Irish border question - how does extending transition deal make a difference anyway?

[threetrees]

Can't see the point of an extension to transition - ie. if they can't sort out border issue now, what difference will an extra year make?

[PetuliaBlavatsky]

I agree, I can't see what possible solution there is anyway.

[threetrees]

so why have the extension?

[threetrees]

one solution would be to leave the EU and have the EU itself or Republic of Ireland choose to put up a border or not

[GhostofFrankGrimes]

one solution would be to leave the EU and have the EU itself or Republic of Ireland choose to put up a border or not

Thats not a solution because Ireland/EU will protect the integrity of the GFA. The GFA being an international agreement voted for by the people on the island of Ireland i.e it is the will of the people with a far bigger mandate than Brexit.

The border is a British problem. The British colonised Ireland and the British annexed the north. The current set up i.e no visible border works well for people on the island of Ireland. It is Brexit (a British problem) that threatens this.

[YeOldeTrout]

Transition extension: allows the BRITISH to argue to their domestic political forces (rebel Tories, DUP) that they haven't capitulated on their red lines, that the Brexit unicorn will still be delivered. It's a face-saving exercise.

May went into negotiations with redlines that she knew were incompatible with EU's redlines. "Bloody difficult woman" indeed.

[threetrees]

GFG: can't see how the EU/Rep or Ire will actually enforce the GFA though if the UK just leaves them to sort out the border?

[Childrenofthesun]

It allows time for the development of the as yet mythical "technological" solutions to customs checks which would mean the border can stay soft.

In reality, there is no reason why we shouldn't just remain in the customs union. There is no economic benefit to us leaving it.

[Childrenofthesun]

If the UK decides not to remain in regulatory alignment with the EU, WTO rules mean that the EU must enforce customs checks as it is a legal requirement that any trading bloc has secure borders. Equally, under WTO most favoured nation regulations, the UK must also enforce border checks on goods from the EU unless it opens its borders freely to goods from anywhere in the world.

[threetrees]

that can be tweaked ,as WTO rules are unenforcable

[Childrenofthesun]

Er, they are enforceable, unless the UK is happy to be subject to sanctions amid all the other Brexit trading issues?

fullfact.org/europe/introduction-world-trade-organisation/

The WTO also has a busy Dispute Settlement Body (DSB). Here countries can take cases against other countries they think violate WTO rules.

Some DSB hearings are public but they are generally held in private. The findings of the DSB are publicly available. The EU and the United States followed by China, India, Brazil and Argentina are the most common participants in disputes. When a country is found in violation of WTO rules it is required to change its laws to comply with them.

If countries choose not to do so, the winning state can take retaliatory action in the form of trade sanctions such as introducing higher tariffs.

[SilverViking]

"GFG: can't see how the EU/Rep or Ire will actually enforce the GFA though if the UK just leaves them to sort out the border?"
...And....
"that can be tweaked ,as WTO rules are unenforcable"

That is the kind of arrogant ignorance that marched uk into the corner they are stuck in. If you ignore it... the problem just wont go away!

Please do a quick search, there is lots of information out there, some of it easy to understand, that describes the border problem and why the uk have boxed themselves into a corner over it.

[threetrees]

a deal is a deal, so why would say a country that we do a 'deal' with then resort to imposing higher tariffs - no sense made

WTO is not the same as EU in this way

[Childrenofthesun]

You don't seem to understand the WTO.

We are already having a lot of trouble negotiating with several other WTO members:

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-trade-deal-wto-liam-fox-no-deal-international-trade-a8603811.html?fbclid=IwAR3r4zqYBzjJ31OV77irVGWEnrDUhY2B_Ki-NLRGx5YPXXvhwd7hwMIt3Yk

[GhostofFrankGrimes]

GFG: can't see how the EU/Rep or Ire will actually enforce the GFA though if the UK just leaves them to sort out the border?

Both the Irish government and the EU are committed to the GFA. It would be the British breaking the honour of the agreement if they did anything that undermined the status quo. The British are co signatories of the GFA, they can't just ignore this.

[prettybird]

So, the Brexiters voted to "take control of the UK's borders" and the first thing that they want to do once we leave is not take control of the border.

Whether you like it or not, it is a matter of international law that the NI/Ireland border is a border with a different sovereign country (which is also in the EU). If the UK chooses not to control that border, then it also need to let in all goods from all countries with whom we don't have trade agreements (that will be all countries on 30 March) without any controls into all of the UK.

Shame that the EU is being the only grown-up here It's trying to help the UK come up with something that doesn't breech international treaties and international trade law - but given that the DUP always hated the GFA and would be happy to see it trashed (despite its overwhelming all Ireland mandate) - the UK Gov is looking a gift horse in the mouth in shunning a solution that would get them out of the shit that it got itself into when it overlooked the GFA while going gung-ho for a hard Brexit.

[HappyHugs]

What prettybird said; perfectly.