Timeline for Why is the UK blaming the EU and what does the UK want?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
32 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 1, 2020 at 16:36 | comment | added | phoog | @Jan thanks. It is widely misunderstood. The security installations were just that: they had nothing to do with customs since those controls were removed in 1993 because of the EU (the GFA was signed in 1998). "Normalization of security arrangements and practices" presumably admits the possibility of customs checks on a border between distinct customs territories, since that is normal. Some will presumably argue that "security installations" includes customs checkpoints. In fact, the agreement as written only makes sense in the context of the customs union, but renegotiating it seems unlikely. | |
| Sep 24, 2020 at 11:08 | comment | added | Jan | @phoog I spent part of today looking up things and have reworded the relevant paragraphs that claim the GFA has a direct implication on the border. I may have missed one. | |
| Sep 24, 2020 at 11:05 | history | edited | Jan | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
I was informed that the GFA did not include all the points I assumed it did. Thus, rewriting a couple of paragraphs was necessary and sources were added in the process.
|
| Sep 23, 2020 at 6:43 | comment | added | Jan | @phoog Apparently the Security section does. I’ll admit that it’s something I read over and over again and never bothered to check against sources. | |
| Sep 19, 2020 at 9:14 | comment | added | MikeB | Probably not a direct answer, but don't gloss over the fact that the current Government is proposing legislation that would purportedly override Sovereign Scottish Law, which would be, shall we say: "interesting". This is not entirely about NI | |
| Sep 19, 2020 at 3:29 | comment | added | phoog | @Colm there are several countries that are in the Schengen area without being in the customs union. Turkey has a partial customs union with the EU without participating in the free movement system. It would not be impossible for the UK to continue to participate in the customs union while withdrawing from free movement of person's, but Brexiteer politicians have repeatedly said that they do not want to do so. Because it is indeed wrong to say that Brexit was only about movement of people: sovereignty over product standards was always an issue as well. | |
| Sep 19, 2020 at 3:19 | comment | added | phoog | "A key part of this agreement is a completely open border": have you read the GFA? It says nothing about border controls. What part of it supposedly has this effect? | |
| Sep 18, 2020 at 21:03 | comment | added | fyrepenguin | @WoJ they are saying that any sort of wall or fence or barrier along the border that isn't simply a private citizen's property fence would be considered unacceptable. The largest acceptable "barrier" along the border being a simple line in the sand. No one is concerned about barriers around private property, rather, they are concerned about national borders not having a physical barrier. | |
| Sep 18, 2020 at 12:51 | comment | added | WoJ | @Jan: I understand, thank you. I am still not clear what the "anything" could be beside a wall on the border (because what happens within the countries is their choice) and how this related to a fence around a private property (within any of the countries) but anyway. | |
| Sep 18, 2020 at 12:44 | comment | added | Jan | @WoJ The sentence is meant as: anything that amounts to more than [a line on the ground (or a fence surrounding private property)] can be … | |
| Sep 18, 2020 at 12:39 | comment | added | WoJ | @Jan: I understand that placing a border fence (that is a construction of a certain height that delimits both countries) is not acceptable. The answer says anything that amounts to more than a line on the ground (or a fence surrounding private property) can be seen as a violation of this agreement.. I an a non-native English speaker so I read it as "a fence surrounding private property can be seen as a violation of this agreement". Otherwise what would be more than "a fence surrounding private property" in that case? (can you give me an example?) | |
| Sep 18, 2020 at 12:34 | comment | added | Jan | @WoJ I think you misread that: a line on the ground between NI and RoI is fine; you can also tell on which side you are based on how the road markings look. A fence along the border as a border fence would not be fine, but of course an individual can put a fence around their property. Because that wouldn’t be a border fence, just one surrounding their property – and a private endeavour, not a government one ;) | |
| Sep 18, 2020 at 12:07 | comment | added | WoJ | or a fence surrounding private property - I know that this is not the core of the answer but I am really curious (as a French): it is not allowed to put fences around one's land/garden in NI? (or UK, I do not know) Are there other signs of Alan limits (you mention that not even a line is possible) | |
| Sep 18, 2020 at 9:27 | comment | added | Jan | @JBentley Thanks for clearing that up, I have rephrased and incorporated data from that article. I may have missed instances of the alleged even split further down. | |
| Sep 18, 2020 at 9:26 | history | edited | Jan | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Incorporated a source on a recent poll that measured the attitudes of the Northern Irish population
|
| Sep 18, 2020 at 7:57 | comment | added | JBentley | "The population is approximately evenly split between those who see themselves as British and wish to stay part of the United Kingdom and those who see themselves as Irish and wish to be close to or unified with the Republic of Ireland." - this is incorrect and as far as I am aware has never been correct and indeed is a core part of the problem. See for example here | |
| Sep 18, 2020 at 5:42 | comment | added | vsz | +1 It's so refreshing to see an answer on this site which is not a propaganda for one side or the other, but presents both from a neutral and factual perspective! | |
| Sep 17, 2020 at 13:21 | comment | added | user10186512 | (Said document also contains statements like "Whilst the Protocol is in force, both the UK and EU must respect and abide by the legal obligations it contains", which is in contrast with recent UK government statements indicating they intend to potentially breach the legal obligations it contains.) | |
| Sep 17, 2020 at 13:18 | comment | added | user10186512 | As an additional point about the willful ignorance of the agreement, it's perhaps noteworthy that the UK government already published a document in May which appears to acknowledge several of the potential issues the prime minister has brought up, such as customs checks on agricultural products between the islands. It appears that the government has been aware of these things since at least May, and as such they shouldn't be surprises at this time. | |
| Sep 17, 2020 at 12:39 | comment | added | Dave Gremlin | +1 Also, @Paddy is correct. Boris' agreement with the EU explicitly consented to the first bullet point. The UK signed a treaty with the EU that would impose customs requirements between Ulster and the UK mainland. Now the UK wants to break that agreement | |
| Sep 17, 2020 at 12:13 | comment | added | Andy Hames | @Criggie Who would that satisfy? In Northern Ireland, not the Loyalists that want to remain part of the UK, nor the Republicans that want to to be part of a united Republic. Neither the rest of the UK which would then cease to be the United Kingdom and would revert to being Great Britain, and risk further break-up by an emboldened Scottish or Welsh independence. I don't know what the feeling would be in the ROI but I don't think what the rest of the EU think is relevant in such a matter. | |
| Sep 17, 2020 at 11:42 | comment | added | Criggie | Is a separate Northern Ireland sovereign nation, separate to the Republic of Ireland and also separate to the UK, any solution ? | |
| Sep 17, 2020 at 11:38 | comment | added | Paddy | The only other point to maybe add here was that there seemed to be wilful ignorance about the points noted her in relation to Northern Ireland on behalf of the conservative government when it came to negotiating the brexit agreement. Even after years of negotiation where this was one of the main sticking points, to be now expressing surprise at the possibility of a sea border when this was an obvious outcome of the agreement would indicate either extreme ignorance or a desperate political ploy for it not to be 'their fault' in the eyes of history. | |
| Sep 17, 2020 at 11:20 | history | edited | Jan | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Replaced Ulster with Northern Ireland as Ulster has nine counties.
|
| Sep 17, 2020 at 11:20 | comment | added | Jan | I have tried to briefly outline why it is important and why no party is openly trying to break it. However, I have also heard voices from the UK that suggest ‘solutions’ in violation of the GFA. That is why I chose to write absolutely unacceptable for the RoI without mentioning the UK as it seems that there is a less universal acceptance of the terms of the GFA in the UK. | |
| Sep 17, 2020 at 11:17 | comment | added | Jan | the remaining EU states. Thus, the RoI–NI border can be completely open to people (no ID checks) before and after Brexit as long as both sides want it (they do). While EU citizens would be granted all Freedom of Movement rights in the RoI, they would not in the UK, which would be exactly as desired. Therefore, nothing about the movement of people is inhibitory when it comes to the issues the question asks about. 2. The legal agreement GFA has been signed by the UK, the RoI and various parties in NI, and it has been ratified (in your words: ‘signed into law’) by both the RoI and the UK. … | |
| Sep 17, 2020 at 11:13 | comment | added | Jan | @Colm 3. thank you for clearing that up, I had assumed that they were synonyms. As they are not, I have removed the Ulster bit. 1. I specifically wrote one, not the. I also added simplified. I am aware that there are many underlying reasons that led to the Brexit vote. EU rules concerning goods was definitely one of them (something about pillow and pillowcase jumps to mind). As far as the content of this answer is concerned, the movement of people is not a problem. Neither the Republic of Ireland nor the UK are part of Schengen so there are ID checks when travelling from the RoI to … | |
| Sep 17, 2020 at 10:48 | comment | added | Colm | @BrianDrummond. :) I understand you now. | |
| Sep 17, 2020 at 10:47 | comment | added | user_1818839 | @Colm There was no ROI at the time ... with Connacht, in that story... :-) | |
| Sep 17, 2020 at 10:42 | comment | added | Colm | Actually it has factual errors and ignores several key facts. 1. The relevant issue for British voting to leave the EU is to control movement of people not goods. EU membership requires both or neither. 2. The will and desires of the people of NI and ROI are secondary to the legal agreement called the "Good Friday Agreement" signed into British Law in 1998. Renaging on this agreement would reignite violence in the region. 3. "six counties... known as Ulster, Northern Ireland" - Ulster has 9 counties. It is not a synonym for Northern Ireland. | |
| Sep 17, 2020 at 10:37 | comment | added | user_1818839 | Indeed, Ulster seems to have been at war with the rest of Ireland long before the 20thC Troubles... en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T%C3%A1in_B%C3%B3_C%C3%BAailnge | |
| Sep 17, 2020 at 6:23 | history | answered | Jan | CC BY-SA 4.0 |