Discussion:
Irish govt asked May to try to bounce the DUP. She complied. But the DUP had none of it
Add Reply
James Harris
2017-12-06 07:15:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
I just read this:

Irish Government said UK could not show text of Brexit deal to DUP
before Monday, claims Arlene Foster. Theresa May complied.
https://twitter.com/christopherhope/status/938092141578018816

Apparently, May tried to bounce the DUP into accepting the deal ... at
the bidding of the Irish government. That follows a number of related
reports, albeit unsubstantiated. I don't know about you but May
increasingly comes across as the EU's person in the UK rather than our
person in Europe.

Fortunately, the DUP refused to be coerced. Good for them!
--
James Harris
abelard
2017-12-06 09:40:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 07:15:49 +0000, James Harris
Post by James Harris
Irish Government said UK could not show text of Brexit deal to DUP
before Monday, claims Arlene Foster. Theresa May complied.
https://twitter.com/christopherhope/status/938092141578018816
Apparently, May tried to bounce the DUP into accepting the deal ... at
the bidding of the Irish government. That follows a number of related
reports, albeit unsubstantiated.
so?
yet you build on it?
Post by James Harris
I don't know about you but May
increasingly comes across as the EU's person in the UK rather than our
person in Europe.
Fortunately, the DUP refused to be coerced. Good for them!
i see guido going on in like manner

"Tory Brexiteers fear Theresa May is being bounced by her top civil
servants Jeremy Heywood and Olly Robbins"

it was said previously that she was inclined to follow 'civil'
'servants' rather than to lead

if it proves true, i doubt she'll last a week...

is she really so foolish? where is real evidence?

rather that 'unsubstantiateds' from the reptiles?
--
www.abelard.org
James Harris
2017-12-06 09:54:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by abelard
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 07:15:49 +0000, James Harris
Post by James Harris
Irish Government said UK could not show text of Brexit deal to DUP
before Monday, claims Arlene Foster. Theresa May complied.
https://twitter.com/christopherhope/status/938092141578018816
Apparently, May tried to bounce the DUP into accepting the deal ... at
the bidding of the Irish government. That follows a number of related
reports, albeit unsubstantiated.
so?
yet you build on it?
Post by James Harris
I don't know about you but May
increasingly comes across as the EU's person in the UK rather than our
person in Europe.
Fortunately, the DUP refused to be coerced. Good for them!
i see guido going on in like manner
"Tory Brexiteers fear Theresa May is being bounced by her top civil
servants Jeremy Heywood and Olly Robbins"
it was said previously that she was inclined to follow 'civil'
'servants' rather than to lead
if it proves true, i doubt she'll last a week...
is she really so foolish? where is real evidence?
rather that 'unsubstantiateds' from the reptiles?
I like to be clear about the limits of an argument but I wouldn't have
made the point without having seen a lot of corroborative comments from
different sources. I've come across a lot over the past few weeks from
certain journalists and Tory commentators who have put out sufficiently
detailed assertions as to make what they say have the ring of truth,
especially when taken together. I would point you to none by themselves
but there is a pattern building up and it is internally consistent as a
description of May's approach and character.
--
James Harris
abelard
2017-12-06 09:58:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 09:54:13 +0000, James Harris
Post by James Harris
Post by abelard
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 07:15:49 +0000, James Harris
Post by James Harris
Irish Government said UK could not show text of Brexit deal to DUP
before Monday, claims Arlene Foster. Theresa May complied.
https://twitter.com/christopherhope/status/938092141578018816
Apparently, May tried to bounce the DUP into accepting the deal ... at
the bidding of the Irish government. That follows a number of related
reports, albeit unsubstantiated.
so?
yet you build on it?
Post by James Harris
I don't know about you but May
increasingly comes across as the EU's person in the UK rather than our
person in Europe.
Fortunately, the DUP refused to be coerced. Good for them!
i see guido going on in like manner
"Tory Brexiteers fear Theresa May is being bounced by her top civil
servants Jeremy Heywood and Olly Robbins"
it was said previously that she was inclined to follow 'civil'
'servants' rather than to lead
if it proves true, i doubt she'll last a week...
is she really so foolish? where is real evidence?
rather that 'unsubstantiateds' from the reptiles?
I like to be clear about the limits of an argument but I wouldn't have
made the point without having seen a lot of corroborative comments from
different sources. I've come across a lot over the past few weeks from
certain journalists and Tory commentators who have put out sufficiently
detailed assertions as to make what they say have the ring of truth,
especially when taken together. I would point you to none by themselves
but there is a pattern building up and it is internally consistent as a
description of May's approach and character.
or a campaign to remove may?
or a campaign to disrupt brexit?
or just the usual trouble making of the left?

or a combination of all 3?
--
www.abelard.org
James Hammerton
2017-12-06 18:38:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by James Harris
Post by abelard
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 07:15:49 +0000, James Harris
Post by James Harris
Irish Government said UK could not show text of Brexit deal to DUP
before Monday, claims Arlene Foster. Theresa May complied.
https://twitter.com/christopherhope/status/938092141578018816
Apparently, May tried to bounce the DUP into accepting the deal ... at
the bidding of the Irish government. That follows a number of related
reports, albeit unsubstantiated.
so?
yet you build on it?
Post by James Harris
I don't know about you but May
increasingly comes across as the EU's person in the UK rather than our
person in Europe.
Fortunately, the DUP refused to be coerced. Good for them!
i see guido going on in like manner
"Tory Brexiteers fear Theresa May is being bounced by her top civil
servants Jeremy Heywood and Olly Robbins"
it was said previously that she was inclined to follow 'civil'
     'servants' rather than to lead
if it proves true, i doubt she'll last a week...
is she really so foolish? where is real evidence?
rather that 'unsubstantiateds' from the reptiles?
I like to be clear about the limits of an argument but I wouldn't have
made the point without having seen a lot of corroborative comments from
different sources. I've come across a lot over the past few weeks from
certain journalists and Tory commentators who have put out sufficiently
detailed assertions as to make what they say have the ring of truth,
especially when taken together. I would point you to none by themselves
but there is a pattern building up and it is internally consistent as a
description of May's approach and character.
I've read a fair few articles about the events on Monday now, and it's
as clear as mud as to what happened with all sorts of claims going on
with the finger of blame pointing to May, to the DUP or tothe EU
dependinbg on whichg version you favour.

The process of inference you describe above seems likely to be prone to
confirmation bias on your part (NB we are all prone to this) as well as
the experience being consistent with the possibility of a concerted
campaign and/or group think amongst the people concerned.

I suspect we won't get the truth until papers are released decades
hence, or perhaps the politicians involved are writing their memoirsm
and possibly not even under either process.

I have my doubts about May, but I also have my doubts about the
reporting of what's going on...

Regards,

James
--
James Hammerton
http://jhammerton.wordpress.com
http://www.magnacartaplus.com/
Joe
2017-12-06 18:41:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 18:38:25 +0000
James Hammerton <***@virginmedia.com> wrote:

Funny, nobody to my knowledge has asked yet whether it is reasonable for
the Irish Republic (or at least, some of its politicians) to want their
country to be a member state of both the EU and the UK, especially as it
seceded from the latter a century ago with some ill-feeling.
--
Joe
James Hammerton
2017-12-06 18:57:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Joe
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 18:38:25 +0000
Funny, nobody to my knowledge has asked yet whether it is reasonable for
the Irish Republic (or at least, some of its politicians) to want their
country to be a member state of both the EU and the UK, especially as it
seceded from the latter a century ago with some ill-feeling.
I'm confused by this comment. Who do you think is wanting the Republic
of Ireland to be part of the UK?!

My understanding is they want there to be sufficient regulatory
alignment between NI and the RoI that the EU doesn't feel it necessary
to put up a 'hard' border.

Because the UK is leaving the single market and customs union, if the EU
were to treat the UK as it treats other countries outside the single
market that would entail customs checks at the NI/RoI border.

NB: for animal origin foods it gets worse - under EU law they're
supposed to be routed through Border Inspection Posts where they're
likely to be physically insepected - 20% to 50% inspection rates from
what I've recall and there's currently only 2 Irish BIPs in Shannon and
Dublin.

So the question is whether the EU is willing to budge on that insistence
and/or whether the UK is willing to make compromises on regulatory
alignment that minimise the impact of that insistence.

Regards,

James
--
James Hammerton
http://jhammerton.wordpress.com
http://www.magnacartaplus.com/
abelard
2017-12-06 19:16:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 18:57:10 +0000, James Hammerton
Post by James Hammerton
Post by Joe
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 18:38:25 +0000
Funny, nobody to my knowledge has asked yet whether it is reasonable for
the Irish Republic (or at least, some of its politicians) to want their
country to be a member state of both the EU and the UK, especially as it
seceded from the latter a century ago with some ill-feeling.
I'm confused by this comment. Who do you think is wanting the Republic
of Ireland to be part of the UK?!
My understanding is they want there to be sufficient regulatory
alignment between NI and the RoI that the EU doesn't feel it necessary
to put up a 'hard' border.
Because the UK is leaving the single market and customs union, if the EU
were to treat the UK as it treats other countries outside the single
market that would entail customs checks at the NI/RoI border.
NB: for animal origin foods it gets worse - under EU law they're
supposed to be routed through Border Inspection Posts where they're
likely to be physically insepected - 20% to 50% inspection rates from
what I've recall and there's currently only 2 Irish BIPs in Shannon and
Dublin.
So the question is whether the EU is willing to budge on that insistence
and/or whether the UK is willing to make compromises on regulatory
alignment that minimise the impact of that insistence.
why does 'regulatory alignment' need to be general rather
than case by case?
--
www.abelard.org
James Hammerton
2017-12-06 19:26:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by abelard
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 18:57:10 +0000, James Hammerton
Post by James Hammerton
Post by Joe
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 18:38:25 +0000
Funny, nobody to my knowledge has asked yet whether it is reasonable for
the Irish Republic (or at least, some of its politicians) to want their
country to be a member state of both the EU and the UK, especially as it
seceded from the latter a century ago with some ill-feeling.
I'm confused by this comment. Who do you think is wanting the Republic
of Ireland to be part of the UK?!
My understanding is they want there to be sufficient regulatory
alignment between NI and the RoI that the EU doesn't feel it necessary
to put up a 'hard' border.
Because the UK is leaving the single market and customs union, if the EU
were to treat the UK as it treats other countries outside the single
market that would entail customs checks at the NI/RoI border.
NB: for animal origin foods it gets worse - under EU law they're
supposed to be routed through Border Inspection Posts where they're
likely to be physically insepected - 20% to 50% inspection rates from
what I've recall and there's currently only 2 Irish BIPs in Shannon and
Dublin.
So the question is whether the EU is willing to budge on that insistence
and/or whether the UK is willing to make compromises on regulatory
alignment that minimise the impact of that insistence.
why does 'regulatory alignment' need to be general rather
than case by case?
As far as I'm concerned I can see no reason why it can't be case by case
and thus limited to the issues that impact the RoI/NI border and the
Good Friday Agreement, though it seems the DUP will insist (not entirely
unreasonably) that it can't introduce divergence between NI and the rest
of the UK, so we're probably talking about any moves towards regulatory
alignment being UK-wide as a result.

Whether the EU or RoI will be satisfied with that, I don't know.

The more extensive the regulatory alignment asked for, the closer we get
to effectively remaining in the single market and that may then make
many of the Brexiteers unhappy.

Regards,

James
--
James Hammerton
http://jhammerton.wordpress.com
http://www.magnacartaplus.com/
abelard
2017-12-06 19:36:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 19:26:11 +0000, James Hammerton
Post by James Hammerton
Post by abelard
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 18:57:10 +0000, James Hammerton
Post by James Hammerton
Post by Joe
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 18:38:25 +0000
Funny, nobody to my knowledge has asked yet whether it is reasonable for
the Irish Republic (or at least, some of its politicians) to want their
country to be a member state of both the EU and the UK, especially as it
seceded from the latter a century ago with some ill-feeling.
I'm confused by this comment. Who do you think is wanting the Republic
of Ireland to be part of the UK?!
My understanding is they want there to be sufficient regulatory
alignment between NI and the RoI that the EU doesn't feel it necessary
to put up a 'hard' border.
Because the UK is leaving the single market and customs union, if the EU
were to treat the UK as it treats other countries outside the single
market that would entail customs checks at the NI/RoI border.
NB: for animal origin foods it gets worse - under EU law they're
supposed to be routed through Border Inspection Posts where they're
likely to be physically insepected - 20% to 50% inspection rates from
what I've recall and there's currently only 2 Irish BIPs in Shannon and
Dublin.
So the question is whether the EU is willing to budge on that insistence
and/or whether the UK is willing to make compromises on regulatory
alignment that minimise the impact of that insistence.
why does 'regulatory alignment' need to be general rather
than case by case?
As far as I'm concerned I can see no reason why it can't be case by case
and thus limited to the issues that impact the RoI/NI border and the
Good Friday Agreement, though it seems the DUP will insist (not entirely
unreasonably) that it can't introduce divergence between NI and the rest
of the UK, so we're probably talking about any moves towards regulatory
alignment being UK-wide as a result.
Whether the EU or RoI will be satisfied with that, I don't know.
The more extensive the regulatory alignment asked for, the closer we get
to effectively remaining in the single market and that may then make
many of the Brexiteers unhappy.
just so...

re another half-question i thought i detected...

eire is likely to look for wheezes that move towards
'a united ireland'
at present there is a chimera out there that could be called
'a united europe'
--
www.abelard.org
James Hammerton
2017-12-06 19:42:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by abelard
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 19:26:11 +0000, James Hammerton
Post by James Hammerton
Post by abelard
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 18:57:10 +0000, James Hammerton
Post by James Hammerton
Post by Joe
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 18:38:25 +0000
Funny, nobody to my knowledge has asked yet whether it is reasonable for
the Irish Republic (or at least, some of its politicians) to want their
country to be a member state of both the EU and the UK, especially as it
seceded from the latter a century ago with some ill-feeling.
I'm confused by this comment. Who do you think is wanting the Republic
of Ireland to be part of the UK?!
My understanding is they want there to be sufficient regulatory
alignment between NI and the RoI that the EU doesn't feel it necessary
to put up a 'hard' border.
Because the UK is leaving the single market and customs union, if the EU
were to treat the UK as it treats other countries outside the single
market that would entail customs checks at the NI/RoI border.
NB: for animal origin foods it gets worse - under EU law they're
supposed to be routed through Border Inspection Posts where they're
likely to be physically insepected - 20% to 50% inspection rates from
what I've recall and there's currently only 2 Irish BIPs in Shannon and
Dublin.
So the question is whether the EU is willing to budge on that insistence
and/or whether the UK is willing to make compromises on regulatory
alignment that minimise the impact of that insistence.
why does 'regulatory alignment' need to be general rather
than case by case?
As far as I'm concerned I can see no reason why it can't be case by case
and thus limited to the issues that impact the RoI/NI border and the
Good Friday Agreement, though it seems the DUP will insist (not entirely
unreasonably) that it can't introduce divergence between NI and the rest
of the UK, so we're probably talking about any moves towards regulatory
alignment being UK-wide as a result.
Whether the EU or RoI will be satisfied with that, I don't know.
The more extensive the regulatory alignment asked for, the closer we get
to effectively remaining in the single market and that may then make
many of the Brexiteers unhappy.
just so...
re another half-question i thought i detected...
eire is likely to look for wheezes that move towards
'a united ireland'
That accusation has already been made by some... and of course denied.
Post by abelard
at present there is a chimera out there that could be called
'a united europe'
Well the phrase European Union does imply some level of unity,
apparently it involves 'ever closer union' and I don't expect that means
ever closer to some asymptote short of 'europe' becoming a single state.

Regards,

James
--
James Hammerton
http://jhammerton.wordpress.com
http://www.magnacartaplus.com/
abelard
2017-12-06 19:49:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 19:42:23 +0000, James Hammerton
Post by James Hammerton
Post by abelard
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 19:26:11 +0000, James Hammerton
Post by James Hammerton
Post by abelard
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 18:57:10 +0000, James Hammerton
Post by James Hammerton
Post by Joe
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 18:38:25 +0000
Funny, nobody to my knowledge has asked yet whether it is reasonable for
the Irish Republic (or at least, some of its politicians) to want their
country to be a member state of both the EU and the UK, especially as it
seceded from the latter a century ago with some ill-feeling.
I'm confused by this comment. Who do you think is wanting the Republic
of Ireland to be part of the UK?!
My understanding is they want there to be sufficient regulatory
alignment between NI and the RoI that the EU doesn't feel it necessary
to put up a 'hard' border.
Because the UK is leaving the single market and customs union, if the EU
were to treat the UK as it treats other countries outside the single
market that would entail customs checks at the NI/RoI border.
NB: for animal origin foods it gets worse - under EU law they're
supposed to be routed through Border Inspection Posts where they're
likely to be physically insepected - 20% to 50% inspection rates from
what I've recall and there's currently only 2 Irish BIPs in Shannon and
Dublin.
So the question is whether the EU is willing to budge on that insistence
and/or whether the UK is willing to make compromises on regulatory
alignment that minimise the impact of that insistence.
why does 'regulatory alignment' need to be general rather
than case by case?
As far as I'm concerned I can see no reason why it can't be case by case
and thus limited to the issues that impact the RoI/NI border and the
Good Friday Agreement, though it seems the DUP will insist (not entirely
unreasonably) that it can't introduce divergence between NI and the rest
of the UK, so we're probably talking about any moves towards regulatory
alignment being UK-wide as a result.
Whether the EU or RoI will be satisfied with that, I don't know.
The more extensive the regulatory alignment asked for, the closer we get
to effectively remaining in the single market and that may then make
many of the Brexiteers unhappy.
just so...
re another half-question i thought i detected...
eire is likely to look for wheezes that move towards
'a united ireland'
That accusation has already been made by some... and of course denied.
to be perfectly frank an honest...as wislon said
prior to every lie
Post by James Hammerton
Post by abelard
at present there is a chimera out there that could be called
'a united europe'
Well the phrase European Union does imply some level of unity,
apparently it involves 'ever closer union' and I don't expect that means
ever closer to some asymptote short of 'europe' becoming a single state.
looks like we're 'on the same page' :-)
--
www.abelard.org
Joe
2017-12-06 19:43:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 18:57:10 +0000
Post by James Hammerton
Post by Joe
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 18:38:25 +0000
Funny, nobody to my knowledge has asked yet whether it is
reasonable for the Irish Republic (or at least, some of its
politicians) to want their country to be a member state of both the
EU and the UK, especially as it seceded from the latter a century
ago with some ill-feeling.
I'm confused by this comment. Who do you think is wanting the
Republic of Ireland to be part of the UK?!
My understanding is they want there to be sufficient regulatory
alignment between NI and the RoI that the EU doesn't feel it
necessary to put up a 'hard' border.
Because the UK is leaving the single market and customs union, if the
EU were to treat the UK as it treats other countries outside the
single market that would entail customs checks at the NI/RoI border.
NB: for animal origin foods it gets worse - under EU law they're
supposed to be routed through Border Inspection Posts where they're
likely to be physically insepected - 20% to 50% inspection rates from
what I've recall and there's currently only 2 Irish BIPs in Shannon
and Dublin.
So the question is whether the EU is willing to budge on that
insistence and/or whether the UK is willing to make compromises on
regulatory alignment that minimise the impact of that insistence.
In other words, the RoI wants the kind of access to the UK market that
other UK members such as Scotland and NI have, but it also wants to
remain an EU member state. Should we assume that the RoI only joined
the EU when we did in order to avoid having a proper border with NI
and having to do these nasty customs checks? There will be a border
between two different sovereign states, just as there was for more than
half a century before we both joined the EU.

It's not as if the EU food regulation system is able to distinguish,
for example, random horsemeat from that which is edible. Nor does the
EU external border seem to restrict the free movement of arbitrary
African and Arab migrants.
--
Joe
James Hammerton
2017-12-06 20:13:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by abelard
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 18:57:10 +0000
Post by James Hammerton
Post by Joe
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 18:38:25 +0000
Funny, nobody to my knowledge has asked yet whether it is
reasonable for the Irish Republic (or at least, some of its
politicians) to want their country to be a member state of both the
EU and the UK, especially as it seceded from the latter a century
ago with some ill-feeling.
I'm confused by this comment. Who do you think is wanting the
Republic of Ireland to be part of the UK?!
My understanding is they want there to be sufficient regulatory
alignment between NI and the RoI that the EU doesn't feel it
necessary to put up a 'hard' border.
Because the UK is leaving the single market and customs union, if the
EU were to treat the UK as it treats other countries outside the
single market that would entail customs checks at the NI/RoI border.
NB: for animal origin foods it gets worse - under EU law they're
supposed to be routed through Border Inspection Posts where they're
likely to be physically insepected - 20% to 50% inspection rates from
what I've recall and there's currently only 2 Irish BIPs in Shannon
and Dublin.
So the question is whether the EU is willing to budge on that
insistence and/or whether the UK is willing to make compromises on
regulatory alignment that minimise the impact of that insistence.
In other words, the RoI wants the kind of access to the UK market that
other UK members such as Scotland and NI have, but it also wants to
remain an EU member state.
Ah that makes your earlier comment about the RoI joining the UK clearer,
they seem to want to be part of both the UK's and the EU's single
market. If we stayed in the latter, that would probably suffice, but
we're not and thus the UK, incl NI end up outside the tariff wall and
other trade barriers the EU erected around the single market with RoI
inside...
Post by abelard
Should we assume that the RoI only joined
the EU when we did in order to avoid having a proper border with NI
and having to do these nasty customs checks?
I'd be surprised if it weren't a factor in their thinking.

There will be a border
Post by abelard
between two different sovereign states, just as there was for more than
half a century before we both joined the EU.
Though equally there was also the common travel area.
Post by abelard
It's not as if the EU food regulation system is able to distinguish,
for example, random horsemeat from that which is edible.
:-) Much good those Border Inspection Posts did...

Nor does the
Post by abelard
EU external border seem to restrict the free movement of arbitrary
African and Arab migrants.
Regards,

James
--
James Hammerton
http://jhammerton.wordpress.com
http://www.magnacartaplus.com/
m***@btopenworld.com
2017-12-06 20:25:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by James Hammerton
My understanding is they want there to be sufficient regulatory
alignment between NI and the RoI that the EU doesn't feel it necessary
to put up a 'hard' border.
Beware seemingly innocuous and reasonable words that really lack definition. They will have definition all right when the other side wants them to.
Post by James Hammerton
Because the UK is leaving the single market and customs union, if the EU
were to treat the UK as it treats other countries outside the single
market that would entail customs checks at the NI/RoI border.
NB: for animal origin foods it gets worse - under EU law they're
supposed to be routed through Border Inspection Posts where they're
likely to be physically insepected - 20% to 50% inspection rates from
what I've recall and there's currently only 2 Irish BIPs in Shannon and
Dublin.
All meat that enters the food chain via retail outlets is monitored in the UK regardless of its origin and our abattoir regulations and practice match any in the world surpassing most. It's all a matter of emphasis. If the EU wants border inspections then the EU must have border inspections but the onus is one them to provide the facilities to effect this needed. There is no reason at all as to why the UK should slavishly follow EU practices with meat products destined for UK stores.

For years British meat products have been exported to the EU with little problem (ignoring F&M and BSE scares) then suddenly at 12 midnight on the 29th of March 2019, the practices involved in preparing UK meat for export will become inadequate.

How will this affect the thousands of tons of Danish and Dutch bacon,pork and continental hams that enter the UK retail market every year presumably though our non BIP ports?

It's all nonsense dreamed up to complicate Brexit. A firm line needs to be taken. I UK meat cannot enter Europe then no EU meat enters the UK.

Simple! problem solved - next!
Post by James Hammerton
So the question is whether the EU is willing to budge on that insistence
and/or whether the UK is willing to make compromises on regulatory
alignment that minimalise the impact of that insistence.
By the sound of it, too many compromises are already being contemplated and they are all in the same direction.
MM
2017-12-07 17:05:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
It's all nonsense dreamed up to complicate Brexit. A firm line needs to be taken. I UK meat cannot enter Europe then no EU meat enters the UK.
What about EU meat from Irish farmers in the Republic?

You're going to destroy their livelihoods just to bolster your
xenophobia?

MM
James Hammerton
2017-12-09 19:44:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
Post by James Hammerton
My understanding is they want there to be sufficient regulatory
alignment between NI and the RoI that the EU doesn't feel it necessary
to put up a 'hard' border.
Beware seemingly innocuous and reasonable words that really lack definition. They will have definition all right when the other side wants them to.
Agreed!
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
Post by James Hammerton
Because the UK is leaving the single market and customs union, if the EU
were to treat the UK as it treats other countries outside the single
market that would entail customs checks at the NI/RoI border.
NB: for animal origin foods it gets worse - under EU law they're
supposed to be routed through Border Inspection Posts where they're
likely to be physically insepected - 20% to 50% inspection rates from
what I've recall and there's currently only 2 Irish BIPs in Shannon and
Dublin.
All meat that enters the food chain via retail outlets is monitored in the UK regardless of its origin and our abattoir regulations and practice match any in the world surpassing most. It's all a matter of emphasis. If the EU wants border inspections then the EU must have border inspections but the onus is one them to provide the facilities to effect this needed. There is no reason at all as to why the UK should slavishly follow EU practices with meat products destined for UK stores.
Agreed, it was the traffic going the other way I had in mind. Though it
is possible the EU might be more willing to relax inspections regimes
for goods the EU believes have already been subjected to high standards
in the originating country - if so this would be done via negotiated
agreements, or perhaps lowering inspection rates due to lower risk as
the EU sees it (my understanding is that inspection rates are in part
determined by the risks of letting through sub standard produce).
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
For years British meat products have been exported to the EU with little problem (ignoring F&M and BSE scares) then suddenly at 12 midnight on the 29th of March 2019, the practices involved in preparing UK meat for export will become inadequate.
That is the legal consequence of us becoming a 'third country' unless
some agreement is made otherwise, e.g. to change EU laws.

If we make promises to maintain alignment with EU standards on this
issue both now and into the future in a treaty then they might be able
to relax this requirement for us.

Outside of making an agreement with us, the EU cannot give us
preferential treatment that they don't give to other third countries.
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
How will this affect the thousands of tons of Danish and Dutch bacon,pork and continental hams that enter the UK retail market every year presumably though our non BIP ports?
It depends on what rules we apply to those, but you appear to expect the
EU to relax the rules its applying to imports from third countries to
facilitate our post brexit EU bound exports. They're constrained (a) by
the desire to protect the integrity of their markets (b) avoiding
breaching WTO "most favoured nation" rules and setting precedents that
other third countries may try to exploit.

Of course we could use the UK bound produce from the EU as leverage
here, e.g. in the absence of agreement we could bar the imports of those
meats (and thus end up paying higher prices for imports from elsewhere
or increase home grown produce or find these meats less available than
before) or require them to follow similar procedures as they enter our
territory (in which case we'll probably need to expand our existing BIPs).
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
It's all nonsense dreamed up to complicate Brexit.
It's a simple fact that the EU laws currently require third country
imports to the EU to follow the procedure I described.

As leaving the single market and customs union entails third country
status then either the EU has to be persuaded to change the law or
persuade us to remain in or sufficiently aligned with the single market
(in the SM in all but name, as far as animal products are concerned)
that they feel no need to impose these procedures. If we left without an
agreement then surely the WTO rules against preferential treatment would
entail them putting this procedure in place on the Irish border?
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
A firm line needs to be taken. I UK meat cannot enter Europe then no EU meat enters the UK.
And if the consequences of that are UK consumers either paying higher
food prices or going without those products?
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
Simple! problem solved - next!
Doesn't seem so simple to me. However events have moved on - it looks
like a version of regulatory alignment has been committed to on our part
in order to get to phase 2.

Regards,

James
--
James Hammerton
http://jhammerton.wordpress.com
http://www.magnacartaplus.com/
Joe
2017-12-06 10:11:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 06 Dec 2017 10:40:29 +0100
Post by abelard
"Tory Brexiteers fear Theresa May is being bounced by her top civil
servants Jeremy Heywood and Olly Robbins"
it was said previously that she was inclined to follow 'civil'
'servants' rather than to lead
"That's very.... courageous.... Prime Minister."
--
Joe
m***@btopenworld.com
2017-12-06 10:49:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by James Harris
Irish Government said UK could not show text of Brexit deal to DUP
before Monday, claims Arlene Foster. Theresa May complied.
https://twitter.com/christopherhope/status/938092141578018816
Apparently, May tried to bounce the DUP into accepting the deal ... at
the bidding of the Irish government. That follows a number of related
reports, albeit unsubstantiated. I don't know about you but May
increasingly comes across as the EU's person in the UK rather than our
person in Europe.
Fortunately, the DUP refused to be coerced. Good for them!
We might have reason to be eternally grateful to them if they have put the skids under any attempt to come to a premature agreement with the EU - fingers crossed!

We will get the agreement we want in the end but that will need time, patience and Brexit.
businessofraud
2017-12-06 19:48:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
Post by James Harris
Irish Government said UK could not show text of Brexit deal to DUP
before Monday, claims Arlene Foster. Theresa May complied.
https://twitter.com/christopherhope/status/938092141578018816
Apparently, May tried to bounce the DUP into accepting the deal ... at
the bidding of the Irish government. That follows a number of related
reports, albeit unsubstantiated. I don't know about you but May
increasingly comes across as the EU's person in the UK rather than our
person in Europe.
Fortunately, the DUP refused to be coerced. Good for them!
We might have reason to be eternally grateful to them if they have put
the skids under any attempt to come to a premature agreement with the EU
- fingers crossed!
We will get the agreement we want in the end but that will need time, patience and Brexit.
what the hell does that mean "time patience and brexit?"

it's some kind of a religion?

idiot
Loading...