Sunday, 3 March 2019

More exquisite Remainer logic.

From The Independent:

The English are blindly driving Northern Ireland to conflict – the fear is that they are too stupid to care. A return to violence is not a worst-case scenario but an inevitability if a hard border returns, as it will if there is a full Brexit.

OK, why's that then?

Focus is often placed on the sheer difficulty of policing the 310-mile border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland because there are at least 300 major and minor crossing points.

But the real problem is not geographic or military but political and demographic because almost all the border runs through country where Catholics greatly outnumber Protestants.

The Catholics will not accept, and are in a position to prevent, a hard border unless it is defended permanently by several thousand British troops in fortified positions.


Sounds like a terribly stupid idea to me, it fails for practicality, so whose idea is it?

The EU could never agree to a deal – and would be signing its own death warrant if it did – in which the customs union and the single market have a large unguarded hole in their tariff and regulatory walls.

Jolly good. Let Them sort it out then, not the UK's problem. What if the UK sensibly refuses to get involved with imposing a 'hard border'?
------------------------------------------------
UPDATE, let's re-write this to state the actual position:

The EU is blindly driving Northern Ireland to conflict – the fear is that they are too stupid to care. A return to violence is not a worst-case scenario but an inevitability if a hard border returns, as it will if there is a full Brexit.

The EU could never agree to a deal – and would be signing its own death warrant if it did – in which the customs union and the single market have a large unguarded hole in their tariff and regulatory walls.

Focus is often placed on the sheer difficulty of policing the 310-mile border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland because there are at least 300 major and minor crossing points.

But the real problem is not geographic or military but political and demographic because almost all the border runs through country where Catholics greatly outnumber Protestants.

The Catholics will not accept, and are in a position to prevent, a hard border unless it is defended permanently by several thousand EU/Irish troops in fortified positions.

15 comments:

Ted Treen said...

What if the UK sensibly refuses to get involved with imposing a 'hard border'?


That's far too reasonable a suggestion: brimming as it is with common-sense, rationality and pragmatism, it would never be adopted by the inmates of The Palace of Westminster.

Mark Wadsworth said...

TT, depressing but true.

Bayard said...

"The EU could never agree to a deal in which the customs union and the single market have a large unguarded hole in their tariff and regulatory walls."

Well if we leave without a deal, they won't have to, will they?

On the subject of No Deal, I have yet to hear why leaving without one will be such a bad idea, it seems that I am supposed to accept it as an article of faith. I mean it's not as if a deal would involve any sensible option, like staying in the customs union or the single market or rejoining EFTA, allowing freedom of movement or anything like that.

Mark Wadsworth said...

B, if you were in charge, what would you go for? CU, SM, EFTA, EEA, WTO, second referendum, what?

Shiney said...

@MW

I know you didn't ask me but.... WTO.

And, for the record, in case anyone thinks that I haven't thought through the issues, my company's

1. second biggest customer is in an EU27 country
2. largest supplier is in the customs union but not in the EU
3. 2nd largest supplier is in the EU

And >10% of my workforce are EU nationals.

Mark Wadsworth said...

Sh, I didn't ask you, but thanks nonetheless. I guess 2. is Turkey?

Bayard said...

EFTA/EEA, but as you say, they wouldn't have us now and I don't blame them.

If I'd been in charge, I would have started from the position of no deal, so that when the EU made any sort of deal ludicrously expensive, we could have just threatened to walk away. It may have been on this blog that someone said the the government was the ideal customer, because they were so bad at negotiating. I suppose because there is never anything in it for the negotiators.

formertory said...

It would be worth the taxpayers' money to buy G. Adams a plane ticket to Brussels, and to introduce him and a few of his cronies to that unpleasant Herr Selmayr. Usher them all into a comfortable room, lock the door behind them, and let Mr Adams explain in detail why a hard border might be difficult for him to support, and the consequences of his difficulties. Oh, and chuck that treasonous rat Robbins in there, too.

Bayard said...

The solution to the "hard border" problem, as everyone, including the DUP, realises, is to re-unite Ireland. AFAICS, the main sticking point
preventing a popular vote for re-unification is the lack of an NHS in Eire. However, there is no reason why NI can't go from being a part of the UK where things are done differently to being a part of Eire where things are done differently, including healthcare free at the point of use. It would be worth the UK government funding that in return for getting rid of the whole mess that is NI.

Mark Wadsworth said...

FT, a golden opportunity missed.

B, lateral thinking, reunify Ireland, great idea. As an Irish republican sympathiser and English taxpayer, that's both thumbs up from me.

Lola said...

The article perpetuates the standard fallacy that there has been a hard border between the UK NI and Eire. There never has been a hard border. Even during the height of The Troubles. Sure there were lots of VCP's but mostly they were used to search vehicles that 'looked suspicious' or which intelligence had told them to search. And as easy target for IRA thugs.

This is an entirely EU problem.

Shiney. So what are you doing about that? Or what?

Mark Wadsworth said...

L, that fallacy is not even a fallacy, it is an outright lie, isn't it?

Lola said...

MW. I was being polite....

Shiney said...

@MW

Yep Turkey - good eggs actually and supply a quality product at a keen price - see #2 below.

@L

1. Continue selling to them as before - they aren't in the least bit worried (at the mo they'd quite like no deal as the goods are priced in £ and £ would fall against €)

2. No change as we have to do a customs declaration anyway (well our FF does) 'cos they're not in the SM. If the UK govt are fuckwits we might have to pay a bit of duty in which case we can then switch to the cheaper supplier from FE to mitigate the cost

3. We swap having to do a customs declaration via FF and a small cost in exchange for NOT having to do intrastat declarations and all the EU paperwork - sq root of sweet FA in terms of time and cost. Plus as per #2 on duty.

People - well who knows.

Most of 'em are long term UK res so not an issue AFAIAC unless, again, UK govt is stupid and chucks 'em all out. At which point we'll buy an industrial robot that I've been looking at for two/three years and can't quite decide on.

Lola said...

Shiney.

As I thought. Non Problem then. Thanks for the info.