Is my assessment of the brexit situation wrong 
We got a deal - no more negotiation
We can accept that deal or have no deal but no deal would mean WTO rules
WTO rules means no discriminating so if apples are coming from the USA and from France then both have to be subject to the same border rules which in effect means a border in Ireland or no borders anywhere which means illegal stuff could come here all the time
I must have got something wrong in that assessment …
As i understand it the deal on offer is a ‘separation agreement’ only…loads more negotiations to go about the future, which is why the fuss about the ‘backstop’ and any time limits on it. The deal on offer will surely be a basis for future trade deals between UK and EU, but it’s certainly not the complete and final deal.
Broadly speaking, if it’s a crash out, yes, WTO rules so needs a frontier somewhere.
NI to Eire not possible because of the Good Friday agreement. And Eire would suffer badly too.
NI to UK mainland not possible because it’d split the country. And the Gov needs the support of Unionists to function.
Eire to EU not possible as they are in full partnership.
Even if this bill goes through there is still years of employment for negotiators, civil servants, politicians, reporters, and loads more opportunities for bureaucrats of all sorts to spent tax payers money.
Sent from my SM-G361F using Tapatalk
If you go on Holiday to Turkey, when you return you will have to queue up with Turks in the red and green channels
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
ROG:
Is my assessment of the brexit situation wrongWe got a deal - no more negotiation
We can accept that deal or have no deal but no deal would mean WTO rules
WTO rules means no discriminating so if apples are coming from the USA and from France then both have to be subject to the same border rules which in effect means a border in Ireland or no borders anywhere which means illegal stuff could come here all the time
I must have got something wrong in that assessment …
If I ship a plane load of car parts from USA via Shannon airport and then bring them into UK whether it’s 1972 or now or after Brexit what’s the difference regarding the NI/Eire border ?.Or for that matter what stops me importing a truck load of new Mercs bought in Luxembourg and importing them to Denmark via Germany thereby supposedly avoiding 100 % Danish new car duty owing to the lack of border controls.
As for May’s ‘deal’ that in no way shape or form fits the definition of ‘Brexit’.
Carryfast:
ROG:
Is my assessment of the brexit situation wrongWe got a deal - no more negotiation
We can accept that deal or have no deal but no deal would mean WTO rules
WTO rules means no discriminating so if apples are coming from the USA and from France then both have to be subject to the same border rules which in effect means a border in Ireland or no borders anywhere which means illegal stuff could come here all the time
I must have got something wrong in that assessment …
If I ship a plane load of car parts from USA via Shannon airport and then bring them into UK whether it’s 1972 or now or after Brexit what’s the difference regarding the NI/Eire border ?.Or for that matter what stops me importing a truck load of new Mercs bought in Luxembourg and importing them to Denmark via Germany thereby supposedly avoiding 100 % Danish new car duty owing to the lack of border controls.
As for May’s ‘deal’ that in no way shape or form fits the definition of ‘Brexit’.
Christmas really is coming!
Nice to see C.F. is bringing out some familiar old chestnuts.
[emoji4]
Sent from my SM-G361F using Tapatalk
Franglais:
Carryfast:
If I ship a plane load of car parts from USA via Shannon airport and then bring them into UK whether it’s 1972 or now or after Brexit what’s the difference regarding the NI/Eire border ?.Or for that matter what stops me importing a truck load of new Mercs bought in Luxembourg and importing them to Denmark via Germany thereby supposedly avoiding 100 % Danish new car duty owing to the lack of border controls.Christmas really is coming!
Nice to see C.F. is bringing out some familiar old chestnuts.
And your answers to the familiar old questions raised being no better than a bad Christmas cracker joke. 
1972…you’d go through Customs at Shannon airport
Now…as above
Post Brexit…hard border…you’d go through Customs at Shannon (entering EU) , then again leaving EU, then again when you entered UK.But quite possibly it won’t be the UK any more, because post-Brexit Scotland could break from the Union and rejoin the EU in due course.
ROG:
Is my assessment of the brexit situation wrongWe got a deal - no more negotiation
We can accept that deal or have no deal but no deal would mean WTO rules
WTO rules means no discriminating so if apples are coming from the USA and from France then both have to be subject to the same border rules which in effect means a border in Ireland or no borders anywhere which means illegal stuff could come here all the time
I must have got something wrong in that assessment …
Rory Stewart, who seems to be the only MP with a brain, explained it on the radio the other day.
There’s only 30 - 60 MPs in the HoC who would vote for a no deal Brexit.
There’s a similar number who would vote Remain or for a 2nd EU ref.
Most MPs will vote for a deal. Parliament gets the last say, as defined by the BRITISH court.
We know what the deal is.
Oh, don’t you like it?
Get over it, you won!
GasGas:
1972…you’d go through Customs at Shannon airportNow…as above
Post Brexit…hard border…you’d go through Customs at Shannon (entering EU) , then again leaving EU, then again when you entered UK.But quite possibly it won’t be the UK any more, because post-Brexit Scotland could break from the Union and rejoin the EU in due course.
Why would goods in transit from US to the UK be subject to Irish customs duties when goods destined for the UK are obviously subject to UK customs not Irish ?.Bearing in mind the difference between goods in transit v import.
It’s ironic that the non country of the EU thinks it needs let alone has the right to designate equally non borders.While the EU’s deluded loyal non citizens seem to think that the very real recognised country of Eire supposedly didn’t need a supposed hard border with the different and equally very real recognised country of UK.So tell us why the double standards of no hard border needed between the two different countries of Eire and UK before 1973 but a hard border supposedly and conveniently needed between EU member state Eire and non EU member state UK ?.Bearing in mind the EU is not yet even a declared de Jure,let alone an internationally recognised de Facto,state in its own right.
Which leaves the question how does Denmark enforce its massive car purchase taxes without a hard border between Denmark and Germany ?.
GasGas:
Rory Stewart, who seems to be the only MP with a brain, explained it on the radio the other day.There’s only 30 - 60 MPs in the HoC who would vote for a no deal Brexit.
There’s a similar number who would vote Remain or for a 2nd EU ref.
Most MPs will vote for a deal. Parliament gets the last say, as defined by the BRITISH court.
We know what the deal is.
Oh, don’t you like it?
Get over it, you won!
The problem being that the ‘deal’ in question effectively means the same thing as remain + and Cameron and the Leave manifesto made the terms of Brexit clear.( Leave means Leave not BRINO/Remain + ).It seems obvious where the argument goes from there just like most of the other Federalist v Nationalist/Secessionist arguments throughout history.While,unlike even the Yugoslav Federation for example,the EU doesn’t even have the validity/legality of being a recognised state.What could possibly go wrong.Especially if Russia sees the opportunity of supporting and kicking off a proxy/civil war between Brit secessionists v EU federalists.With the Brit secessionists having the moral high ground of defending an internationally recognised nation state against the criminal imposition of a rogue dictatorship adding insult to injury by pretending that it is a country.