The people of NI have been let down by Boris, and the DUP.
NI Protocol port checks could be reduced by 80% – Coveney
The number of checks on goods arriving into Northern Ireland from Great Britain could be reduced by 80%, the Irish Foreign Affairs minister has said.
Simon Coveney said that option exists within the Northern Ireland Protocol if the UK was willing to agreed a common approach to standards in relation to veterinary practices, and sanitary and phytosanitary standards on food.
This is what happens when you only listen to 1 side.
Current divergence? None. Current planned divergence? None. Need for those current checks? None. Reason carried out? Because the UK refuses to promise that it will not diverge at some unspecified time in the future. When might the checks need to be done? Then. And only then. Unless you just want to be petty and vindictive.
Got to admire a Politician who has the gall to criticise the UK for giving one-sided press briefings. While giving a one-sided press briefing.
I'll leave you to your thread now.
Feel free to believe that everything your country does is wrong. And everything the other side does is perfect.
The "UK Trade and Business Commission" tries desperately to fool people as to its basis. It is not a Parliamentary Committee-it was set up by "Best for Britain", a campaign group whose main purposes are for us to rejoin the EU and to frustrate any moves towards independence from the EU.
53% polled did not like Boris's deal? Sure. But then the majority have voted against pretty much everything-staying in the EU, every single type of deal to leave, every party wanting to remain.
The British public votes against everything. In short, it votes to have the omelette without breaking eggs. Doesn't prove anything. Other than the public have unrealistic expectations.
The polls that matter-the ones that really determine the path ahead-have not gone your way.
"Crisis facing touring musicians"? Really? So they are to be treated like everyone else wanting to do work abroad. I don't see US bands finding this to be insurmountable.
This is just the opposite side of the coin to the likes of the ERG. Propaganda. Designed to fool the gullible.
So you think its a good deal, and there are no real problems?
Of course not. There only seem to be 2 sides to the debate:- (1) It's all brilliant, we've got our country back; and (2) We're all doomed
Both are faintly ridiculous.
The Northern Ireland bit is not going well. There needs to be renegotiation on all sides, particularly including Ireland.
There needs to be immigration policies tailor-made for the needs of the UK. a willingness not to rely on 3rd World countries to do our dirty work. And to provide forward-looking ideas. Not rest on the laurels/defeat of 2016.
'Ignored on Afghanistan and now on trade': Boris is mocked over cunning plan to join US-Mexico-Canada free trade area after Biden snub - with US saying there is NO WAY to get into the pact and UK ALREADY has deals with Canada and Mexico
Joe Biden dashed the PM's dreams of a quick Transatlantic deal when they met at the White House for the first time last night, telling him vaguely: 'We're going to have to work that through.' Mr Biden, who is proud of his Irish heritage, also infuriated ministers by delivering another stark warning about wrangling with the EU over Northern Ireland's post-Brexit trade rules, saying changes must not hit the peace process. As Mr Johnson was hit with the bad news, it emerged that ministers are looking at getting a backdoor into American markets via the existing USMCA. But trade experts pointed out that the UK already has trade deals with both Canada and Mexico, and adding another layer of complexity would cause huge problems, for limited benefits. The US authorities also seemed bewildered by the idea, highlighting that there is no mechanism for joining the USMCA. And Labour MP Neil Coyle said: 'Johnson was ignored by the US in Afghanistan and has failed to even get a date for a future trade deal with America. The Tories' 'Global Britain' seems more easily sidelined than Great Britain ever was.'
The people of NI have been let down by Boris, and the DUP.
NI Protocol port checks could be reduced by 80% – Coveney
The number of checks on goods arriving into Northern Ireland from Great Britain could be reduced by 80%, the Irish Foreign Affairs minister has said.
Simon Coveney said that option exists within the Northern Ireland Protocol if the UK was willing to agreed a common approach to standards in relation to veterinary practices, and sanitary and phytosanitary standards on food.
This is what happens when you only listen to 1 side.
Current divergence? None. Current planned divergence? None. Need for those current checks? None. Reason carried out? Because the UK refuses to promise that it will not diverge at some unspecified time in the future. When might the checks need to be done? Then. And only then. Unless you just want to be petty and vindictive.
Got to admire a Politician who has the gall to criticise the UK for giving one-sided press briefings. While giving a one-sided press briefing.
I'll leave you to your thread now.
Feel free to believe that everything your country does is wrong. And everything the other side does is perfect.
There have been many articles making the same point.
The people of NI have been let down by Boris, and the DUP.
NI Protocol port checks could be reduced by 80% – Coveney
The number of checks on goods arriving into Northern Ireland from Great Britain could be reduced by 80%, the Irish Foreign Affairs minister has said.
Simon Coveney said that option exists within the Northern Ireland Protocol if the UK was willing to agreed a common approach to standards in relation to veterinary practices, and sanitary and phytosanitary standards on food.
This is what happens when you only listen to 1 side.
Current divergence? None. Current planned divergence? None. Need for those current checks? None. Reason carried out? Because the UK refuses to promise that it will not diverge at some unspecified time in the future. When might the checks need to be done? Then. And only then. Unless you just want to be petty and vindictive.
Got to admire a Politician who has the gall to criticise the UK for giving one-sided press briefings. While giving a one-sided press briefing.
I'll leave you to your thread now.
Feel free to believe that everything your country does is wrong. And everything the other side does is perfect.
Brussels has wisely taken the sizzle and spice out of the “sausage war” between the UK and the EU, but the fundamental problem is that Boris Johnson is still seemingly unwilling to stomach the consequences of Brexit he has chosen.
Johnson signed up to an arrangement in the autumn of 2019 that directed that all goods travelling to Northern Ireland from Great Britain would have to follow EU rules.
For example, in the issue at hand today: under EU rules, chilled meats, including “meat preparations” such as sausages, have to be sent frozen into the bloc from a non-EU country with which it does not have an all-encompassing veterinary agreement. This applies to trade from Britain, as Northern Ireland has in effect stayed in the single market for goods under the terms of protocol.
This was explicitly accepted by the UK government in annex two of the protocol and reaffirmed last December when a six-month grace period was agreed to allow businesses in Northern Ireland to adjust their supply chains in order to secure such goods locally or from the Republic of Ireland.
Now we hear the prime minister suggest there was no such recognition by the UK and it would be clear madness for anyone to consider any such thing.
That is quite difficult for Brussels to digest and it is a pointer to the wider problem in the relationship.
The UK’s decision not to align with EU standards in plant and animal products has introduced a range of sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) checks on plant and animal products. There are document checks, identity checks and physical checks. This has already led to some British products not being available in shops in Northern Ireland due to the added expense to retailers. It is a red rag to some in the loyalist community. Tension is high. It is also proving to be a greater hindrance than expected by Downing Street to trade between the UK and the 27 EU member states.
The EU has offered, despite repeated rejection, a temporary Switzerland-style agreement under which the UK would align with Brussels’ rulebook for a period and 80% of the checks would disappear. Johnson and his Brexit minister, Lord Frost, don’t like this. It smacks of rule-taking and they believe it will stand in the way of a trade deal with the US. The EU restricts the use of hormones and the chemical washing of animal carcasses, both of which are staples of the US agri-food sector.
The UK has suggested something a little more flexible to Brussels, under which checks can be spared for as long the government sticks with its current standards. Discussions would be had if there was a change of policy by either side as to whether it is significant enough for controls to be newly necessary.
The precise form of this proposal is unclear. But what baffles Brussels is that the government has repeatedly said it has no intention of lowering its standards. They see “Brexit purism” standing in the way of pragmatic solutions. It is evidently the case that Johnson wants to have his sausage and to eat it. But it isn’t sustainable.
However, membership of the single market does not in itself preclude making trade deals with third countries: the non-EU members of the EEA and Switzerland do so, which in turn means border controls are required between those countries and the EU.
Brexit: What is a third country?
The row about food comes after the UK defended its Internal Market Bill, which has been heavily criticised as it would override parts of the Brexit withdrawal agreement it reached with the EU.
Some of the claims and counter claims should be taken with a pinch of salt. But part of the current row is about third country listing.
A "third country" basically refers to any country outside the EU, and in this case outside its economic structures - the single market and the customs union.
Businesses in a third country have to fill in customs declarations, for example, when they import from and export to the EU - whether there is a trade agreement or not.
The EU also has a formal list of third countries that are approved for food imports - that's what third country listing means. It's mainly about sanitary rules for products of animal origin, and making sure they meet the basic standard for sale in the single market.
The UK government says the EU is threatening not to put the UK on that approved list.
And because the terms of the EU withdrawal agreement mean Northern Ireland will stay within the rules of the EU single market, but the rest of the UK will not, that could in theory prevent food being sent from Great Britain to Northern Ireland.
The EU says it is not refusing to put the UK on the third country list. Instead, it says, it is simply waiting to find out what the UK's import and export rules will be, before it makes a decision.
Why doesn't the UK make those rules clear? The government says its position is already clear. At the moment UK rules are exactly the same as EU rules because we are still in the single market. And that, as the UK negotiator David Frost has said on social media, will remain the case on 1 January 2021.
But the EU says it wants to know what the UK's future plans are - whether it intends, for example, to water down some of the strict food safety standards that the EU has agreed.
What's it got to do with the Internal Market Bill?
The issues on which the UK government says it is prepared to break international law in a "very specific and limited way" are rather different.
They involve the need for Northern Ireland businesses to fill out online export declarations when they send goods to Great Britain, and the need for the UK to follow EU state aid rules (on subsidies for business) when they affect trade in Northern Ireland.
These are commitments which were made in the withdrawal agreement, which the government now wants to change.
It's also possible that there could be more changes to come. The upcoming finance bill may allow ministers to decide unilaterally which goods moving from Great Britain to Northern Ireland are "at risk" of being exported to the EU and should therefore have tariffs, or taxes on imports, imposed on them.
That too would breach the agreement made with the EU.
The people of NI have been let down by Boris, and the DUP.
NI Protocol port checks could be reduced by 80% – Coveney
The number of checks on goods arriving into Northern Ireland from Great Britain could be reduced by 80%, the Irish Foreign Affairs minister has said.
Simon Coveney said that option exists within the Northern Ireland Protocol if the UK was willing to agreed a common approach to standards in relation to veterinary practices, and sanitary and phytosanitary standards on food.
This is what happens when you only listen to 1 side.
Current divergence? None. Current planned divergence? None. Need for those current checks? None. Reason carried out? Because the UK refuses to promise that it will not diverge at some unspecified time in the future. When might the checks need to be done? Then. And only then. Unless you just want to be petty and vindictive.
Got to admire a Politician who has the gall to criticise the UK for giving one-sided press briefings. While giving a one-sided press briefing.
I'll leave you to your thread now.
Feel free to believe that everything your country does is wrong. And everything the other side does is perfect.
10 real-life Brexit consequences that have already happened since we left the EU
1. Fishing communities are facing ruin
2. Some shellfish exports to the EU are banned completely
3. Port workers in Northern Ireland face threats - and a shaky future
4. There’s a furious diplomatic row over… diplomats
5. Online shopping from the EU has got more expensive
6. Amsterdam has overtaken London as the world's trading hub
7. UK businesses are finding it harder
8. More than half of trucks are crossing empty
9. Workers’ rights ‘came under threat’
10. Musicians are angry at red tape
And a few things that have gone better than feared
We got a trade deal
The tampon tax has been scrapped
We haven’t seen massive truck queues in Kent - yet
More than 4.5million EU citizens have been granted settled status
They will follow a familiar format. Yes. Or No. Or, you could just ignore them, of course.
1. Do you believe that the UK Government does lots of good things? Yes/No 2. Do you believe the people who run the EU do lots of good things? Yes/no 3. Do you believe the UK Government do quite a few things that, regardless of individual views on Brexit/the EU are bad? Yes/no 4. Do you believe the EU officials do quite a few things that, regardless of individual views on Brexit/the EU are bad? Yes/no 5. Do you believe that the UK Government sometimes says things that are deliberately misleading in order to further its own aims? Yes/No 6. Do you believe that the EU leaders sometimes say things that are deliberately misleading in order to further its own aims? Yes/No
My answers, to every 1 of those questions, is Yes. Your thousands of posts suggest you genuinely believe the answers to 1, 4 & 6 are No.
Which is why I struggle to think of anyone who so consistently praises everything done by Continental Europe, while simultaneously seeking to be constantly and consistently negative in relation to the UK.
They will follow a familiar format. Yes. Or No. Or, you could just ignore them, of course.
1. Do you believe that the UK Government does lots of good things? Yes/No 2. Do you believe the people who run the EU do lots of good things? Yes/no 3. Do you believe the UK Government do quite a few things that, regardless of individual views on Brexit/the EU are bad? Yes/no 4. Do you believe the EU officials do quite a few things that, regardless of individual views on Brexit/the EU are bad? Yes/no 5. Do you believe that the UK Government sometimes says things that are deliberately misleading in order to further its own aims? Yes/No 6. Do you believe that the EU leaders sometimes say things that are deliberately misleading in order to further its own aims? Yes/No
My answers, to every 1 of those questions, is Yes. Your thousands of posts suggest you genuinely believe the answers to 1, 4 & 6 are No.
Which is why I struggle to think of anyone who so consistently praises everything done by Continental Europe, while simultaneously seeking to be constantly and consistently negative in relation to the UK.
And why I would rather read a Conspiracy thread.
Well in that case you would be wrong. I have no illusions about any large groups of politicians. Although I do appreciate some are more truthful, and honourable, than others, they usually stand out. Nigel Farage, and Ann Widdecombe were MEPs, they both make the top 5 of my most disliked politicians. I have always been proud to be British. I am embarrassed that we have a PM like Boris Johnson. I am not too keen on the majority of the cabinet either. Many politicians are guilty of overestimating the benefits of a particular policy, and at the same time downplaying any disadvantages. Boris operates on a much higher level, he often just tells barefaced lies. When faced with a choice you can almost bank on him making the wrong one, hence all the u-turns. I dont pay much attention to the EU on a daily basis, I have just followed the arguments over Brexit. So I dont think the EU is always right are we are always in the wrong. I just think it has been handled badly from our point of view. I appreciate that we voted in favour of leaving the EU, but Boris could have made some less damaging choices. I am aware that we cant turn the clock back, and what is done is done, but I wonder if we could revisit the referendum, knowing what we know today, whether the result would have been the same. I am at a loss to explain why so many people in the UK are keen to blame the EU for stuff that they are not responsible for. Boris has been very keen on the rights afforded by the Brexit agreement, but reluctant to even acknowledge the obligations. He finally admitted to the number of kids he has, yesterday, so maybe he is turning over a new leaf, and reaching a new level of maturity. Although I very much doubt it.
With respect, you overvalue the virtue/value of honesty in politicians. Particularly PMs.
Brown was far more honest than Blair. Far nicer man. Post-PM, a greater statesman (reminds me of Jimmy Carter in that respect). But Blair was unquestionably the more effective PM.
The best time to judge Johnson is when he has stepped down. For him, Brexit was the springboard to being PM. He didn't care one way or the other about Brexit-he wanted to do what was Best for Boris. But now he wants to prepare the way to leave, and to cement (or create) his legacy.
It would not surprise me if he actually went for a Swiss-style Brexit deal going forward. It will be dressed up as something different, of course. Faces need to be saved on all sides.Political suicide, of course. But Johnson doesn't think like other politicians. The last thing he needs is to be 1 of many PMs who have been tarnished over their dealings on the island of Ireland. I don't like him-but I actually think he is our best chance of moving forward. Because what is Best for Boris might, just might, also be what is Best for Britain. In the near future.
People in the UK tend to want something to blame. Blaming Brexit is no different to blaming the EU. Businesses have always needed to adapt or fail. But the failing ones always seem to blame change, rather than their failure to adapt. So, to a lesser extent, do people. In its way, it is no different to people trying to blame the RNG here.
Having said all that, Farage and Widdecombe would definitely and probably (in that order) be in my Bottom 5.
With respect, you overvalue the virtue/value of honesty in politicians. Particularly PMs.
Brown was far more honest than Blair. Far nicer man. Post-PM, a greater statesman (reminds me of Jimmy Carter in that respect). But Blair was unquestionably the more effective PM.
The best time to judge Johnson is when he has stepped down. For him, Brexit was the springboard to being PM. He didn't care one way or the other about Brexit-he wanted to do what was Best for Boris. But now he wants to prepare the way to leave, and to cement (or create) his legacy.
It would not surprise me if he actually went for a Swiss-style Brexit deal going forward. It will be dressed up as something different, of course. Faces need to be saved on all sides.Political suicide, of course. But Johnson doesn't think like other politicians. The last thing he needs is to be 1 of many PMs who have been tarnished over their dealings on the island of Ireland. I don't like him-but I actually think he is our best chance of moving forward. Because what is Best for Boris might, just might, also be what is Best for Britain. In the near future.
People in the UK tend to want something to blame. Blaming Brexit is no different to blaming the EU. Businesses have always needed to adapt or fail. But the failing ones always seem to blame change, rather than their failure to adapt. So, to a lesser extent, do people. In its way, it is no different to people trying to blame the RNG here.
Having said all that, Farage and Widdecombe would definitely and probably (in that order) be in my Bottom 5.
My ratings started with the most disliked at the top. I just cant help disliking politicians that continually tell bare faced lies. I dont think they have to.
UK distances itself from ‘laughable and unhelpful’ plan to join North American trade pact
The UK has distanced itself from an “unprofessional” and “frankly embarrassing” plan to try and join a North American trade pact, just 24 hours after mooting the idea.
With respect, you overvalue the virtue/value of honesty in politicians. Particularly PMs.
Brown was far more honest than Blair. Far nicer man. Post-PM, a greater statesman (reminds me of Jimmy Carter in that respect). But Blair was unquestionably the more effective PM.
The best time to judge Johnson is when he has stepped down. For him, Brexit was the springboard to being PM. He didn't care one way or the other about Brexit-he wanted to do what was Best for Boris. But now he wants to prepare the way to leave, and to cement (or create) his legacy.
It would not surprise me if he actually went for a Swiss-style Brexit deal going forward. It will be dressed up as something different, of course. Faces need to be saved on all sides.Political suicide, of course. But Johnson doesn't think like other politicians. The last thing he needs is to be 1 of many PMs who have been tarnished over their dealings on the island of Ireland. I don't like him-but I actually think he is our best chance of moving forward. Because what is Best for Boris might, just might, also be what is Best for Britain. In the near future.
People in the UK tend to want something to blame. Blaming Brexit is no different to blaming the EU. Businesses have always needed to adapt or fail. But the failing ones always seem to blame change, rather than their failure to adapt. So, to a lesser extent, do people. In its way, it is no different to people trying to blame the RNG here.
Having said all that, Farage and Widdecombe would definitely and probably (in that order) be in my Bottom 5.
I dont think that you have to be dishonest in order to be effective. Gordon Brown was just a less effective PM than Tony Blair.
Not sure how a Swiss style deal would go down. Freight traffic would be still subject to customs checks, and,
Proposed framework accord Negotiations between Switzerland and the European Commission on an institutional framework accord began in 2014 and concluded in November 2018. On 7 December 2018, the Swiss Federal Council decided to neither accept nor decline the negotiated accord, instead opting for a public consultation.[33] The negotiated accord[34] would cover five areas of existing agreements between the EU and Switzerland made in 1999:
free movement of persons air transport carriage of goods and passengers by rail and road trade in agricultural products mutual recognition of standards Notably, the accord would facilitate EU law in these fields to be readily transposed into Swiss law, and the European Court of Justice would be the final and binding arbiter on disputes in these fields.
It’s under strain, though, after a Swiss referendum vote to cap immigration from the EU.
This has been criticised by the EU as against the rules of the treaty dealing with free movement of people, and led to the suspension of talks over cooperation in research funding.
There’s a lot of uncertainty about how to resolve this. News outlets report that the current Swiss deal with the EU could be under threat.
And the EU has previously said that it’s concerned about the way this system is working in general.
I cant believe you have posted this in good faith.
Really? You believe anyone who has an opinion that does not coincide with yours is acting in bad faith? How sad are you?
I made that comment because you seem intent on blaming the EU for just about everything, irrespective of their involvement. I have posted many articles that have been published in the mainstream press, they are therefore not my opinions, but opinions that I have merely agreed with. On many occasions these are the opinions of experts. It seems strange that you would accuse me of what you are actually doing.
Everyone was aware of the geographical situation before the referendum. None of our respected politicians ever pointed out the implications.
2 sentences that contradict one another. The second is true.
They dont. What I meant was that the geography of the UK is more complicated than your average country. In that it is not a single land mass. The geography was not going to change post Brexit. Had it been possible to implement a land border in Ireland, Brexit would have been straightforward. These two factors made the implementation of Brexit extremely difficult. This aspect was completely ignored during the referendum campaign. Had it been discussed, the result may have been completely different.
After tearing up the backstop how could Boris not, 1 Put a border in the Irish Sea? 2 Not leave NI in the SM/CU?
Always going to be a major problem. Needs co-operation from both the UK and EU. Both sides failing in this.
Theresa May had a solution. The EU have suggested a means of reducing the border checks by 80%. Boris not understanding the agreement he signed is no excuse.
Boris split up the UK.
No-he has not.
I think that many of the people in NI think that he has.
As the Irish Sea border is the barrier between GB and the SM, we surely expected an increased number of checks? Who are we to dictate what checks the EU should carry out on their side? Perhaps Boris should have tried to negotiate less checks BEFORE signing the deal?
Not as simple as that. There are lots of key borders. GB-NI. NI to Ireland, Ireland to the rest of the EU. Any sensible solution necessarily involves elements from all of these. For example, the GB-NI border is not "their side".
The GB/NI border is the one causing the major difficulties. NI is still in the SM/CU. They are subject to EU laws. The rest of GB is a third country. GB/NI exports are going into the single market. Of course it is their side.
I am not sure that the examples you quote are relevant, both in terms of volume of trade, and that unchecked goods are able to enter the SM through NI.
You seem to ignore that these rules were in place while we were members, and we helped to compile them.
The Single Market does not provide rules in relation to non-member countries. That is decided on a case-by-case basis by the EU. So-for example-Greenland joined the EEC in 1972 with Denmark. It then refused to abide by the Fisheries policy, and exited the EU, although it is still nominally in the Single Market. 90% of Greenland's exports are fish. No checks on the products in relation to following EU rules. There has been no case of the size of the UK-the EU has chosen to adopt a hardline approach.
That is not strictly true. The silly sausage war was stupid. They didnt ban chilled meats. They just insisted on them being frozen. Such a hardship.
Commission Decision of 8 September 2000 laying down the animal and public health and veterinary certification conditions for imports of meat preparations into the Community from third countries (notified under document number C(2000) 2533) (Text with EEA relevance) (2000/572/EC)
they have been frozen at an internal temperature of not more than – 18 °C at the production plant or plants of origin.]
The protection for NI, as far as Boris was concerned, was to include a clause where Stormont could vote the protocol down. This is a question I have asked you a number of times, but you have ignored it each time. Assuming the EU stick to their guns as firmly as the UK is likely to do, and Stormont votes down the protocol, what on earth could it be replaced with?
I'm not ignoring it. I can't predict the future. If Stormont were to vote down the Protocol, the likeliest result will be a return to the Troubles. And that will be the fault of the EU, as well as the UK.
Where could you move the border to? How do you get NI out of the SM, and CU?
I dont really see what you could change. You cant have a land border. You cant move the sea border. Taking NI out of the SM/CU, would mean a land border. Leaving them in puts you back to square one. Ignoring the whole of the UK being in the SM/CU, there is no simple solution. Unless the EU suddenly allow us to dictate what checks they are allowed to do, on goods entering their single market.
No need to move the border. There have been special rules between the UK and Ireland since before the creation of the EEC. There needs to be a compromise that suits all parties. Like, for example, Switzerland.
But NI is still in the SM/CU. Switzerland have border checks on goods. As well as level playing fields, freedom of movement, EU law, etc etc. When we eventually end the grace periods more problems will be created. As we diverge this becomes more difficult, rather than easier. As we do trade deals with other countries, and import goods that dont comply with EU standards, additional problems are created.
As I have said a number of times before the implementation of Brexit is the problem, rather than the protocol.
The facts don't bear this out. Let's use the TUV as an example. NI elections-got precisely 1 seat. 2017 elections-nowhere. 2019 elections-didn't even field a candidate. 2021-look like a massive problem.
Many people in NI are up in arms over the border. They wont wear any border. They will not accept an Irish Sea border, or a land border. They see it as the splitting up of the UK. Unfortunately leaving the EU meant having a border. Brexit means a border.
Why do you think we have declined the EUs offer of a veterinary agreement to reduce the border checks by 80%? Why do you think that instead of accepting the options available to us, we have to blame the other side for not caving in to our demands? Dont forget that more havoc has been postponed by delaying the end of grace periods, some of them until the middle of next year.
This is a typical example of how you only believe the facts that suit you. I'll deal withb this in a separate post.
I find it absolutely ridiculous that Boris would rather die in a ditch than extend the transition period, on the advice of business leaders to postpone the new rules coming in to place. Yet he now seems to spend half his life whinging about these rules, and extending grace periods to avoid implementing them. You couldnt make it up.
"Business leaders" want to do what is best for them. they're not unbiased. We have consistently voted for a Party that have delivered exactly what they promised. They didn't "make it up". We agreed to it. Not you, and not me-but democracy.
Really? The transition period gave us the ability to continue frictionless trade, until we had time to get used to the new rules, before implementing them, as there was likely to be chaos. He would rather die in a ditch than extend the transition period. Yet the grace periods are intended to serve exactly the same purpose. And he continues to extend them time after time, and avoids any ditches. This means that the future holds more chaos, when we eventually end the grace periods. When this finally happens, I am certain that many businesses, and a majority of people in NI will wish he had died in the ditch. You keep bringing it up, but I wont wear it. The referendum was democratic. The manner in which we left wasnt. Many were misled. For instance we could have left the EU, but remained in the SM/CU, which would have solved the current problems.
The DUP shot themselves in the foot by supporting a Brexit they clearly didnt understand, believed the lies told to them by the PM, and failed to get anything in writing.
Agree. With the exception that they did get some cash.
The people of NI have been let down by Boris, and the DUP.
This is where we disagree. The people of NI have been let down by Boris, the DUP AND the EU.
I really cant see how the EU have let them down. They have offered a solution that would reduce border checks by 80%. They agreed to no land border, which was probably best for them. They agreed to the backstop. They agreed to the protocol. They agreed to NI staying in the SM/CU, when failure to agree to this would have made everything impossible. Not doing a deal would have still meant a border. If the shoe was on the other foot, I can imagine Boris standing up in Parliament shouting f..k the EU, why should NI be allowed to remain in the SM/CU.
The people of NI are objecting to a border between them and the rest of the UK. Leaving the SM/CU made this inevitable. This is the result of Brexit, not the protocol.
If they vote down the protocol at Stormont, they cant get rid of the border, so how could this help? Another Boris solution that in reality is not worth a light.
They will follow a familiar format. Yes. Or No. Or, you could just ignore them, of course.
1. Do you believe that the UK Government does lots of good things? Yes/No 2. Do you believe the people who run the EU do lots of good things? Yes/no 3. Do you believe the UK Government do quite a few things that, regardless of individual views on Brexit/the EU are bad? Yes/no 4. Do you believe the EU officials do quite a few things that, regardless of individual views on Brexit/the EU are bad? Yes/no 5. Do you believe that the UK Government sometimes says things that are deliberately misleading in order to further its own aims? Yes/No 6. Do you believe that the EU leaders sometimes say things that are deliberately misleading in order to further its own aims? Yes/No
My answers, to every 1 of those questions, is Yes. Your thousands of posts suggest you genuinely believe the answers to 1, 4 & 6 are No.
Which is why I struggle to think of anyone who so consistently praises everything done by Continental Europe, while simultaneously seeking to be constantly and consistently negative in relation to the UK.
The EU, the Single Market, the Good Friday Agreement, and impact on Northern Ireland politics.
The Single Market is much misunderstood. The 1 thing that it does consistently is provide various rules within the EU member countries.
What it does not do is set out what tariffs./rules must apply in relation to trade with non-member countries. In a better world, this would be left to the directly affected nations to sort out. This is particularly important once you leave Europe's continental land mass, and look at the islands at the edge of Europe. Like Great Britain. Or Ireland. But no-the countries that run the EU make the rules.
Let's look at Northern Ireland. Geographically, it has 3 major sources of trade. Itself, Ireland, and Great Britain.
Then, let's briefly look at the Good Friday Agreement. At its heart, its basic premise is that, in order to avoid various problems, the people of Northern Ireland should be free to support the UK and Ireland. As it chooses. To avoid sectarianism.
Now let's look at the current situation in Northern Ireland. Northern Irish goods may freely be traded to Ireland. And vice versa. But-if the goods come from Great Britain, people from Northern Ireland cannot sell those goods to people from Northern Ireland. But the EU does not have to impose these rules. It just chooses to do so. Compare/contrast with French Guiana, Greenland, the UK bases of Akrotiri/Dhekelia. Lots of compromises were and are possible.
This is not just the fault of the EU. It is doing it for political reasons. As is Boris Johnson.
But there are significant political changes in Northern Ireland as a result. The DUP share of the vote has collapsed, causing Sinn Fein to be comfortably the largest party in NI. The Unionist vote, having deserted the DUP, is going in 2 directions. Firstly, to the UUP-a moderate, left-leaning Party. But.
The Party that has risen from nowhere to 3rd place in the polls is the TUV-the Traditional Unionist Voice. A group that make UKIP/the DUP look left wing and inclusive. Being given effective support by the machinations of the Conservatives and the EU.
EU must respond to UK's demand on Brexit deal urgently, minister says
On Tuesday, European Commission Vice President Maros Sefcovic, who oversees EU relations with Britain, said he hoped to solve the Northern Irish trading issues by the end of the year.
But he again rejected a British demand to renegotiate the protocol and warned London not to take unilateral action.
Under the protocol, Britain agreed to leave some EU rules in place in Northern Ireland and accept checks on goods arriving from elsewhere in the UK, in order to preserve an open land border with EU member state Ireland.
The arrangement has, however, effectively placed a border in the Irish Sea, which businesses say has damaged trade.
It has also angered pro-British unionists in Northern Ireland who believe it divides them from the rest of the UK, raising concerns about a return to the sectarian violence that plagued the province for three decades.
The people of NI have been let down by Boris, and the DUP.
NI Protocol port checks could be reduced by 80% – Coveney
The number of checks on goods arriving into Northern Ireland from Great Britain could be reduced by 80%, the Irish Foreign Affairs minister has said.
Simon Coveney said that option exists within the Northern Ireland Protocol if the UK was willing to agreed a common approach to standards in relation to veterinary practices, and sanitary and phytosanitary standards on food.
This is what happens when you only listen to 1 side.
Current divergence? None. Current planned divergence? None. Need for those current checks? None. Reason carried out? Because the UK refuses to promise that it will not diverge at some unspecified time in the future. When might the checks need to be done? Then. And only then. Unless you just want to be petty and vindictive.
Got to admire a Politician who has the gall to criticise the UK for giving one-sided press briefings. While giving a one-sided press briefing.
I'll leave you to your thread now.
Feel free to believe that everything your country does is wrong. And everything the other side does is perfect.
Legends in their own minds.
Tory ‘Spartans’ finally toast victory over Theresa May that helped deliver Brexit
Sir Bill Cash, the veteran Eurosceptic and the evening’s co-host, told the dinner at the party’s historic Carlton Club in St James’s, central London, that without their opposition, Mrs May’s withdrawal agreement would now be in force.
Sir Bill said that if the MPs had buckled, “we would still be in the EU by the customs union, the backstop”. He then thanked everyone “for staying strong”.
MPs remarked how some high-profile Brexiteers were not eligible to attend because they had caved in to the pressure and backed Mrs May’s deal, including Boris Johnson – who was in America on a visit – and Jacob Rees-Mogg, the Leader of the House of Commons.
Sir Bernard said the MPs told how “how we supported each other, and how the Daily Telegraph was the only paper that supported us. Everybody [else] crumbled”.
The MPs did not entirely rest on their laurels during the dinner. Sir John Redwood noted that nearly two million Britons in Northern Ireland still effectively lived in the EU and others noted that fishing had not fully been taken back under UK control, so there was still work to be done.
As the group broke up at around 10.30pm, they agreed to pose for a team photograph on the main stairs at the Carlton club, wearing the mementoes that had been laid out on the table for them by Sir Bill: green ties and cufflinks for the men, green scarves for the women.
Each was decorated with small gold Spartan helmets, modelled on one that Sir Bill had spotted in the British Museum.
Speaking on Thursday, Mr Francois said: “It was a great pleasure to dine with my fellow Spartans, especially as the event was delayed several times by Covid restrictions.
“These are the MPs who held out against all the odds and thus helped to deliver a real Brexit. They can wear their commemorative ties and scarves with pride.”
Inside the EU's £37million 'Closed Controlled Access' migrant centre that sprawls across a Greek island and will be home 3,000 arrivals - a far cry from Britain's chaotic system of housing them in B&Bs
A purpose-built £37million facility (pictured, main) on the Greek island of Samos has the capacity to hold 3,000 asylum seekers with basketball courts and playgrounds site as well as container-style accommodation units (inset, left, a migrant settles in). Those who arrive on Samos from north Africa and the Middle East are free to come and go from the centre with the gates (inset right) open from 8am to 8pm, with a bus running to and from the main town four times a day. It has been criticises as 'prison-like' but it is a far more humane destination than the dangerous and insanitary conditions experienced by migrants in the shanty towns. In the UK however, many migrants are picked up off beaches (top right in Dungeness, Kent) and placed in random hotels, B&Bs and hostels.
With respect, you overvalue the virtue/value of honesty in politicians. Particularly PMs.
Brown was far more honest than Blair. Far nicer man. Post-PM, a greater statesman (reminds me of Jimmy Carter in that respect). But Blair was unquestionably the more effective PM.
The best time to judge Johnson is when he has stepped down. For him, Brexit was the springboard to being PM. He didn't care one way or the other about Brexit-he wanted to do what was Best for Boris. But now he wants to prepare the way to leave, and to cement (or create) his legacy.
It would not surprise me if he actually went for a Swiss-style Brexit deal going forward. It will be dressed up as something different, of course. Faces need to be saved on all sides.Political suicide, of course. But Johnson doesn't think like other politicians. The last thing he needs is to be 1 of many PMs who have been tarnished over their dealings on the island of Ireland. I don't like him-but I actually think he is our best chance of moving forward. Because what is Best for Boris might, just might, also be what is Best for Britain. In the near future.
People in the UK tend to want something to blame. Blaming Brexit is no different to blaming the EU. Businesses have always needed to adapt or fail. But the failing ones always seem to blame change, rather than their failure to adapt. So, to a lesser extent, do people. In its way, it is no different to people trying to blame the RNG here.
Having said all that, Farage and Widdecombe would definitely and probably (in that order) be in my Bottom 5.
Boris Johnson has been using the same French joke since 1994
Comments
NI Protocol port checks could be reduced by 80% – Coveney
The number of checks on goods arriving into Northern Ireland from Great Britain could be reduced by 80%, the Irish Foreign Affairs minister has said.
Simon Coveney said that option exists within the Northern Ireland Protocol if the UK was willing to agreed a common approach to standards in relation to veterinary practices, and sanitary and phytosanitary standards on food.
https://www.itv.com/news/utv/2021-05-20/ni-protocol-port-checks-could-be-reduced-by-80-coveney
This is what happens when you only listen to 1 side.
Current divergence? None.
Current planned divergence? None.
Need for those current checks? None.
Reason carried out? Because the UK refuses to promise that it will not diverge at some unspecified time in the future.
When might the checks need to be done? Then. And only then. Unless you just want to be petty and vindictive.
Got to admire a Politician who has the gall to criticise the UK for giving one-sided press briefings. While giving a one-sided press briefing.
I'll leave you to your thread now.
Feel free to believe that everything your country does is wrong. And everything the other side does is perfect.
https://video.dailymail.co.uk/preview/mol/2021/09/22/3029692620101012962/308x174_MP4_3029692620101012962.mp4
Joe Biden dashed the PM's dreams of a quick Transatlantic deal when they met at the White House for the first time last night, telling him vaguely: 'We're going to have to work that through.' Mr Biden, who is proud of his Irish heritage, also infuriated ministers by delivering another stark warning about wrangling with the EU over Northern Ireland's post-Brexit trade rules, saying changes must not hit the peace process. As Mr Johnson was hit with the bad news, it emerged that ministers are looking at getting a backdoor into American markets via the existing USMCA. But trade experts pointed out that the UK already has trade deals with both Canada and Mexico, and adding another layer of complexity would cause huge problems, for limited benefits. The US authorities also seemed bewildered by the idea, highlighting that there is no mechanism for joining the USMCA. And Labour MP Neil Coyle said: 'Johnson was ignored by the US in Afghanistan and has failed to even get a date for a future trade deal with America. The Tories' 'Global Britain' seems more easily sidelined than Great Britain ever was.'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10016271/Boris-mocked-cunning-plan-join-Mexico-Canada-trade-area.html
The number of checks on goods arriving into Northern Ireland from Great Britain could be reduced by 80%, the Irish Foreign Affairs minister has said.
Simon Coveney said that option exists within the Northern Ireland Protocol if the UK was willing to agreed a common approach to standards in relation to veterinary practices, and sanitary and phytosanitary standards on food.
https://www.itv.com/news/utv/2021-05-20/ni-protocol-port-checks-could-be-reduced-by-80-coveney
This is what happens when you only listen to 1 side.
Current divergence? None.
Current planned divergence? None.
Need for those current checks? None.
Reason carried out? Because the UK refuses to promise that it will not diverge at some unspecified time in the future.
When might the checks need to be done? Then. And only then. Unless you just want to be petty and vindictive.
Got to admire a Politician who has the gall to criticise the UK for giving one-sided press briefings. While giving a one-sided press briefing.
I'll leave you to your thread now.
Feel free to believe that everything your country does is wrong. And everything the other side does is perfect.
There have been many articles making the same point.
The number of checks on goods arriving into Northern Ireland from Great Britain could be reduced by 80%, the Irish Foreign Affairs minister has said.
Simon Coveney said that option exists within the Northern Ireland Protocol if the UK was willing to agreed a common approach to standards in relation to veterinary practices, and sanitary and phytosanitary standards on food.
https://www.itv.com/news/utv/2021-05-20/ni-protocol-port-checks-could-be-reduced-by-80-coveney
This is what happens when you only listen to 1 side.
Current divergence? None.
Current planned divergence? None.
Need for those current checks? None.
Reason carried out? Because the UK refuses to promise that it will not diverge at some unspecified time in the future.
When might the checks need to be done? Then. And only then. Unless you just want to be petty and vindictive.
Got to admire a Politician who has the gall to criticise the UK for giving one-sided press briefings. While giving a one-sided press briefing.
I'll leave you to your thread now.
Feel free to believe that everything your country does is wrong. And everything the other side does is perfect.
Brussels has wisely taken the sizzle and spice out of the “sausage war” between the UK and the EU, but the fundamental problem is that Boris Johnson is still seemingly unwilling to stomach the consequences of Brexit he has chosen.
Johnson signed up to an arrangement in the autumn of 2019 that directed that all goods travelling to Northern Ireland from Great Britain would have to follow EU rules.
For example, in the issue at hand today: under EU rules, chilled meats, including “meat preparations” such as sausages, have to be sent frozen into the bloc from a non-EU country with which it does not have an all-encompassing veterinary agreement. This applies to trade from Britain, as Northern Ireland has in effect stayed in the single market for goods under the terms of protocol.
This was explicitly accepted by the UK government in annex two of the protocol and reaffirmed last December when a six-month grace period was agreed to allow businesses in Northern Ireland to adjust their supply chains in order to secure such goods locally or from the Republic of Ireland.
Now we hear the prime minister suggest there was no such recognition by the UK and it would be clear madness for anyone to consider any such thing.
That is quite difficult for Brussels to digest and it is a pointer to the wider problem in the relationship.
The UK’s decision not to align with EU standards in plant and animal products has introduced a range of sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) checks on plant and animal products. There are document checks, identity checks and physical checks. This has already led to some British products not being available in shops in Northern Ireland due to the added expense to retailers. It is a red rag to some in the loyalist community. Tension is high. It is also proving to be a greater hindrance than expected by Downing Street to trade between the UK and the 27 EU member states.
The EU has offered, despite repeated rejection, a temporary Switzerland-style agreement under which the UK would align with Brussels’ rulebook for a period and 80% of the checks would disappear. Johnson and his Brexit minister, Lord Frost, don’t like this. It smacks of rule-taking and they believe it will stand in the way of a trade deal with the US. The EU restricts the use of hormones and the chemical washing of animal carcasses, both of which are staples of the US agri-food sector.
The UK has suggested something a little more flexible to Brussels, under which checks can be spared for as long the government sticks with its current standards. Discussions would be had if there was a change of policy by either side as to whether it is significant enough for controls to be newly necessary.
The precise form of this proposal is unclear. But what baffles Brussels is that the government has repeatedly said it has no intention of lowering its standards. They see “Brexit purism” standing in the way of pragmatic solutions. It is evidently the case that Johnson wants to have his sausage and to eat it. But it isn’t sustainable.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/jun/30/sausage-war-truce-leaves-eu-and-uk-with-much-to-chew-on
However, membership of the single market does not in itself preclude making trade deals with third countries: the non-EU members of the EEA and Switzerland do so, which in turn means border controls are required between those countries and the EU.
Brexit: What is a third country?
The row about food comes after the UK defended its Internal Market Bill, which has been heavily criticised as it would override parts of the Brexit withdrawal agreement it reached with the EU.
Some of the claims and counter claims should be taken with a pinch of salt. But part of the current row is about third country listing.
A "third country" basically refers to any country outside the EU, and in this case outside its economic structures - the single market and the customs union.
Businesses in a third country have to fill in customs declarations, for example, when they import from and export to the EU - whether there is a trade agreement or not.
The EU also has a formal list of third countries that are approved for food imports - that's what third country listing means. It's mainly about sanitary rules for products of animal origin, and making sure they meet the basic standard for sale in the single market.
The UK government says the EU is threatening not to put the UK on that approved list.
And because the terms of the EU withdrawal agreement mean Northern Ireland will stay within the rules of the EU single market, but the rest of the UK will not, that could in theory prevent food being sent from Great Britain to Northern Ireland.
The EU says it is not refusing to put the UK on the third country list. Instead, it says, it is simply waiting to find out what the UK's import and export rules will be, before it makes a decision.
Why doesn't the UK make those rules clear?
The government says its position is already clear. At the moment UK rules are exactly the same as EU rules because we are still in the single market. And that, as the UK negotiator David Frost has said on social media, will remain the case on 1 January 2021.
But the EU says it wants to know what the UK's future plans are - whether it intends, for example, to water down some of the strict food safety standards that the EU has agreed.
What's it got to do with the Internal Market Bill?
The issues on which the UK government says it is prepared to break international law in a "very specific and limited way" are rather different.
They involve the need for Northern Ireland businesses to fill out online export declarations when they send goods to Great Britain, and the need for the UK to follow EU state aid rules (on subsidies for business) when they affect trade in Northern Ireland.
These are commitments which were made in the withdrawal agreement, which the government now wants to change.
It's also possible that there could be more changes to come. The upcoming finance bill may allow ministers to decide unilaterally which goods moving from Great Britain to Northern Ireland are "at risk" of being exported to the EU and should therefore have tariffs, or taxes on imports, imposed on them.
That too would breach the agreement made with the EU.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/54152583
The number of checks on goods arriving into Northern Ireland from Great Britain could be reduced by 80%, the Irish Foreign Affairs minister has said.
Simon Coveney said that option exists within the Northern Ireland Protocol if the UK was willing to agreed a common approach to standards in relation to veterinary practices, and sanitary and phytosanitary standards on food.
https://www.itv.com/news/utv/2021-05-20/ni-protocol-port-checks-could-be-reduced-by-80-coveney
This is what happens when you only listen to 1 side.
Current divergence? None.
Current planned divergence? None.
Need for those current checks? None.
Reason carried out? Because the UK refuses to promise that it will not diverge at some unspecified time in the future.
When might the checks need to be done? Then. And only then. Unless you just want to be petty and vindictive.
Got to admire a Politician who has the gall to criticise the UK for giving one-sided press briefings. While giving a one-sided press briefing.
I'll leave you to your thread now.
Feel free to believe that everything your country does is wrong. And everything the other side does is perfect.
10 real-life Brexit consequences that have already happened since we left the EU
1. Fishing communities are facing ruin
2. Some shellfish exports to the EU are banned completely
3. Port workers in Northern Ireland face threats - and a shaky future
4. There’s a furious diplomatic row over… diplomats
5. Online shopping from the EU has got more expensive
6. Amsterdam has overtaken London as the world's trading hub
7. UK businesses are finding it harder
8. More than half of trucks are crossing empty
9. Workers’ rights ‘came under threat’
10. Musicians are angry at red tape
And a few things that have gone better than feared
We got a trade deal
The tampon tax has been scrapped
We haven’t seen massive truck queues in Kent - yet
More than 4.5million EU citizens have been granted settled status
And of course... we've 'taken back control'
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/10-real-life-brexit-consequences-23482214
They will follow a familiar format. Yes. Or No. Or, you could just ignore them, of course.
1. Do you believe that the UK Government does lots of good things? Yes/No
2. Do you believe the people who run the EU do lots of good things? Yes/no
3. Do you believe the UK Government do quite a few things that, regardless of individual views on Brexit/the EU are bad? Yes/no
4. Do you believe the EU officials do quite a few things that, regardless of individual views on Brexit/the EU are bad? Yes/no
5. Do you believe that the UK Government sometimes says things that are deliberately misleading in order to further its own aims? Yes/No
6. Do you believe that the EU leaders sometimes say things that are deliberately misleading in order to further its own aims? Yes/No
My answers, to every 1 of those questions, is Yes.
Your thousands of posts suggest you genuinely believe the answers to 1, 4 & 6 are No.
Which is why I struggle to think of anyone who so consistently praises everything done by Continental Europe, while simultaneously seeking to be constantly and consistently negative in relation to the UK.
And why I would rather read a Conspiracy thread.
I have no illusions about any large groups of politicians.
Although I do appreciate some are more truthful, and honourable, than others, they usually stand out.
Nigel Farage, and Ann Widdecombe were MEPs, they both make the top 5 of my most disliked politicians.
I have always been proud to be British.
I am embarrassed that we have a PM like Boris Johnson.
I am not too keen on the majority of the cabinet either.
Many politicians are guilty of overestimating the benefits of a particular policy, and at the same time downplaying any disadvantages.
Boris operates on a much higher level, he often just tells barefaced lies.
When faced with a choice you can almost bank on him making the wrong one, hence all the u-turns.
I dont pay much attention to the EU on a daily basis, I have just followed the arguments over Brexit.
So I dont think the EU is always right are we are always in the wrong.
I just think it has been handled badly from our point of view.
I appreciate that we voted in favour of leaving the EU, but Boris could have made some less damaging choices.
I am aware that we cant turn the clock back, and what is done is done, but I wonder if we could revisit the referendum, knowing what we know today, whether the result would have been the same.
I am at a loss to explain why so many people in the UK are keen to blame the EU for stuff that they are not responsible for.
Boris has been very keen on the rights afforded by the Brexit agreement, but reluctant to even acknowledge the obligations.
He finally admitted to the number of kids he has, yesterday, so maybe he is turning over a new leaf, and reaching a new level of maturity.
Although I very much doubt it.
Brown was far more honest than Blair. Far nicer man. Post-PM, a greater statesman (reminds me of Jimmy Carter in that respect). But Blair was unquestionably the more effective PM.
The best time to judge Johnson is when he has stepped down. For him, Brexit was the springboard to being PM. He didn't care one way or the other about Brexit-he wanted to do what was Best for Boris. But now he wants to prepare the way to leave, and to cement (or create) his legacy.
It would not surprise me if he actually went for a Swiss-style Brexit deal going forward. It will be dressed up as something different, of course. Faces need to be saved on all sides.Political suicide, of course. But Johnson doesn't think like other politicians. The last thing he needs is to be 1 of many PMs who have been tarnished over their dealings on the island of Ireland. I don't like him-but I actually think he is our best chance of moving forward. Because what is Best for Boris might, just might, also be what is Best for Britain. In the near future.
People in the UK tend to want something to blame. Blaming Brexit is no different to blaming the EU. Businesses have always needed to adapt or fail. But the failing ones always seem to blame change, rather than their failure to adapt. So, to a lesser extent, do people. In its way, it is no different to people trying to blame the RNG here.
Having said all that, Farage and Widdecombe would definitely and probably (in that order) be in my Bottom 5.
I just cant help disliking politicians that continually tell bare faced lies.
I dont think they have to.
The UK has distanced itself from an “unprofessional” and “frankly embarrassing” plan to try and join a North American trade pact, just 24 hours after mooting the idea.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/uk-distances-itself-from-laughable-and-unhelpful-plan-to-join-north-american-trade-pact/ar-AAOIrzm?ocid=msedgntp
Gordon Brown was just a less effective PM than Tony Blair.
Not sure how a Swiss style deal would go down.
Freight traffic would be still subject to customs checks, and,
Proposed framework accord
Negotiations between Switzerland and the European Commission on an institutional framework accord began in 2014 and concluded in November 2018. On 7 December 2018, the Swiss Federal Council decided to neither accept nor decline the negotiated accord, instead opting for a public consultation.[33] The negotiated accord[34] would cover five areas of existing agreements between the EU and Switzerland made in 1999:
free movement of persons
air transport
carriage of goods and passengers by rail and road
trade in agricultural products
mutual recognition of standards
Notably, the accord would facilitate EU law in these fields to be readily transposed into Swiss law, and the European Court of Justice would be the final and binding arbiter on disputes in these fields.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Switzerland–European_Union_relations
It’s under strain, though, after a Swiss referendum vote to cap immigration from the EU.
This has been criticised by the EU as against the rules of the treaty dealing with free movement of people, and led to the suspension of talks over cooperation in research funding.
There’s a lot of uncertainty about how to resolve this. News outlets report that the current Swiss deal with the EU could be under threat.
And the EU has previously said that it’s concerned about the way this system is working in general.
https://fullfact.org/europe/norway-switzerland-eu-laws/
As I have said a number of times before the implementation of Brexit is the problem, rather than the protocol.
The facts don't bear this out. Let's use the TUV as an example. NI elections-got precisely 1 seat. 2017 elections-nowhere. 2019 elections-didn't even field a candidate. 2021-look like a massive problem.
Many people in NI are up in arms over the border.
They wont wear any border.
They will not accept an Irish Sea border, or a land border.
They see it as the splitting up of the UK.
Unfortunately leaving the EU meant having a border.
Brexit means a border.
Why do you think we have declined the EUs offer of a veterinary agreement to reduce the border checks by 80%?
Why do you think that instead of accepting the options available to us, we have to blame the other side for not caving in to our demands?
Dont forget that more havoc has been postponed by delaying the end of grace periods, some of them until the middle of next year.
This is a typical example of how you only believe the facts that suit you. I'll deal withb this in a separate post.
I find it absolutely ridiculous that Boris would rather die in a ditch than extend the transition period, on the advice of business leaders to postpone the new rules coming in to place.
Yet he now seems to spend half his life whinging about these rules, and extending grace periods to avoid implementing them.
You couldnt make it up.
"Business leaders" want to do what is best for them. they're not unbiased. We have consistently voted for a Party that have delivered exactly what they promised. They didn't "make it up". We agreed to it. Not you, and not me-but democracy.
Really?
The transition period gave us the ability to continue frictionless trade, until we had time to get used to the new rules, before implementing them, as there was likely to be chaos.
He would rather die in a ditch than extend the transition period.
Yet the grace periods are intended to serve exactly the same purpose.
And he continues to extend them time after time, and avoids any ditches.
This means that the future holds more chaos, when we eventually end the grace periods.
When this finally happens, I am certain that many businesses, and a majority of people in NI will wish he had died in the ditch.
You keep bringing it up, but I wont wear it.
The referendum was democratic.
The manner in which we left wasnt.
Many were misled.
For instance we could have left the EU, but remained in the SM/CU, which would have solved the current problems.
The DUP shot themselves in the foot by supporting a Brexit they clearly didnt understand, believed the lies told to them by the PM, and failed to get anything in writing.
Agree. With the exception that they did get some cash.
The people of NI have been let down by Boris, and the DUP.
This is where we disagree. The people of NI have been let down by Boris, the DUP AND the EU.
I really cant see how the EU have let them down.
They have offered a solution that would reduce border checks by 80%.
They agreed to no land border, which was probably best for them.
They agreed to the backstop.
They agreed to the protocol.
They agreed to NI staying in the SM/CU, when failure to agree to this would have made everything impossible.
Not doing a deal would have still meant a border.
If the shoe was on the other foot, I can imagine Boris standing up in Parliament shouting f..k the EU, why should NI be allowed to remain in the SM/CU.
The people of NI are objecting to a border between them and the rest of the UK.
Leaving the SM/CU made this inevitable.
This is the result of Brexit, not the protocol.
If they vote down the protocol at Stormont, they cant get rid of the border, so how could this help?
Another Boris solution that in reality is not worth a light.
On Tuesday, European Commission Vice President Maros Sefcovic, who oversees EU relations with Britain, said he hoped to solve the Northern Irish trading issues by the end of the year.
But he again rejected a British demand to renegotiate the protocol and warned London not to take unilateral action.
Under the protocol, Britain agreed to leave some EU rules in place in Northern Ireland and accept checks on goods arriving from elsewhere in the UK, in order to preserve an open land border with EU member state Ireland.
The arrangement has, however, effectively placed a border in the Irish Sea, which businesses say has damaged trade.
It has also angered pro-British unionists in Northern Ireland who believe it divides them from the rest of the UK, raising concerns about a return to the sectarian violence that plagued the province for three decades.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/eu-must-respond-to-uk-s-demand-on-brexit-deal-urgently-minister-says/ar-AAOKLz7?ocid=msedgntp
The number of checks on goods arriving into Northern Ireland from Great Britain could be reduced by 80%, the Irish Foreign Affairs minister has said.
Simon Coveney said that option exists within the Northern Ireland Protocol if the UK was willing to agreed a common approach to standards in relation to veterinary practices, and sanitary and phytosanitary standards on food.
https://www.itv.com/news/utv/2021-05-20/ni-protocol-port-checks-could-be-reduced-by-80-coveney
This is what happens when you only listen to 1 side.
Current divergence? None.
Current planned divergence? None.
Need for those current checks? None.
Reason carried out? Because the UK refuses to promise that it will not diverge at some unspecified time in the future.
When might the checks need to be done? Then. And only then. Unless you just want to be petty and vindictive.
Got to admire a Politician who has the gall to criticise the UK for giving one-sided press briefings. While giving a one-sided press briefing.
I'll leave you to your thread now.
Feel free to believe that everything your country does is wrong. And everything the other side does is perfect.
Legends in their own minds.
Tory ‘Spartans’ finally toast victory over Theresa May that helped deliver Brexit
Sir Bill Cash, the veteran Eurosceptic and the evening’s co-host, told the dinner at the party’s historic Carlton Club in St James’s, central London, that without their opposition, Mrs May’s withdrawal agreement would now be in force.
Sir Bill said that if the MPs had buckled, “we would still be in the EU by the customs union, the backstop”. He then thanked everyone “for staying strong”.
MPs remarked how some high-profile Brexiteers were not eligible to attend because they had caved in to the pressure and backed Mrs May’s deal, including Boris Johnson – who was in America on a visit – and Jacob Rees-Mogg, the Leader of the House of Commons.
Sir Bernard said the MPs told how “how we supported each other, and how the Daily Telegraph was the only paper that supported us. Everybody [else] crumbled”.
The MPs did not entirely rest on their laurels during the dinner. Sir John Redwood noted that nearly two million Britons in Northern Ireland still effectively lived in the EU and others noted that fishing had not fully been taken back under UK control, so there was still work to be done.
As the group broke up at around 10.30pm, they agreed to pose for a team photograph on the main stairs at the Carlton club, wearing the mementoes that had been laid out on the table for them by Sir Bill: green ties and cufflinks for the men, green scarves for the women.
Each was decorated with small gold Spartan helmets, modelled on one that Sir Bill had spotted in the British Museum.
Speaking on Thursday, Mr Francois said: “It was a great pleasure to dine with my fellow Spartans, especially as the event was delayed several times by Covid restrictions.
“These are the MPs who held out against all the odds and thus helped to deliver a real Brexit. They can wear their commemorative ties and scarves with pride.”
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/tory-spartans-finally-toast-victory-over-theresa-may-that-helped-deliver-brexit/ar-AAOKGMn?ocid=msedgntp
A purpose-built £37million facility (pictured, main) on the Greek island of Samos has the capacity to hold 3,000 asylum seekers with basketball courts and playgrounds site as well as container-style accommodation units (inset, left, a migrant settles in). Those who arrive on Samos from north Africa and the Middle East are free to come and go from the centre with the gates (inset right) open from 8am to 8pm, with a bus running to and from the main town four times a day. It has been criticises as 'prison-like' but it is a far more humane destination than the dangerous and insanitary conditions experienced by migrants in the shanty towns. In the UK however, many migrants are picked up off beaches (top right in Dungeness, Kent) and placed in random hotels, B&Bs and hostels.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10022747/EUs-37million-migrant-centre-provide-clean-safe-accommodation-3-000-arrivals.html
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/boris-johnson-has-been-using-the-same-french-joke-since-1994/ar-AAOKlAa?ocid=msedgntp