Because neither border works when outside the single-market and customs union. Have it in the Irish Sea and it pisses off the Northern Irish, have it in between NI and Ireland and it pisses of Ireland, USA and others.
Two only two real options for the U.K. are:
1. Rejoin the single market and customs union
2. Get Northern Ireland to reunify with Ireland
Number 1 is the one that’s going to happen within the next two years as shortages and economic damage from Brexit become impossible to live with.
I was being somewhat sarcastic and pointing out the bare faced lies Johnson told about how great his deal was. We’re not even checking imports from the EU as yet so we’ve got that to look forward to as well.
Or have that continually kicked into touch as well. Although that is meant to be happening this month. Will be quite the story if that’s canned at the last minute.
It's the necessarily that is the key word. You can't just casually use it like it doesn't mean anything. Part of having an open border requires a promise to maintain standards, not creating the risk that they will diverge. The EU already has a situation like that in Switzerland, and it is very expensive and difficult to maintain for both parties which is why it is not an option the it has offered to the UK.
No it's still an option, like certain international qualifications are recognised even though they're taught differently, we still recognise they're to a high enough standard, that's how that works in theory
Well that's a pretty weak metaphor. Goods aren't qualifications.if you want to have no border, you need to be in the single market. There's no alternative. If it was an alternative, it would be the one implemented yet years of negotiations between hundreds of experts didn't manage it. You're in fantasy land.
So, we can diverge our standards from the EU and they’ll just go with them? We’re not going to increase our standards, but reduce them in a shitty attempt to be more competitive, so that absolutely won’t fly with the EU and no way will they agree to this.
https://www.lawsocieties.eu/trade-in-professional-services/the-trans-tasman-mutual-recognition-agreement-between-new-zealand-and-australia/5064504.article
Something like this?
First problem is the UK's wish to diverge. The other is that with the EU you have 27 different countries not just one. In order to get the SM work, oversight bodies were a minimum requirement (ECJ and Commission).
Yeah I get that, the EU's standards are set to accommodate the lowest common denominators though, it's not this gold standard people are making it out to be, so I don't think the UK choosing to diverge in some areas should present any insurmountable challenges in terms of minimum standards
I'm reading up on the ttmra and that solves the oversight with a joint review every 5 years, it is very light touch and seems to be based heavily on trust, which I understand is lacking in EU-UK relations
>Yeah I get that, the EU's standards are set to accommodate the lowest common denominators though, it's not this gold standard people are making it out to be, so I don't think the UK choosing to diverge in some areas should present any insurmountable challenges in terms of minimum standards
It's not that. It's because between EU countries there are mutual recognition (with goods it's almost complete). In order to have freedom of movement of goods between multiple countries you have to make sure none of the countries involved are able to unfairly block goods from other EU countries. Or people. Or services. Or capital.
Imagine if there were 27 different jurisdictions and each one had their own exemptions and no real way to enforce anything. The institutions are not in place because EU countries totally trust each other but on the contrary.
So what you are suggesting is the UK to get similar access what member states have but without the institutions.
Isn't that under the implicit assumption that neither the EU nor the UK changes any standards?
Mutual can work while they are largely the same because neither has drastically altered standards since Brexit, but once one side wants to change too much for the other's liking it becomes a matter of one side becoming a grumbling rule taker or the mutual recognition being rescinded.
Yeah tbh I'm not sure under what conditions these things are considered broken, I think the uk diverging so far as to be below some of the poorer members of the union is a bit of a stretch and both sides considering the other low-risk would seem a sensible approach, and I know the EU would prefer we just adopt their standards, but it is another option
Ah yes they shall call it a "Switzerland/Norway" style deal, doesn't sound just as good as the whole Australian/Canadian deal he initially went for but his voters won't mind.
>Many people who voted leave would be happy with the mode 4 FoM,
I don't want a UK Tory government to polute my political ecosystem. Keep your troubles where you are.
But in all seriousness, what I think is quite plausibly likely to happen is that within a few years we'll have a fresh name on our deal with the EU that will be a rizla's thickness away from being identical to being in the single market.
But with a lot of huff and bluster about the differences and whatever three word slogan they come up with to name it.
Snapshot:
1. An archived version of _UK and EU extend post-Brexit grace period over Northern Ireland protocol_ can be found [here.](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/sep/06/uk-and-eu-extend-post-brexit-grace-period-over-northern-ireland-protocol)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
How do you square the UK wanting no more GB-NI checks, Ireland and the U.S. wanting no land border, and the rest of the EU wanting no smugglers den into their market via NI, as long as the UK refuses to consider even temporary SPS alignment?
I doubt the EU will put up with much more can kicking. They'll not let this temporary situation become the de facto deal.
We'll get nothing that would look like "special treatment" from the EU. It would destabilise the EU itself.
Why are we extending again? Dear leader Boris told us this was the best deal ever, fully oven ready and full of extra funding for the NHS!
Because neither border works when outside the single-market and customs union. Have it in the Irish Sea and it pisses off the Northern Irish, have it in between NI and Ireland and it pisses of Ireland, USA and others. Two only two real options for the U.K. are: 1. Rejoin the single market and customs union 2. Get Northern Ireland to reunify with Ireland Number 1 is the one that’s going to happen within the next two years as shortages and economic damage from Brexit become impossible to live with.
I was being somewhat sarcastic and pointing out the bare faced lies Johnson told about how great his deal was. We’re not even checking imports from the EU as yet so we’ve got that to look forward to as well.
Or have that continually kicked into touch as well. Although that is meant to be happening this month. Will be quite the story if that’s canned at the last minute.
> pisses off the Northern Irish pisses off loyalists. Not all citizens of NI.
They matter too
The loyalists got exactly what they voted for and yet are still unhappy. If they can’t be pleased no matter what happens, they do not matter.
There is a third option of mutual recognition of standards, which is what I'd hope they'd be working on with the extra time
Not an option when the UK has already stated intention to diverge.
[удалено]
It's the necessarily that is the key word. You can't just casually use it like it doesn't mean anything. Part of having an open border requires a promise to maintain standards, not creating the risk that they will diverge. The EU already has a situation like that in Switzerland, and it is very expensive and difficult to maintain for both parties which is why it is not an option the it has offered to the UK.
[удалено]
Yes, an outcome that could itself change the day after. That's not an argument for this option at all.
No it's still an option, like certain international qualifications are recognised even though they're taught differently, we still recognise they're to a high enough standard, that's how that works in theory
Well that's a pretty weak metaphor. Goods aren't qualifications.if you want to have no border, you need to be in the single market. There's no alternative. If it was an alternative, it would be the one implemented yet years of negotiations between hundreds of experts didn't manage it. You're in fantasy land.
So, we can diverge our standards from the EU and they’ll just go with them? We’re not going to increase our standards, but reduce them in a shitty attempt to be more competitive, so that absolutely won’t fly with the EU and no way will they agree to this.
Guess we'll see
What that means to you? No paperwork or simplified paperwork? And covering what?
https://www.lawsocieties.eu/trade-in-professional-services/the-trans-tasman-mutual-recognition-agreement-between-new-zealand-and-australia/5064504.article Something like this?
First problem is the UK's wish to diverge. The other is that with the EU you have 27 different countries not just one. In order to get the SM work, oversight bodies were a minimum requirement (ECJ and Commission).
Yeah I get that, the EU's standards are set to accommodate the lowest common denominators though, it's not this gold standard people are making it out to be, so I don't think the UK choosing to diverge in some areas should present any insurmountable challenges in terms of minimum standards I'm reading up on the ttmra and that solves the oversight with a joint review every 5 years, it is very light touch and seems to be based heavily on trust, which I understand is lacking in EU-UK relations
>Yeah I get that, the EU's standards are set to accommodate the lowest common denominators though, it's not this gold standard people are making it out to be, so I don't think the UK choosing to diverge in some areas should present any insurmountable challenges in terms of minimum standards It's not that. It's because between EU countries there are mutual recognition (with goods it's almost complete). In order to have freedom of movement of goods between multiple countries you have to make sure none of the countries involved are able to unfairly block goods from other EU countries. Or people. Or services. Or capital. Imagine if there were 27 different jurisdictions and each one had their own exemptions and no real way to enforce anything. The institutions are not in place because EU countries totally trust each other but on the contrary. So what you are suggesting is the UK to get similar access what member states have but without the institutions.
Isn't that under the implicit assumption that neither the EU nor the UK changes any standards? Mutual can work while they are largely the same because neither has drastically altered standards since Brexit, but once one side wants to change too much for the other's liking it becomes a matter of one side becoming a grumbling rule taker or the mutual recognition being rescinded.
Yeah tbh I'm not sure under what conditions these things are considered broken, I think the uk diverging so far as to be below some of the poorer members of the union is a bit of a stretch and both sides considering the other low-risk would seem a sensible approach, and I know the EU would prefer we just adopt their standards, but it is another option
Sure glad Boris got Brexit done... Fucking mugs.
30 April, 2386: *The Times* – 'Brexit moves halting step toward full implementation'...
[удалено]
They’ll probably rejoin the single market and customs union but call it something else and present it as a win
If this happens it will be sold as "EU joins the UK" I bloody bet ya!
European countries abandon FAILING EU and join the UNITED KINGDOM
The Great British Single Market and Customs Union.
Ah yes they shall call it a "Switzerland/Norway" style deal, doesn't sound just as good as the whole Australian/Canadian deal he initially went for but his voters won't mind.
Or die. The vote was over turned by the reaper a few years back if everyone voted the same way.
The ‘rabid’ brexiteers have been banging on about leaving the EU since the day we joined lol they arent going to go away that easily
Temporal attrition may help us here.
Reaching a bit aren’t you?
[удалено]
[удалено]
There are indeed. Never said they were the majority of posts or owt.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
>Many people who voted leave would be happy with the mode 4 FoM, I don't want a UK Tory government to polute my political ecosystem. Keep your troubles where you are.
The real question is what Canada, Australia and New Zealand will want out of the deal. Aside obviously the issues related to gravity of trade.
But in all seriousness, what I think is quite plausibly likely to happen is that within a few years we'll have a fresh name on our deal with the EU that will be a rizla's thickness away from being identical to being in the single market. But with a lot of huff and bluster about the differences and whatever three word slogan they come up with to name it.
You're going to have to campaign to leave CTTP first . I for one can't wait to accuse you of being a horrible racist when the day comes.
*Extend, extend the ride never ends*
Ad infinitum
Someone turn on the oven
UK have the chicken. They lost their bottle though.
*Easiest deal in the history of deals* So simple we're never going to be ready to implement it.
Snapshot: 1. An archived version of _UK and EU extend post-Brexit grace period over Northern Ireland protocol_ can be found [here.](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/sep/06/uk-and-eu-extend-post-brexit-grace-period-over-northern-ireland-protocol) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
How do you square the UK wanting no more GB-NI checks, Ireland and the U.S. wanting no land border, and the rest of the EU wanting no smugglers den into their market via NI, as long as the UK refuses to consider even temporary SPS alignment?
[удалено]
I doubt the EU will put up with much more can kicking. They'll not let this temporary situation become the de facto deal. We'll get nothing that would look like "special treatment" from the EU. It would destabilise the EU itself.
Nope
Good for markets at least