Current Affairs EU In or Out

In or Out

  • In

    Votes: 688 67.9%

  • Out

    Votes: 325 32.1%
  • Total voters
    1,013
Status
Not open for further replies.
peteblue said:
Ok, can you explain why we should not have had a ‘border’ between the ROI and the EU, but you think it’s fine to have one between the NI and U.K......in your own time, no rush, just explain the logic.....
Click to expand...
Several reasons really, primary one being that it would be nonsensical for the EU to treat a member state differently, particularly so when the the state itself had no involvement in the vote of another country.

Secondly, as you know, NI voted to Remain and it makes basic business and political sense to align the Northern part of the Island with the South in trading terms in the event of Brexit. To force all of the country to change how it deals with the EU, as you suggest, is as ludicrous as it is unworkable.

Thirdly, both the last 2 Tory governments have recognised publicly that all of Ireland is best served operating under the Protocol as negotiated and agreed. Even the DUP had accepted it FFS.
 
Armaghtoffee said:
Several reasons really, primary one being that it would be nonsensical for the EU to treat a member state differently, particularly so when the the state itself had no involvement in the vote of another country.

Secondly, as you know, NI voted to Remain and it makes basic business and political sense to align the Northern part of the Island with the South in trading terms in the event of Brexit. To force all of the country to change how it deals with the EU, as you suggest, is as ludicrous as it is unworkable.

Thirdly, both the last 2 Tory governments have recognised publicly that all of Ireland is best served operating under the Protocol as negotiated and agreed. Even the DUP had accepted it FFS.
Click to expand...

Of course it’s ridiculous, but no more ridiculous than the EU demanding the U.K. treat a member state differently. Neither the U.K. , ROI nor NI wish to put any kind of hard borders in place, the only body demanding something is the EU because they have wished to use this as a political and negotiating football from the beginning. Even the WTO do not demand hard borders.....
 
peteblue said:
Of course it’s ridiculous, but no more ridiculous than the EU demanding the U.K. treat a member state differently. Neither the U.K. , ROI nor NI wish to put any kind of hard borders in place, the only body demanding something is the EU because they have wished to use this as a political and negotiating football from the beginning. Even the WTO do not demand hard borders.....
Click to expand...
I can’t agree with that interpretation at all Pete.

What I see is the EU, and Irish voters, telling the U.K. to accept that their own imposed border in Ireland means that NI must be treated differently from the rest of the U.K. I have argued on here from 2016 that NI would need a bespoke arrangement and I have seen nothing since to change that opinion.
 
Armaghtoffee said:
I can’t agree with that interpretation at all Pete.

What I see is the EU, and Irish voters, telling the U.K. to accept that their own imposed border in Ireland means that NI must be treated differently from the rest of the U.K. I have argued on here from 2016 that NI would need a bespoke arrangement and I have seen nothing since to change that opinion.
Click to expand...

I agree there should be a bespoke arrangement, for both NI and ROI. The U.K. have imposed no borders and have consistently said they would not do so. So who is it demanding a border ? The EU are using this issue to impose fishing access, European Law and State subsidy agreement with the U.K. ,all designed to reduce our sovereignty and keep close control. This is not acceptable to an Independent country which the U.K. now is. They could have agreed to an FTA just like Canada and there would be no issue, and arrangements would have undoubtably been made over fishing, but this was their negotiating strategy from the beginning. If the U.K. has to walk away from the negotiations in order to break free then so be it. France believes this to be a negotiating tactic, because that’s exactly what they would have done, I just hope the U.K. sticks to its guns for a change....
 
peteblue said:
ROI nor NI wish to put any kind of hard borders in place, the only body demanding something is the EU because they have wished to use this as a political and negotiating football from the beginning. Even the WTO do not demand hard borders.....
Click to expand...

Naivety or plain stupidity to consider the EU would not take this approach.. Brexit has become David Moyes of a gun fight.
 
peteblue said:
I agree there should be a bespoke arrangement, for both NI and ROI. The U.K. have imposed no borders and have consistently said they would not do so. So who is it demanding a border ? The EU are using this issue to impose fishing access, European Law and State subsidy agreement with the U.K. ,all designed to reduce our sovereignty and keep close control. This is not acceptable to an Independent country which the U.K. now is. They could have agreed to an FTA just like Canada and there would be no issue, and arrangements would have undoubtably been made over fishing, but this was their negotiating strategy from the beginning. If the U.K. has to walk away from the negotiations in order to break free then so be it. France believes this to be a negotiating tactic, because that’s exactly what they would have done, I just hope the U.K. sticks to its guns for a change....
Click to expand...

So somewhere, within the UK, we will have some border of some sort. Otherwise, free movement of people and goods between the UK and EU will remain.

I mean I may be thick, but 4 years after asking how this circle can be squared, to me, its as complicated and well, impossible, still.
 
peteblue said:
I agree there should be a bespoke arrangement, for both NI and ROI. The U.K. have imposed no borders and have consistently said they would not do so. So who is it demanding a border ? The EU are using this issue to impose fishing access, European Law and State subsidy agreement with the U.K. ,all designed to reduce our sovereignty and keep close control. This is not acceptable to an Independent country which the U.K. now is. They could have agreed to an FTA just like Canada and there would be no issue, and arrangements would have undoubtably been made over fishing, but this was their negotiating strategy from the beginning. If the U.K. has to walk away from the negotiations in order to break free then so be it. France believes this to be a negotiating tactic, because that’s exactly what they would have done, I just hope the U.K. sticks to its guns for a change....
Click to expand...
would sticking to it's guns not mean honoring the withdrawal agreement?
 
orchard said:
But we've left ?
Click to expand...
Yes, but member states tried to sack her two days prior to the Brexit date on the basis that the UK would be out of the EU and as such anyone appointed to the EU, by virtue of UK membership, would also be out of a job.

She has a mandate until Oct 21 and has UK and Luxembourg nationality.

The President of the ECJ, on Brexit day indicated her vacancy and asked 27 member states to nominate someone to fill it.

But, she's not a judge, she's an advocate General and her job is not attached to any particular member states, regardless of who nominated her.

The court determines if the role ends prematurely, not a decision by the President on the assumption of departure. She asked for it to be referred to the court for decision, based upon Art.50 but it was refused.

It's unfair and petty.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

→ Log in 🔑 Register
🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top