[Politics] Brexit

[Two Professors]

You are exactly the kind of **** that prompts accusations of stupidity, by being bloody stupid though. Catch 22 innit?

Aaah diddums,Baldy,have you banged your head again?Quite why you think your side of the argument is allowed to hand out abuse without any form of response is only known to you and that utter chopper,now that Clampy has lost his stupidest remainer crown.

 

[Two Professors]

We don't need to take back control when we already have control. The legislation is already there.
I don't know about you but every single time I return to the UK, I have to show my passport. I can't just waltz back in.

So why are you always moaning about losing 'free movement' then?

 

[Two Professors]

Because it wasn't policy of the coalition prior to 2015 to hold one.

It just goes to show how unsustainable the whole idea of Brexit is longer term. The Chequers 'plan' has actually made both no deal and remaining in The EU increase in likelihood. If the former occurs in March and we do just crash out, the clamour to rejoin The EEA, assuming we do actually leave it and Article 127 doesn't require invocation separately to Article 50, will be difficult to be endure politically. I appreciate that prospect is an uncomfortable one and will be every bit as divisive as this whole car crash has been thus far, but's it's a palpable one.

But most people eventually grow up,as well as grow old,and start to have the common sense needed to vote Leave,replacing those who pass away.

 

[ManOfSussex]

Can't remember where I read it.

However, a quick search to this blog clarifies that we don't have to secure our borders. It also covers the border issue regarding security implications (the basis for not having physical checks/infrastructure) and is non-committal.

https://tradebetablog.wordpress.com/2018/07/18/does-the-wto-require-countries-to-control-their-borders/

"First, a fact:

There is no rule in the WTO requiring its member governments to secure their borders.

After Brexit, the UK could drop all border controls for traded goods and services and it would be perfectly within its WTO rights."

So we're not taking back control of our borders then? As well as reading in full all the article of the link you posted (for the bit about apples, instead think about chicken from Nigeria v chicken from The Netherlands and the problems that might pose in particular to public health) perhaps you should also familiarise yourself with The WCO's Revised Kyoto Convention as well, to which we are signatories and the fact that borders work two ways.

 

[Two Professors]

It's not wanting an input, we have to agree schedules (and quotas) with all WTO members if we don't want to default to the highest tariffs.

Then we can 'Cherry Pick' who we buy from,as not everybody has high tariffs.

 

[pastafarian]

We don't need to take back control when we already have control. The legislation is already there.
I don't know about you but every single time I return to the UK, I have to show my passport. I can't just waltz back in.

It must be hard being as dishonest as you.
If the legislation and the mechanism already exists for adequate border control of our EU borders that would allow us to implement quotas and entry permits should we choose,(like we have on non EU citizens) then why are you having such a hard time sharing this legislation and proving its existence?
Simply showing you possess a passport ( or an ID card) to gain entry to live, work or jobhunt is not considered adequate enough to the millions who wish for stronger controls at the border over immigration on EU citizens and who do not subscribe to EU free movement.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Then we can 'Cherry Pick' who we buy from,as not everybody has high tariffs.

Let’s hope so, as your pension might not stetch too far if prices go up further.

 

[larus]

So we're not taking back control of our borders then? As well as reading in full all the article of the link you posted (for the bit about apples, instead think about chicken from Nigeria v chicken from The Netherlands and the problems that might pose in particular to public health) perhaps you should also familiarise yourself with The WCO's Revised Kyoto Convention as well, to which we are signatories and the fact that borders work two ways.

Ireland ha always been accepted as a special case, and I do not confuse regulations/customs and immigration, which is what taking back out borders refers to. I’m sure you realise that and are just being obtuse.

http://www.wcoomd.org/en/topics/facilitation/instrument-and-tools/conventions/pf_revised_kyoto_conv.aspx

Quote from the WCO Kyoto Convention:
“transparency and predictability of Customs actions;
standardization and simplification of the goods declaration and supporting documents;
simplified procedures for authorized persons;
maximum use of information technology;
minimum necessary Customs control to ensure compliance with regulations;
use of risk management and audit based controls;
coordinated interventions with other border agencies;
partnership with the trade.”

Sounds good to me. What’s not to like?

 

[Garry Nelson's teacher]

Can't remember where I read it.

However, a quick search to this blog clarifies that we don't have to secure our borders. It also covers the border issue regarding security implications (the basis for not having physical checks/infrastructure) and is non-committal.

https://tradebetablog.wordpress.com/2018/07/18/does-the-wto-require-countries-to-control-their-borders/

"First, a fact:

There is no rule in the WTO requiring its member governments to secure their borders.

After Brexit, the UK could drop all border controls for traded goods and services and it would be perfectly within its WTO rights."

That's quite a good source BUT the author admits he is not a lawyer and actually quotes one who says that a 'waiver' on the grounds of national security would be NOT be applicable. I think if this is the platform for your rather confident claims then it s beginning to wobble a bit. In fairness, I think it might work if the EU and ROI agree but could be the subject of an appeal by 3rd parties. But then I'm not a lawyer either.

One of the characteristics of the EU is the ability at one and the same time to be a rule-based organisation but to also do deals and fudges. (I rather admire this, and it might be the final saving grace to the deal/no deal dichotomy.)

 

[ManOfSussex]

Ireland ha always been accepted as a special case, and I do not confuse regulations/customs and immigration, which is what taking back out borders refers to. I’m sure you realise that and are just being obtuse.

http://www.wcoomd.org/en/topics/facilitation/instrument-and-tools/conventions/pf_revised_kyoto_conv.aspx

Quote from the WCO Kyoto Convention:
“transparency and predictability of Customs actions;
standardization and simplification of the goods declaration and supporting documents;
simplified procedures for authorized persons;
maximum use of information technology;
minimum necessary Customs control to ensure compliance with regulations;
use of risk management and audit based controls;
coordinated interventions with other border agencies;
partnership with the trade.”

Sounds good to me. What’s not to like?

I wouldn't go that far, but I'm glad you're finally accepting that'll be just like the Swiss/French, Norwegian/Swedish and indeed at The Eastern Docks at our very own Port of Dover where lorries from outside The EU, and therefore entering into a different customs territory are checked and held up for 20 minutes-1 hour, as per every other such border in the world outside a customs union, as per clause 6.1 of The International Convention on the Simplification and Harmonisation of Customs procedures: "All goods, including means of transport, which enter or leave the Customs territory, regardless of whether they are liable to duties and taxes, shall be subject to Customs control."

Glad we got there in the end, you're not as naive as I thought.

 

[Garry Nelson's teacher]

But most people eventually grow up,as well as grow old,and start to have the common sense needed to vote Leave,replacing those who pass away.

An interesting if unlikely (in my view) hypothesis. You probably subscribe to this: The man who is not a socialist at 20 has no heart, but if he is still a socialist at 40 he has no head. - Aristide Briand (1862 - 1932) [French premier and former socialist]


I'm aware of the fallacy of confusing socialism with being a Remainer, but I suspect you'll get my drift.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

So why are you always moaning about losing 'free movement' then?

Because the UK will lose Free Movement after March 2019.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

It must be hard being as dishonest as you.
If the legislation and the mechanism already exists for adequate border control of our EU borders that would allow us to implement quotas and entry permits should we choose,(like we have on non EU citizens) then why are you having such a hard time sharing this legislation and proving its existence?
Simply showing you possess a passport ( or an ID card) to gain entry to live, work or jobhunt is not considered adequate enough to the millions who wish for stronger controls at the border over immigration on EU citizens and who do not subscribe to EU free movement.

I am not going to answer someone who accuses me of being dishonest. If you cannot debate in a polite and good mannered way (nor do your own research) then I see no reason to waste my time on you.

 

[Ernest]

Because the UK will lose Free Movement after March 2019.

I think most of the swivel eyed loons haven't realised that free movement worked both ways and will affect them going on their hols etc , probably thought a flash of their blue passport would have the immigration officers swooning

 

[Thunder Bolt]

I think most of the swivel eyed loons haven't realised that free movement worked both ways and will affect them going on their hols etc , probably thought a flash of their blue passport would have the immigration officers swooning

Nor will their EH1C work so travel insurance will go up, and there will be surcharges on holidays in Europe. If they're driving, they'll need a green card or the modern equivalent. Oh what fun we'll have.

 

[Deleted member 22389]

Chill out.

 

[larus]

That's quite a good source BUT the author admits he is not a lawyer and actually quotes one who says that a 'waiver' on the grounds of national security would be NOT be applicable. I think if this is the platform for your rather confident claims then it s beginning to wobble a bit. In fairness, I think it might work if the EU and ROI agree but could be the subject of an appeal by 3rd parties. But then I'm not a lawyer either.

One of the characteristics of the EU is the ability at one and the same time to be a rule-based organisation but to also do deals and fudges. (I rather admire this, and it might be the final saving grace to the deal/no deal dichotomy.)

You may be right about it being on subjective grounds, but it's interesting that strict border controls are NOT a requirement of WTO compliance.

Let's carry on being realistic here. There are very different processes going on with the Brexit saga. First, there is the public protestations from both sides, but the reality is, the EU will want a trade deal with us. They have a huge surplus and they want a big chunk of our money. If we can accept that as a reasonable starting position, then it comes down to what we get/agree.

I want to believe that the spirit of the leave vote is respected (no ECJ, no freedom of movement and no large payments to the EU budget). Chequers is dead (remainers hate it, leavers hate it and the EU won't accept it), so another option must be found. This leaves a FTA which is what leave voters want, and the statement "The easiest trade deal ever" is actually very true. The complication of free trade deals in regulatory alignment - this does not apply as we are already aligned, but may choose to diverge over time. This will be possible as it's a FTA and not a customs union.

 

[WATFORD zero]

And still not answered the question about if in negotiations.

So because we are (in your mind) negotiating an FTA with one member of the WTO, you believe that all other members have to wait ?

OK

 

[larus]

I wouldn't go that far, but I'm glad you're finally accepting that'll be just like the Swiss/French, Norwegian/Swedish and indeed at The Eastern Docks at our very own Port of Dover where lorries from outside The EU, and therefore entering into a different customs territory are checked and held up for 20 minutes-1 hour, as per every other such border in the world outside a customs union, as per clause 6.1 of The International Convention on the Simplification and Harmonisation of Customs procedures: "All goods, including means of transport, which enter or leave the Customs territory, regardless of whether they are liable to duties and taxes, shall be subject to Customs control."

Glad we got there in the end, you're not as naive as I thought.

Yes, of course there will be extra checks, but most customs paperwork is completed ports. I watched an interesting program a couple of weeks ago and they interviewed port workers at one of the Eastern docks and they said this whole saga about delays at the ports and gridlock is overplayed. Tariffs (taxes) are not collected at the docks and are a paperwork/accounting exercise. Regulatory alignment again has no impact at the docks.

Regarding food rotting, the other day I was eating some mini corns and mange toute (Rodney) and these came from Egypt and Kenya. So food from the EU will still get through fine. I accept that we may have to build additional facilities at or near Dover to handle the extra checks, but we don't have to have these in place for day one. We can choose to ignore these checks (which are for our benefit) for the time being.

 

[larus]

So because we are (in your mind) negotiating an FTA with one member of the WTO, you believe that all other members have to wait ?

OK

I'm still waiting for an answer on this question. I try to answer your questions, but won't anymore until you do me the same courtesy.

And you still have yet to reply to the FACT that the EU (according to you) need to implement checks but they have said that they won't. So what is it? Are you right or the EU?