Almost Canadian

Are you seriously suggesting that those few million gave a crap about anyone travelling from Ireland to Northern Ireland in the context of what is being talked about in relation to the "backstop"?

BristolUK

No, but your "who cares" comment followed your reference to "any border" and then an example of America to Canada, so it didn't seem unreasonable to allow the possibility it might have meant any or all borders rather than only one specific one.

But mainly it was for humour.

Will_PA

The EU suggested a backstop for Northern Ireland only. It's to preserve the Good Friday agreement: border-less movement.

Theresa May couldn't go along with this because she relied on the confidence of the DUP.

So she made the backstop cover the whole of the UK, so as to avoid a border appearing between NI and mainland UK.

If there's an election triggered by a VoNC or Boris calling one, resulting in DUP votes no longer needed, the backstop will likely be limited to just NI again. Everyone will declare a victory (except DUP), and withdrawal agreement will be passed.

Then island of Ireland will continue towards reunification, and Scotland could perhaps achieve independence second time round. Wales voted for leave, so they'll have to stick with England, but Westminster will be completely dominated by Conservative MPs given historical election results.

Oakvillian

I'm sure you're not as naive as this post makes you seem.

There's not some sort of magic fairy that waves a wand and makes goods from the US appear on a delivery truck in Canada. They've cleared customs, either with duty pre-paid at the point of purchase, or paid cash-on-delivery to the agent (Canada Post or a courier company) contracted to act on behalf of Canada's revenues agency. Any such shipment is also liable to be held at the border for inspection, with potentially unpredictable and irritating delays to delivery as a result. There are sure as hell any number of hard-border infrastructure facilities along the US-Canada border, both for freight and for people in cars.

The UK and Irish governments have decided (largely as a result of the terms of the various Northern Ireland peace accords) that such customs and border services infrastructure is not acceptable (not to mention seriously impractical) along the Irish land border. But there still needs to be a mechanism to inspect goods and people, as there will be a structure of duties and tariffs for goods, and immigration controls for people, who cross this border. Your assumption in bold above is the crux of this paradox. You can't have "a simple border check" without border infrastructure; yet the governments on both sides of the border in Ireland have said that such infrastructure is not acceptable.

To pretend that this challenge can be resolved simply be relying on the goodwill of those on both sides of the border is hopelessly unrealistic. And, of course, would be the furthest thing imaginable from the "taking back control" so beloved in the rhetoric of some of the ant-EU campaigning of the last 4 years or so. As dbd suggests, the technology to manage these required border controls seamlessly simply does not exist today. To imagine otherwise is to ignore the magnitude of the challenge.

dave_j

If Boris's scheme reaches fruition then the Irish border will become an experiment in open borders. Criminal elements who profited in years gone by will no longer be able to exploit an open border to the same extent (as a guarded one) that'll be free to anyone wanting to move across a line in the road.
'But what about all those chlorinated chickens' I hear you cough as you detect some in your mouth.
Well if, if they are allowed into the UK, I suspect that punitive fines imposed on Irish traders would quickly squash that, and other similar traceable, activities.
The problem with trading in the 21st century is the existence of the 'paper trail' and who wants to smuggle chickens when there are much easier, less easily traceable, goods available.
That's not to say that small scale smuggling won't be endemic, but that's a small price to pay when the alternative is a reversion to the small scale conflict that was the Irish Madness (a more apt epithet than 'troubles').
I suspect that the police on both sides of the border will be on the lookout for large scale smuggling, and Ireland, being the island that it is, won't be the open door, but it might be a little ajar, to the EU that they bleat about.

Almost Canadian

There either needs to be a border, as your post suggests, or there doesn't. They are mutually exclusive.

Agreements aside, the parties needs to focus upon solutions or, it will appear, a border will be imposed on November 1.

The EU stating that is is for the UK to resolve is somewhat childish if it wishes to hold itself out as the "Supporter in chief" of the GFA. Of course, at this time, it won't as, by refusing to move, those MPs that dont like the decision of the referendum will do all they can to ensure that Brexit never happens.

Those that believe that Boris is a cad really need to explain what will happen if a further extension is granted.
.
The EU has stated that the agreement will not be changed and that has been rejected a number of times by Parliament. As a naive poster, I would love to know why the brains on this board believe the solution is.

dbd33

Revocation. Acknowledgement that the whole Brexit idea is daft.

Almost Canadian

Fair enough.

Now go sell that to the UK electorate.

dbd33

I may well as it seems no politician in England is doing even a reasonable job of it, except perhaps Steve Barclay. “The car industry’s ‘just-in-time’ supply chains rely on fluid cross-Channel trade routes" he says, making it obvious that having a car industry means having fluid trade routes and that means being in the EU (or having a comprehensive trade agreement with the EU of the type that might be tricky to negotiate after having stormed out shouting "I'm all grown up now, I don't need you").

Cameron's to blame for this but the Labour Party have also failed their voters dismally. It should not be the role of a Labour Party leader to bumble about loving Russia and dissing the Jews when the party in power is throwing away the jobs of the workers. Jobs for all and funding for social equality demands a strong economy, In a strange role reversal conservatives now stand for trashing the economy, the Labour party should fought this, they should have stood up for the workers; they should have been emphatically "remain".

jimf

When presented with the choice 544 to 53 MPs expressed a wish for the referendum to take place.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-33067157

BristolUK

What do they wish now?

jimf

Note options E & G.

https://www.dw.com/en/uk-parliament-...ard/a-48149796

BristolUK

That's what they don't wish

bc2015

Yes but at that point in time, there was very little or no talk at all about exiting the EU but not having some form of trading agreement with the EU. No deal as a concept didn't really come a long until wll after the negotiations on the agreement had started.

dave_j

There's a strong rumour going around that there's money to be made in the commons by collecting backbones that have wrenched themselves free from MP's as they crawl away into those dark spaces that only the spineless can squeeze into.
After wasting three years, during which time the only thing they've managed to agree on is that they couldn't bring themselves to agree on anything, demonstrates all too clearly that they've forfeited the right to demand anything other than scorn from the UK voter.
All this brexit bleating from MPs who wouldn't be able to decide which side of the bread to butter if their lives depended on it is utterly disgusting.
The voters of the UK sent these jellies to the commons to do a job and they've been badly let down, from top to bottom.
If I were in the UK I'd be minded to slap Boris on the back and say 'Get on with it!'