Brexit, the economy and house prices part 5

wunferall

esuhl wrote: »

Ha ha! :rotfl: Sure, and I could just walk away from my 24-month mobile phone contract that I've just agreed to. Just like that!

Reneging on our agreements makes the UK look untrustworthy and jeopardises any future deals.

We can't just walk away from our promises without there being consequences.

Oh dear, are you yet another remainer that just doesn't understand?

You can walk away from your phone contract when it finishes. Okay so far? If you decide to renew your phone contract you must agree to it, and your provider must also agree. Otherwise the contract expires. Still with it?

So, the UK has said that we are leaving the EU; our contract with them will expire on March 29th 2019. As for any sort of renewal, nothing yet has been set in stone and (still) unless both sides agree otherwise the UK will leave on March 29th 2019. Since the contract expires then, yes just as with your example above the UK is quite legally entitled to just walk. As no deal would be in place there would be nothing to renege upon (or very little, since both sides will by then have had ample opportunity and according to EU regulations the onus is upon them to reach agreement). Nobody in the world except those within the EU cares about how it looks, sorry to disappoint you. Those that might care are far more likely to see the EU's attitudes and tactics regarding Brexit in a negative light than those of the UK.

Yet again I am not advocating that we just walk. But we could, especially if the EU make reaching agreement on reasonable terms impossible.

wunferall

vivatifosi wrote: »

Thanks. I have just found and read the Karlsson report, which is very thorough. Given that Karlsson is an expert of digital border solutions, as a way of breaking the impasse, why don't we just adopt his model and move on?

Because (surprise, surprise) the EU refuse to accept it.

Karlsson isn't alone in thinking it can be done but his report was after all commissioned by the EU. And you're right, it does at least appear to be very thorough. It's pretty obvious (yet again) that the EU just don't really want to reach agreement.

wunferall

Herzlos wrote: »

The UK agreed.

As you have repeatedly been shown, the UK has indeed agreed that no hard border will exist between NI & ROI.

Anything and everything else is providing a final Brexit agreement can be reached. So far no Brexit agreement has been concluded and no final agreement has been signed.

mayonnaise

vivatifosi wrote: »

Thanks. I have just found and read the Karlsson report, which is very thorough. Given that Karlsson is an expert of digital border solutions, as a way of breaking the impasse, why don't we just adopt his model and move on?

Because the Karlsson model requires border infractructure, cameras, etc...
While our Brexit secretary promised:

Brexit secretary David Davis has promised that there will be no cameras or any other physical infrastructure on the Border after Brexit.

Mr Davis told the BBC’s Andrew Marr that he was confident that Britain and the European Union would reach an agreement on the Border’s future and that there would be “no cameras, no booths, no wire, no nothing”

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/brexit-secretary-signals-border-status-quo-after-eu-departure-1.3439980

Surprise, surprise, it's not the EU being obstructionist despite what the Europhobes on this thread want us to believe, but rather the UK position being all over the place and utterly untenable.

wunferall

mayonnaise wrote: »

Because the Karlsson model requires border infractructure, cameras, etc...
While our Brexit secretary promised:


https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/brexit-secretary-signals-border-status-quo-after-eu-departure-1.3439980

Surprise, surprise, it's not the EU being obstructionist despite what the Europhobes on this thread want us to believe, but rather the UK position being all over the place and utterly untenable.

Yes, David Davies has said this after EU obstructionism. Not before. There is a significant difference.

You're wrong because the UK position isn't all over the place, is it? They have since the beginning said that there will be no hard border, much though you might wish otherwise.

Surprise surprise, another Europhile trying to make something out of nothing. Even your posting buddy gfplux can see that you should "wait to see what the expert negotiators agree in the next few months". I agree; this has been done to death and you might as well argue over heads or tails for all the difference it'll make to any outcome.

Herzlos

gfplux wrote: »

How is it possible to negotiate new trade deals if Britain has an open border. I am sure it can be done but it does not give Britain a strong negotiating position.
Yes can do but at what cost?

It can't, really. Any trade agreement we make, which isn't compatible with our EU trade agreement (like chlorine chicken), must require some method to stop the non-EU compliant stuff crossing the border from NI to Eire, and visa versa.

Regulatory divergence and no border means an enormous back door for non-compliant goods to get into the EU. The EU has already made it clear that they won't accept the UK becoming a back door for dodgy goods getting into the EU.

The same applies where tax rates diverge. It sort of already applies with the currency where it's often cheaper to drive across the border to get something than to buy locally.

wunferall wrote: »

As you have repeatedly been shown, the UK has indeed agreed that no hard border will exist between NI & ROI.

Anything and everything else is providing a final Brexit agreement can be reached. So far no Brexit agreement has been concluded and no final agreement has been signed.

The UK agreed that it will provide a satisfactory solution to avoid a hard border in Ireland, with the backstop that if they can't, that they'll ensure regulatory alignment. Twice.

It's pretty straight forward, really.

mayonnaise

wunferall wrote: »

Yes, David Davies has said this after EU obstructionism. Not before. There is a significant difference.

The Karlsson report dates back to November 2017.
David Davis effectively dismissed it as a solution during his performance on Andrew Marr.

:doh:

wunferall

mayonnaise wrote: »

The Karlsson report dates back to November 2017.
David Davis effectively dismissed it as a solution during his performance on Andrew Marr.

:doh:

Oh dear, is not a good morning for you? Look at the date of your link with Davis on the Marr show. Sunday 25th March 2018. So (as I said) after the EU had rejected Karlsson's report that they, the EU, themselves funded.
:wall:

wunferall

Herzlos wrote: »

Waffle deleted as irrelevent to the following and having no desire to waste more forum space .....
The UK agreed that it will provide a satisfactory solution to avoid a hard border in Ireland, with the backstop that if they can't, that they'll ensure regulatory alignment. Twice.

It's pretty straight forward, really.

It is indeed pretty straightforward but it seems that you can't understand it, sadly.

The UK has agreed a backstop provided agreement is reached on an overall Brexit deal with the EU. So if the EU and the UK don't also reach agreement on this there may well be no deal.

Herzlos

wunferall wrote: »

It is indeed pretty straightforward but it seems that you can't understand it, sadly.

The UK has agreed a backstop provided agreement is reached on an overall Brexit deal with the EU. So if the EU and the UK don't also reach agreement on this there may well be no deal.

At this point I think you're deliberately missing the point, or just being obtuse.

You are sort of right, in a totally irrelevant way (is winning an argument on the internet so important?). If an overall Brexit deal isn't reached with the EU, then we're on WTO Terms (or potentially not leaving), and thus the border situation is already defined (WTO=border. Remaining=no border).

The UK has agreed to provide a workable borderless solution or to use the backstop. Those are the only 2 options, and the EU will be happy with either of them.

You're also right that if the UK and EU don't agree on this there will be no deal. So the UK needs to get it's finger out and get a solution. Or if the solution isn't actually possible, we've been totally played by the EU (which isn't hard, our negotiators are incompetent).