Please can someone tell me the upsides of Brexit

[CleopatrasMum]

Apparently Dominic Raab has said there are many upsides of Brexit. The article in the Guardian that I read this in gave no details of what Raab (presumably) went on to say those upsides were.

Please can someone explain them to me?

Link to article here for what it's worth:

Raab says Brexit will bring 'huge series of upsides' for UK trade

www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/aug/06/raab-says-brexit-will-bring-huge-series-of-upsides-for-uk-trade?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

@HateIsNotGood - There are more than 3 options, including that the EU also reduces its 'stance' as well as the UK and that more options are considered to get to a resolution.

I give up. You are obviously clueless about the GFA and have no intention of educating yourself.

Ahem: The GFA and the USA. Notably the Republicans.

www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jul/31/brexit-mess-with-good-friday-and-well-block-uk-trade-deal-us-politicians-warn

^There are more than 3 options, including that the EU also reduces its 'stance' as well as the UK and that more options are considered
to get to a resolution.^

Why should they? It's the UK which has decided that it wants to Leave, so it's up to the UK to try to square the circle.

If all sides agreed that the GFA or any treaty was now redundant then there would be no problem but all sides haven't agreed - it's only one side that finds it getting in the way. Now if we still had that Empire we might be able to impose our will on them although we still had an Empire when Ireland became independent.

@Peregrina - Now if we still had that Empire we might be able to impose our will on them although we still had an Empire when Ireland became independent.

The problem is that the current UK government is using Empire diplomacy here. They don't seem to realise it won't work any more.

@HateIsNotGood

Trying to find the EU proposal to get rid of the CTA, have you a link?

jas - I'll have a look and post it tomorrow, it would be from at least 2015 (before the Ref was even unanounced). I'm off now, another long day and I'm not sticking around tonight so posters can call me 'clueless' or whatever, just because I'm looking at the problem from a different perspective to them. But that is inevitable on this Board unfortunately, and so stifles any real debate or discussion.

@HateIsNotGood - I'm not sticking around tonight so posters can call me 'clueless'

I have called you clueless because you are talking shite about the GFA despite the fact that you have obviously never read it or considered any of its implications.

Thankyou @HateIsNotGood
I'd be wary of reading too much into EU proposals, there is an awful lot of hoops to jump through before any real action would take place.

Trying to find the EU proposal to get rid of the CTA, have you a link?

In principle it might now have become redundant with both countries being in the EU, with Freedom of Movement, EU citizens being allowed to vote in Local elections and most EU members and some EEA members being in Schengen. However, as members we would be able to negotiate for it to be at an advantageous time to get rid of it.

Not being in Schengen makes a mockery of the Leavers claim about wanting to control our borders. We do much more than the other countries and we could throw out those EU citizens who don't find work.

Hubris now. And UK or should I say soon to be former UK, will blame everyone else for the disaster incoming. Apart from themselves. It is inevitable.

What a fkn shitshow this is. And so unnecessary.

Three years on and nothing decided. UK needs to get a kick up the the goolies now really and a big dose of reality.

But sadly they are relying on the Mark Froincois and Grease mogg of this world to run our country. Does anyone care?

Honestly. Well OK kill our economy for your own ends. But no one even knows what that means. Quite sinister IMV.

There has never been a positive put forward for Brexit that was not ERG generated.

If they don't do this, they are breaking an international peace treaty that they signed in 1998

Article 50 was developed by EU to provide a mechanism for any member who wished to leave the EU and was completed in 2009. All 28 EU members agreed to Article 50.

GFA was developed in 1998. So when EU developed Article 50 they were fully aware of GFA, but no reference is made to GFA in Article 50.

If UK leaves the EU without a deal then all legal agreements between EU and UK cease to exist. UK would have no say in what EU does afterward.

EU regulations require border control between EU and Non EU countries. GFA does not overrule the EU regulations as EU was never a party to the GFA and EU came into existence decades before GFA developed.

How is installation of a border between NI and ROI by EU the fault of UK when it EU acting in accordance with EU regulations?

Ahem: The GFA and the USA. Notably the Republicans

UK and US already have trade deals. US is UK second largest trading partner. Check out

Www.fullfact.org

Just because the UK has shifted the goalposts again, doesn't mean they should demand anything from the EU

Article 50 reads:

1. A Member State which decides to withdraw must notify the European Council of its intention. In light of the guidelines provided by the European Council, the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State..........

1. The Treaties shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of the withdrawal agreement or failing that two years after the notification in paragraph 2. unless both the Member State and European Council agree to extend this period.

Nothing in Article 50 about any of the following:

Good Friday Agreement
Customs Union
Single Market
State that wants to leave EU can only do so if an agreement is made

If the negotiations do not produce an agreement then the Member State that notified its intention to leave does so and all prior Treaties between EU and the State that has left cease to exist.

Why should they? It's the UK which has decided that it wants to Leave, so it's up to the UK to try to square the circle

Article 50 allows any member state to leave the EU. Remember that Article 50 was developed in 2009 and agreed between all EU members at the time, ROI included and made no reference was made to the GFA that was developed in 1998. A huge oversight by the EU

Article 50 reads:

2. A Member State which decides to withdraw must notify the European Council of its intention. In light of the guidelines provided by the European Council, the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State..........

3. The Treaties shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of the withdrawal agreement or failing that two years after the notification in paragraph 2. unless both the Member State and European Council agree to extend this period

If the negotiations fail then UK leaves without an agreement and all Treaties between EU and UK cease to exist and in terms of borders UK becomes a third country.

Under EU law there is no freedom of movement of people or goods between EU and non EU Countries. Therefore each member state of the EU has a responsibility to control passage of persons and goods from outside EU. In this case ROI, as a member of the EU would have install a border between NI and ROI as NI is part of UK which would have third country status.

Article 50 does not go on to say that the member who has left shall remain responsible for the EU's future actions and ability to comply with it's own laws and regulations.

EU laws on border control came into effect long before GFA was developed and EU are not a party to the GFA. Hence GFA does not overrule the EU Laws.

It would be morally wrong to say "tough luck" to those whose daily lives rely on easy passage across the invisible border between NI and ROI, but when it comes to battles and legal arguments moral considerations are usually ignored. So target should be to avoid such battles.

The backstop only kicks in if a trade deal isn’t sorted in two years.

Why is this a problem.

Nosy you're obsessed with the UK right to leave.

Not surprised at all that you're not considering the NIrish and Irish people having the right to live in peace.

Which they are. Have been for 21 years. But now because London says so that's at risk?

It's beyond unfair.

Iggly,

The backstop is a problem (clearly!) as the EU can offer us terms that are unacceptable and, if we don’t accept them, can (effectively) keep us in the EU forever.

Of course, the EU claim that the backstop is a last resort and it would negotiate a Brexit on a best efforts basis.

However, many think it would irrevocably weaken our negotiating position.

The backstop is there to protect the border between the EU and non EU while maintaining the GFA.

Why would the EU want to trick the UK into staying in?

We’ve negotiated with them for two years. They don’t want the UK to get any special treatment. The backstop is about the ROI, not the UK.

So, the UK should knuckle down and work on a sensible arrangement instead of ignorant dick swinging.

It’s embarrassing.

So, the UK should knuckle down and work on a sensible arrangement instead of ignorant dick swinging.

This. The UK knew fine it's obligations under the GFA and chose to ignore them.

The ridiculous charade of Brexit is down to the Tory party and those who voted to Leave.

What they want should not be prioritised over peace, and the sooner people stop stamping their feet and whinging about that the better.

When it comes down to it, preservation of peace is all that matters.

Whatever anyone else wants has to come second to that.

Iggly,

They don’t want the UK to get any special treatment. The UK does. That is how you negotiate.

You will say we have no negotiating power. I would disagree. We are somewhere between the 5th and 7th largest economies in the world and 1/8 the size of the remaining EU, as well as a huge buyer if their goods (especially Germany).

Many on this board think that, as we have chosen to leave, we should slink away with our tail between our legs.

We can negotiate in the same way as North Korea and Iran can negotiate with a huge military power like the US. No deal is far more painful to the ‘lesser’ nation but painful enough to the ‘greater’ power that the ‘lesser’ power does have leverage.

It amazes me how many fail to grasp that point.

Have you stopped to think why we are the 6th largest economy....

I personally think being in the EU is a huge part of that - think of the City of London - take the EU link away and....... 🤷🏻‍♀️

I didn’t say we had no negotiating power. You’re putting words in my posts.

I said we should crack on and accept that some things really aren’t for us to dictate - there are other countries’ interests at stake here, not just ours.

We were the idiots who chose to vote Leave and we should finally face the facts (such at the ROI border) and work with it.

Iggly,

You can imply something without explicitly stating it.

We have our red lines, the EU have theirs. We have negotiated extraordinarily badly, mainly because we were way too weak (and also because we do not have a meaningful mandate to leave.

However, we either remain or negotiate and negotiating implies we may have no deal.

I really hope we get a deal, or even stay in, but preparing for no deal is the only way we will ever get an even half way decent deal.

Being a huge buyer of goods means we need those goods because we can’t make them ourselves.

Yes we could go elsewhere - but have you stopped to think about how that actually works? It isn’t a single organisation making those import decisions. It’s loads of companies who buy based on the best price and quality for their business.

Naive to be looking for upsides in the Gruniad!
As to imports -if the British can't buy where do they sell to? The perishables would just go to waste - an't just magic up buyers from nowhere - of course supplies will continue -ridiculous to think otherwise.

@larrygrylls what's your magic deal, then?