Brexit and the waning days of the United Kingdom

[Sheilbh]

I also noticed that the only people she mentions apart from her family are those she is forced to come in contact with.  A good snapshot for you Squeeze of the self-centered, narcissistic Londoner.

You forgot her exciting mix of friends including both estate owners and landowners

[Richard Hakluyt]

You can't get more remote and rural than the Cotswolds....

[The Larch]

You can't get more remote and rural than the Cotswolds....

Yet she was still commuting to London while living there, if I read the article right.

Wouldn't other places like the Lake district be more remote, though? No idea about the rural character.

[The Larch]

I think his take is on a slight misreporting because Raab said the EU were wanting to erect a border that would undermine the NIP and the GFA. The NIP exists because of the GFA - which both sides want to support. If the implementation of NIP in practice undermines the GFA either because it basically doesn't have cross-community support then that is likely to lead to Stormont rejecting the NIP in 2024 (the election is next year and currently if, as they almost always do, the unionists win a majority then the NIP will likely be rejected by Stormont in 2024) or to a resumption of violence, then the application has undermined the NIP and the GFA. It will have achieved the exact opposite of what it's intent is.

I think there is a way of implementing the NIP in a way that means it and the GFA can survive, but it's not where we're headed now.

Also on a purely political level it is really unhelpful to position the NIP as a border or a barrier - because the single core part of unionist identity is that they are core part of the UK like any other part of the UK. The single biggest thing the people we're trying to convince to support the NIP want to avoid is a border with the rest of the UK. Every time it's described as a border or barrier it just reinforces the unionist allegation that Downing Street is surreptitiously "greening" Northern Ireland through the NIP. I know it's angels dancing on the head of a pin (but this is Northern Ireland - the two communities can't even agree on the name of the peace treaty) so I think it should just be positioned in a less inflamatory way, like the agricultural checks that have always been conducted on the island of Ireland, it's a developed version of that sort of check. Because talking about the implementation of the NIP = a border/barrier is just a red flag to a bull.

Then how can you apply the NIP protocol without having the loyalist communities up in arms because of wording? What would be a way of presenting it that would be acceptable to them? And who should do this outreach, the UK or the EU?

[Admiral Yi]

Lee Harvey Cotswald

[Sheilbh]

Then how can you apply the NIP protocol without having the loyalist communities up in arms because of wording? What would be a way of presenting it that would be acceptable to them? And who should do this outreach, the UK or the EU?

In terms of the technical implementation I'm not sure - the key is, I think, to reduce the impact on individuals as much as possible. Business is very supportive of the NIP - it's individuals who are getting pissed off generally speaking. So I'd focus on solving issues with the retailers as much as possible. A tiny example is the energy efficiency scheme for white goods - the UK has cut and paste EU law into domestic law (as has generally been the approach) so you get the exact same sticker on a fridge with a UK or EU flag. In Northern Ireland they'll get the EU flag because that's the applicable regulation - it will piss people off and we should just have both stickers on the fridge. One possible solution I'd think of is doing the checks in GB ports because no-one here cares, staff are not going to get threatened  and there may be more resources - for example it looks, based on the level of checks and exemptions right now, like there aren't enough vets in Northern Ireland to do all the necessary checks that's less of an issue in GB.

For presentation I'd present as an extension and development of existing checks that have always been carried out on agricultural imports for example, it probably won't work now (I cannot emphasise enough how much the Article 16 night was like a nuke going off in Northern Irish politics) but try to de-dramatise it. You know because there's always been a separate agricultural region (famously Ian Paisley always used to claim "our people may be British but our cows are Irish"), Northern Ireland didn't have mad cow disease or restrictions of beef exports. I'd try and build on that as a precedent: our people may be British but our goods and services are European. But if we focus on borders and barriers or there's big impacts for individuals then they will feel like their Britishness is at stake which will be a problem.

With engagement I don't know. Unionists always feel in a state of siege but they really feel it now - there's no trust with London, Dublin, the EU or the US right now. On the other hand a "no surrender" state of siege is arguably where unionism is happiest. And they don't help themselves, Irish nationalists are great at building international relationships and drumming up international support - unionists are barely interested in building support in Westminster. I think everyone needs to engage closely - I'd focus on communities and business first, build support there and then move to the political. I think it's probably too late to get support from/engage the political parties - so I'd aim at community groups and businesses for now - you know try and build support from teh ground up.

[Tamas]

I think Raab was right in the sense that yes there is a border on the Irish Sea as far as trade concerned. But it was Britain who erected that border, not the EU.

[Sheilbh]

I think Raab was right in the sense that yes there is a border on the Irish Sea as far as trade concerned. But it was Britain who erected that border, not the EU.

Two parties agreed to the NIP. Both of them had redlines that required a special solution. The UK and EU were both political actors - you know, if the EU hadn't compromised on what is sort of strictly in the treaties then we wouldn't have the NIP at all.

[Richard Hakluyt]

You can't get more remote and rural than the Cotswolds....

Yet she was still commuting to London while living there, if I read the article right.

Wouldn't other places like the Lake district be more remote, though? No idea about the rural character.

Sorry Larch; the Cotswolds are extremely pretty and have virtually no genuine rural inhabitants...was being sarky

[Sheilbh]

Sorry Larch; the Cotswolds are extremely pretty and have virtually no genuine rural inhabitants...was being sarky

It looks nice (not my cup of tea) but yeah I think the Cotswolds is where Cameron lives and is about 80% holiday home.

[The Larch]

You can't get more remote and rural than the Cotswolds....

Yet she was still commuting to London while living there, if I read the article right.

Wouldn't other places like the Lake district be more remote, though? No idea about the rural character.

Sorry Larch; the Cotswolds are extremely pretty and have virtually no genuine rural inhabitants...was being sarky

Ah, so the point is that it's not really a rural area then? Just a pretty place where urbanites go for weekends or to 2nd homes?

[Richard Hakluyt]

Yes, exactly

[The Larch]

Yes, exactly

Just googled some pics and yes, it looks like the "stereotypical idylic English countryside" that one would only find in a film. 

[Tamas]

I think Raab was right in the sense that yes there is a border on the Irish Sea as far as trade concerned. But it was Britain who erected that border, not the EU.

Two parties agreed to the NIP. Both of them had redlines that required a special solution. The UK and EU were both political actors - you know, if the EU hadn't compromised on what is sort of strictly in the treaties then we wouldn't have the NIP at all.

I am sorry but with the UK leaving the single market - a British decision - there had to be a border either on the island or on the sea. The only choice the EU had was to compromise single market principles. Once they refused to do that to Britain's - a non-EU member - benefit and their own detriment, it was all up to the UK how to get around it.

We are back to this essential debate that you fall victim of like so many Britons - the EU and its member states have their own interests, their thinking is not framed by British interests.

[Sheilbh]

I am sorry but with the UK leaving the single market - a British decision - there had to be a border either on the island or on the sea. The only choice the EU had was to compromise single market principles. Once they refused to do that to Britain's - a non-EU member - benefit and their own detriment, it was all up to the UK how to get around it.

I don't see how that follows. You've just described two sets of red-lines - the UK leaving the single market and the EU focused on defending the single market. I don't see why it's now up to one party to fix it.

And that's not how it's been approached by the parties, either - they both had another redline around the GFA (for example the other choice the EU had was whether to accept a land border) which is why we've ended up with the NIP. Both parties compromised to produce that for the purpose of protecting the GFA, it's now up to both parties to make sure that it doesn't in itself end up undermining the GFA and, I'd argue, to now make it work so it does what it's designed to do which is protect the GFA.

We are back to this essential debate that you fall victim of like so many Britons - the EU and its member states have their own interests, their thinking is not framed by British interests.

That's not my issue - they absolutely have their own interests which they need to look after - and they did. Personally I think it was, like the UK, quite a defensive negotiating approach/view of their interests but that's fine.

My point is that people all too often take the EU and its position as almost apolitical. It didn't take political decisions rather its position was as sure and inevitable as gravity - it just reflected the treaties. Which is nonsense the EU made political choices about what its interests were and how to protect them and how and where to flex - as I say the NIP is a demonstration of this. I'm not saying the EU should have taken another position, I'm just saying we should acknowledge that both the EU and the UK took positions.