Author Topic: Brexit.  (Read 871096 times)

Milltown Row2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 25711
  • It was the Ref that did it!!
    • View Profile
Re: Brexit.
« Reply #9870 on: July 21, 2021, 12:39:55 PM »
I can get the fact that there needs to be controls of 'goods' entering NI from Britain but I was looking at it from the likes of foods not materials like wood, steel and things like that.

The reason why I'm asking is that more and more companies are not delivering to the north and I'm taking, lets say, garden furniture, what's the difficulty in the paperwork or is it a handy excuse to not bother shipping here?

My take is that while it may not be that hard to get up to speed with the paperwork we are such a small market most just can't be ars*d.

This and the pricks in GB haven't fully resourced their end of the bargain. Probably didn't expect the EU to make them honour their side of the agreement, charlatans.

So our useless reps at Westminster can't pull these companies and show them up for what it is?

I spoke to one of the firms that I was trying to order from, he said due to brexit we can't deliver, I said I work for a company that delivers from all over Europe and UK to the North, why can't you brext was his reply, no other reason, pure lazy
Anything I post is not the view of the County Board!! Nobody died in the making of this post ;-)

lfdown2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1082
    • View Profile
Re: Brexit.
« Reply #9871 on: July 21, 2021, 12:54:01 PM »
I can get the fact that there needs to be controls of 'goods' entering NI from Britain but I was looking at it from the likes of foods not materials like wood, steel and things like that.

The reason why I'm asking is that more and more companies are not delivering to the north and I'm taking, lets say, garden furniture, what's the difficulty in the paperwork or is it a handy excuse to not bother shipping here?

My take is that while it may not be that hard to get up to speed with the paperwork we are such a small market most just can't be ars*d.

This and the pricks in GB haven't fully resourced their end of the bargain. Probably didn't expect the EU to make them honour their side of the agreement, charlatans.

So our useless reps at Westminster can't pull these companies and show them up for what it is?

I spoke to one of the firms that I was trying to order from, he said due to brexit we can't deliver, I said I work for a company that delivers from all over Europe and UK to the North, why can't you brext was his reply, no other reason, pure lazy

I would say the effort, or any effort is being deemed not worth the reward for the number of units they are shipping to the north. I would imagine that quite will wait to see how it pans out and will reassess once the difficulties (perceived or otherwise) are ironed out (who knows when that might be).

seafoid

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26027
    • View Profile
Re: Brexit.
« Reply #9872 on: July 21, 2021, 01:29:22 PM »
Brexit is a failure. it was based on economic assumptions which failed to materialise.
the EU didn't give the UK free Single Market Access . There are no decent trade deals out there.

Taking the UK out of its economic hinterland is ridiculous.
Lookit

johnnycool

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3037
    • View Profile
Re: Brexit.
« Reply #9873 on: July 21, 2021, 01:39:57 PM »
Brexit is a failure. it was based on economic assumptions which failed to materialise.
the EU didn't give the UK free Single Market Access . There are no decent trade deals out there.

Taking the UK out of its economic hinterland is ridiculous.

Brexit was never about economic benefits, it was about immigration and the elephant in the room was closing down taxation loopholes for the well heeled.
Everything thereafter was pure bullshít.

screenexile

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11788
  • Up The Screen!
    • View Profile
Re: Brexit.
« Reply #9874 on: July 21, 2021, 01:58:22 PM »
I can get the fact that there needs to be controls of 'goods' entering NI from Britain but I was looking at it from the likes of foods not materials like wood, steel and things like that.

The reason why I'm asking is that more and more companies are not delivering to the north and I'm taking, lets say, garden furniture, what's the difficulty in the paperwork or is it a handy excuse to not bother shipping here?

My take is that while it may not be that hard to get up to speed with the paperwork we are such a small market most just can't be ars*d.

This and the pricks in GB haven't fully resourced their end of the bargain. Probably didn't expect the EU to make them honour their side of the agreement, charlatans.

So our useless reps at Westminster can't pull these companies and show them up for what it is?

I spoke to one of the firms that I was trying to order from, he said due to brexit we can't deliver, I said I work for a company that delivers from all over Europe and UK to the North, why can't you brext was his reply, no other reason, pure lazy

I would say the effort, or any effort is being deemed not worth the reward for the number of units they are shipping to the north. I would imagine that quite will wait to see how it pans out and will reassess once the difficulties (perceived or otherwise) are ironed out (who knows when that might be).

I think it’s more transport it’s much more costly to send something to the North than it used to be as there are less goods going there.

Rossfan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18076
  • Ballaghaderreen CO ROSCOMMON
    • View Profile
    • Roscommon County Board official website
Re: Brexit.
« Reply #9875 on: July 21, 2021, 03:48:13 PM »
Remember we're a noble race from a land where Kings once trod.

seafoid

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26027
    • View Profile
Re: Brexit.
« Reply #9876 on: July 21, 2021, 04:03:03 PM »
Brexit is a failure. it was based on economic assumptions which failed to materialise.
the EU didn't give the UK free Single Market Access . There are no decent trade deals out there.

Taking the UK out of its economic hinterland is ridiculous.

Brexit was never about economic benefits, it was about immigration and the elephant in the room was closing down taxation loopholes for the well heeled.
Everything thereafter was pure bullshít.
In order to be sustainable, Brexit had to have economic benefits. Unionism in NI is the same. It has to benefit people. Neither do.
Brexit is doomed. So is Unionism

Lookit

johnnycool

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3037
    • View Profile
Re: Brexit.
« Reply #9877 on: July 21, 2021, 04:59:51 PM »
Brexit is a failure. it was based on economic assumptions which failed to materialise.
the EU didn't give the UK free Single Market Access . There are no decent trade deals out there.

Taking the UK out of its economic hinterland is ridiculous.

Brexit was never about economic benefits, it was about immigration and the elephant in the room was closing down taxation loopholes for the well heeled.
Everything thereafter was pure bullshít.
In order to be sustainable, Brexit had to have economic benefits. Unionism in NI is the same. It has to benefit people. Neither do.
Brexit is doomed. So is Unionism

Tell that to the 15million people who voted for something they never fully understood but it was going to keep the immigrants out at whatever cost.

seafoid

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26027
    • View Profile
Re: Brexit.
« Reply #9878 on: July 21, 2021, 08:18:14 PM »
Brexit is a failure. it was based on economic assumptions which failed to materialise.
the EU didn't give the UK free Single Market Access . There are no decent trade deals out there.

Taking the UK out of its economic hinterland is ridiculous.

Brexit was never about economic benefits, it was about immigration and the elephant in the room was closing down taxation loopholes for the well heeled.
Everything thereafter was pure bullshít.
In order to be sustainable, Brexit had to have economic benefits. Unionism in NI is the same. It has to benefit people. Neither do.
Brexit is doomed. So is Unionism

Tell that to the 15million people who voted for something they never fully understood but it was going to keep the immigrants out at whatever cost.
Cummings decided in 2015 that there would be no detail attching to Brexit. People voted for a void.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00WCEbKM_SE
Lookit

seafoid

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26027
    • View Profile
Re: Brexit.
« Reply #9879 on: July 22, 2021, 08:14:20 PM »
Lookit

StPatsAbu

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 231
    • View Profile
Re: Brexit.
« Reply #9880 on: July 22, 2021, 08:49:33 PM »
Brexit is a failure. it was based on economic assumptions which failed to materialise.
the EU didn't give the UK free Single Market Access . There are no decent trade deals out there.

Taking the UK out of its economic hinterland is ridiculous.

Brexit was never about economic benefits, it was about immigration and the elephant in the room was closing down taxation loopholes for the well heeled.
Everything thereafter was pure bullshít.
In order to be sustainable, Brexit had to have economic benefits. Unionism in NI is the same. It has to benefit people. Neither do.
Brexit is doomed. So is Unionism

Tell that to the 15million people who voted for something they never fully understood but it was going to keep the immigrants out at whatever cost.
Cummings decided in 2015 that there would be no detail attching to Brexit. People voted for a void.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00WCEbKM_SE

People voted in response to the xenophobia /racism whipped up by the media who incessantly blamed migrants for the cuts to public services introduced under Tory austerity.

seafoid

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26027
    • View Profile
Re: Brexit.
« Reply #9881 on: July 27, 2021, 10:54:17 AM »
This is interesting

https://www.ft.com/content/2f343703-90c2-4bbc-bbe2-1199f685b9b4

Britain undermines its own case in Northern Ireland Maximalist demands obscure reasonable options for improving the Brexit deal THE EDITORIAL BOARD Add to myFT Loyalists hold a protest against the Northern Ireland protocol and the so-called Irish Sea border at Belfast Harbour earlier this month © Charles McQuillan/Getty Share on Twitter (opens new window) Share on Facebook (opens new window) Share on LinkedIn (opens new window) Share Save The editorial board JULY 25 2021 404 Print this page One can hardly blame the EU for a sense of irritation at the latest British effort to relitigate the Northern Ireland protocol of its Brexit deal. This is a mess created entirely by the prime minister. He advocated Brexit without any consideration for its consequences in the province, careless of the point that it was the common membership of the EU that made the Good Friday Agreement possible. He then scuppered a Brexit deal that would have maintained the integrity of the UK. As prime minister he betrayed the very Unionists whose cause he had championed and negotiated a deal that left Northern Ireland in the single market for goods — leaving trade between Britain and the province subject to customs and regulatory checks. Having denied the protocol would lead to a regulatory border between Britain and Northern Ireland, he now proclaims the rules he said did not exist are in fact too onerous to be borne. His latest gambit is to demand substantial renegotiation of the arrangement under the threat of activating a provision allowing the UK unilaterally to abandon certain key provisions of the protocol as they apply to checks on goods moving between Britain and Northern Ireland. Though this threat should be taken seriously, EU officials are understandably unwilling to reward what they see as bad faith by a government trying to relitigate a deal it wishes it had not signed. Brussels has rejected calls for renegotiation of the protocol, though it remains willing to discuss narrow issues to improve the implementation.
 It is understandable if the EU is not feeling terribly charitable towards Boris Johnson or the Democratic Unionist party, which is using the threat of instability to try to recoup lost political ground and unpick a deal they always opposed because its impact (as widely envisaged) will be to pull Northern Ireland’s businesses away from the UK and further into the EU’s orbit. Opinion: David Allen Green: the Northern Ireland Protocol And yet within the maximalist British demands there are some legitimate points. An overzealous EU interpretation of rules is out of proportion to the threat to the integrity of the single market from British goods arriving in Northern Ireland.

 The risk is theoretical rather than real, not least because there is as yet no significant regulatory divergence. Furthermore there are concerns of a future risk to medicine supplies (Northern Ireland is within the NHS) because of the different approval regimes. Likewise the British request for lighter treatment for goods that are destined to stay in Northern Ireland is worth consideration. There are several other issues that can be eased by a more risk-based approach to the protocol.  Brussels can defensibly argue that the UK can remove many problems by signing up to EU sanitary and phytosanitary rules. This conflicts with the UK’s desire for free trade deals, but choosing to prioritise that over a solution is, Brussels might argue, Boris Johnson’s choice.

And yet for all this there is a need to recognise a problem. So while the EU should rightly reject structural changes to its agreement, it does make sense to ask (as it already has in a few areas) whether it cannot be more imaginative in implementing regulations to draw the sting of the most heartfelt and visible grievances. The nation best placed to broker compromise is Ireland, which can only lose from renewed instability in the North. Having fought for the protocol, Dublin is understandably treading a careful line. But if your neighbour’s semi-detached house is on fire, at some point it ceases to be relevant whether or not they started the blaze.
Lookit

johnnycool

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3037
    • View Profile
Re: Brexit.
« Reply #9882 on: July 27, 2021, 11:46:23 AM »
This is interesting

https://www.ft.com/content/2f343703-90c2-4bbc-bbe2-1199f685b9b4

Britain undermines its own case in Northern Ireland Maximalist demands obscure reasonable options for improving the Brexit deal THE EDITORIAL BOARD Add to myFT Loyalists hold a protest against the Northern Ireland protocol and the so-called Irish Sea border at Belfast Harbour earlier this month © Charles McQuillan/Getty Share on Twitter (opens new window) Share on Facebook (opens new window) Share on LinkedIn (opens new window) Share Save The editorial board JULY 25 2021 404 Print this page One can hardly blame the EU for a sense of irritation at the latest British effort to relitigate the Northern Ireland protocol of its Brexit deal. This is a mess created entirely by the prime minister. He advocated Brexit without any consideration for its consequences in the province, careless of the point that it was the common membership of the EU that made the Good Friday Agreement possible. He then scuppered a Brexit deal that would have maintained the integrity of the UK. As prime minister he betrayed the very Unionists whose cause he had championed and negotiated a deal that left Northern Ireland in the single market for goods — leaving trade between Britain and the province subject to customs and regulatory checks. Having denied the protocol would lead to a regulatory border between Britain and Northern Ireland, he now proclaims the rules he said did not exist are in fact too onerous to be borne. His latest gambit is to demand substantial renegotiation of the arrangement under the threat of activating a provision allowing the UK unilaterally to abandon certain key provisions of the protocol as they apply to checks on goods moving between Britain and Northern Ireland. Though this threat should be taken seriously, EU officials are understandably unwilling to reward what they see as bad faith by a government trying to relitigate a deal it wishes it had not signed. Brussels has rejected calls for renegotiation of the protocol, though it remains willing to discuss narrow issues to improve the implementation.
 It is understandable if the EU is not feeling terribly charitable towards Boris Johnson or the Democratic Unionist party, which is using the threat of instability to try to recoup lost political ground and unpick a deal they always opposed because its impact (as widely envisaged) will be to pull Northern Ireland’s businesses away from the UK and further into the EU’s orbit. Opinion: David Allen Green: the Northern Ireland Protocol And yet within the maximalist British demands there are some legitimate points. An overzealous EU interpretation of rules is out of proportion to the threat to the integrity of the single market from British goods arriving in Northern Ireland.

 The risk is theoretical rather than real, not least because there is as yet no significant regulatory divergence. Furthermore there are concerns of a future risk to medicine supplies (Northern Ireland is within the NHS) because of the different approval regimes. Likewise the British request for lighter treatment for goods that are destined to stay in Northern Ireland is worth consideration. There are several other issues that can be eased by a more risk-based approach to the protocol.  Brussels can defensibly argue that the UK can remove many problems by signing up to EU sanitary and phytosanitary rules. This conflicts with the UK’s desire for free trade deals, but choosing to prioritise that over a solution is, Brussels might argue, Boris Johnson’s choice.

And yet for all this there is a need to recognise a problem. So while the EU should rightly reject structural changes to its agreement, it does make sense to ask (as it already has in a few areas) whether it cannot be more imaginative in implementing regulations to draw the sting of the most heartfelt and visible grievances. The nation best placed to broker compromise is Ireland, which can only lose from renewed instability in the North. Having fought for the protocol, Dublin is understandably treading a careful line. But if your neighbour’s semi-detached house is on fire, at some point it ceases to be relevant whether or not they started the blaze.

But we're not on fire in that sense and it's interesting that the UFU and the fisheries industries are quiet as church mice on the NI protocol. They know it's a good thing for them but won't publically say if for fear of the loyalist backlash.

The perceived issues with the protocol are constitutional for loyalists who once again believe everything the DUP who led them down this path say.

trailer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3795
    • View Profile
Re: Brexit.
« Reply #9883 on: July 27, 2021, 11:50:14 AM »
This is interesting

https://www.ft.com/content/2f343703-90c2-4bbc-bbe2-1199f685b9b4

Britain undermines its own case in Northern Ireland Maximalist demands obscure reasonable options for improving the Brexit deal THE EDITORIAL BOARD Add to myFT Loyalists hold a protest against the Northern Ireland protocol and the so-called Irish Sea border at Belfast Harbour earlier this month © Charles McQuillan/Getty Share on Twitter (opens new window) Share on Facebook (opens new window) Share on LinkedIn (opens new window) Share Save The editorial board JULY 25 2021 404 Print this page One can hardly blame the EU for a sense of irritation at the latest British effort to relitigate the Northern Ireland protocol of its Brexit deal. This is a mess created entirely by the prime minister. He advocated Brexit without any consideration for its consequences in the province, careless of the point that it was the common membership of the EU that made the Good Friday Agreement possible. He then scuppered a Brexit deal that would have maintained the integrity of the UK. As prime minister he betrayed the very Unionists whose cause he had championed and negotiated a deal that left Northern Ireland in the single market for goods — leaving trade between Britain and the province subject to customs and regulatory checks. Having denied the protocol would lead to a regulatory border between Britain and Northern Ireland, he now proclaims the rules he said did not exist are in fact too onerous to be borne. His latest gambit is to demand substantial renegotiation of the arrangement under the threat of activating a provision allowing the UK unilaterally to abandon certain key provisions of the protocol as they apply to checks on goods moving between Britain and Northern Ireland. Though this threat should be taken seriously, EU officials are understandably unwilling to reward what they see as bad faith by a government trying to relitigate a deal it wishes it had not signed. Brussels has rejected calls for renegotiation of the protocol, though it remains willing to discuss narrow issues to improve the implementation.
 It is understandable if the EU is not feeling terribly charitable towards Boris Johnson or the Democratic Unionist party, which is using the threat of instability to try to recoup lost political ground and unpick a deal they always opposed because its impact (as widely envisaged) will be to pull Northern Ireland’s businesses away from the UK and further into the EU’s orbit. Opinion: David Allen Green: the Northern Ireland Protocol And yet within the maximalist British demands there are some legitimate points. An overzealous EU interpretation of rules is out of proportion to the threat to the integrity of the single market from British goods arriving in Northern Ireland.

 The risk is theoretical rather than real, not least because there is as yet no significant regulatory divergence. Furthermore there are concerns of a future risk to medicine supplies (Northern Ireland is within the NHS) because of the different approval regimes. Likewise the British request for lighter treatment for goods that are destined to stay in Northern Ireland is worth consideration. There are several other issues that can be eased by a more risk-based approach to the protocol.  Brussels can defensibly argue that the UK can remove many problems by signing up to EU sanitary and phytosanitary rules. This conflicts with the UK’s desire for free trade deals, but choosing to prioritise that over a solution is, Brussels might argue, Boris Johnson’s choice.

And yet for all this there is a need to recognise a problem. So while the EU should rightly reject structural changes to its agreement, it does make sense to ask (as it already has in a few areas) whether it cannot be more imaginative in implementing regulations to draw the sting of the most heartfelt and visible grievances. The nation best placed to broker compromise is Ireland, which can only lose from renewed instability in the North. Having fought for the protocol, Dublin is understandably treading a careful line. But if your neighbour’s semi-detached house is on fire, at some point it ceases to be relevant whether or not they started the blaze.

But we're not on fire in that sense and it's interesting that the UFU and the fisheries industries are quiet as church mice on the NI protocol. They know it's a good thing for them but won't publically say if for fear of the loyalist backlash.

The perceived issues with the protocol are constitutional for loyalists who once again believe everything the DUP who led them down this path say.

Yeah a lot of the issues are constitutional but some of the paperwork and checks are OTT. I think if Nats recognised that it might help to take the sting out of it a small bit.

Rossfan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18076
  • Ballaghaderreen CO ROSCOMMON
    • View Profile
    • Roscommon County Board official website
Re: Brexit.
« Reply #9884 on: July 27, 2021, 11:55:46 AM »
I see former Senator Ian Marshall has joined the UUP.
Any hope it might be a sign of a more pragmatic approach from the organisation?
« Last Edit: July 27, 2021, 12:40:32 PM by Rossfan »
Remember we're a noble race from a land where Kings once trod.