4 ms·

Are you from the UK? The point is that between the UK and Ireland there is a CTA, common travel agreement. This means frictionless border crossing between the R

Are you from the UK? The point is that between the UK and Ireland there is a CTA, common travel agreement. This means frictionless border crossing between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland. This was straightforward when both were EU members as the border didn't need to be policed for transfer of goods. If the UK leaves the EU then goods from the UK cannot just be moved into the Republic of Ireland if there is no join customs agreement. So now you have to introduce a hard border with the RoI which goes against the Good Friday Agreement. If you don't understand the relevance of the GFA then you should read up further on or and the Troubles that preceded it.

growlist 8y ago
The UK doesn't have to put anything up. If the EU/Ireland choose to, that's kind of their problem.
- Silhouette 8y ago
  The UK doesn't have to put anything up. While that is technically true, it is practically false. If the UK reverts to trading on WTO terms, at least initially, the Most Favoured Nation principle essentially says that we have to trade with all other nations on an equal basis unless we make a comprehensive trade deal with someone. So if we let down the barriers and remove all restrictions at the Irish border, we are basically required to let down the equivalent barriers trading with anyone else at any border. That is not a sustainable policy. In practice, if we have a hard Brexit with no big deal agreed at the end of March, I would expect both the UK and the EU/EU27 to make unilateral arrangements to protect their own people and businesses in the immediate aftermath and mitigate the likely negative effects as much as possible until better arrangements can be made. This is likely to include both the UK and Ireland declining to build new border infrastructure and turning a blind eye to any border crossings that would technically become illegal. But the EU would put great pressure on Ireland to address that issue quickly since any Irish border is also an EU border, and both the UK and Ireland would be subject to complaints at WTO level about the favourable treatment, which would take a considerable time to resolve but would inevitably result in some form of enforcement action if the issue was not addressed (which it surely would be to avoid that outcome, but the UK and Ireland would have bought themselves significant extra time by bending/breaking the rules until that point).
- celticninja 8y ago
  Of course it doesn't, but then free movement of people cannot be stopped.
Silhouette 8y ago
The point is that between the UK and Ireland there is a CTA, common travel agreement. Yes there is, and it has existed since long before the EU or its predecessors existed. This means frictionless border crossing between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland. No, it means that citizens from either side are allowed to cross the border by default. Production of some basic ID documents may still be required. Checks may still be (and sometimes are) carried out. And the whole thing is based on essentially a long-standing gentleman's agreement and explicitly does not create binding legal obligations. In short, the CTA does not require a completely frictionless border and never has. Indeed, that could not possibly be its effect, because its provisions only cover British and Irish citizens. If the UK leaves the EU then goods from the UK cannot just be moved into the Republic of Ireland if there is no join customs agreement. It's a lot more complicated than that, but yes, the existing provisions for moving goods across the border are governed by EU mechanisms, including the Customs Union and Single Market. So now you have to introduce a hard border with the RoI which goes against the Good Friday Agreement. And at this point I ask you much the same question that I have asked others in this discussion: What specifically constitutes the "hard border" that is required, and in what specific way(s) do any associated processes or infrastructure contradict the GFA? If you don't understand the relevance of the GFA then you should read up further on or and the Troubles that preceded it. Please don't be patronising. It is both rude and unconstructive. The GFA is widely cited by advocates on one side of the Brexit debate as some form of barrier to some possible outcomes, yet it appears that many of those people haven't actually read it and think it says things that it doesn't. It is not unreasonable, when someone introduces it as a new factor in a discussion that was previously about matters of sovereignty, to seek clarification about why they think it is relevant and whether their arguments have any more substance than a lot of the other ones we see referring to the GFA.
- celticninja 8y ago
  The EU membership predates the GFA too. The GFA was able to be out in place in part thanks to the existence of both the CTA and the EU. Do you think that if it worked the way you thought it did, there would be such a furore over the situation? I'm not saying UK MPs are the smartest bunch of people but if Brexit would leave the GFA untouched then surely they would have worked that out by now. Perhaps you are wrong.

growlist 8y ago

The UK doesn't have to put anything up. If the EU/Ireland choose to, that's kind of their problem.

Silhouette 8y ago
The UK doesn't have to put anything up. While that is technically true, it is practically false. If the UK reverts to trading on WTO terms, at least initially, the Most Favoured Nation principle essentially says that we have to trade with all other nations on an equal basis unless we make a comprehensive trade deal with someone. So if we let down the barriers and remove all restrictions at the Irish border, we are basically required to let down the equivalent barriers trading with anyone else at any border. That is not a sustainable policy. In practice, if we have a hard Brexit with no big deal agreed at the end of March, I would expect both the UK and the EU/EU27 to make unilateral arrangements to protect their own people and businesses in the immediate aftermath and mitigate the likely negative effects as much as possible until better arrangements can be made. This is likely to include both the UK and Ireland declining to build new border infrastructure and turning a blind eye to any border crossings that would technically become illegal. But the EU would put great pressure on Ireland to address that issue quickly since any Irish border is also an EU border, and both the UK and Ireland would be subject to complaints at WTO level about the favourable treatment, which would take a considerable time to resolve but would inevitably result in some form of enforcement action if the issue was not addressed (which it surely would be to avoid that outcome, but the UK and Ireland would have bought themselves significant extra time by bending/breaking the rules until that point).
celticninja 8y ago
Of course it doesn't, but then free movement of people cannot be stopped.

Silhouette 8y ago

The point is that between the UK and Ireland there is a CTA, common travel agreement. Yes there is, and it has existed since long before the EU or its predecessors existed. This means frictionless border crossing between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland. No, it means that citizens from either side are allowed to cross the border by default. Production of some basic ID documents may still be required. Checks may still be (and sometimes are) carried out. And the whole thing is based on essentially a long-standing gentleman's agreement and explicitly does not create binding legal obligations. In short, the CTA does not require a completely frictionless border and never has. Indeed, that could not possibly be its effect, because its provisions only cover British and Irish citizens. If the UK leaves the EU then goods from the UK cannot just be moved into the Republic of Ireland if there is no join customs agreement. It's a lot more complicated than that, but yes, the existing provisions for moving goods across the border are governed by EU mechanisms, including the Customs Union and Single Market. So now you have to introduce a hard border with the RoI which goes against the Good Friday Agreement. And at this point I ask you much the same question that I have asked others in this discussion: What specifically constitutes the "hard border" that is required, and in what specific way(s) do any associated processes or infrastructure contradict the GFA? If you don't understand the relevance of the GFA then you should read up further on or and the Troubles that preceded it. Please don't be patronising. It is both rude and unconstructive. The GFA is widely cited by advocates on one side of the Brexit debate as some form of barrier to some possible outcomes, yet it appears that many of those people haven't actually read it and think it says things that it doesn't. It is not unreasonable, when someone introduces it as a new factor in a discussion that was previously about matters of sovereignty, to seek clarification about why they think it is relevant and whether their arguments have any more substance than a lot of the other ones we see referring to the GFA.

celticninja 8y ago
The EU membership predates the GFA too. The GFA was able to be out in place in part thanks to the existence of both the CTA and the EU. Do you think that if it worked the way you thought it did, there would be such a furore over the situation? I'm not saying UK MPs are the smartest bunch of people but if Brexit would leave the GFA untouched then surely they would have worked that out by now. Perhaps you are wrong.