldn't actually come up with a s

"UKGov claimed that this frictionless trade technology/mechanism exists and can be made to work, but in the months (or years) couldn't actually come up with a single bit of evidence that this is actually so." The Norway-Sweden border would be one example. Just like Ireland-Northern Ireland, they are not in a customs union but allow free movement of people.

Tomte 8y ago
You need to distinguish freedom of movement (people) and a customs agreement (goods). Sweden and Norway are both Schengen members, so they have explicitly agreed on freedom of movement for people. That does not say anything about goods. But I don't know why such an arrangement could not work with the UK (both the UK and Norway are members of the European Economic Area) – presumably because the UK wants to leave that as well, because they want to go it alone and not align their trade policies with the European partners?
- Silhouette 8y ago
  In the interests of clarity, there are really (at least) four distinct issues with the border crossing. The first is simply whether people have a right to physically cross the border. This is, broadly speaking, the Common Travel Area that was established on the island of Ireland long before the EU or any of its predecessors existed. The next is Freedom of Movement, which is one of the "Four Freedoms" that underpin the EU Single Market. This is also about people, but rather than physical movement, it relates to what they can legally do. Notably, it grants someone from one side of the border rights to live and work on the other. The third is customs. This is about moving goods across the border, whether tariffs are payable to do so, and the mechanisms for monitoring and enforcing any such tariffs. At present, with the UK and Ireland both in the EU and its Customs Union, there are no tariffs and so no checks or infrastructure are needed. The fourth is regulatory compliance. This is also about moving goods across the border, but it's about the non-tariff barriers, such as whether products for sale meet environmental or safety standards, or whether live animals or food products meet health requirements. These matters are typically regulated at the level of the EU's Single Market, so again, with the UK and Ireland both in the SM there are no discrepancies in standards and any accreditations for testing on one side are recognised by the other, meaning no need for additional verification at the point of crossing the border. Of course there are also other issues with cross-border trade; notably, the above doesn't cover anything to do with provision of services. But in terms of physical crossings, those are the main points, and they are quite distinct.
  - isostatic 8y ago
    Good summary. The first two are irrelevant in the case of Ireland (I can't see anybody imposing restrictions on Irish people living in Northern Ireland, although I don't think the GFA specifically allows it) It's the last two that are the problem - the customs is the immediate one (as regulations won't change on March 31st), the latter has potential to cause major problems in the future, unless the UK remains aligned with EU standards.
- Reason077 8y ago
  "Sweden and Norway are both Schengen members, so they have explicitly agreed on freedom of movement for people. That does not say anything about goods." Exactly. And this is the same situation for Ireland & Northern Ireland, post-Brexit. The UK and Ireland have a Common Travel Area which guarantees the free movement of people, just like the Schengen agreement. "they want to go it alone and not align their trade policies with the European partners?" The UK wants to negotiate free trade with the EU, but to not be a member of the customs union. The advantage of this is that it allows the UK to make its own trade agreements with other third countries. The main UK opposition party (Labour), however, does want the UK to remain a member of the customs union.
  - Tomte 8y ago
    It cannot possibly be in the future, because that would give the UK control over our borders. I know that you're trying to set up an argument where it's supposed to be the EU's fault if border posts appear, but that's misleading. The UK changes things, the UK is responsible.
    - Reason077 8y ago
      Ireland and the UK are not members of the Schengen agreement. They have their own Common Travel Area. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Travel_Area https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Travel_Area
  - theoh 8y ago
    Compare Switzerland: while it's not in the EEA, there are extensive agreements between Switzerland and the EU which ensure regulatory alignment on the issues that matter. There's no way to have Schengen-like free movement without either EEA membership or the Swiss "EEA lite" arrangement. You can't have customs checks at the border (avoiding customs union with EU) and simultaneously maintain the CTA regime. Edit: details here https://www.ft.com/content/2d30482c-da7e-11e7-a039-c64b1c09b482 https://www.ft.com/content/2d30482c-da7e-11e7-a039-c64b1c09b...
    - Reason077 8y ago
oblio 8y ago
Norway is in the EEA. Norway basically applies all EU laws without being able to vote on them. Fine by me, if the UK wants that. Oh, and by the way, Norway declared it doesn't want the UK in the EEA: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/dec/07/norwegian-mp-britain-eea-norway-eu-brexiters https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/dec/07/norweg...
isostatic 8y ago
Norway Sweden broder is not open for goods, same as Switzerland-EU border. That type of border would be a disaster in Ireland.
isostatic 8y ago
It's not Freedom of movement of people between Ireland and the UK is covered by the CTA. That won't change come March 31st. Freedom of goods, services, and capital however would. The Norway Sweden border does not allow freedom of movement of goods. That's a major problem in Ireland, as you can't inspect goods passing between the north and the rest like you can between Norway and Sweden. So why bother with a border at all? The WTO say you have to secure your border to be a member. Imagine the UK charging high tarrifs on imports of Japanese cars. That's fine, Japan charges tarrifs on UK microwaves (or whatever). So the UK simply moves its goods over the border to Ireland and sells them using the EU tarrifs. Japan gets pissed, and the WTO interceeds. A cheese factory in Newry buys milk from a farm in Castleblayney (who's cows roam both sides of the border) and a farm Middletown. It then sells its cheese to a pie factory in Dundalk and a wholesaler in Omagh. The former make cheese and onion pies (onions from Coleraine), and sells them to shops in Belfast and Dublin, the latter simply packages them up and ships them to supermarkets in Galway and Lisburn. That's a nightmare when there's a customs border between the north and south, even if it's a magical invisible one.

Tomte 8y ago

You need to distinguish freedom of movement (people) and a customs agreement (goods). Sweden and Norway are both Schengen members, so they have explicitly agreed on freedom of movement for people. That does not say anything about goods. But I don't know why such an arrangement could not work with the UK (both the UK and Norway are members of the European Economic Area) – presumably because the UK wants to leave that as well, because they want to go it alone and not align their trade policies with the European partners?

Silhouette 8y ago
In the interests of clarity, there are really (at least) four distinct issues with the border crossing. The first is simply whether people have a right to physically cross the border. This is, broadly speaking, the Common Travel Area that was established on the island of Ireland long before the EU or any of its predecessors existed. The next is Freedom of Movement, which is one of the "Four Freedoms" that underpin the EU Single Market. This is also about people, but rather than physical movement, it relates to what they can legally do. Notably, it grants someone from one side of the border rights to live and work on the other. The third is customs. This is about moving goods across the border, whether tariffs are payable to do so, and the mechanisms for monitoring and enforcing any such tariffs. At present, with the UK and Ireland both in the EU and its Customs Union, there are no tariffs and so no checks or infrastructure are needed. The fourth is regulatory compliance. This is also about moving goods across the border, but it's about the non-tariff barriers, such as whether products for sale meet environmental or safety standards, or whether live animals or food products meet health requirements. These matters are typically regulated at the level of the EU's Single Market, so again, with the UK and Ireland both in the SM there are no discrepancies in standards and any accreditations for testing on one side are recognised by the other, meaning no need for additional verification at the point of crossing the border. Of course there are also other issues with cross-border trade; notably, the above doesn't cover anything to do with provision of services. But in terms of physical crossings, those are the main points, and they are quite distinct.
- isostatic 8y ago
  Good summary. The first two are irrelevant in the case of Ireland (I can't see anybody imposing restrictions on Irish people living in Northern Ireland, although I don't think the GFA specifically allows it) It's the last two that are the problem - the customs is the immediate one (as regulations won't change on March 31st), the latter has potential to cause major problems in the future, unless the UK remains aligned with EU standards.
Reason077 8y ago
"Sweden and Norway are both Schengen members, so they have explicitly agreed on freedom of movement for people. That does not say anything about goods." Exactly. And this is the same situation for Ireland & Northern Ireland, post-Brexit. The UK and Ireland have a Common Travel Area which guarantees the free movement of people, just like the Schengen agreement. "they want to go it alone and not align their trade policies with the European partners?" The UK wants to negotiate free trade with the EU, but to not be a member of the customs union. The advantage of this is that it allows the UK to make its own trade agreements with other third countries. The main UK opposition party (Labour), however, does want the UK to remain a member of the customs union.
- Tomte 8y ago
  It cannot possibly be in the future, because that would give the UK control over our borders. I know that you're trying to set up an argument where it's supposed to be the EU's fault if border posts appear, but that's misleading. The UK changes things, the UK is responsible.
  - Reason077 8y ago
    Ireland and the UK are not members of the Schengen agreement. They have their own Common Travel Area. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Travel_Area https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Travel_Area
- theoh 8y ago
  Compare Switzerland: while it's not in the EEA, there are extensive agreements between Switzerland and the EU which ensure regulatory alignment on the issues that matter. There's no way to have Schengen-like free movement without either EEA membership or the Swiss "EEA lite" arrangement. You can't have customs checks at the border (avoiding customs union with EU) and simultaneously maintain the CTA regime. Edit: details here https://www.ft.com/content/2d30482c-da7e-11e7-a039-c64b1c09b482 https://www.ft.com/content/2d30482c-da7e-11e7-a039-c64b1c09b...
  - Reason077 8y ago

oblio 8y ago

Norway is in the EEA. Norway basically applies all EU laws without being able to vote on them. Fine by me, if the UK wants that. Oh, and by the way, Norway declared it doesn't want the UK in the EEA: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/dec/07/norwegian-mp-britain-eea-norway-eu-brexiters https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/dec/07/norweg...

isostatic 8y ago

Norway Sweden broder is not open for goods, same as Switzerland-EU border. That type of border would be a disaster in Ireland.

isostatic 8y ago

It's not Freedom of movement of people between Ireland and the UK is covered by the CTA. That won't change come March 31st. Freedom of goods, services, and capital however would. The Norway Sweden border does not allow freedom of movement of goods. That's a major problem in Ireland, as you can't inspect goods passing between the north and the rest like you can between Norway and Sweden. So why bother with a border at all? The WTO say you have to secure your border to be a member. Imagine the UK charging high tarrifs on imports of Japanese cars. That's fine, Japan charges tarrifs on UK microwaves (or whatever). So the UK simply moves its goods over the border to Ireland and sells them using the EU tarrifs. Japan gets pissed, and the WTO interceeds. A cheese factory in Newry buys milk from a farm in Castleblayney (who's cows roam both sides of the border) and a farm Middletown. It then sells its cheese to a pie factory in Dundalk and a wholesaler in Omagh. The former make cheese and onion pies (onions from Coleraine), and sells them to shops in Belfast and Dublin, the latter simply packages them up and ships them to supermarkets in Galway and Lisburn. That's a nightmare when there's a customs border between the north and south, even if it's a magical invisible one.