111–120 of 399 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, it's the UK's obligation to preserve the Good Friday Agreement. You can't blame the EU for that obligation. I'm pretty sure that fifteen years ago, nobody would have thought that "let's keep the bombings" would be a coherent and respectable opinion. Things have changed.
Well, it's the UK's obligation to preserve the Good Friday Agreement. The legal technicalities of that are debatable, but let's assume for this discussion that there exists a clear legal obligation to do so. Which specific obligation(s) under the GFA do you think would or would not be satisfied by which specific proposal(s) that have been made in relation to the NI/Ireland border?
Article 1 part iii:
"and that it would be wrong to make any change in the status of Northern Ireland save with the consent of a majority of its people;"
A majority of NI didn't vote for Brexit, and a hard border would change the status of NI?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, it's the UK's obligation to preserve the Good Friday Agreement. The legal technicalities of that are debatable, but let's assume for this discussion that there exists a clear legal obligation to do so. Which specific obligation(s) under the GFA do you think would or would not be satisfied by which specific proposal(s) that have been made in relation to the NI/Ireland border?
The agreement contains a commitment by the British and Irish governments to develop "close cooperation between their countries as friendly neighbours and as partners in the European Union". It's hard to see how we can do that as, er, not members of the European Union. I believe the Common Travel Area is also a key issue as it commits us to open travel through the border which on the face of it seems incompatible with…
It's hard to see how we can do that as, er, not members of the European Union.
This is the standard NI-border-tail-wagging-dog argument that you can't have Brexit at all because of wording in the GFA, but it's fundamentally flawed in two different ways.
Firstly, your quote of the GFA is selective. Read the words just before the ones you mentioned, which fundamentally change the meaning.
Secondly, both the UK and Ireland are signatories to the EU treaties, including the TFEU that provides for withdrawal of a member state under Article 50. As a matter of international law, to the extent that any earlier treaty between those parties is contradicted by a later treaty to which they are also signatories, the later one takes precedence. (This is why I noted before that the legal technicalities are debatable.)
I agree with the spirit of the rest of your comment, in that advocates of Brexit need to get their story straight so there are concrete discussions to be had, so I won't comment further on those points here.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are people who identify as Irish and hold Irish passports who live in Northern Ireland and would be cut off from the Republic without the backstop. It's precisely the making of national identity a non-distinguishing factor that underlies the peace process. The backstop is publicly popular in Northern Ireland. Northern Ireland voted by a substantial majority to Remain. The DUP is the only party that voted agains…
I am so confused why a nuclear power is so worried about a line in a contract. Breaching a contract always happens and as long as something good comes out of it no one cares. AND everyone wants to have a good outcome here. No one wants an explosive Northern Ireland again.
This contract matters, as does keeping free movement on the island. For everyone in Ireland, north and south, and many in Britain too.
I'm glad the UK is a member of the EU so we can benefit from this.
So then it IS apparently possible to have a free trade zone without freedom of movement.
If people are able to move freely, then each country should be able to apply tariffs to extract benefits from the economic gradients. If people can move freely, then that's the ideal.
Institutions, governments, "nations" and companies that collapse because of the free movement of people deserve to collapse and should be left to due so. The should even be "helped" to collapse faster and harder, making sure they never rise again!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, it's the UK's obligation to preserve the Good Friday Agreement. The legal technicalities of that are debatable, but let's assume for this discussion that there exists a clear legal obligation to do so. Which specific obligation(s) under the GFA do you think would or would not be satisfied by which specific proposal(s) that have been made in relation to the NI/Ireland border?
The agreement contains a commitment by the British and Irish governments to develop "close cooperation between their countries as friendly neighbours and as partners in the European Union". It's hard to see how we can do that as, er, not members of the European Union. I believe the Common Travel Area is also a key issue as it commits us to open travel through the border which on the face of it seems incompatible with…
No, this happens elsewhere already. Compare Norway - it is in a common travel area with the EU (Schengen), but out of the EU customs union. They're different issues.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You need to distinguish freedom of movement (people) and a customs agreement (goods). Sweden and Norway are both Schengen members, so they have explicitly agreed on freedom of movement for people. That does not say anything about goods. But I don't know why such an arrangement could not work with the UK (both the UK and Norway are members of the European Economic Area) – presumably because the UK wants to leave that…
"Sweden and Norway are both Schengen members, so they have explicitly agreed on freedom of movement for people. That does not say anything about goods." Exactly. And this is the same situation for Ireland & Northern Ireland, post-Brexit. The UK and Ireland have a Common Travel Area which guarantees the free movement of people, just like the Schengen agreement. "they want to go it alone and not align their trade polic…
I know that you're trying to set up an argument where it's supposed to be the EU's fault if border posts appear, but that's misleading. The UK changes things, the UK is responsible.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are people who identify as Irish and hold Irish passports who live in Northern Ireland and would be cut off from the Republic without the backstop. It's precisely the making of national identity a non-distinguishing factor that underlies the peace process. The backstop is publicly popular in Northern Ireland. Northern Ireland voted by a substantial majority to Remain. The DUP is the only party that voted agains…
It is worth pointing out that Northern Ireland does more trade with England than it does with all other trading partners combined - including the rest of Ireland. If you're going to put a custom border somewhere, where does it make sense to put it?
Because you can't put a new border between Northern Ireland and Ireland.
Just because it does more trade with England doesn't mean anything, that's because England is bigger. What's more important is that you can't put a border or wall or customs check really between NI and Ireland.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Sweden and Norway are both Schengen members, so they have explicitly agreed on freedom of movement for people. That does not say anything about goods." Exactly. And this is the same situation for Ireland & Northern Ireland, post-Brexit. The UK and Ireland have a Common Travel Area which guarantees the free movement of people, just like the Schengen agreement. "they want to go it alone and not align their trade polic…
It cannot possibly be in the future, because that would give the UK control over our borders. I know that you're trying to set up an argument where it's supposed to be the EU's fault if border posts appear, but that's misleading. The UK changes things, the UK is responsible.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are people who identify as Irish and hold Irish passports who live in Northern Ireland and would be cut off from the Republic without the backstop. It's precisely the making of national identity a non-distinguishing factor that underlies the peace process. The backstop is publicly popular in Northern Ireland. Northern Ireland voted by a substantial majority to Remain. The DUP is the only party that voted agains…
I am so confused why a nuclear power is so worried about a line in a contract. Breaching a contract always happens and as long as something good comes out of it no one cares. AND everyone wants to have a good outcome here. No one wants an explosive Northern Ireland again.