Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Thankfully, there's a lot of goodwill on all sides to try and reach a solution to the Irish border problem, so it can be done.

Just don't ask me for details

That being said, and I'm no expert on this, Norway (non-EU) shares a long border with Sweden (EU member) and that seems to run smoothly.

Would it be possible to replicate the Norway/Sweden model?

How can someone who speaks at length very regularly on an internet forum about how all the Brexit naysayers are wrong not be familiar with the 'Norway model'? There are kids who've never read a paper that know Norway is a non-EU state with free movement and trade with the EU - it's been one of the most oft-cited examples, by both sides, for several years!

Yes, these are obstacles, but they're not insurmountable obstacles.

After much thought I think we should go with the option of having the boarder in the sea. I don't mind having to show my passport to go to England or Scotland. The only ones who would have a problem with this are hardcore unionists and they've been having their way for too long. You have to be flexible about these things. Also, this could bode well for Northern Ireland's fledging tv and film industry.

nfe wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Thankfully, there's a lot of goodwill on all sides to try and reach a solution to the Irish border problem, so it can be done.

Just don't ask me for details

That being said, and I'm no expert on this, Norway (non-EU) shares a long border with Sweden (EU member) and that seems to run smoothly.

Would it be possible to replicate the Norway/Sweden model?

How can someone who speaks at length very regularly on an internet forum about how all the Brexit naysayers are wrong not be familiar with the 'Norway model'? There are kids who've never read a paper that know Norway is a non-EU state with free movement and trade with the EU - it's been one of the most oft-cited examples, by both sides, for several years!

I forgot

I made a mistake, I was distracted, by, er, something...somewhere...

It happens.

Just to clarify, whilst I consider myself British (despite being a catholic from Northern Ireland) I fully understand the need for a frictionless boarder between the north and south. It's ok to break out the passports for going across the channel by plane or ferry but with land boarders it just becomes a hassle. They helped remove the boarder before the eu and we can continue to do so after the eu.

This would be an example of my hope for a more federal U.K. in the future. Four countries united together but able to handle their own business when the need arises. Since Northern Ireland is the only part of the uk with a land boarder it requires a special approach.

For any American, Canadian and Mexican dakkanaughts looking in, how do you guys deal with your land boarders?

 Future War Cultist wrote:
Just to clarify, whilst I consider myself British (despite being a catholic from Northern Ireland) I fully understand the need for a frictionless boarder between the north and south. It's ok to break out the passports for going across the channel by plane or ferry but with land boarders it just becomes a hassle. They helped remove the boarder before the eu and we can continue to do so after the eu.

The issue is for goods, rather than people. Would you economically isolate NI from the rest of the UK?

Because if there is a border for goods even passenger cars would have to be inspected (maybe not all of them, but a lot of them would have to).

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/aug/16/uk-government-border-proposals-ireland-brexit-position-paper

...This [the new paper] is a welcome concession to reality, but it is predicated on an even bigger unreality: the assumption that the EU will agree to something quite extraordinary: that a 500km external EU border with more than 200 crossing points will be effectively unpoliced. People and goods will pass over it without let or hindrance. Smugglers, people traffickers and terrorists will go on their merry way unmolested. Small companies will not have to do customs checks at all; large ones will operate a charming honour system in which they retrospectively declare the goods they have moved and pay their duties...

It would mean economically decoupling NI from the rest of the UK, and I can't see that fly past the DUP and other unionists.

Having an open border for people but not goods is a feel-good measure. It just doesn't work in the real world unless you're willing to leave a massive backdoor wide open for abuse or worse.

I think there are some special considerations about the Irish border, though.

First is that 30,000 people a day commute to and fro to jobs. It isn't just a feel-good factor for them to have easy transit.

Second is that obviously there is a concern about smuggling or other such illegal activities getting from the UK into the EU through the back door of an open border with Eire. However, the UK is removed by sea from all neighbours and all its neighbours are EU members. This is a different situation to say Greece, a few miles from Turkey, or Spain, a few miles from Morocco, or even more open, the eastern European countries with hundreds of miles of land border with Russia and so on.

Under the sea frontier proposal, for illegal goods to get into the EU via Ireland, they would have to avoid customs inspection on arrival in the UK by sea or air, then avoid customs inspection on arrival in Northern Ireland by sea or air.

It a pity the DUP have already said they will oppose such a plan. Perhaps the government should bung them another £1 billion to change their minds.

 Kilkrazy wrote:


Under the sea frontier proposal, for illegal goods to get into the EU via Ireland, they would have to avoid customs inspection on arrival in the UK by sea or air, then avoid customs inspection on arrival in Northern Ireland by sea or air.

Illegal goods is not the issue but things that might be legal in the UK thanks to new trade agreements but not in the EU.

American chlorinated chicken, Chinese steel outside the quotas, etc.

How does Australia and New Zealand do it? I know they don't share a land boarder but there could be some ideas to be had from there.

 Future War Cultist wrote:
Since Northern Ireland is the only part of the uk with a land boarder it requires a special approach.

So does Gibraltar.

For any American, Canadian and Mexican dakkanaughts looking in, how do you guys deal with your land boarders?

They don't have freedom of movement between the 3 - there's hard borders with guards and customs/passport checks.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

Under the sea frontier proposal, for illegal goods to get into the EU via Ireland, they would have to avoid customs inspection on arrival in the UK by sea or air, then avoid customs inspection on arrival in Northern Ireland by sea or air.

Not if it passes customs inspection on one side of the soft border and is illegal on the other. At least Eire isn't in Shengen or it'd be completely impossible.

Say you've got a chlorinated chicken from 2 posts up. You import it legally into the UK from the US. Then you pass through the UK/NI border legally - it's legal in NI. You carry it over the border into Eire; it's illegal but not checked. From there, you could take it to mainland Europe where there's no custom paperwork, it might be caught depending on how alert whatever officials you're passing are.

It works the other way round as well, so the UK would want a stricter check at the UK/NI border for stuff that shouldn't have made it from EU to NI, and the EU will want a stricter border check at the Eire/EU border (or ports) for stuff that shouldn't have made it from UK to Eire. That's a lot of additional checks for people/goods that shouldn't need them, and a lot of extra cost that's going to be paid for by someone.

 Future War Cultist wrote:
How does Australia and New Zealand do it? I know they don't share a land boarder but there could be some ideas to be had from there.

Goods are checked in customs, and there are customs on each designated port of entry (meaning all major ports and airports).

Most times there isn't actual physical goods inspection, just the documents, but there's always a chance of a yellow or red flag.

 Future War Cultist wrote:
How does Australia and New Zealand do it? I know they don't share a land boarder but there could be some ideas to be had from there.

They've got a fairly open border via a partnership between them - they don't need to do any of those checks.

I can't think of anywhere that has a hybrid soft border like we're proposing. I'd proposition it's because it doesn't make any sense; it has to either be a border or not a border.

jouso wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:


Under the sea frontier proposal, for illegal goods to get into the EU via Ireland, they would have to avoid customs inspection on arrival in the UK by sea or air, then avoid customs inspection on arrival in Northern Ireland by sea or air.

Illegal goods is not the issue but things that might be legal in the UK thanks to new trade agreements but not in the EU.

American chlorinated chicken, Chinese steel outside the quotas, etc.

They also would have to go through customs to get from mainland UK to NI.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Herzlos wrote:

 Future War Cultist wrote:
How does Australia and New Zealand do it? I know they don't share a land boarder but there could be some ideas to be had from there.

They've got a fairly open border via a partnership between them - they don't need to do any of those checks.

I can't think of anywhere that has a hybrid soft border like we're proposing. I'd proposition it's because it doesn't make any sense; it has to either be a border or not a border.

The NAFTA borders are soft for exchange of goods, but not people, as I understand it.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

jouso wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:


Under the sea frontier proposal, for illegal goods to get into the EU via Ireland, they would have to avoid customs inspection on arrival in the UK by sea or air, then avoid customs inspection on arrival in Northern Ireland by sea or air.

Illegal goods is not the issue but things that might be legal in the UK thanks to new trade agreements but not in the EU.

American chlorinated chicken, Chinese steel outside the quotas, etc.

They also would have to go through customs to get from mainland UK to NI.

But that doesn't work. That leaves NI unable to have these things that are legal in the UK but not in the EU. Equally they have no say in how the EU is run, no access to EU support, but have to abide by EU law. It's the worst of both worlds then for NI.

I think the UK will continue to conform to EU rules about most things, because they are our biggest trading partner and we won't be able not to.

In the cases where there is a difference the NI will need to decide if they prefer a very open relationship with Eire to availability of chlorinated chickens.

The easiest solution to all this would be re-unification. It's a shame that this won't happen...

 Kilkrazy wrote:


The NAFTA borders are soft for exchange of goods, but not people, as I understand it.

NAFTA is nowhere near as comprehensive a free trade agreement as the EU.

At the ground level there's no difference between the long lines of lorries crossing from Mexico to the US than, say, Croatia and Serbia. Every commercial transport from Mexico to the US gets stopped, commercial papers and immigration status of the driver checked before being allowed to drive away.

Compare that to the thousands of lorries crossing between France and, say, Belgium nowadays without even having to stop.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
The easiest solution to all this would be re-unification. It's a shame that this won't happen...

An even easier solution would be to cancel Brexit. Then we can all go on as before.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
The easiest solution to all this would be re-unification. It's a shame that this won't happen...

As already stated, the *easiest* solution by far would be to cancel Brexit.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
The easiest solution to all this would be re-unification. It's a shame that this won't happen...

An even easier solution would be to cancel Brexit. Then we can all go on as before.

I was under the impression that the Republic of Ireland was an independent, sovereign nation.

I was also under the impression that Britain was an independent sovereign nation.

I like Ireland and the Irish, but I never overlook the fact that the Republic is a foreign nation.

Britain has made a democratic decision to leave the EU...and I don't want to say anymore for fear of being banned or offending anybody, but I hope people can join the dots and see where I'm going with this, hence my earlier point about re-unification....




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 MinscS2 wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
The easiest solution to all this would be re-unification. It's a shame that this won't happen...

As already stated, the *easiest* solution by far would be to cancel Brexit.

The above point was in response to your point as well...

You've made the "democratic decision" to vote on two alternatives that weren't even defined. It's a farce. A textbook example of how not to make a referendum.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
You've made the "democratic decision" to vote on two alternatives that weren't even defined. It's a farce. A textbook example of how not to make a referendum.

Eh?

An election where the alternatives are not clearly defined is a joke. You STILL haven't decided what "leave the EU!" means and it's over a year after the referendum.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
An election where the alternatives are not clearly defined is a joke. You STILL haven't decided what "leave the EU!" means and it's over a year after the referendum.

I know what I want, but I want doesn't matter as I'm clearly not in a position of influence to make the changes.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
The easiest solution to all this would be re-unification. It's a shame that this won't happen...

An even easier solution would be to cancel Brexit. Then we can all go on as before.

I was under the impression that the Republic of Ireland was an independent, sovereign nation.

I was also under the impression that Britain was an independent sovereign nation.

....

I was under the impression that one of the main reasons for voting Leave was because EU member states are not independent, sovereign nations, and you wanted to get sovereignty back. At any rate, though, I don't see what that has to do with the best solution for the border issue.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
An election where the alternatives are not clearly defined is a joke. You STILL haven't decided what "leave the EU!" means and it's over a year after the referendum.

I know what I want, but I want doesn't matter as I'm clearly not in a position of influence to make the changes.

You might know what you want, but who knows what all the other leave voters want? The referendum was a total farce by an incompetent government. If it was a choice of option A or option B we'd know what people voted for, but it wasn't. It was more like, do you want option A? Or not option A? Pathetic!

At last! My kind of expert.

"Hard Brexit offers £135 bn annual boost to economy. "

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-40972776

This could be the dawn of a golden age of British trading.

Fill our container ships with goods and send them across the 7 seas, and build up the navy again to keep an eye on them.

And in the opposite direction, nations eager to trade with us as we go back to our free market roots, our liberal heritage.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
At last! My kind of expert.

"Hard Brexit offers £135 bn annual boost to economy. "

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-40972776

This could be the dawn of a golden age of British trading.

Fill our container ships with goods and send them across the 7 seas, and build up the navy again to keep an eye on them.

And in the opposite direction, nations eager to trade with us as we go back to our free market roots, our liberal heritage.

So your kind of expert is someone who doesn't know what the feth he's talking about?

One who says that if we remove all tariffs and barriers for the whole world we can be £135bn better off.

This is Laffer Curve levels of intellectual delusion.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
At last! My kind of expert.

"Hard Brexit offers £135 bn annual boost to economy. "

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-40972776

This could be the dawn of a golden age of British trading.

Fill our container ships with goods and send them across the 7 seas, and build up the navy again to keep an eye on them.

And in the opposite direction, nations eager to trade with us as we go back to our free market roots, our liberal heritage.

So your kind of expert is someone who doesn't know what the feth he's talking about?

One who says that if we remove all tariffs and barriers for the whole world we can be £135bn better off.

This is Laffer Curve levels of intellectual delusion.

Mark the day DINLT advocated for a full-on neoliberal reboot of the economy

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:


I was under the impression that the Republic of Ireland was an independent, sovereign nation.

I was also under the impression that Britain was an independent sovereign nation.

I like Ireland and the Irish, but I never overlook the fact that the Republic is a foreign nation.

Britain has made a democratic decision to leave the EU...

England and Wales voted to leave.
Scotland and N. Ireland voted to remain.



The same gentleman being lauded for the report above also claimed that the Poll Tax was a great idea that would reap tremendous financial dividends

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1468-0270.1990.tb01950.x/abstract



his work isn't new either, it's being dragged out , again, to try and distract us from noticing the ongoing carcrash we've been forced into

http://blogs.sussex.ac.uk/uktpo/2017/04/19/will-eliminating-uk-tariffs-boost-uk-gdp-by-4-percent/

http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/the-britain-alone-scenario-how-economists-for-brexit-defy-the-laws-of-gravity/

Minford admits his model predicts that the policy would cause the ‘elimination’ of UK manufacturing and a large increase in wage inequality.

clearly this is a great idea then ?!




and this particular idea



is totally beyond the pale.

You'll note he raves about how cheap we'll be as the £ drops but totally ignores the fact that as this happens everything we import will become more expensive.