Johnson: 'Confident' EU will show flexibility | Forex Factory

  • Johnson: 'Confident' EU will show flexibility

Added at 10:07am
Added at 10:07am

Added at 10:07am
Comment Options
ekan
Aug 8, 2019 2:08pm — Edited
Permalink
Quoting OnlineAddict
Can someone from the UK explain to me why the backstop is the only thing that worries him? From an outsider look, there seem to be far worse things in the deal than this minor(in my view) Irish issue. Is this only some political stunt or what is it? I am trying to understand him, if its even possible.
Even though I am on the EU side, I can try. As far as I understand the issue, the backstop is designed to ensure the Irish Peace will be preserved by avoiding hard border between RofI and NI. While both RofI and UK are part of EU, it happens automatically. Once UK and NI with it exit, then the invisible border becomes a real land border between EU and UK. Such a border becomes a EU-wide problem if UK is not in the Common Market because then goods from UK, which come from an economy with different regulatory regime and (future) FTAs (such as the one Trump is pushing for) can cross into the common market unchecked and uncontrolled. This contaminates the Common Market.

To ensure the above does not happen, EU and UK have to work out a FTA, which takes a long time, even when the two parties agree, much longer if they don't. What if they do not agree, and the FTA never gets signed? This is where the backstop kicks in. It stipulates that if FTA is not signed within a certain time limit (transition period), in order to avoid damaging both the Irish peace and Common Market integrity, UK will stay in the common market until they do. Two scenarios are possible:

1. UK as a whole remains in the common market indefinitely. All hardcore Brexiteers hate it because it is a soft Brexit aka "Brexit in name only". One of May's "red lines" was a non-negotiable exit from both EU and the common market (aka "hard" Brexit). In any case, EU treaties stipulate there has to be an exit agreement signed before any future relations can be negotiated.

Everyone else hates it too. Moderate Brexiteers hate it because it means UK becomes "rule taker, not rule maker" (which was what Remainers used to tell them all along). Remainers hate it because "we already got the best deal, and that is IN not OUT" or "I am for all in, but if it is just a customs union like that, then we are better out".

2. Only NI remains in the common market. That means the border of the custom union moves between GB and NI. DUP hates that as much as fundamentalist Brexiteers hate option 1, if not more, because it pulls NI out of UK's embrace. DUP provided the critical (10, I think) votes to support May's government after she gambled on an early election and lost Cameron's majority.

So, the backstop behaves as an insurance policy. Or a put option held by EU on EU/UK trade, if you will. If there is no foul play and both parties negotiate in good faith and with good progress, and sign FTA, it never gets exercised. All is hunky dory. It is the "held by EU" part that infuriates the Brexiteers, whose whole game plan hinges on how UK is so valuable to EU that they would be begged to stay in, hence have the upper hand in future negotiations.

EU and May then offered additional, legally binding to EU, guarantees in the Political Declaration (the portion of the deal that maps out future relations) that it wasn't a trap and UK could get out of the backstop unilaterally. Raised the put option price, if you will.

At that moment one Geoffrey Cox, a Brexiteer, and May's attorney general, was asked to give his legal opinion on the modified backstop to Parliament. He said that he still could not rule out that if triggered, the back stop would trap UK in custom union indefinitely and they could get out only by signing a (presumably disadvantageous) FTA or only released by EU. That was all that the extreme Brexiteers needed to stand adamantly against the backstop. Nothing but complete removal of the backstop would do.

The votes came one after another, always the deal with the backstop was turned down. Time was running out and the Parliament ordered May to go ask for an extension.

An alternative from UK was to work out a "technological solution" how to have the border (for goods) and not have it (for Irish) at the same time. However, no specific pieces of technology and a proposal how it will work out for real was offered. Even if it were, there was no time to actually prove such a technological solution exists, how it will be deployed, to test how it will work on the spot, etc etc etc. Johnson also does not have such a specific proposal to the best of my knowledge.
Reply
RossEdwards
Aug 8, 2019 11:11am
Permalink
Quoting OnlineAddict
Can someone from the UK explain to me why the backstop is the only thing that worries him? From an outsider look, there seem to be far worse things in the deal than this minor(in my view) Irish issue. Is this only some political stunt or what is it? I am trying to understand him, if its even possible.
The Conservative Government has a majority of 1. Its actually got NO MANDATE..since Mays election in 2017 the UK Government has effectively been a Minority Government. To move any legislation through Parliament in the last 2 years they have depended on a "support & supply" agreement with the DUP. The DUP is an NI ultraconservative right wing protestant party, hypersensitive to anything that weakens the Historical Union between NI and Britain. That why the "Irish Backstop" (a proposal that came from the UK side 2017),
has driven them crazy. Frankly I doubt anyone else in Scotland England or Wales is even mildly bothered.
But it HAS served a rallying point for extreme Brexiteers who look for an excuse to crash out as policy.
Reply
OnlineAddict
Aug 8, 2019 11:13am
Permalink
Quoting RossEdwards
The DUP is an NI ultraconservative right wing protestant party, hypersensitive to anything that weakens the Historical Union between NI and Britain.
Ok, so it really is only a populist stand. They should really ask the people of NI what they want and not decide for them from London, far away from their issues.
Reply
Maxthetrader
Aug 8, 2019 11:49am
Permalink
Quoting clockwork71
Invade France. Its the only sensible thing to do.
Better yet, invade the whole EU. That way Boris can call the shots. Brussels can shove it.
Reply
clockwork71
Aug 8, 2019 10:46am
Permalink
Invade France. Its the only sensible thing to do.
Reply
OnlineAddict
Aug 8, 2019 10:12am
Permalink
Can someone from the UK explain to me why the backstop is the only thing that worries him? From an outsider look, there seem to be far worse things in the deal than this minor(in my view) Irish issue. Is this only some political stunt or what is it? I am trying to understand him, if its even possible.
Reply
OnlineAddict
Aug 8, 2019 11:12am
Permalink
Quoting sadeghi
{quote} I'm not from u.k but as far as i remember, backstop was the most important cause, conservative party has no problem with may's deal except backstop, from other side, the majority of labor party had some problems with two more parts, specially with details of custom union, anyway there won't be any problem if backstop matter solve, as Mr Johnson said.
Yes, I know that, but why?? Is NI that important? I mean, its a tiny part of the UK and even on another island...so why do they care so much? And especially since they know that no backstop will bring back violence to Ireland?
Reply
OnlineAddict
Aug 8, 2019 2:33pm
Permalink
Quoting ekan
{quote} Even though I am on the EU side, I can try. As far as I understand the issue, the backstop is designed to ensure the Irish Peace will be preserved by avoiding hard border between RofI and NI. While both RofI and UK are part of EU, that happens automatically. Once UK and NI with it exit, then this becomes a real land border between EU and UK. Such a border becomes a EU-wide problem if UK is not in the Common Market because then goods from UK, which come from an economy with different regulatory regime and (future) FTAs (such as the one Trump...
Thanks for this great post, highly appreciated!
Reply
Bones
Aug 11, 2019 5:45am — Edited
Permalink
The treaty won't be opened because that's the strongest agreement there is.
The backstop means if you can not agree, you can not leave the EU unilaterally.
That's worse than now because at the moment we are exercising our right to leave.No one else permission.
It's a major sticking point of sovereignty and a super trump card in negotiations
There is no such treaty anywhere in the world.
It's dead as Boris says because it failed parliament 3 times despite some tweaks outside the treaty for reassurance
Legal advice by Cox said there's no guarantee you won't be trapped.

There is literally no way that deal can make it through parliament on any level
3 times -vote the same deal was a joke in itself after the first time being the worst parliament defeat ever.

There was evidence that it could have passed without the backstop.







Quoting OnlineAddict
Can someone from the UK explain to me why the backstop is the only thing that worries him? From an outsider look, there seem to be far worse things in the deal than this minor(in my view) Irish issue. Is this only some political stunt or what is it? I am trying to understand him, if its even possible.
Reply
Bones
Aug 11, 2019 6:15am
Permalink
ok, what happens in a no-deal situ on that border?
since you really believe the insurance policy terminology that actually causes a no-deal.

Quoting ekan
{quote} Even though I am on the EU side, I can try. As far as I understand the issue, the backstop is designed to ensure the Irish Peace will be preserved by avoiding hard border between RofI and NI. While both RofI and UK are part of EU, it happens automatically. Once UK and NI with it exit, then the invisible border becomes a real land border between EU and UK. Such a border becomes a EU-wide problem if UK is not in the Common Market because then goods from UK, which come from an economy with different regulatory regime and (future) FTAs (such...
Reply
Bones
Aug 12, 2019 8:26am
Permalink
I'll tell you one thing for a fact we already have a treaty spelling out no maned border there,
Also confirmed already recently by our Gov we're not putting one there,
the place to do checks is the only ways off the island,then where those routes go...

Not exactly going to be a route for the black market of Uk -EU

BTW= the UK will have no tariff on nearly 90% goods on no-deal already published.

I filled in some more gaps now tell us what's going to happen on that border on a no-deal??

Quoting ekan
{quote} Why don't you tell us, bones?
Reply
Bones
Aug 12, 2019 8:45am
Permalink
Let me ask another way if that's an insurance policy what is it insuring
UK and Ireland won't put a border there
And aren't you the least bit concerned that the very insurance policy you're talking about is the thing that will escalate that border by vertu of the fact the withdrawal treaty won't pass Uk with it.
Reply
Bones
Aug 12, 2019 8:47am
Permalink
Yea he's playing a dangerous game of Russian roulette on EU's behalf.


Quoting ekan
{quote} If that goes on as you described it, then EU has absolutely no incentive to negotiate with Tory party. EU objectives are met. Irish Peace is preserved, The Common market's integrity is assured. The Brexiteer snake is purged out of EU once and for all. Except Varadkar is not buying it and he wants the backstop on no matter what. Can you think of a possible reason why?
Reply
Bones
Aug 12, 2019 8:53am
Permalink
The incentive is they want the money,
No transition and some careful consideration of what's right of the generous offer made, this bill will disappear.
That's not paying into the EU 40 years into the future.

Still, you don't know what's to happen with the border on no deal, this is a direct question?
if that's an insurance policy what is it insuring?

Quoting ekan
{quote} If that goes on as you described it, then EU has absolutely no incentive to negotiate with Tory party. EU objectives are met. Irish Peace is preserved, The Common market's integrity is assured. The Brexiteer snake is purged out of EU once and for all. Except Varadkar is not buying it and he wants the backstop on no matter what. Can you think of a possible reason why?
Reply
Bones
Aug 12, 2019 11:18am — Edited
Permalink
The backstop is strategic in the negotiations, that's why it's logical the Irish have to maintain they want it.
No one is going to enforce that border at the border and that's the correct answer.

That's why you don't need to insure against it.

To be clear the route from Ireland and Northern Ireland to the EU is over the UK , that border is a route to nowhere


Quoting ekan
{quote} This is totally illogical once you think more on it. Unless he is a suicidal psycho, what would he gain from such a thing? And why on EU's behalf? Continental EU26 and the ~700 million people living therein want to take on a legacy off-shore liability from the British Empire, which concerns only a tiny percentage of EU population - come on, really? Let's assume there is no deal and noone lifts a finger. The status quo across the Irish border is frozen as it was. However, the legal status changes. When UK exits the EU without a trade deal,...
Attached Images
Reply
Bones
Aug 12, 2019 11:29am
Permalink
The reason it was refused is that that splits NI from the UK
under different rules

"According to internet sources I read, R of Ireland proposed the backstop, and in its first version, it applied to North Ireland only. May's government apprently refused saying this would give North Ireland unfair competitive advantage in accessing EU markets."
Reply
Bones
Aug 12, 2019 11:34am
Permalink
I don't believe this guy in the first place
he's playing his part for the greater good of the EU to achieve the strongest negotiating position

"So if you are thinking that EU may force Varadkar to yield"
Reply
Bones
Aug 12, 2019 4:29pm
Permalink
yes physical checks have to be off the border, there already systems outside the EU goods where less than 5% is physically checked,
this blown up out of proportion


Quoting ekan
{quote} Interesting idea. Let's entertain it for a while. Could you describe in more detail how that would work within the broader context of the common market?
Reply
Bones
Aug 12, 2019 4:44pm — Edited
Permalink
you can't leave Ireland without going through customs
the vast majority going to the EU goes through Dover + Channel tunnel as I already said
over the cost-effective Uk land bridge
looks like Holyhead is the route the other way round to the EU
so all they have to do is figure out a way of monitoring the crossings of the short internal border on an island
Attached Image (click to enlarge)
Click to Enlarge Name: Screenshot 2019-08-13 at 00.38.01.png Size: 246 KB
Reply
Bones
Aug 12, 2019 6:34pm
Permalink
I'm making suggestions, 153 k lorries leave Belfast and only 0-25% of those head for EU officially.
That's also a number that's easy monitored.
This border isn't like a border with Russia, people are controlled going in and out of the island and our countries are friendly. There's nowhere else to go once you're there!
You monitor the land border and whittle the vehicles down by trusted trader who declares in advance right to a domestic crosser etc via number plate readers.
Then you pick out high riskers at the ports

Looking at NI exports the only way to transport is by road, across the UK mainland.They have to pass multiple checks before the EU shores.
If you know another route or common export product please let me know.


UK has a treaty already saying no hard border.
So the backstop does not need to be in a treaty?
Its ramifications are so toxic, that they stop a deal altogether,

So if the EU is willing to let this Withdrawal fail on that, there's more to it?





Quoting ekan
{quote} Interesting idea. Let's entertain it for a while. Could you describe in more detail how that would work within the broader context of the common market?
Reply
Bones
Aug 13, 2019 7:14am — Edited
Permalink
where that backstop should be is in the declaration of trust because you don't know the trade agreement until that has concluded.
Cross border NI-RI trade is the only problem I see
not people or goods coming in or off that island, I can't agree an open border there affect the rest of EU as the checks on and off already exist
I looked at that and goods across that border are pretty much, so, assuming tariff are equal they would be pointless

If it were in the trust document it would give more time to advance technology solutions and allow us all to move forward.

A cast-iron agreement of no hard border by treaty right now is not possible, no deal would hurt the republic the most of all
Attached Image
Reply
Bones
Aug 13, 2019 9:08am
Permalink
this bloke is rolling the dice and likely to lose or back down last min

No-deal Brexit could cost Ireland more than 100,000 jobs
‘The government has relished wearing the green jersey on Brexit and standing up to the British with the help of the European Union — and been aware of the political benefits of doing so,’ thundered Pat Leahy in the Irish Times last week. ‘But now the pitfalls begin to emerge from the fog.’

Leo Varadkar gambled on the British government either cancelling Brexit or getting roped in by the backstop to accept Brexit in name only. The Taoiseach lost that gamble — and his strategy now lies in tatters.

Since mid-2017, when Varadkar took office, teaming up with Brussels to take a maximalist, ultra-legalistic approach to the Irish border, his domestic commentariat has overwhelmingly backed him. The opportunity to exploit Theresa May’s reliance on the DUP, with tiny Ireland making life difficult for the mighty Brits, was just too tempting to miss.

There was a cynical belief, in the political saloons of both Dublin and Brussels, that if fears about a return to the Troubles were whipped up enough, the biggest expression of democracy in British history could be thwarted. That, or the Brits might be goaded into staying in the customs union — diverting billions each year to Brussels, as UK consumers and businesses kept paying the EU’s common external tariff on non-EU imports.

But with Boris Johnson heading for Downing Street, there’s a growing realisation that no deal could actually happen — and that it would be terrible for Ireland. Half the Republic’s beef, timber and construction material exports are sold in the UK, and over two-thirds of goods exporters use Britain as a ‘land bridge’ — crossing the Irish Sea, then travelling by road to eastern UK ports, heading for the EU and global markets.

With default EU intransigence, however, and Johnson on a ‘do or die’ mission to take Britain out of the EU on 31 October ‘come what may’, the ‘crash-out’ Brexit which the Irish fear is now on the cards.

‘Reality intrudes on the government’s Brexit game plan,’ read the headline on Pat Leahy’s article last week. Leahy is political editor of the Irish Times — until now, the standard bearer of Irish backstop resolve. Yet Ireland’s most important newspaper now says Varadkar should get off his Brexit high horse.

‘If a concession on the backstop materialises — perhaps a time-limiting protocol; a legal codicil which specifies a review in the absence of agreement; something, anything to give [Johnson] an opportunity to bring the withdrawal agreement back to the House of Commons, there will be intense pressure on the Irish government to accept it,’ wrote Leahy. ‘After all, isn’t the possibility of border checks in a few years’ time better than the certainty of checks on 31 October?’



Quoting ekan
{quote} That's not the real problem. I will give you a hint. It is called "regulatory arbitrage".
Reply
Bones
Aug 13, 2019 9:13am — Edited
Permalink
There's already a boarder there with different rules, name a potential loophole you can think of that makes it off the island
They should agree to leave these countries well alone there's no benefit creating a barrier between

David Davis accuses Number 10 of exaggerating Northern Ireland Brexit border row
"The Northern Ireland border is a border already," he said.
"It's got a VAT border, its got an excise border, its got a security border, and it works perfectly well with careful cooperation between both sides.
"The only thing that will be added if we got a tariff-free agreement, which is what we are after, then the only thing that would be added would be rules of origin of goods coming into Northern Ireland that might go in to the South."
He added: "We can control that. There are only six ports in Northern Ireland. This is a much more straightforward issue to deal with if we choose to. If we put the political will behind it.




Quoting ekan
{quote} That's not the real problem. I will give you a hint. It is called "regulatory arbitrage".
Reply
Bones
Aug 14, 2019 11:42am — Edited
Permalink
how do goods get from Ireland to the EU? RI is going to be very isolated
It has to go through local exit hard customs across the UK then through a port your apparently happy with.

We talk goods because that's the only thing a hard border achieves.
You have to make sure the ports and airports have very good customs.

There will be a border and they can develop technology and nationality of goods and livestock.
It just won't have checks directly on the border.That's what all Irish want
Livestock these days I think already carries long-chain history.

It's pointless getting legal one side contraband into Ireland via NI for export
Anymore than trying at Dover





Quoting ekan
{quote} I told you, regulatory arbitrage. Not just any regulatory arbitrage, but regulatory arbitrage by design. One of the Leave campaign key promises was to make trade deals with all sorts of states and trading blocks. The more the merrier. These trade deals are expected to fall short of the high regulatory standards of the EU especially with respect to labour and environmental parameters. This may happen because UK is desperate to restart their economy after hard/no-deal Brexit or entirely by design in line with the Brexiteer economic philosophy....
Reply
Bones
Aug 14, 2019 12:09pm
Permalink
Stop buying into these negative stories, it's not our intention to lower standards
"This may happen because UK is desperate to restart their economy after hard/no-deal Brexit or entirely by design in line with the Brexiteer economic philosophy. "

not important in this discussion, muddy the waters.
"And the goods is the easy part. Finance and digital services is where it really gets tricky. Discussion on those has been conspicuously absent from the above materials you provided..."

It's not is it, you're looking at a special ecosystem on an Island,
Let's talk real world not sounds right
The best thing for both sides is don't interfere where possible, use the trade negotiations for a comprehensive FTA between and keep the common travel area on Ireland.
"This is what "Contamination of The Common Market" means. You asked me what the backstop insures. This is what it insures."

That's what I'm saying move the border issue into the trade negotiations. That creates time and is most logical anyway.

1. Note the conditional language of those texts and maps. Lots of could's, would's, will (one day)'s, if we choose's. Nothing of this is ready to go online and to work smoothly on day 1. It wasn't ready on March 29, won't be ready on Oct. 31 either. To expect EU to go into Brexit using this setup is not serious. The technical solution probably could have avoided the Irish backstop issue if it were being worked seriously by May's government, but for whatever reasons wasn't. Johnson shows absolutely no signs he would attempt to make such a technological solution viable before his do or die date either.

Stop making untrue problems.

2. The Irish were not consulted seriously on such a solution and political agreement that they will accept the changed status of the Irish border was never secured. Anyone may claim "the border is the same as it was", but if Irish extremists from either or both camps decide that is not and take action, then what? It will take 1 or 2 attacks and this whole set up will come crashing like house of cards.


Its what they want, the border is there and checks will happen all the time, just not on it.

3. The expectations that Ireland takes a role in making this arrangement work are OK, but not to the extent where that infringes on their sovereignty. As I said before, the expectation that the border checks that will be due at the Ireland-NI border move somewhere else puts the area between that border and the somewhere else out of the common market.












Quoting ekan
{quote} I told you, regulatory arbitrage. Not just any regulatory arbitrage, but regulatory arbitrage by design. One of the Leave campaign key promises was to make trade deals with all sorts of states and trading blocks. The more they....
Reply
Bones
Aug 15, 2019 10:59am — Edited
Permalink
You understand that withdrawal failed parliament and EU won't open it. The laws on his side on that matter.
Negotiations have happened already.
Quoting ekan
{quote} If Johnson leaves not just without WA, but without even trying to get one negotiated, I suspect (not a lawyer here) that international law will not be on his side.

Why not appropriate?
Quoting ekan
{quote}The above argument was made by UK early on and was not accepted by EU on the basis that it is not appropriate to discuss FTA for the time UK will be out while UK is still in.

The WA isn't a problem in itself if makes sense to sign first. But the trade deal needs to be ready to rock straight after to be fair.
That's actually what we were sold. This includes a trade deal -not split like that =giving away any position off bat.
Quoting ekan
{quote} UK used article 50 to trigger Brexit. Article 50 (2) states that there has to be WA signed for orderly withdrawal, hence it can be argued that UK agreed on the need of having a WA as well.
Reply
Bones
Aug 15, 2019 11:05am
Permalink
I'm not going there to all Uk
my comment was about Ireland, the place to deal with the border is in the declaration of trust
Also, I don't believe there will ever be an FTA for all Uk but they should make one Ireland at no cost to anyone
Given its history and geography
For the sake of Ireland both sides.
Trust me though leaving the EU is more important than Scotland and NI Ireland to most leavers.
Reply
Bones
Aug 15, 2019 11:14am
Permalink
Ok go back to withdrawal you understand it failed already not once but 3 times but then blame the tories,
So what do you think should happen
The EU won't open it.

Quoting ekan
{quote} Can but won't. Same as Uk's Tory government.
Reply
Bones
Aug 15, 2019 11:20am — Edited
Permalink
The only time that WD will be opened is if the EU believe no deal, as long as there's a thread of hope it will stay shut.
Only as times gone on these gambles have exacerbated the talks from Cameron to May -now you have Boris
Next -the Brexit party & a super hostile public.
Reply
Bones
Aug 15, 2019 11:43am
Permalink
How toxic do you need to see before you say no way

"The defeat of the EU Withdrawal Agreement is the largest defeats in the Commons for a government in history, with the government losing by 230 votes. The previous largest defeat was 166.

Previously, only two governments have got close to facing a defeat of more than 100 votes, and both faced a general election within months."
Reply
Bones
Aug 15, 2019 12:24pm
Permalink
Elections are coming for sure
That's when we get out chance to oust those holding this back from a better outcome right now
But then this could look way more ugly for any deal at all

I already predicted that May cabinet is a dead man walking, there all gone and crying now
All the time she's saying it's my deal or no brexit =deluded
Next, they will be out of parliament and Labour will be devastated.
Lib Dems a winner on remain front
Reply
sadeghi
Aug 8, 2019 11:07am
Permalink
Quoting OnlineAddict
Can someone from the UK explain to me why the backstop is the only thing that worries him? From an outsider look, there seem to be far worse things in the deal than this minor(in my view) Irish issue. Is this only some political stunt or what is it? I am trying to understand him, if its even possible.
I'm not from u.k but as far as i remember, backstop was the most important cause, conservative party has no problem with may's deal except backstop, from other side, the majority of labor party had some problems with two more parts, specially with details of custom union, anyway there won't be any problem if backstop matter solve, as Mr Johnson said.
Reply
sadeghi
Aug 8, 2019 11:31am
Permalink
Quoting OnlineAddict
{quote} Yes, I know that, but why?? Is NI that important? I mean, its a tiny part of the UK and even on another island...so why do they care so much? And especially since they know that no backstop will bring back violence to Ireland?
that's not just about NI, one-third of conservatives were opposite, one-third plus labors = failing, please note it's not just connected to one tiny part, they are delegations of one country. country which is an important part of u.k
Reply
barkie
Aug 15, 2019 11:56am
Permalink
Quoting Bones
How toxic do you need to see before you say no way "The defeat of the EU Withdrawal Agreement is the largest defeats in the Commons for a government in history, with the government losing by 230 votes. The previous largest defeat was 166. Previously, only two governments have got close to facing a defeat of more than 100 votes, and both faced a general election within months."
Impressive walk away then
Reply
ekan
Aug 12, 2019 8:45am
Permalink
Quoting Bones
I'll tell you one thing for a fact we already have a treaty spelling out no maned border there, Also confirmed already recently by our Gov we're not putting one there, the place to do checks is the only ways off the island. Not exactly going to be a route for the black market of Uk -EU BTW= the UK will have no tariff on nearly 90% goods on no deal already published. i filled in some more gaps now tell us what's going to happen on that border on a no-deal {quote}
If that goes on as you described it, then EU has absolutely no incentive to negotiate with Tory party.

EU objectives are met. Irish Peace is preserved, The Common market's integrity is assured. The Brexiteer snake is purged out of EU once and for all.

Except Varadkar is not buying it and he wants the backstop on no matter what. Can you think of a possible reason why?
Reply
ekan
Aug 12, 2019 10:28am — Edited
Permalink
Quoting Bones
Yea he's playing a dangerous game of Russian roulette on EU's behalf. {quote}
This is totally illogical once you think more on it. Unless he is a suicidal psycho, what would he gain from such a thing?

And why on EU's behalf? Continental EU26 and the ~700 million people living therein want to take on a legacy off-shore liability from the British Empire, which concerns only a tiny percentage of EU population - come on, really?

Let's assume there is no deal and noone lifts a finger. The status quo across the Irish border is frozen as it was. However, the legal status changes. When UK exits the EU without a trade deal, it exits the common market. There is no trade deal in place, there is no time to make one, and without a WA signed, EU treaties rule out negotiating one anyway.

So what happens then is no deal Brexit puts the burden on Varadkar to enforce the border between UK and The common market. This can happen either on the Ireland - North Ireland land border, thus violating the Irish Peace, or on the Ireland - EU maritime/air border, thus effectively dragging R of I out of the common market along with UK, which is incompatible with a full EU membership. Understandably, he wants to avoid both of these unpleasant eventualities. That is why he wants the back stop - not because he is playing russian roulette, let alone on EU behalf.

According to internet sources I read, R of Ireland proposed the backstop, and in its first version, it applied to North Ireland only. May's government apprently refused saying this would give North Ireland unfair competitive advantage in accessing EU markets. (EU is not blocking UK out of the common market, quite the opposite. It is the extremist Brexiteers who want all out).

And then of course there is DUP, for whom the idea of NI being separated from UK even partially is anathema. So the other alternative, backstop applies to whole of UK if triggered, was put in the draft WA.

So if you are thinking that EU may force Varadkar to yield, think that Con party can ask DUP to take one for the team and support the WA with NI backstop only. Both of them have about equal chance of working.
Reply
ekan
Aug 12, 2019 12:34pm
Permalink
Quoting Bones
No one is going to enforce that border at the border and that's the correct answer. {quote} {image} {image}
Interesting idea. Let's entertain it for a while.

Could you describe in more detail how that would work within the broader context of the common market?
Reply
ekan
Aug 14, 2019 6:00am
Permalink
Quoting Bones
There's already a boarder there with different rules, name a potential loophole you can think of that makes it off the island
I told you, regulatory arbitrage. Not just any regulatory arbitrage, but regulatory arbitrage by design.

One of the Leave campaign key promises was to make trade deals with all sorts of states and trading blocks. The more the merrier. These trade deals are expected to fall short of the high regulatory standards of the EU especially with respect to labour and environmental parameters.

This may happen because UK is desperate to restart their economy after hard/no-deal Brexit or entirely by design in line with the Brexiteer economic philosophy.

Imagine an "inequal FTA" between UK and PRC (oh what a historical irony) whereby UK accepts Made in PRC goods without adherence to any First World-level standards in exchange for some financial lifeline to deal with Brexit fallout.

And the goods is the easy part. Finance and digital services is where it really gets tricky. Discussion on those has been conspicuously absent from the above materials you provided...

Then a lot of PRC companies will start up local subsidiaries and will use the porous Irish border to get into EU circumventing the much tighter enforcement at other EU borders, including the future France-UK maritime border.

This is what "Contamination of The Common Market" means. You asked me what the backstop insures. This is what it insures.

This can be taken care of if a comprehensive FTA between UK and the common market is adopted first. That has a number of options - like Common Market Lite, Custom Union, The Norway Way, The Swiss Cheesy border, etc. The problem is extremist Brexiteers vehemently oppose all of them as BINO.

In the absence of firm legally binding guarantees that the common market integrity will not be compromised either by carelessness or by design, the backstop makes up for those until they are in place.

All of the things you provided above are what it is usually meant by "technological solution". Here are what I see as the main issues.

1. Note the conditional language of those texts and maps. Lots of could's, would's, will (one day)'s, if we choose's. Nothing of this is ready to go online and to work smoothly on day 1. It wasn't ready on March 29, won't be ready on Oct. 31 either. To expect EU to go into Brexit using this setup is not serious. The technical solution probably could have avoided the Irish backstop issue if it were being worked seriously by May's government, but for whatever reasons wasn't. Johnson shows absolutely no signs he would attempt to make such a technological solution viable before his do or die date either.

2. The Irish were not consulted seriously on such a solution and political agreement that they will accept the changed status of the Irish border was never secured. Anyone may claim "the border is the same as it was", but if Irish extremists from either or both camps decide that is not and take action, then what? It will take 1 or 2 attacks and this whole set up will come crashing like house of cards.

3. The expectations that Ireland takes a role in making this arrangement work are OK, but not to the extent where that infringes on their sovereignty. As I said before, the expectation that the border checks that will be due at the Ireland-NI border move somewhere else puts the area between that border and the somewhere else out of the common market.
Reply
ekan
Aug 15, 2019 9:48am
Permalink
Quoting Bones
The best thing for both sides is don't interfere where possible, use the trade negotiations for a comprehensive FTA between and keep the common travel area on Ireland.

That's what I'm saying move the border issue into the trade negotiations. That creates time and is most logical anyway.
This discussion was about the WA the backstop and technical alternatives to the backstop, and the status of the Irish border on Oct.31 and immediately after. Those two are separate from FTA signed later on, whenever that comes to pass.

The above argument was made by UK early on and was not accepted by EU on the basis that it is not appropriate to discuss FTA for the time UK will be out while UK is still in.

UK used article 50 to trigger Brexit. Article 50 (2) states that there has to be WA signed for orderly withdrawal, hence it can be argued that UK agreed on the need of having a WA as well. If Johnson leaves not just without WA, but without even trying to get one negotiated, I suspect (not a lawyer here) that international law will not be on his side.

WA includes provisions about future treaties, and procedures for their acceptance. Specifically for FTA, UK is much better with the procedure outlined in WA than in the general procedure. With WA, FTA need be approved by majority, without - by every state AND regional parliament. During the acceptance of the FTA with Canada, a single Belgian regional parliament torpedoed the whole thing (very embarrassing).
Reply
ekan
Aug 15, 2019 1:00pm
Permalink
Bones, I understand all this. It is an internal UK matter, the UK political body need to work its way through the situation. EU side has no such problem, our positions are clear - especially now after the onslaught of the far right/nationalist parties have been were thwarted in the recent EU elections.

To demand EU "bend their back" is ridiculous. These kind of concessions you (and BoJo) are pushing for are usually given only after defeat in a war. You leavers did not win a war, just a silly little referendum with a 52:48 result.

The situation is at a stalemate, and both sides now are dug in their trenches. We shall witness the events unfold firsthand shortly. Buckle up.

I will leave it at that.
Reply
Bones
Aug 11, 2019 5:57am
Permalink
The backstop is actually a device for the EU to maintain super control over negotiations
The backstop being the UKs idea is a joke, you believe that spin...
Reply
Bones
Aug 12, 2019 11:48am
Permalink
Attached Image (click to enlarge)
Click to Enlarge Name: Screenshot 2019-08-12 at 19.40.34.jpg Size: 5 KB
Reply
Bones
Aug 13, 2019 7:34am — Edited
Permalink
Attached Image (click to enlarge)
Click to Enlarge Name: Screenshot 2019-08-13 at 15.33.05.png Size: 82 KB
Reply
Bones
Aug 13, 2019 8:40am
Permalink
UK mainland is also the bridge to EU Mainland
Attached Image
Reply
Bones
Aug 14, 2019 12:24pm
Permalink
Can the EU bend its rigid back to save the republic
Reply
Bones
Aug 14, 2019 12:32pm
Permalink
You have to agree on special arrangements because WTO is also a problem you never mentioned
Reply
Bones
Aug 15, 2019 12:15pm
Permalink
Yea I would and belive the Uk public majority would

Quoting barkie
{quote} Impressive walk away then
Reply
Jhunt
Aug 8, 2019 11:14am
Permalink
Quoting OnlineAddict
Can someone from the UK explain to me why the backstop is the only thing that worries him? From an outsider look, there seem to be far worse things in the deal than this minor(in my view) Irish issue. Is this only some political stunt or what is it? I am trying to understand him, if its even possible.
This is what is preventing the DUP from approving the deal.
Reply
ekan
Aug 8, 2019 3:12pm
Permalink
Quoting OnlineAddict
{quote} Thanks for this great post, highly appreciated!
You're welcome.
Reply
ekan
Aug 12, 2019 7:30am
Permalink
Quoting Bones
ok, what happens in a no-deal situ on that border? {quote}
Why don't you tell us, bones?
Reply
ekan
Aug 13, 2019 8:48am
Permalink
Quoting Bones
Cross border NI-RI trade is the only problem
That's not the real problem.

I will give you a hint. It is called "regulatory arbitrage".
Reply
ekan
Aug 15, 2019 9:50am
Permalink
Quoting Bones
Can the EU bend its rigid back to save the republic
Can but won't. Same as Uk's Tory government.
Reply
Aaafx-trader
Aug 8, 2019 12:08pm
Permalink
I'm sure about that too ... it will end up with hugs, kisses & Sterling at 1.40!
Let's end some Careers here JoJo
Reply
bshappens
Aug 9, 2019 1:21am
Permalink
Anyway... October 31 is near.
Reply
Trader#5738
Aug 9, 2019 9:20am
Permalink
If the EU and Ireland give in on the backstop the British government will want more and more changes instead of moaning about the Irish prime minister why don't the DUP give in and think of business people in NI they are happy to accept the backstop
Reply
Trader#76C8
Aug 8, 2019 11:01am
Permalink
Time to brexit news now. Trade war pause.
Reply
  • Story Stats