Irish Border post Brexit

[The Agrarian]

What I don't quite understand is this:

The UK is leaving the EU, yet insists it does not want a border post on the NI/ROI border.
The EU says that when the UK leaves the EU, there must be a border.
Therefore, surely if there is going to be any border post, it must be on the ROI side of the border, not (necessarily) on the UK side.

This being the case, either the ROI and/or the EU must place it there and pay for it.

The very fact that the UK would not have a manned border post their side, would negate any paramilitary activity, would it not?


What it really comes down to is EU intransigence in refusing to renegotiate the Backstop, putting a legally timed end on it.
Therefore one could argue that if any such paramilitary action was to occur, because of no manned border on the UK side, the EU would be to blame.

One could also argue very strongly that it is therefore only the EU that might cause the breakdown of the Good Friday agreement.

The EU doesn't give a stuff about the Belfast agreement. It only uses it as a stick to beat May with.

 

[Two Tone]

It seems to me that Mrs May might have a lever to use on this very point.
What she should tell the EU is that we absolutely refuse to put a border point on our side of the border irrespective of any deal or not. That unless they give us a sensible Trade agreement, the only border point they will have will be their own ROI / EU border side and that they can stuff any Backstop altogether.

Bearing in mind that if the is a No Deal situation on 29th March, ROI will have to put up a border checkpoint on their side of the border anyway, what has TM got to loose?

Or am I missing something?

 

[The Agrarian]

What is to stop May from bringing forward a motion to parliament stating that the UK will not erect controls at the land border with the EU, or at the UK to UK sea crossings, for a minimum period of say 10 years - drop the backstop in the agreement - and tell the EU that's the deal? Take it or leave it.

 

[mar]

It seems to me that Mrs May might have a lever to use on this very point.
What she should tell the EU is that we absolutely refuse to put a border point on our side of the border irrespective of any deal or not. That unless they give us a sensible Trade agreement, the only border point they will have will be their own ROI / EU border side and that they can stuff any Backstop altogether.

Bearing in mind that if the is a No Deal situation on 29th March, ROI will have to put up a border checkpoint on their side of the border anyway, what has TM got to loose?

Or am I missing something?

The UK will have to put a border on its side for the same reasons the EU will have to put one on it's side.

 

[Two Tone]

The UK will have to put a border on its side for the same reasons the EU will have to put one on it's side.

Does it?
Did it not agree to dispense with borders as part of the Good Friday agreement?
Just because the EU would have to have a border on its side, why does that mean that the UK has to have one in its side?
Could it not claim that it doesn't want one and use the Good Friday agreement as its reason?
Let alone claim that the majority, if not absolutely no one in the entire Island of Ireland wants the border anyway.

I don't know the answers. But I know a retired Diplomat and Ambassador who might be able to shed a bit of light on this subject, who I will try to get an opinion from.

 

[caveman]

Does it?
Did it not agree to dispense with borders as part of the Good Friday agreement?
Just because the EU would have to have a border on its side, why does that mean that the UK has to have one in its side?
Could it not claim that it doesn't want one and use the Good Friday agreement as its reason?
Let alone claim that the majority, if not absolutely no one in the entire Island of Ireland wants the border anyway.

I don't know the answers. But I know a retired Diplomat and Ambassador who might be able to shed a bit of light on this subject, who I will try to get an opinion from.

If we go WTO, the WTO might insist on one?
In which case.
Going article 24 and using the WTO as a referee may be the only way to go?

 

[thewalrus]

The UK will have to put a border on its side for the same reasons the EU will have to put one on it's side.

The roi would have to protect the integrity of the single market therefore erect border controls. The uk would be under no such obligation

 

[The Agrarian]

Does it?
Did it not agree to dispense with borders as part of the Good Friday agreement?
Just because the EU would have to have a border on its side, why does that mean that the UK has to have one in its side?
Could it not claim that it doesn't want one and use the Good Friday agreement as its reason?
Let alone claim that the majority, if not absolutely no one in the entire Island of Ireland wants the border anyway.

I don't know the answers. But I know a retired Diplomat and Ambassador who might be able to shed a bit of light on this subject, who I will try to get an opinion from.

Let's be clear about the border. Your language is unintentionally a bit confused and misleading. There is an international border. The question is what kind of border. Unionists are generally perfectly happy with there being an international border there, as are some from the Catholic/nationalist community, due to the benefits of being in the UK. Most people are also happy though that, while it acts as a national boundary and all the things that flow from that, it also permits freedom of movement, to work and trade across said line.

 

[mar]

Does it?
Did it not agree to dispense with borders as part of the Good Friday agreement?
Just because the EU would have to have a border on its side, why does that mean that the UK has to have one in its side?
Could it not claim that it doesn't want one and use the Good Friday agreement as its reason?
Let alone claim that the majority, if not absolutely no one in the entire Island of Ireland wants the border anyway.

I don't know the answers. But I know a retired Diplomat and Ambassador who might be able to shed a bit of light on this subject, who I will try to get an opinion from.

I'm no expert on the subject but I will try and give an example.
Lets say a packet of cigarettes are a pound cheaper in Eire because of different tax rates, what's stopping a lorry filling up with a load of cigarettes in Dublin. and driving to Belfast through an unmanned border and selling them on the streets cheaper than the shops in Belfast. The shops in Belfast who pay their rates or council taxes won't be to happy, they will want someone manning that border and stopping the cheap cigarettes coming in from the EU.
Apply the same principle to a whole host of other goods and that is why there will be a border on both sides.

 

[alex04w]

I'm no expert on the subject but I will try and give an example.
Lets say a packet of cigarettes are a pound cheaper in Eire because of different tax rates, what's stopping a lorry filling up with a load of cigarettes in Dublin. and driving to Belfast through an unmanned border and selling them on the streets cheaper than the shops in Belfast. The shops in Belfast who pay their rates or council taxes won't be to happy, they will want someone manning that border and stopping the cheap cigarettes coming in from the EU.
Apply the same principle to a whole host of other goods and that is why there will be a border on both sides.

That is already happening - mainly with fuel. There is a huge organised crime industry around the subject. Leaving the EU will not change it one little bit.

Even on everyday basic living items, towns just north and south of the border see huge swings in trade depending on the exchange rate. Again this will not change when we leave the EU.

From the UKs point of view, it will come down to acceptable losses. Some revenue will be lost post Brexit, in the same way it is lost now. Efforts by HMRC will keep it in check as it does now - and that without any border at present nor in the future.

To quote Sammy Wilson (DUP spokesman on Brexit) - the UK tried for 40 years to police the border during the troubles and could not. Best of luck to the RoI and EU trying to do it post Brexit.

 

[Two Tone]

I'm no expert on the subject but I will try and give an example.
Lets say a packet of cigarettes are a pound cheaper in Eire because of different tax rates, what's stopping a lorry filling up with a load of cigarettes in Dublin. and driving to Belfast through an unmanned border and selling them on the streets cheaper than the shops in Belfast. The shops in Belfast who pay their rates or council taxes won't be to happy, they will want someone manning that border and stopping the cheap cigarettes coming in from the EU.
Apply the same principle to a whole host of other goods and that is why there will be a border on both sides.

Good point!

However, in my scenario, I am still suggesting that there is a border post on the ROI side. Surely they will pick up that lorry load of tobacco and want a levy/tariff on it?

It is, after all, only the EU and NOT either the ROI or NI that want a border!

Perhaps the ROI should insist that if there is no deal and that EU insists on a border control point (on their side of it), that it is manned by other EU member state staff.


Interestingly though, from what I can see, at the moment tobacco is about the same price in both Dublin and Belfast.

 

[Boohoo]

I'm no expert on the subject but I will try and give an example.
Lets say a packet of cigarettes are a pound cheaper in Eire because of different tax rates, what's stopping a lorry filling up with a load of cigarettes in Dublin. and driving to Belfast through an unmanned border and selling them on the streets cheaper than the shops in Belfast. The shops in Belfast who pay their rates or council taxes won't be to happy, they will want someone manning that border and stopping the cheap cigarettes coming in from the EU.
Apply the same principle to a whole host of other goods and that is why there will be a border on both sides.

That sort of thing goes on at the moment, only a few weeks ago I was talking to someone who stayed the night in a 4* hotel in Athlone. When he went to the bar he was served a 300ml bottle of Budweiser with all the UK health warnings on it. So not only was it a UK bottle of beer but a UK multi pack bottle only for sale in off licences. The bar staff weren't best pleased when he asked for a full sized bottle.
There are plenty of things moving across the border at the moment that shouldn't be, what difference will brexit make?

 

[Two Tone]

That is already happening - mainly with fuel. There is a huge organised crime industry around the subject. Leaving the EU will not change it one little bit.

Even on everyday basic living items, towns just north and south of the border see huge swings in trade depending on the exchange rate. Again this will not change when we leave the EU.

From the UKs point of view, it will come down to acceptable losses. Some revenue will be lost post Brexit, in the same way it is lost now. Efforts by HMRC will keep it in check as it does now - and that without any border at present nor in the future.

To quote Sammy Wilson (DUP spokesman on Brexit) - the UK tried for 40 years to police the border during the troubles and could not. Best of luck to the RoI and EU trying to do it post Brexit.

Is that scam of mixing red NI (non Derv) diesel with green ROI (non Derv) which neutralises the colour to the same colour as Dev still happening?

A few years ago there was a TV program saying that if you did this it would bugger up your engine. Rubbish! It might get picked up by modern Common-rail diesel engines now. But as far as I can see, it would only bugger up your engine if it was supposed to run on petrol!

 

[Henarar]

There won't be a hard border , any man who would risk his life to man would be a dead man walking , a border would be target practice for the IRA.

whats the problem then ?

 

[Boohoo]

Is that scam of mixing red NI (non Derv) diesel with green ROI (non Derv) which neutralises the colour to the same colour as Dev still happening?

A few years ago there was a TV program saying that if you did this it would bugger up your engine. Rubbish! It might get picked up by modern Common-rail diesel engines now. But as far as I can see, it would only bugger up your engine if it was supposed to run on petrol!

Haven't heard about mixing red and green diesel together. But there have been plenty of illegal diesel laundering plants along the border over the years that removed the dye then left a hazardous mess that had to be cleaned up at the taxpayer's expense.

Far more common are the lorries than run over the border with empty tanks and maybe a few empty cubes hidden behind the curtains to fill with diesel that is then pumped back out in Northern Ireland to be used in other vehicles or sold.

 

[Farm buy]

Haven't heard about mixing red and green diesel together. But there have been plenty of illegal diesel laundering plants along the border over the years that removed the dye then left a hazardous mess that had to be cleaned up at the taxpayer's expense.

Far more common are the lorries than run over the border with empty tanks and maybe a few empty cubes hidden behind the curtains to fill with diesel that is then pumped back out in Northern Ireland to be used in other vehicles or sold.

Talking to people along the border recently many old timers are waiting and wanting that borders to come back.They said "we have never made money as easy since that border was done away with" so its an ill wind that dont blow some good.
Different strokes for different folks.

 

[alex04w]

Is that scam of mixing red NI (non Derv) diesel with green ROI (non Derv) which neutralises the colour to the same colour as Dev still happening?

A few years ago there was a TV program saying that if you did this it would bugger up your engine. Rubbish! It might get picked up by modern Common-rail diesel engines now. But as far as I can see, it would only bugger up your engine if it was supposed to run on petrol!

The process of removing the dye takes two forms. Firstly passing the diesel through kaolin clay (raw china clay). Secondly adding a form of acid to the diesel.

Both processes remove the dye. However the first also removed the oil and this wrecks the engine due to lack of lubricant. The second method means you are running acid through your engine, whereby also wrecking it.

Not that I am an expert in laundering diesel.

 

[Ashtree]

That is already happening - mainly with fuel. There is a huge organised crime industry around the subject. Leaving the EU will not change it one little bit.

Even on everyday basic living items, towns just north and south of the border see huge swings in trade depending on the exchange rate. Again this will not change when we leave the EU.

From the UKs point of view, it will come down to acceptable losses. Some revenue will be lost post Brexit, in the same way it is lost now. Efforts by HMRC will keep it in check as it does now - and that without any border at present nor in the future.

To quote Sammy Wilson (DUP spokesman on Brexit) - the UK tried for 40 years to police the border during the troubles and could not. Best of luck to the RoI and EU trying to do it post Brexit.

Well if Sammy said so, the whole world needs to sit up and listen......

 

[Ashtree]

That sort of thing goes on at the moment, only a few weeks ago I was talking to someone who stayed the night in a 4* hotel in Athlone. When he went to the bar he was served a 300ml bottle of Budweiser with all the UK health warnings on it. So not only was it a UK bottle of beer but a UK multi pack bottle only for sale in off licences. The bar staff weren't best pleased when he asked for a full sized bottle.
There are plenty of things moving across the border at the moment that shouldn't be, what difference will brexit make?

I wouldn’t take a bit of notice to anything that comes out of the mouth of any man, who drinks shite like Budweiser.

 

[Two Tone]

Well if Sammy said so, the whole world needs to sit up and listen......

I wouldn’t take a bit of notice to anything that comes out of the mouth of any man, who drinks shite like Budweiser.

I think that this thread might have stated asking some serious questions, to which most of us are giving some serious thought and answers to this very serious but interesting debate.

Rather than your usual flippant “Aren’t I a clever chap and aren’t you Brits unbelievably stupid (more like “Oh sh!t, I am really going to be in said sh!t, if a hard Brexit Happens) answers @Ashtree , I am wondering what you would think of the U.K. refusing to put any border control points on its side of the NI border in bringing the EU to its senses and producing an acceptable deal to both side on trade deals and much more, including a legally time limited Backstop. Which would in effect preclude the need for any border control point on either side of the border.

Or are you the only guy on the whole of the Island of Ireland that wants the reintroduction of border controls that will result from a No Deal situation on your side of it?


I could say this: Apart from realising the unfortunate prospects for you guys on either side of the border, with regard to a Hard Brexit, I really wouldn’t give a sh!t.

But seriously @Ashtree, do you actually want a sensible solution that makes the best out of this unavoidable situation for both sides, or not?