I wonder how many jobs that would cost. Honda said similar recently as well.
Never mind though, at least we'll have blue passports in a couple of years.
Yes, all those orange robot arms will be looking for another job.
The automotive industry is a vital part of the UK economy accounting for more than £77.5 billion turnover and £18.9 billion value added.
With some 169,000 people employed directly in manufacturing and in excess of 814,000 across the wider automotive industry, it accounts for 12.0% of total UK export of goods and invests £4 billion each year in automotive R&D.
More than 30 manufacturers build in excess of 70 models of vehicle in the UK supported by 2,500 component providers and some of the world’s most skilled engineers.
Just to let you know... Honda are investing millions in their production and develomenrt facility in swindon..that includes millions on their security there... We have lost 4 C&I Techs in the last 3 months all left and gone there. I acknowledge they were all mates and apprentices together and we did not want to lose them., but most of these guys are married and with big mortgages. They highly likely to join an organisation that is likely to clear off.
They will likely write that investment off (chicken feed to Honda) and shift production to the EU if they can’t sell their Civics into Europe tariff free. Either that or they will keep R&D here with a small, highly skilled and highly paid workforce and just shift the production to the EU where most of the jobs will go.
I hope I’m wrong and tariff free full access to the single market will be maintained.
Sorry i live 30 miles from Swindon and know people who work there and am linked to their locall news as inbetween regions There has never been one local story about them moving. Billions invested chicken feed...
It’s billions now is it - you said millions.
Sorry, didn’t realise you were living so close and had the inside track on Honda’s corporate decisions.
I said ‘likely’ but hope I’m wrong. You know as much as I do, which is about as much as most people living 3,000 miles from Swindon know.
They have been there for years have invested billions and continuing to do so.. Nothing like a good old scare story again without foundation..... Nothing new there though...
I wonder how many jobs that would cost. Honda said similar recently as well.
Never mind though, at least we'll have blue passports in a couple of years.
Yes, all those orange robot arms will be looking for another job.
The automotive industry is a vital part of the UK economy accounting for more than £77.5 billion turnover and £18.9 billion value added.
With some 169,000 people employed directly in manufacturing and in excess of 814,000 across the wider automotive industry, it accounts for 12.0% of total UK export of goods and invests £4 billion each year in automotive R&D.
More than 30 manufacturers build in excess of 70 models of vehicle in the UK supported by 2,500 component providers and some of the world’s most skilled engineers.
Just to let you know... Honda are investing millions in their production and develomenrt facility in swindon..that includes millions on their security there... We have lost 4 C&I Techs in the last 3 months all left and gone there. I acknowledge they were all mates and apprentices together and we did not want to lose them., but most of these guys are married and with big mortgages. They highly likely to join an organisation that is likely to clear off.
They will likely write that investment off (chicken feed to Honda) and shift production to the EU if they can’t sell their Civics into Europe tariff free. Either that or they will keep R&D here with a small, highly skilled and highly paid workforce and just shift the production to the EU where most of the jobs will go.
I hope I’m wrong and tariff free full access to the single market will be maintained.
Sorry i live 30 miles from Swindon and know people who work there and am linked to their locall news as inbetween regions There has never been one local story about them moving. Billions invested chicken feed...
It’s billions now is it - you said millions.
Sorry, didn’t realise you were living so close and had the inside track on Honda’s corporate decisions.
I said ‘likely’ but hope I’m wrong. You know as much as I do, which is about as much as most people living 3,000 miles from Swindon know.
They have been there for years have invested billions and continuing to do so.. Nothing like a good old scare story again without foundation..... Nothing new there though...
Ford have been in Dagenham longer. How many people do you know working there ?
I wonder how many jobs that would cost. Honda said similar recently as well.
Never mind though, at least we'll have blue passports in a couple of years.
Yes, all those orange robot arms will be looking for another job.
The automotive industry is a vital part of the UK economy accounting for more than £77.5 billion turnover and £18.9 billion value added.
With some 169,000 people employed directly in manufacturing and in excess of 814,000 across the wider automotive industry, it accounts for 12.0% of total UK export of goods and invests £4 billion each year in automotive R&D.
More than 30 manufacturers build in excess of 70 models of vehicle in the UK supported by 2,500 component providers and some of the world’s most skilled engineers.
Just to let you know... Honda are investing millions in their production and develomenrt facility in swindon..that includes millions on their security there... We have lost 4 C&I Techs in the last 3 months all left and gone there. I acknowledge they were all mates and apprentices together and we did not want to lose them., but most of these guys are married and with big mortgages. They highly likely to join an organisation that is likely to clear off.
They will likely write that investment off (chicken feed to Honda) and shift production to the EU if they can’t sell their Civics into Europe tariff free. Either that or they will keep R&D here with a small, highly skilled and highly paid workforce and just shift the production to the EU where most of the jobs will go.
I hope I’m wrong and tariff free full access to the single market will be maintained.
Sorry i live 30 miles from Swindon and know people who work there and am linked to their locall news as inbetween regions There has never been one local story about them moving. Billions invested chicken feed...
It’s billions now is it - you said millions.
Sorry, didn’t realise you were living so close and had the inside track on Honda’s corporate decisions.
I said ‘likely’ but hope I’m wrong. You know as much as I do, which is about as much as most people living 3,000 miles from Swindon know.
They have been there for years have invested billions and continuing to do so.. Nothing like a good old scare story again without foundation..... Nothing new there though...
Ford have been in Dagenham longer. How many people do you know working there ?
I wonder how many jobs that would cost. Honda said similar recently as well.
Never mind though, at least we'll have blue passports in a couple of years.
Yes, all those orange robot arms will be looking for another job.
The automotive industry is a vital part of the UK economy accounting for more than £77.5 billion turnover and £18.9 billion value added.
With some 169,000 people employed directly in manufacturing and in excess of 814,000 across the wider automotive industry, it accounts for 12.0% of total UK export of goods and invests £4 billion each year in automotive R&D.
More than 30 manufacturers build in excess of 70 models of vehicle in the UK supported by 2,500 component providers and some of the world’s most skilled engineers.
Just to let you know... Honda are investing millions in their production and develomenrt facility in swindon..that includes millions on their security there... We have lost 4 C&I Techs in the last 3 months all left and gone there. I acknowledge they were all mates and apprentices together and we did not want to lose them., but most of these guys are married and with big mortgages. They highly likely to join an organisation that is likely to clear off.
They will likely write that investment off (chicken feed to Honda) and shift production to the EU if they can’t sell their Civics into Europe tariff free. Either that or they will keep R&D here with a small, highly skilled and highly paid workforce and just shift the production to the EU where most of the jobs will go.
I hope I’m wrong and tariff free full access to the single market will be maintained.
Sorry i live 30 miles from Swindon and know people who work there and am linked to their locall news as inbetween regions There has never been one local story about them moving. Billions invested chicken feed...
It’s billions now is it - you said millions.
Sorry, didn’t realise you were living so close and had the inside track on Honda’s corporate decisions.
I said ‘likely’ but hope I’m wrong. You know as much as I do, which is about as much as most people living 3,000 miles from Swindon know.
They have been there for years have invested billions and continuing to do so.. Nothing like a good old scare story again without foundation..... Nothing new there though...
Ford have been in Dagenham longer. How many people do you know working there ?
I wonder how many jobs that would cost. Honda said similar recently as well.
Never mind though, at least we'll have blue passports in a couple of years.
Yes, all those orange robot arms will be looking for another job.
The automotive industry is a vital part of the UK economy accounting for more than £77.5 billion turnover and £18.9 billion value added.
With some 169,000 people employed directly in manufacturing and in excess of 814,000 across the wider automotive industry, it accounts for 12.0% of total UK export of goods and invests £4 billion each year in automotive R&D.
More than 30 manufacturers build in excess of 70 models of vehicle in the UK supported by 2,500 component providers and some of the world’s most skilled engineers.
Just to let you know... Honda are investing millions in their production and develomenrt facility in swindon..that includes millions on their security there... We have lost 4 C&I Techs in the last 3 months all left and gone there. I acknowledge they were all mates and apprentices together and we did not want to lose them., but most of these guys are married and with big mortgages. They highly likely to join an organisation that is likely to clear off.
They will likely write that investment off (chicken feed to Honda) and shift production to the EU if they can’t sell their Civics into Europe tariff free. Either that or they will keep R&D here with a small, highly skilled and highly paid workforce and just shift the production to the EU where most of the jobs will go.
I hope I’m wrong and tariff free full access to the single market will be maintained.
Sorry i live 30 miles from Swindon and know people who work there and am linked to their locall news as inbetween regions There has never been one local story about them moving. Billions invested chicken feed...
It’s billions now is it - you said millions.
Sorry, didn’t realise you were living so close and had the inside track on Honda’s corporate decisions.
I said ‘likely’ but hope I’m wrong. You know as much as I do, which is about as much as most people living 3,000 miles from Swindon know.
They have been there for years have invested billions and continuing to do so.. Nothing like a good old scare story again without foundation..... Nothing new there though...
Ford have been in Dagenham longer. How many people do you know working there ?
Anyway, hows your mate barnier doing, apparrently the uk isn't doing its bit to stop isis. Not surprised anyone hasn't mentioned that this evening.
I wonder how many jobs that would cost. Honda said similar recently as well.
Never mind though, at least we'll have blue passports in a couple of years.
Yes, all those orange robot arms will be looking for another job.
The automotive industry is a vital part of the UK economy accounting for more than £77.5 billion turnover and £18.9 billion value added.
With some 169,000 people employed directly in manufacturing and in excess of 814,000 across the wider automotive industry, it accounts for 12.0% of total UK export of goods and invests £4 billion each year in automotive R&D.
More than 30 manufacturers build in excess of 70 models of vehicle in the UK supported by 2,500 component providers and some of the world’s most skilled engineers.
Just to let you know... Honda are investing millions in their production and develomenrt facility in swindon..that includes millions on their security there... We have lost 4 C&I Techs in the last 3 months all left and gone there. I acknowledge they were all mates and apprentices together and we did not want to lose them., but most of these guys are married and with big mortgages. They highly likely to join an organisation that is likely to clear off.
They will likely write that investment off (chicken feed to Honda) and shift production to the EU if they can’t sell their Civics into Europe tariff free. Either that or they will keep R&D here with a small, highly skilled and highly paid workforce and just shift the production to the EU where most of the jobs will go.
I hope I’m wrong and tariff free full access to the single market will be maintained.
Sorry i live 30 miles from Swindon and know people who work there and am linked to their locall news as inbetween regions There has never been one local story about them moving. Billions invested chicken feed...
It’s billions now is it - you said millions.
Sorry, didn’t realise you were living so close and had the inside track on Honda’s corporate decisions.
I said ‘likely’ but hope I’m wrong. You know as much as I do, which is about as much as most people living 3,000 miles from Swindon know.
They have been there for years have invested billions and continuing to do so.. Nothing like a good old scare story again without foundation..... Nothing new there though...
Ford have been in Dagenham longer. How many people do you know working there ?
I own it so loads creepy.
I’m getting fed up with you calling me that.
Good.. Well stop following me about... Ignore me..
I wonder how many jobs that would cost. Honda said similar recently as well.
Never mind though, at least we'll have blue passports in a couple of years.
Yes, all those orange robot arms will be looking for another job.
The automotive industry is a vital part of the UK economy accounting for more than £77.5 billion turnover and £18.9 billion value added.
With some 169,000 people employed directly in manufacturing and in excess of 814,000 across the wider automotive industry, it accounts for 12.0% of total UK export of goods and invests £4 billion each year in automotive R&D.
More than 30 manufacturers build in excess of 70 models of vehicle in the UK supported by 2,500 component providers and some of the world’s most skilled engineers.
Just to let you know... Honda are investing millions in their production and develomenrt facility in swindon..that includes millions on their security there... We have lost 4 C&I Techs in the last 3 months all left and gone there. I acknowledge they were all mates and apprentices together and we did not want to lose them., but most of these guys are married and with big mortgages. They highly likely to join an organisation that is likely to clear off.
They will likely write that investment off (chicken feed to Honda) and shift production to the EU if they can’t sell their Civics into Europe tariff free. Either that or they will keep R&D here with a small, highly skilled and highly paid workforce and just shift the production to the EU where most of the jobs will go.
I hope I’m wrong and tariff free full access to the single market will be maintained.
Sorry i live 30 miles from Swindon and know people who work there and am linked to their locall news as inbetween regions There has never been one local story about them moving. Billions invested chicken feed...
It’s billions now is it - you said millions.
Sorry, didn’t realise you were living so close and had the inside track on Honda’s corporate decisions.
I said ‘likely’ but hope I’m wrong. You know as much as I do, which is about as much as most people living 3,000 miles from Swindon know.
They have been there for years have invested billions and continuing to do so.. Nothing like a good old scare story again without foundation..... Nothing new there though...
Ford have been in Dagenham longer. How many people do you know working there ?
I own it so loads creepy.
I’m getting fed up with you calling me that.
Good.. Well stop following me about... Ignore me..
I wonder how many jobs that would cost. Honda said similar recently as well.
Never mind though, at least we'll have blue passports in a couple of years.
Yes, all those orange robot arms will be looking for another job.
The automotive industry is a vital part of the UK economy accounting for more than £77.5 billion turnover and £18.9 billion value added.
With some 169,000 people employed directly in manufacturing and in excess of 814,000 across the wider automotive industry, it accounts for 12.0% of total UK export of goods and invests £4 billion each year in automotive R&D.
More than 30 manufacturers build in excess of 70 models of vehicle in the UK supported by 2,500 component providers and some of the world’s most skilled engineers.
Just to let you know... Honda are investing millions in their production and develomenrt facility in swindon..that includes millions on their security there... We have lost 4 C&I Techs in the last 3 months all left and gone there. I acknowledge they were all mates and apprentices together and we did not want to lose them., but most of these guys are married and with big mortgages. They highly likely to join an organisation that is likely to clear off.
They will likely write that investment off (chicken feed to Honda) and shift production to the EU if they can’t sell their Civics into Europe tariff free. Either that or they will keep R&D here with a small, highly skilled and highly paid workforce and just shift the production to the EU where most of the jobs will go.
I hope I’m wrong and tariff free full access to the single market will be maintained.
Sorry i live 30 miles from Swindon and know people who work there and am linked to their locall news as inbetween regions There has never been one local story about them moving. Billions invested chicken feed...
It’s billions now is it - you said millions.
Sorry, didn’t realise you were living so close and had the inside track on Honda’s corporate decisions.
I said ‘likely’ but hope I’m wrong. You know as much as I do, which is about as much as most people living 3,000 miles from Swindon know.
They have been there for years have invested billions and continuing to do so.. Nothing like a good old scare story again without foundation..... Nothing new there though...
I wonder how many jobs that would cost. Honda said similar recently as well.
Never mind though, at least we'll have blue passports in a couple of years.
Yes, all those orange robot arms will be looking for another job.
The automotive industry is a vital part of the UK economy accounting for more than £77.5 billion turnover and £18.9 billion value added.
With some 169,000 people employed directly in manufacturing and in excess of 814,000 across the wider automotive industry, it accounts for 12.0% of total UK export of goods and invests £4 billion each year in automotive R&D.
More than 30 manufacturers build in excess of 70 models of vehicle in the UK supported by 2,500 component providers and some of the world’s most skilled engineers.
Just to let you know... Honda are investing millions in their production and develomenrt facility in swindon..that includes millions on their security there... We have lost 4 C&I Techs in the last 3 months all left and gone there. I acknowledge they were all mates and apprentices together and we did not want to lose them., but most of these guys are married and with big mortgages. They highly likely to join an organisation that is likely to clear off.
They will likely write that investment off (chicken feed to Honda) and shift production to the EU if they can’t sell their Civics into Europe tariff free. Either that or they will keep R&D here with a small, highly skilled and highly paid workforce and just shift the production to the EU where most of the jobs will go.
I hope I’m wrong and tariff free full access to the single market will be maintained.
Sorry i live 30 miles from Swindon and know people who work there and am linked to their locall news as inbetween regions There has never been one local story about them moving. Billions invested chicken feed...
It’s billions now is it - you said millions.
Sorry, didn’t realise you were living so close and had the inside track on Honda’s corporate decisions.
I said ‘likely’ but hope I’m wrong. You know as much as I do, which is about as much as most people living 3,000 miles from Swindon know.
They have been there for years have invested billions and continuing to do so.. Nothing like a good old scare story again without foundation..... Nothing new there though...
What about those pesky Germans ? Announced yesterday that they were investing half a billion in UK pharma industry. What with Brexit round the corner - how very dare they.
A lucid response @NornIrishAddick but you paint a picture that results from painting by numbers. If you have the will you can choose your own colours and change the picture.
Part 1 Apologies for the delay, I suffered from fat finger syndrome and a poor phone battery on the bus home from Belfast. Thank you @Dippenhall, for suggesting my response is lucid, I was originally a bit concerned about your reference to painting by numbers. However, on reflection, this may be an analogy with which I can agree. The negotiations are like the detailed work required to replicate a given masterpiece, painting by numbers, which requires remaining within the lines marked on the picture (the rules of the negotiation) and ensuring that the right colours are selected to achieve the desired result (Brexit and future relations). Unfortunately, at best, the UK approach seems to be akin to either a case of slapping on random colours with a wallpaper paste brush or, sometimes when watching D Davis, an image straight out of a three year old's colouring book.
"The simple reason being that a) it would be unacceptable to the other party (Ireland and the EU) and b) everyone else in the WTO will be entitled to the same access."It's so unacceptable it's worth risking civil unrest in Ireland. >
The UK cannot, unless it either remains in the Single Market/Customs Union or decides on having no controls on imports, retain the current border arrangements. The only negotiated free trade arrangement that would allow a continuation of no non-tariff barriers is the Single Market/Customs Union option rejected out of hand by the UK Government. It is duplicitous to suggest that other countries seeking to protect their national interests (and, in the case of the Irish Government, represent that majority in Northern Ireland) threatens civil unrest, that responsibility lies solely with the UK Government. It is the UK's choice to leave the environment that supports the peace process, it is the UK Government's responsibility to provide realistic options that will prevent that environment from being undermined.
"anyone who believes that such an agreement will be signed, ratified and implemented by 2021 is being entirely too optimistic." What, too optimistic that the EU will prioritise a mutually beneficial arrangement?
The priority is virtually irrelevant. The UK states that it wants a bespoke deal, far better than the CETA arrangement, which took 7 years to agree. Whilst there may be regulatory equivalence on day 1, the measures by which that will be retained, the scope of activities included and the resolution mechanisms will not be plucked out of thin air. The complexity of this arrangement dwarfs that of the first stage of the Article 50 negotiations which, it appears increasingly likely, could and should have been resolved months ago. This suggests that speed is not likely to be a feature of any trade talks.
"...also all the irritating paperwork that UK businesses currently don't have to fill out, all the regulatory hoops that they dont have to jump through and, more importantly, all the associated delays"Think what you could have argued if we were also in the Eurozone - (massive disruption managing two currencies for a single transaction, exchange rates moving the cost of raw materials by 10% overnight).
The fact that the UK is not in the Eurozone means that there are not additional exchange issues to consider, but that doesn't affect the fact that there will be considerably more paperwork, regulatory compliance issues and delays for UK importers and exporters trading with the EU (and, depending on trade negotiations, with those countries having FTAs with the EU).
"I know of no-one who has suggested that being outside the Single Market would mean that the UK could no longer trade with the EU,"They are probably not your acquaintances, they just appear on screen in random street interviews with the public, you should pay more attention.
Thank you for your kind words, though I am spending too much time paying attention to Brexit and all it's wondrous works already. I have never heard or read such comments in a vox pop (I have, however, heard dairy farmers here in Northern Ireland express that fear), though I have both heard and read individuals state that it will not be possible to trade with the EU as happens now. This is entirely consistent with the UK's expressed desire for its future relationship with the EU.
"The UK will not achieve the same benefits in terms of non-tariff barriers, regulatory equivalence or influence as membership of the EU, Single Market, or Customs Union, if it it relies on a Free Trade Agreement" No and neither is it paying £9bn for the privilege.
Nor is losing however many billions of pounds in taxes, economic activity, inward investment or employment should there not be an agreement that replicates, inasmuch as it can, what we have today.
P.S - Ken Clark believes that by leaving the EU we lose the "macro economic benefits" of being in the EU. I tried to find an EU statement that clarifies these "macro economic benefits", this is from the Social Market Foundation referring to the growth in UK GDP since 1974? - These positive effects stem from the EU’s success in increasing trade and the impact of stronger competition on UK productivity. So it couldn't say it helped our productivity, only helped with "competition" on our productivity. Our trade increased more with non EU countries, so what are the real "macro economic benefits" of being in the Single Market that is worth £9bn a year, must be more than "competition on our productivity", which is clearly not having much impact.
UK trade, like that of Ireland, has benefitted with countries outside the EU because it is an English speaking entry point to the EU markets. The value, in terms of inward investment, of being within the EU is that, for example, businesses expanded their UK operations because they could use them as their bases for the whole of the EU. Nor is it just the case of the direct economic benefits, because membership is about much more than economic benefits. The literature on the impact of EU membership is more limited that I would wish, and almost all predates the referendum, but this media briefing may help: res.org.uk/details/mediabrief/6052141/ECONOMIC-BENEFITS-FROM-MEMBERSHIP-OF-THE-EUROPEAN-UNION-New-estimates.html, there is also last year's report by the Treasury Select Committee, which, seeking to find the truth from both sides, makes for interesting reading (https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201617/cmselect/cmtreasy/122/122.pdf).
"I'm actually quite disappointed @Dippenhall with your response to the article about Peter Grant's views"Im disappointed when I read anti British rhetoric that would be condemned as Anglophobia if there was parity of standards in defining racial/ethnic discrimination. The anti UK sentiment can't disguise the fact that Ireland cannot make decisions in its own interests while it is a colony of the EU.
I have desperately sought a way of responding to this comment without stating that it is bollocks, but unfortunately, that is precisely what it is. There is nothing anti-British about the comments, suggesting that in the UK, many in Government, politics and the media are expressing views that seem to be rooted in an older, Imperial world view. The assumption that Ireland would just roll over, or that Australia and New Zealand would leap to offer trade agreements at the drop of the hat has been quite common. And the language of UK politicians, suggesting that Ireland is, in some way, still part of the UK or, to use your wording, a colony of the UK and obliged to follow the UK's lead, including the encouragement from Brexit supporters of Irexit, indicates that there is a lack of understanding that Ireland has been an independent state for some 95 years.
Ireland's economic interests are clearly best served by continued membership of the EU and retaining the integrity of the Single Market and the Customs Union. Very little could be more damaging to the Irish economy than to become a back door for importation of sub-standard or unregulated goods into the Single Market.
Politically, it wants and needs to secure the Good Friday Agreement. The only way that the Irish Government believes that the Good Friday Agreement can be secured is by retaining the border relationship as it now is. The stated intentions of the UK Government are contradictory and simply unworkable, to say nothing of lacking entirely in any sort of detail. If the UK Government had a detailed plan to address the border, it would have been to its advantage to provide it, placing the EU on the back foot. But they don't. Don't get me wrong, I like platitudes as much as the next man, but...
Ireland will not accept a position that is detrimental to its best interests. The EU position is to require Ireland's concerns to be met. The EU's acceptance of the Irish view on the border clearly demonstrates that Ireland is not some vassal state or colony of the EU.
However, the real shame is that relations between the two countries have recently been better than they have been for almost all of those years, the demonisation of the Irish Government over the last few weeks will do little to ensure that this remains the case. In fact, far from being anti-UK, the current minority Government, led by Fine Gael (often decried by Sinn Fein supporters as "West Brits") is about as pro-British as it could be. The fact that this Government is solidly on the same page as Fianna Fail about the border shows that the Irish Government perspective is widely shared in the country.
Supporting the EU stance, and refusing to first develop a trade relationship that obviated a border problem in Ireland is a strange way of acting independently in the interests of Ireland. Supporting the notion that the UK could come up with a border solution to a problem unable to be articulated until it was known if there was a FTA, WTO rules trade or a micro single market is hardly acting independently in the interests of Ireland.
The problem with your argument is that it is the EU that is supporting the Irish position, not the other way round. And it is clear that the UK had not seriously considered the border a problem, given the way it seems to have bitten the Government on the arse in recent weeks. The border problem can clearly be articulated now, because the UK Government has determined that it wants out of both Single Market and Customs Union. This desire leaves only two options available, a Free Trade Agreement or no deal. There is no circumstance where, under WTO rules and outside the Customs Union, all controls on imported goods can be abandoned, unlike tariffs, on the border in Ireland without adopting unilateral free trade.
The Irish Government (and the EU) is representing the interests of the majority of people on both sides of the border on the island. But, you are right, the Irish Government is not acting independently, it is, in fact, acting in concert with its fellow member states as an equal. Personally, I don't find that to be a problem (from an Irish perspective), because acting independently is another way of saying acting alone (and while it's okay to listen to the song "Freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose", it's not much fun to live it).
"I'm actually quite disappointed @Dippenhall with your response to the article about Peter Grant's views"Im disappointed when I read anti British rhetoric that would be condemned as Anglophobia if there was parity of standards in defining racial/ethnic discrimination. The anti UK sentiment can't disguise the fact that Ireland cannot make decisions in its own interests while it is a colony of the EU.
I have desperately sought a way of responding to this comment without stating that it is bollocks, but unfortunately, that is precisely what it is. There is nothing anti-British about the comments, suggesting that in the UK, many in Government, politics and the media are expressing views that seem to be rooted in an older, Imperial world view. The assumption that Ireland would just roll over, or that Australia and New Zealand would leap to offer trade agreements at the drop of the hat has been quite common. And the language of UK politicians, suggesting that Ireland is, in some way, still part of the UK or, to use your wording, a colony of the UK and obliged to follow the UK's lead, including the encouragement from Brexit supporters of Irexit, indicates that there is a lack of understanding that Ireland has been an independent state for some 95 years.
Ireland's economic interests are clearly best served by continued membership of the EU and retaining the integrity of the Single Market and the Customs Union. Very little could be more damaging to the Irish economy than to become a back door for importation of sub-standard or unregulated goods into the Single Market.
Politically, it wants and needs to secure the Good Friday Agreement. The only way that the Irish Government believes that the Good Friday Agreement can be secured is by retaining the border relationship as it now is. The stated intentions of the UK Government are contradictory and simply unworkable, to say nothing of lacking entirely in any sort of detail. If the UK Government had a detailed plan to address the border, it would have been to its advantage to provide it, placing the EU on the back foot. But they don't. Don't get me wrong, I like platitudes as much as the next man, but...
Ireland will not accept a position that is detrimental to its best interests. The EU position is to require Ireland's concerns to be met. The EU's acceptance of the Irish view on the border clearly demonstrates that Ireland is not some vassal state or colony of the EU.
However, the real shame is that relations between the two countries have recently been better than they have been for almost all of those years, the demonisation of the Irish Government over the last few weeks will do little to ensure that this remains the case. In fact, far from being anti-UK, the current minority Government, led by Fine Gael (often decried by Sinn Fein supporters as "West Brits") is about as pro-British as it could be. The fact that this Government is solidly on the same page as Fianna Fail about the border shows that the Irish Government perspective is widely shared in the country.
Supporting the EU stance, and refusing to first develop a trade relationship that obviated a border problem in Ireland is a strange way of acting independently in the interests of Ireland. Supporting the notion that the UK could come up with a border solution to a problem unable to be articulated until it was known if there was a FTA, WTO rules trade or a micro single market is hardly acting independently in the interests of Ireland.
The problem with your argument is that it is the EU that is supporting the Irish position, not the other way round. And it is clear that the UK had not seriously considered the border a problem, given the way it seems to have bitten the Government on the arse in recent weeks. The border problem can clearly be articulated now, because the UK Government has determined that it wants out of both Single Market and Customs Union. This desire leaves only two options available, a Free Trade Agreement or no deal. There is no circumstance where, under WTO rules and outside the Customs Union, all controls on imported goods can be abandoned, unlike tariffs, on the border in Ireland without adopting unilateral free trade.
The Irish Government (and the EU) is representing the interests of the majority of people on both sides of the border on the island. But, you are right, the Irish Government is not acting independently, it is, in fact, acting in concert with its fellow member states as an equal. Personally, I don't find that to be a problem (from an Irish perspective), because acting independently is another way of saying acting alone (and while it's okay to listen to the song "Freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose", it's not much fun to live it).
The EU is using Ireland as a bargaining chip just as it is using citizens rights, and now following Barnier's speech on security, stoops to the level of making intelligence sharing to fight terrorism a bargaining chip. Presumably Barnier is rejecting the message May gave in her Florence speech that the UK wanted to go further than the current arrangements and develop a more effective intelligence sharing arrangement across all European states, not just those in the EU.
The Irish position is no different to the UK's position on the desired outcome for no hard border. If we are talking about bollox, can we include the UK wanting a "hard Brexit", which I assume means no deal. A hard Brexit if it happens will be because the EU thinks the pain for the EU is worth taking, compared to what it hopes it will cause for the UK. Ireland is a pawn in their game and will not prevent the EU sacrificing peace in Ireland, as long as the blame can be put at the feet of the UK because it voted Brexit. If Ireland could dictate to the EU it would demand a special internal market on a bilateral agreement between the UK and Ireland - it can't, the EU trumps every other card, so will act as best it can to pretend the EU is supporting it's priority to find a border solution.
The EU simply uses the strategies that prevent the means to agreement being reached so it can stall progress, pressurise the UK to cough up more money, yet give the impression it is the fault of the UK. It is its go to strategy and it is has no equal in negotiating skills in using its control of information fed to the media to undermine the other side's position, ask my old mate Varafoukis, he's a staunch left wing anti Brexit Europhile on QT tonight. Our negotiators are pussy cats compared to the EU team.
Ireland is already in the Eurozone and the benefits Ireland receives as an EU member and net recipient means it is unlikely to want to leave, as is the case for most other EU members. A united states of Europe under fiscal jurisdiction of a central bank will make the EU stronger and at that stage virtually impossible to leave, even for the net contributors whose citizens might not agree with EU policy. There should be no reason why the EU so fears an exodus of other nations, the UK would need to join the Eurozone ultimately and is leaving using a window of opportunity that will be neither open to, nor desirable for other nations. The EU's cynical, vindictive dog-in-the manger approach only reinforces every Brexit voter's negative views of the EU, many of which were probably not justified, but are now.
Why there has been such vitriolic denial on here of the ambition and logic of fiscal union is beyond me. Even @Fiiish doesn't like me any more just for saying it. Suggests a poor understanding of how a single market operates to achieve optimum efficiency and more importantly, to ensure the EU budget is applied equitably, despite voting to remain in.
As I said before, the single market doesn't need to operate at 100% efficiency (ie fiscal union) to be worth having. It just needs to be operating at better efficiency than 28 countries squabbling and hard borders.
Apologies for being particularly irascible last night, I withdraw comments made that were clearly inflammatory and insulting.
@Dippenhall your post contains a lot of assumptions that the EU is acting malevolently, using issues as pawns in the game and so on. We are way past demanding evidence to back up your opinion. Your opinion is valid as an opinion, you may even think it is 'obvious' or common sense. However it is an opinion as mine are (BTW I disagree with you). Are you not able to take solace in the knowledge that you won? Is it not now beholden on the winners !like you to solve the issues and make it happen?
Net immigration is falling due to higher emigration and lower immigration, and has called over 100,000 in the last year. But, it is still 230,000 and is a drop from all time high figures. The devil is in the detail... Similar number of EU migrants who have a job, big drop in those looking for work. Be interesting if this is just an adjustment from all time high figures, or is part of a long term trend
The EU is using Ireland as a bargaining chip just as it is using citizens rights, and now following Barnier's speech on security, stoops to the level of making intelligence sharing to fight terrorism a bargaining chip. Presumably Barnier is rejecting the message May gave in her Florence speech that the UK wanted to go further than the current arrangements and develop a more effective intelligence sharing arrangement across all European states, not just those in the EU.
The Irish position is no different to the UK's position on the desired outcome for no hard border. If we are talking about bollox, can we include the UK wanting a "hard Brexit", which I assume means no deal. A hard Brexit if it happens will be because the EU thinks the pain for the EU is worth taking, compared to what it hopes it will cause for the UK. Ireland is a pawn in their game and will not prevent the EU sacrificing peace in Ireland, as long as the blame can be put at the feet of the UK because it voted Brexit. If Ireland could dictate to the EU it would demand a special internal market on a bilateral agreement between the UK and Ireland - it can't, the EU trumps every other card, so will act as best it can to pretend the EU is supporting it's priority to find a border solution.
The EU simply uses the strategies that prevent the means to agreement being reached so it can stall progress, pressurise the UK to cough up more money, yet give the impression it is the fault of the UK. It is its go to strategy and it is has no equal in negotiating skills in using its control of information fed to the media to undermine the other side's position, ask my old mate Varafoukis, he's a staunch left wing anti Brexit Europhile on QT tonight. Our negotiators are pussy cats compared to the EU team.
Ireland is already in the Eurozone and the benefits Ireland receives as an EU member and net recipient means it is unlikely to want to leave, as is the case for most other EU members. A united states of Europe under fiscal jurisdiction of a central bank will make the EU stronger and at that stage virtually impossible to leave, even for the net contributors whose citizens might not agree with EU policy. There should be no reason why the EU so fears an exodus of other nations, the UK would need to join the Eurozone ultimately and is leaving using a window of opportunity that will be neither open to, nor desirable for other nations. The EU's cynical, vindictive dog-in-the manger approach only reinforces every Brexit voter's negative views of the EU, many of which were probably not justified, but are now.
Why there has been such vitriolic denial on here of the ambition and logic of fiscal union is beyond me. Even @Fiiish doesn't like me any more just for saying it. Suggests a poor understanding of how a single market operates to achieve optimum efficiency and more importantly, to ensure the EU budget is applied equitably, despite voting to remain in.
@Dippenhall, it is hard to imagine how you could be any more wrong on the border question, I had thought you understood things better than this.
While she stated that she wanted tariff free trade and for cross-border trade to be as frictionless as possible, there is no realistic future trading relationship imaginable that does not require a hardening of the border.
Unless the UK is following the Minford model of unilateral free trade which would, at the very least, decimate agribusiness, it has to establish the processes and infrastructure to manage the paperwork and associated checks that are required for managing cross-border trade outside the Customs Union.
By definition, almost, the UK position also requires that the European Union also establishes the processes and infrastructure needed to manage its external customs border.
Even with the greatest possible agreement between the two sides (which I have my doubts about) there will have to be, in comparison to what exists now and has operated in conjunction with the Good Friday Agreement, a hard border.
If they were being honest with you UK civil servants and Ministers would admit the truth of this. If there was a possibility of avoiding a hard border within the context of the UK's stated desires for leaving the EU, it would be the simplest thing in the world to provide precisely the assurances that the Irish Government needs.
It is Ireland and the EU that is requiring that the UK provide, at the least, a firm commitment to an open, soft border, as today. Irish concerns have dictated that this be a key element of the EU's position on a negotiated Brexit. There is no diktat from the EU, forcing Ireland to comply with the evil Commission's will, if anything, the opposite is the case, because the Irish Government has been able to shape (not dictate) the EU27 approach - as the suggestions about the UK or Northern Ireland effectively remaining within the Customs Union clearly demonstrate.
How can a position which requires the continuation of the status quo in which the peace process survives, if not thrives, be the EU threatening peace?
You say the EU is using the Irish border and citizens' rights as bargaining chips (strangely the language used by the UK Government in the Summer), I say that they are conditions for a negotiated exit. The EU thinks they are important concerns, that must be addressed now. The UK Government has sought to disagree and kick the can down the road, in the hopes that they can confuse the exit process with the future trade arrangements. Personally, I don't believe that the UK Government believed that the EU was serious about the need for "sufficient progress" and, if they thought about the border at all, they thought they could blag it.
The problem that has arisen about the border is the result of the UK's stated position on its preferred outcome. Something has to give, too much is at stake for a fudge, but the decision on which it will be will be the UK's to take.
I like this proposal. It seems to me it means the UK remains almost a full member of the EU until 2021. It means the UK economy does not go over a cliff, UK buseinesses do not have to make panic large investment commitments that would cause severe damage to the UK economy for decades, and best of all, it gives the growing anti Brexit movement more time to mobilise and stop Brexit altogether.
Net immigration is falling due to higher emigration and lower immigration, and has called over 100,000 in the last year. But, it is still 230,000 and is a drop from all time high figures. The devil is in the detail... Similar number of EU migrants who have a job, big drop in those looking for work. Be interesting if this is just an adjustment from all time high figures, or is part of a long term trend
I like this proposal. It seems to me it means the UK remains almost a full member of the EU until 2021. It means the UK economy does not go over a cliff, UK buseinesses do not have to make panic large investment commitments that would cause severe damage to the UK economy for decades, and best of all, it gives the growing anti Brexit movement more time to mobilise and stop Brexit altogether.
Completely agree - could see the DUP end their confidence and supply arrangement which could be the end of the government doing the negotiating though.
I like this proposal. It seems to me it means the UK remains almost a full member of the EU until 2021. It means the UK economy does not go over a cliff, UK buseinesses do not have to make panic large investment commitments that would cause severe damage to the UK economy for decades, and best of all, it gives the growing anti Brexit movement more time to mobilise and stop Brexit altogether.
Completely agree - could see the DUP end their confidence and supply arrangement which could be the end of the government doing the negotiating though.
Comments
Not my scare story.
Announced yesterday that they were investing half a billion in UK pharma industry.
What with Brexit round the corner - how very dare they.
Apologies for the delay, I suffered from fat finger syndrome and a poor phone battery on the bus home from Belfast. Thank you @Dippenhall, for suggesting my response is lucid, I was originally a bit concerned about your reference to painting by numbers. However, on reflection, this may be an analogy with which I can agree. The negotiations are like the detailed work required to replicate a given masterpiece, painting by numbers, which requires remaining within the lines marked on the picture (the rules of the negotiation) and ensuring that the right colours are selected to achieve the desired result (Brexit and future relations). Unfortunately, at best, the UK approach seems to be akin to either a case of slapping on random colours with a wallpaper paste brush or, sometimes when watching D Davis, an image straight out of a three year old's colouring book. The UK cannot, unless it either remains in the Single Market/Customs Union or decides on having no controls on imports, retain the current border arrangements. The only negotiated free trade arrangement that would allow a continuation of no non-tariff barriers is the Single Market/Customs Union option rejected out of hand by the UK Government. It is duplicitous to suggest that other countries seeking to protect their national interests (and, in the case of the Irish Government, represent that majority in Northern Ireland) threatens civil unrest, that responsibility lies solely with the UK Government. It is the UK's choice to leave the environment that supports the peace process, it is the UK Government's responsibility to provide realistic options that will prevent that environment from being undermined. The priority is virtually irrelevant. The UK states that it wants a bespoke deal, far better than the CETA arrangement, which took 7 years to agree. Whilst there may be regulatory equivalence on day 1, the measures by which that will be retained, the scope of activities included and the resolution mechanisms will not be plucked out of thin air. The complexity of this arrangement dwarfs that of the first stage of the Article 50 negotiations which, it appears increasingly likely, could and should have been resolved months ago. This suggests that speed is not likely to be a feature of any trade talks. The fact that the UK is not in the Eurozone means that there are not additional exchange issues to consider, but that doesn't affect the fact that there will be considerably more paperwork, regulatory compliance issues and delays for UK importers and exporters trading with the EU (and, depending on trade negotiations, with those countries having FTAs with the EU). Thank you for your kind words, though I am spending too much time paying attention to Brexit and all it's wondrous works already. I have never heard or read such comments in a vox pop (I have, however, heard dairy farmers here in Northern Ireland express that fear), though I have both heard and read individuals state that it will not be possible to trade with the EU as happens now. This is entirely consistent with the UK's expressed desire for its future relationship with the EU. Nor is losing however many billions of pounds in taxes, economic activity, inward investment or employment should there not be an agreement that replicates, inasmuch as it can, what we have today. UK trade, like that of Ireland, has benefitted with countries outside the EU because it is an English speaking entry point to the EU markets. The value, in terms of inward investment, of being within the EU is that, for example, businesses expanded their UK operations because they could use them as their bases for the whole of the EU. Nor is it just the case of the direct economic benefits, because membership is about much more than economic benefits. The literature on the impact of EU membership is more limited that I would wish, and almost all predates the referendum, but this media briefing may help: res.org.uk/details/mediabrief/6052141/ECONOMIC-BENEFITS-FROM-MEMBERSHIP-OF-THE-EUROPEAN-UNION-New-estimates.html, there is also last year's report by the Treasury Select Committee, which, seeking to find the truth from both sides, makes for interesting reading (https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201617/cmselect/cmtreasy/122/122.pdf).
Ireland's economic interests are clearly best served by continued membership of the EU and retaining the integrity of the Single Market and the Customs Union. Very little could be more damaging to the Irish economy than to become a back door for importation of sub-standard or unregulated goods into the Single Market.
Politically, it wants and needs to secure the Good Friday Agreement. The only way that the Irish Government believes that the Good Friday Agreement can be secured is by retaining the border relationship as it now is. The stated intentions of the UK Government are contradictory and simply unworkable, to say nothing of lacking entirely in any sort of detail. If the UK Government had a detailed plan to address the border, it would have been to its advantage to provide it, placing the EU on the back foot. But they don't. Don't get me wrong, I like platitudes as much as the next man, but...
Ireland will not accept a position that is detrimental to its best interests. The EU position is to require Ireland's concerns to be met. The EU's acceptance of the Irish view on the border clearly demonstrates that Ireland is not some vassal state or colony of the EU.
However, the real shame is that relations between the two countries have recently been better than they have been for almost all of those years, the demonisation of the Irish Government over the last few weeks will do little to ensure that this remains the case. In fact, far from being anti-UK, the current minority Government, led by Fine Gael (often decried by Sinn Fein supporters as "West Brits") is about as pro-British as it could be. The fact that this Government is solidly on the same page as Fianna Fail about the border shows that the Irish Government perspective is widely shared in the country. The problem with your argument is that it is the EU that is supporting the Irish position, not the other way round. And it is clear that the UK had not seriously considered the border a problem, given the way it seems to have bitten the Government on the arse in recent weeks. The border problem can clearly be articulated now, because the UK Government has determined that it wants out of both Single Market and Customs Union. This desire leaves only two options available, a Free Trade Agreement or no deal. There is no circumstance where, under WTO rules and outside the Customs Union, all controls on imported goods can be abandoned, unlike tariffs, on the border in Ireland without adopting unilateral free trade.
The Irish Government (and the EU) is representing the interests of the majority of people on both sides of the border on the island. But, you are right, the Irish Government is not acting independently, it is, in fact, acting in concert with its fellow member states as an equal. Personally, I don't find that to be a problem (from an Irish perspective), because acting independently is another way of saying acting alone (and while it's okay to listen to the song "Freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose", it's not much fun to live it).
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/nov/29/vortex-online-political-debate-arguments-trump-brexit
The Irish position is no different to the UK's position on the desired outcome for no hard border. If we are talking about bollox, can we include the UK wanting a "hard Brexit", which I assume means no deal. A hard Brexit if it happens will be because the EU thinks the pain for the EU is worth taking, compared to what it hopes it will cause for the UK. Ireland is a pawn in their game and will not prevent the EU sacrificing peace in Ireland, as long as the blame can be put at the feet of the UK because it voted Brexit. If Ireland could dictate to the EU it would demand a special internal market on a bilateral agreement between the UK and Ireland - it can't, the EU trumps every other card, so will act as best it can to pretend the EU is supporting it's priority to find a border solution.
The EU simply uses the strategies that prevent the means to agreement being reached so it can stall progress, pressurise the UK to cough up more money, yet give the impression it is the fault of the UK. It is its go to strategy and it is has no equal in negotiating skills in using its control of information fed to the media to undermine the other side's position, ask my old mate Varafoukis, he's a staunch left wing anti Brexit Europhile on QT tonight. Our negotiators are pussy cats compared to the EU team.
Ireland is already in the Eurozone and the benefits Ireland receives as an EU member and net recipient means it is unlikely to want to leave, as is the case for most other EU members. A united states of Europe under fiscal jurisdiction of a central bank will make the EU stronger and at that stage virtually impossible to leave, even for the net contributors whose citizens might not agree with EU policy. There should be no reason why the EU so fears an exodus of other nations, the UK would need to join the Eurozone ultimately and is leaving using a window of opportunity that will be neither open to, nor desirable for other nations. The EU's cynical, vindictive dog-in-the manger approach only reinforces every Brexit voter's negative views of the EU, many of which were probably not justified, but are now.
Why there has been such vitriolic denial on here of the ambition and logic of fiscal union is beyond me. Even @Fiiish doesn't like me any more just for saying it. Suggests a poor understanding of how a single market operates to achieve optimum efficiency and more importantly, to ensure the EU budget is applied equitably, despite voting to remain in.
Apologies for being particularly irascible last night, I withdraw comments made that were clearly inflammatory and insulting.
past demanding evidence to back up your opinion. Your opinion is valid as an opinion, you may even think it is 'obvious' or common sense. However it is an opinion as mine are (BTW I disagree with you).
Are you not able to take solace in the knowledge that you won?
Is it not now beholden on the winners !like you to solve the issues and make it happen?
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/brexit-britain-close-to-irish-border-deal-pltcgrvcj?shareToken=dd47164130b51360e4f3c2e11db6f8d6
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/internationalmigration/bulletins/migrationstatisticsquarterlyreport/november2017
Net immigration is falling due to higher emigration and lower immigration, and has called over 100,000 in the last year. But, it is still 230,000 and is a drop from all time high figures. The devil is in the detail... Similar number of EU migrants who have a job, big drop in those looking for work. Be interesting if this is just an adjustment from all time high figures, or is part of a long term trend
It's really very simple.
In January of this year, before the UK entered into any Article 50 negotiations with the EU 27, Theresa May made clear that her Government was taking the UK out of both the Single Market and the Customs Union in addition to leaving the EU (https://gov.uk/government/speeches/the-governments-negotiating-objectives-for-exiting-the-eu-pm-speech).
While she stated that she wanted tariff free trade and for cross-border trade to be as frictionless as possible, there is no realistic future trading relationship imaginable that does not require a hardening of the border.
Unless the UK is following the Minford model of unilateral free trade which would, at the very least, decimate agribusiness, it has to establish the processes and infrastructure to manage the paperwork and associated checks that are required for managing cross-border trade outside the Customs Union.
By definition, almost, the UK position also requires that the European Union also establishes the processes and infrastructure needed to manage its external customs border.
Even with the greatest possible agreement between the two sides (which I have my doubts about) there will have to be, in comparison to what exists now and has operated in conjunction with the Good Friday Agreement, a hard border.
If they were being honest with you UK civil servants and Ministers would admit the truth of this. If there was a possibility of avoiding a hard border within the context of the UK's stated desires for leaving the EU, it would be the simplest thing in the world to provide precisely the assurances that the Irish Government needs.
It is Ireland and the EU that is requiring that the UK provide, at the least, a firm commitment to an open, soft border, as today. Irish concerns have dictated that this be a key element of the EU's position on a negotiated Brexit. There is no diktat from the EU, forcing Ireland to comply with the evil Commission's will, if anything, the opposite is the case, because the Irish Government has been able to shape (not dictate) the EU27 approach - as the suggestions about the UK or Northern Ireland effectively remaining within the Customs Union clearly demonstrate.
How can a position which requires the continuation of the status quo in which the peace process survives, if not thrives, be the EU threatening peace?
You say the EU is using the Irish border and citizens' rights as bargaining chips (strangely the language used by the UK Government in the Summer), I say that they are conditions for a negotiated exit. The EU thinks they are important concerns, that must be addressed now. The UK Government has sought to disagree and kick the can down the road, in the hopes that they can confuse the exit process with the future trade arrangements. Personally, I don't believe that the UK Government believed that the EU was serious about the need for "sufficient progress" and, if they thought about the border at all, they thought they could blag it.
The problem that has arisen about the border is the result of the UK's stated position on its preferred outcome. Something has to give, too much is at stake for a fudge, but the decision on which it will be will be the UK's to take.