Politics is about appearance. Mrs May isn't a good speaker, and never has been. She becomes shrill, races her words, and looks uncomfortable when asked an awkward question.
Jezza has improved his delivery and dresses less like an old tramp than he used to.
Gordon has moments when he appeared demented, and Ed had some peculiar facial contortions too. Cameron and Blair had the look, even if most of the content was vacuous.
The content and logic is less important than the look. The ones who take particular note of the content of a speech tend to be the ones whose mind is already made up. I'm looking at some of you on here.
I admit that not everyone is as shallow as me, but many are. But that may be because I assume every politician is lying anyway. That way, you're never disappointed.
It's not remotely shallow. Appearances are the best judge we have of the quality of people's judgement. People are poor at presentation as May typically make worse decisions than the polished, and it's an incorrect national tendency to believe the opposite that allowed Gordon Brown to feign competency purely on the back of incompetent communication.
Gordon Brown was a great platform speaker but after spending a decade as Chancellor ducking interviews, he'd not developed the 1-to-1 or small-screen skills. This was discussed with reference to Theresa May yesterday, of course.
But there is a more subtle problem for both -- their media handlers did not adapt to the change of leader so built campaigns based around the old leaders, Blair and Cameron. It is noteworthy that Corbyn's surge came when he started being Corbyn, the veteran campaigner, not when he tried (and largely failed) to follow the Blair/Cameron model. Trump too, perhaps.
CCHQ must build its next campaign around its actual leader, not its ideal one.
The reason Labour cant win is because underneath the bonnet Corbyn Labour's policies and personalities are toxic to the majority of the public, not because they are "complacent"..
PB obsessing yet again about "presentation". This seems to be a particular problem with political anoraks.
I wish that was true, but it isn't:
Here is a list of problems facing the country. Could you say for each of them which political party you think would handle the problem best?
Labour lead over Con: NHS: +18 Immigration: -6 Laura Norder: -8 Education: +9 Tax: 0 Unemployment: +3 Economy: -9 Housing: +16 Brexit: -10 Defence: -13
The top five issues facing the country are: Brexit: 59 (Con lead 10) Health: 53 (Lab Lead 18) Immigration: 30 (Con lead 6) Economy: 26 (Con lead 9) Housing: 19 (Lab Lead 16)
I would say it was much of a muchness - once Brexit goes, Con are on Economy & Immigration - and immigration has been declining as a worry. Labour just need to plug on with 'NHS & Housing'. The Tories risk turning into a 'one trick pony' - the Economy - and that could easily turn sour.
Corbyn's programme is one that a majority will not vote for. This will become apparent when scrutinised.
The 'majority' never vote for the winning program - Con or Lab. And that's the problem with a 'Hope and Sunlit Uplands' program - its jolly difficult to scrutinise, however ludicrous it might be - ask Remain.....
That didn’t seem excritiating at all. They seemed to be talking past each other.
The questioner was focused on the bearing the ship was on; Thatcher on where it was a danger to soldiers. Ultimately in a time of war you are going to have to delegate authority to the executive but it seems pretty thin case that she gave an order she didn’t think was justified (and given the sensitivity the “trust me” may have been the only one possible even if unsatisfying)
You have to remember the context. This was the first action in the conflict and 323 mainly sea cadets were killed. When we heard they had been killed outside the exclusione zone there was genuine shock and horror.This lady was the first to dent Mrs T's self confidence. Though I agree it isn't as obvious as it seemed at the time
Presumably because we would have a different tariff environment.
Different tariff environment = opportunity to benefit by smuggling from one to the other
Opportunity to smuggle = criminal activity
Criminal activity = potential for undesirable groups to participate
Potential for undesirable groups to participate = 1970s
1970s = Troubles.
Switzerland has a (limited) FTA with China, while the EU does not. Yet smuggling between Switzerland and France is not a major (or even a minor) issue.
The EU's average external tariff is something like 2.7%. We're not - despite the dreams of some - going to meaningfully deviate from it. We're also unlikely to have more FTAs that the EU in the near future (indeed, I suspect we'll have quite a lot fewer for the next decade).
So I fail to see how a situation like the Swiss-French border is such a problem.
We are talking about an organisation that would take cows from one side of the border to the other repeatedly in order to qualify for Brussels' subsidies. If there is an opportunity, it will be exploited.
Firstly, the CAP doesn't work like that anymore. Secondly, even if there was some simple way to exploit the subsidy system like that, I suspect it would be pretty easy to detect.
Will there be smuggling of booze and fags across the border to avoid duty? Yes. Will it be a major issue? No.
Presumably because we would have a different tariff environment.
Different tariff environment = opportunity to benefit by smuggling from one to the other
Opportunity to smuggle = criminal activity
Criminal activity = potential for undesirable groups to participate
Potential for undesirable groups to participate = 1970s
1970s = Troubles.
Switzerland has a (limited) FTA with China, while the EU does not. Yet smuggling between Switzerland and France is not a major (or even a minor) issue.
The EU's average external tariff is something like 2.7%. We're not - despite the dreams of some - going to meaningfully deviate from it. We're also unlikely to have more FTAs that the EU in the near future (indeed, I suspect we'll have quite a lot fewer for the next decade).
So I fail to see how a situation like the Swiss-French border is such a problem.
We are talking about an organisation that would take cows from one side of the border to the other repeatedly in order to qualify for Brussels' subsidies. If there is an opportunity, it will be exploited.
So we should decide the UKs future trade policy because of a few cows and a few minor smuggling issues. There are already major differences in tax rates.
Now we have a Mogg defender who goes to parties in Nazi uniform, and antisemites in UKIP were widely ignored because, well, UKIP got a free pass on most things.
Labour's Ed Balls also went to parties in Nazi uniform:
So I fail to see how a situation like the Swiss-French border is such a problem.
You fail to see it because your whole position on Brexit depends on your failing to see it.
We are not talking about the end of the Common Travel Area, passport checks on the train from Belfast to Dublin, and long queues to cross the border.
We're talking about a system that - just as on the France-Switzerland border - requires exporters to go to a website ahead of time to log their cargo. (Which, because there will be an FTA between the EU and the UK, will probably be a five minute job.) Now, is that a hassle? A little bit. Will it affect trade on the island? Sure, but only marginally. Will the average Northern Irish or Republic or Ireland resident notice the change? Probably not.
Really interesting piece* from Freakonomics on the gender pay gap at Uber - despite the algorithms being gender-blind, there is an observed 7% gap in pay-per-hour.
20% is explained by choices about where and when to drive 30% is explained by additional returns to experience (men stick on Uber for longer, and do more hours per week as well) 50% is explained by driving speed!
* podcast, but with transcript - please can we consider getting one for Polling Matters?
We must be careful not to conflate explanation with exculpation. There is still a pay gap even if we know where it comes from. There is a tendency, especially in America, to stop at this point. Today's news sees Tesco's sex pay gap between store-based women and warehouse-based men. This is what the Ford dispute in the 1960s was about, and which led to the Equal Pay Act.
Presumably because we would have a different tariff environment.
Different tariff environment = opportunity to benefit by smuggling from one to the other
Opportunity to smuggle = criminal activity
Criminal activity = potential for undesirable groups to participate
Potential for undesirable groups to participate = 1970s
1970s = Troubles.
Switzerland has a (limited) FTA with China, while the EU does not. Yet smuggling between Switzerland and France is not a major (or even a minor) issue.
The EU's average external tariff is something like 2.7%. We're not - despite the dreams of some - going to meaningfully deviate from it. We're also unlikely to have more FTAs that the EU in the near future (indeed, I suspect we'll have quite a lot fewer for the next decade).
So I fail to see how a situation like the Swiss-French border is such a problem.
We are talking about an organisation that would take cows from one side of the border to the other repeatedly in order to qualify for Brussels' subsidies. If there is an opportunity, it will be exploited.
Firstly, the CAP doesn't work like that anymore. Secondly, even if there was some simple way to exploit the subsidy system like that, I suspect it would be pretty easy to detect.
Will there be smuggling of booze and fags across the border to avoid duty? Yes. Will it be a major issue? No.
If it were ordinary decent criminals then maybe. If it is providing an opportunity for criminal-terrorist organisations to re-establish themselves, then perhaps not.
The Northern Ireland issue really is not just about the occurrence or not of smuggling.
Presumably because we would have a different tariff environment.
Different tariff environment = opportunity to benefit by smuggling from one to the other
Opportunity to smuggle = criminal activity
Criminal activity = potential for undesirable groups to participate
Potential for undesirable groups to participate = 1970s
1970s = Troubles.
Switzerland has a (limited) FTA with China, while the EU does not. Yet smuggling between Switzerland and France is not a major (or even a minor) issue.
The EU's average external tariff is something like 2.7%. We're not - despite the dreams of some - going to meaningfully deviate from it. We're also unlikely to have more FTAs that the EU in the near future (indeed, I suspect we'll have quite a lot fewer for the next decade).
So I fail to see how a situation like the Swiss-French border is such a problem.
We are talking about an organisation that would take cows from one side of the border to the other repeatedly in order to qualify for Brussels' subsidies. If there is an opportunity, it will be exploited.
Will there be smuggling of booze and fags across the border to avoid duty? Yes. Will it be a major issue? No.
Am I the only one finding the LibDems clutching on to Anna Soubry as a possible MP - leader even! - a hoot? She may be the applying copious amounts of Essence of Anti-Brexit, but in many other aspects of policy she would strain their cohesion to bursting point.
And they haven't always been so kindly disposed to her. Being a Remainer scrubs away all other failings?
Presumably because we would have a different tariff environment.
Different tariff environment = opportunity to benefit by smuggling from one to the other
Opportunity to smuggle = criminal activity
Criminal activity = potential for undesirable groups to participate
Potential for undesirable groups to participate = 1970s
1970s = Troubles.
Switzerland has a (limited) FTA with China, while the EU does not. Yet smuggling between Switzerland and France is not a major (or even a minor) issue.
The EU's average external tariff is something like 2.7%. We're not - despite the dreams of some - going to meaningfully deviate from it. We're also unlikely to have more FTAs that the EU in the near future (indeed, I suspect we'll have quite a lot fewer for the next decade).
So I fail to see how a situation like the Swiss-French border is such a problem.
We are talking about an organisation that would take cows from one side of the border to the other repeatedly in order to qualify for Brussels' subsidies. If there is an opportunity, it will be exploited.
Will there be smuggling of booze and fags across the border to avoid duty? Yes. Will it be a major issue? No.
Now we have a Mogg defender who goes to parties in Nazi uniform, and antisemites in UKIP were widely ignored because, well, UKIP got a free pass on most things.
Labour's Ed Balls also went to parties in Nazi uniform:
There was a time when Tomorrow Belonged to Him.....
Presumably because we would have a different tariff environment.
Different tariff environment = opportunity to benefit by smuggling from one to the other
Opportunity to smuggle = criminal activity
Criminal activity = potential for undesirable groups to participate
Potential for undesirable groups to participate = 1970s
1970s = Troubles.
Switzerland has a (limited) FTA with China, while the EU does not. Yet smuggling between Switzerland and France is not a major (or even a minor) issue.
The EU's average external tariff is something like 2.7%. We're not - despite the dreams of some - going to meaningfully deviate from it. We're also unlikely to have more FTAs that the EU in the near future (indeed, I suspect we'll have quite a lot fewer for the next decade).
So I fail to see how a situation like the Swiss-French border is such a problem.
We are talking about an organisation that would take cows from one side of the border to the other repeatedly in order to qualify for Brussels' subsidies. If there is an opportunity, it will be exploited.
Firstly, the CAP doesn't work like that anymore. Secondly, even if there was some simple way to exploit the subsidy system like that, I suspect it would be pretty easy to detect.
Will there be smuggling of booze and fags across the border to avoid duty? Yes. Will it be a major issue? No.
Wasn't the IRA partly funded by a cross-border fuel smuggling scam using a farm with an underground fuel tank? It would be filled on one side from where the oil would flow downhill across the border, and then be collected and driven back round? Google "Slab Murphy" for the details.
So I fail to see how a situation like the Swiss-French border is such a problem.
You fail to see it because your whole position on Brexit depends on your failing to see it.
We are not talking about the end of the Common Travel Area, passport checks on the train from Belfast to Dublin, and long queues to cross the border.
We're talking about a system that - just as on the France-Switzerland border - requires exporters to go to a website ahead of time to log their cargo. (Which, because there will be an FTA between the EU and the UK, will probably be a five minute job.) Now, is that a hassle? A little bit. Will it affect trade on the island? Sure, but only marginally. Will the average Northern Irish or Republic or Ireland resident notice the change? Probably not.
You could make the same argument about the average resident to justify King Herod's policies...
How would someone transporting freight from Clones to Cloverhill operate under the new regime?
Presumably because we would have a different tariff environment.
Different tariff environment = opportunity to benefit by smuggling from one to the other
Opportunity to smuggle = criminal activity
Criminal activity = potential for undesirable groups to participate
Potential for undesirable groups to participate = 1970s
1970s = Troubles.
Switzerland has a (limited) FTA with China, while the EU does not. Yet smuggling between Switzerland and France is not a major (or even a minor) issue.
The EU's average external tariff is something like 2.7%. We're not - despite the dreams of some - going to meaningfully deviate from it. We're also unlikely to have more FTAs that the EU in the near future (indeed, I suspect we'll have quite a lot fewer for the next decade).
So I fail to see how a situation like the Swiss-French border is such a problem.
We are talking about an organisation that would take cows from one side of the border to the other repeatedly in order to qualify for Brussels' subsidies. If there is an opportunity, it will be exploited.
Will there be smuggling of booze and fags across the border to avoid duty? Yes. Will it be a major issue? No.
You mean 'as there is today' (along with fuel)?
Fair point
Fuel to supply the boilers running 24-7 for the cash for ash jolly ?
Presumably because we would have a different tariff environment.
Different tariff environment = opportunity to benefit by smuggling from one to the other
Opportunity to smuggle = criminal activity
Criminal activity = potential for undesirable groups to participate
Potential for undesirable groups to participate = 1970s
1970s = Troubles.
Switzerland has a (limited) FTA with China, while the EU does not. Yet smuggling between Switzerland and France is not a major (or even a minor) issue.
The EU's average external tariff is something like 2.7%. We're not - despite the dreams of some - going to meaningfully deviate from it. We're also unlikely to have more FTAs that the EU in the near future (indeed, I suspect we'll have quite a lot fewer for the next decade).
So I fail to see how a situation like the Swiss-French border is such a problem.
We are talking about an organisation that would take cows from one side of the border to the other repeatedly in order to qualify for Brussels' subsidies. If there is an opportunity, it will be exploited.
Firstly, the CAP doesn't work like that anymore. Secondly, even if there was some simple way to exploit the subsidy system like that, I suspect it would be pretty easy to detect.
Will there be smuggling of booze and fags across the border to avoid duty? Yes. Will it be a major issue? No.
If it were ordinary decent criminals then maybe. If it is providing an opportunity for criminal-terrorist organisations to re-establish themselves, then perhaps not.
The Northern Ireland issue really is not just about the occurrence or not of smuggling.
Particularly when the outcome of Brexit will have been imposed with the help of one side of the bitter divide.
Headlined clip on the BBC of Justin Trudeau apparently talking about 'peoplekind' rather than 'mankind'. Surely if we want a less seemingly gendered term 'humankind' works better?
Any use of the three letters in the sequence "M-A-N" is clearly a always an intended slight against those defining themselves as the female of the species.
Next stop: Personufacturing. Because a MAN makes everything, huh?
Manu Factum = made by hand - so women don't have hands?
Am I the only one finding the LibDems clutching on to Anna Soubry as a possible MP - leader even! - a hoot? She may be the applying copious amounts of Essence of Anti-Brexit, but in many other aspects of policy she would strain their cohesion to bursting point.
And they haven't always been so kindly disposed to her. Being a Remainer scrubs away all other failings?
Almost as hootsom as the Ruth for pm mob, who're jusr behind the Ruth for fm in chortlesomness.
Headlined clip on the BBC of Justin Trudeau apparently talking about 'peoplekind' rather than 'mankind'. Surely if we want a less seemingly gendered term 'humankind' works better?
Any use of the three letters in the sequence "M-A-N" is clearly a always an intended slight against those defining themselves as the female of the species.
Next stop: Personufacturing. Because a MAN makes everything, huh?
Manu Factum = made by hand - so women don't have hands?
Although, it would be worth embracing the concept if certain people in the NW had to go watch PersonU.....
Presumably because we would have a different tariff environment.
Different tariff environment = opportunity to benefit by smuggling from one to the other
Opportunity to smuggle = criminal activity
Criminal activity = potential for undesirable groups to participate
Potential for undesirable groups to participate = 1970s
1970s = Troubles.
Switzerland has a (limited) FTA with China, while the EU does not. Yet smuggling between Switzerland and France is not a major (or even a minor) issue.
The EU's average external tariff is something like 2.7%. We're not - despite the dreams of some - going to meaningfully deviate from it. We're also unlikely to have more FTAs that the EU in the near future (indeed, I suspect we'll have quite a lot fewer for the next decade).
So I fail to see how a situation like the Swiss-French border is such a problem.
We are talking about an organisation that would take cows from one side of the border to the other repeatedly in order to qualify for Brussels' subsidies. If there is an opportunity, it will be exploited.
Firstly, the CAP doesn't work like that anymore. Secondly, even if there was some simple way to exploit the subsidy system like that, I suspect it would be pretty easy to detect.
Will there be smuggling of booze and fags across the border to avoid duty? Yes. Will it be a major issue? No.
Wasn't the IRA partly funded by a cross-border fuel smuggling scam using a farm with an underground fuel tank? It would be filled on one side from where the oil would flow downhill across the border, and then be collected and driven back round? Google "Slab Murphy" for the details.
Of course it was, as with the dizzy cows I mentioned above. Wrong colour diesel checks was a standard one to carry out...DURING THE TROUBLES...
So I fail to see how a situation like the Swiss-French border is such a problem.
You fail to see it because your whole position on Brexit depends on your failing to see it.
We are not talking about the end of the Common Travel Area, passport checks on the train from Belfast to Dublin, and long queues to cross the border.
We're talking about a system that - just as on the France-Switzerland border - requires exporters to go to a website ahead of time to log their cargo. (Which, because there will be an FTA between the EU and the UK, will probably be a five minute job.) Now, is that a hassle? A little bit. Will it affect trade on the island? Sure, but only marginally. Will the average Northern Irish or Republic or Ireland resident notice the change? Probably not.
You could make the same argument about the average resident to justify King Herod's policies...
How would someone transporting freight from Clones to Cloverhill operate under the new regime?
Goods in transit through one country to another are common. Road deliveries go to Turkey, Middle East, all sorts of places where you cross through a country..
Your ability to highlight problems that are non existent is laudable.
Mr. Glenn, you couldn't. Herod, assuming you mean Herod the Great, imposed heavy taxation which lost him much public support (which he had earnt for heroism and decisiveness during a war in his earlier days).
Presumably because we would have a different tariff environment.
Different tariff environment = opportunity to benefit by smuggling from one to the other
Opportunity to smuggle = criminal activity
Criminal activity = potential for undesirable groups to participate
Potential for undesirable groups to participate = 1970s
1970s = Troubles.
Switzerland has a (limited) FTA with China, while the EU does not. Yet smuggling between Switzerland and France is not a major (or even a minor) issue.
The EU's average external tariff is something like 2.7%. We're not - despite the dreams of some - going to meaningfully deviate from it. We're also unlikely to have more FTAs that the EU in the near future (indeed, I suspect we'll have quite a lot fewer for the next decade).
So I fail to see how a situation like the Swiss-French border is such a problem.
The Irish border will be COMPLETELY different from the Swiss-French one. The Swiss have always controlled their borders very firmly and in fact closed them during the Second World War. They separate people who clearly identify themselves as Swiss or French. Physically there are relatively few crossing points.
The Irish border is imposed on people, who in the neighbourbood mostly think it's an abomination and make no distinction between people on one side and the other. The Good Friday Agreement aims to make it ambiguous; the effect of Brexit is to make the border firmer than it has ever been before. Physically the border follows ditches in a line drawn by Edward Carson on a map one evening after the the First World War. The sensible thing would be to put any border controls at the Irish Sea - it's a hard physical border - but that runs against the political realities in Northern Ireland.
I mentioned Transnistria tongue-in-cheek but the Northern Irish setup has more than a passing resemblance to that tinpot territory. Brexit will make the resemblance stronger.
So I fail to see how a situation like the Swiss-French border is such a problem.
You fail to see it because your whole position on Brexit depends on your failing to see it.
We are not talking about the end of the Common Travel Area, passport checks on the train from Belfast to Dublin, and long queues to cross the border.
We're talking about a system that - just as on the France-Switzerland border - requires exporters to go to a website ahead of time to log their cargo. (Which, because there will be an FTA between the EU and the UK, will probably be a five minute job.) Now, is that a hassle? A little bit. Will it affect trade on the island? Sure, but only marginally. Will the average Northern Irish or Republic or Ireland resident notice the change? Probably not.
You could make the same argument about the average resident to justify King Herod's policies...
How would someone transporting freight from Clones to Cloverhill operate under the new regime?
Drive via Redhills and Scotshouse? It's 2km longer.
So I fail to see how a situation like the Swiss-French border is such a problem.
You fail to see it because your whole position on Brexit depends on your failing to see it.
We are not talking about the end of the Common Travel Area, passport checks on the train from Belfast to Dublin, and long queues to cross the border.
We're talking about a system that - just as on the France-Switzerland border - requires exporters to go to a website ahead of time to log their cargo. (Which, because there will be an FTA between the EU and the UK, will probably be a five minute job.) Now, is that a hassle? A little bit. Will it affect trade on the island? Sure, but only marginally. Will the average Northern Irish or Republic or Ireland resident notice the change? Probably not.
You could make the same argument about the average resident to justify King Herod's policies...
How would someone transporting freight from Clones to Cloverhill operate under the new regime?
Goods in transit through one country to another are common. Road deliveries go to Turkey, Middle East, all sorts of places where you cross through a country..
Your ability to highlight problems that are non existent is laudable.
In 1976, I went with a long-distance lorry driver through West Germany, East Germany, Czechoslavakia, Hungary, Yugoslavia, Greece - and back.
If we can arrange trade through the Iron Curtain at the height of the Cold War, I think we can cope.....
So I fail to see how a situation like the Swiss-French border is such a problem.
You fail to see it because your whole position on Brexit depends on your failing to see it.
We are not talking about the end of the Common Travel Area, passport checks on the train from Belfast to Dublin, and long queues to cross the border.
We're talking about a system that - just as on the France-Switzerland border - requires exporters to go to a website ahead of time to log their cargo. (Which, because there will be an FTA between the EU and the UK, will probably be a five minute job.) Now, is that a hassle? A little bit. Will it affect trade on the island? Sure, but only marginally. Will the average Northern Irish or Republic or Ireland resident notice the change? Probably not.
You could make the same argument about the average resident to justify King Herod's policies...
How would someone transporting freight from Clones to Cloverhill operate under the new regime?
Goods in transit through one country to another are common. Road deliveries go to Turkey, Middle East, all sorts of places where you cross through a country..
Your ability to highlight problems that are non existent is laudable.
We're not talking about 'all sorts of places'; we're talking about this place. How would it work on the ground?
This 6 counties/Republic border control by Snapchat or whatever the fuck they are going to do is going to have the piss taken mightily by criminals and opportunists, there's no doubt about that. But it's not even going to be in the top 50 post-Brexit issues.
So I fail to see how a situation like the Swiss-French border is such a problem.
You fail to see it because your whole position on Brexit depends on your failing to see it.
We are not talking about the end of the Common Travel Area, passport checks on the train from Belfast to Dublin, and long queues to cross the border.
We're talking about a system that - just as on the France-Switzerland border - requires exporters to go to a website ahead of time to log their cargo. (Which, because there will be an FTA between the EU and the UK, will probably be a five minute job.) Now, is that a hassle? A little bit. Will it affect trade on the island? Sure, but only marginally. Will the average Northern Irish or Republic or Ireland resident notice the change? Probably not.
You could make the same argument about the average resident to justify King Herod's policies...
How would someone transporting freight from Clones to Cloverhill operate under the new regime?
Drive via Redhills and Scotshouse? It's 2km longer.
And the people who live alongside that route will just have to lump the fact that they now have lorries driving past their door?
We are not talking about the end of the Common Travel Area, passport checks on the train from Belfast to Dublin, and long queues to cross the border.
We're talking about a system that - just as on the France-Switzerland border - requires exporters to go to a website ahead of time to log their cargo. (Which, because there will be an FTA between the EU and the UK, will probably be a five minute job.)
Anyone who has recently done their self-assessment return will be deeply, deeply sceptical about any solution that involves the British government building a website.
"It may also explain why homosexuality is more common in men than women."
Recent work suggests that women tend to have more bisexual members of their fraternity. Men, as you say, are more bimodal - one or t'other. However, now we're straying into sociology, a lesser breed of science.
For those interested, the Americans seem very happy to publish their research on-line at an early stage. They tend to pay lip-service to the sociologists eg, "Brain sex differences uniquely affect biochemical processes, may contribute to susceptibility to specific diseases, and may influence specific behaviours. Such biological differences should never be used to justify discrimination or sexism."
Review articles are available, and for them you only need a general background in science.
Can I recommend Wu et al (2009) Estrogen masculinizes Neural Pathways and Sex-Specific Behaviours. Cell, Volume 139, issue 1, 2 October. pps 61 - 72 for a more specific article, as this has many citations.
So I fail to see how a situation like the Swiss-French border is such a problem.
You fail to see it because your whole position on Brexit depends on your failing to see it.
We are not talking about the end of the Common Travel Area, passport checks on the train from Belfast to Dublin, and long queues to cross the border.
We're talking about a system that - just as on the France-Switzerland border - requires exporters to go to a website ahead of time to log their cargo. (Which, because there will be an FTA between the EU and the UK, will probably be a five minute job.) Now, is that a hassle? A little bit. Will it affect trade on the island? Sure, but only marginally. Will the average Northern Irish or Republic or Ireland resident notice the change? Probably not.
You could make the same argument about the average resident to justify King Herod's policies...
How would someone transporting freight from Clones to Cloverhill operate under the new regime?
You could say the same about Campione d'Italia, which is a bit of Italy stuck in Switzerland. (Indeed, there are numerous enclaves in Switzerland.)
And you know what? It's not a problem.
Your myopia about the Irish border means you missed something in the Charles Grant piece that has much bigger consequences for Brexit. Some of the EU's existing FTAs contain Most Favoured Nation clauses. So, if the EU were to allow British financial services firms to sell directly to consumers in the bloc, then it might have to offer the same concession to Canadians - with whom there is no regulatory alignment. That is potentially a very serious issue for us.
So I fail to see how a situation like the Swiss-French border is such a problem.
You fail to see it because your whole position on Brexit depends on your failing to see it.
We are not talking about the end of the Common Travel Area, passport checks on the train from Belfast to Dublin, and long queues to cross the border.
We're talking about a system that - just as on the France-Switzerland border - requires exporters to go to a website ahead of time to log their cargo. (Which, because there will be an FTA between the EU and the UK, will probably be a five minute job.) Now, is that a hassle? A little bit. Will it affect trade on the island? Sure, but only marginally. Will the average Northern Irish or Republic or Ireland resident notice the change? Probably not.
You could make the same argument about the average resident to justify King Herod's policies...
How would someone transporting freight from Clones to Cloverhill operate under the new regime?
Drive via Redhills and Scotshouse? It's 2km longer.
And the people who live alongside that route will just have to lump the fact that they now have lorries driving past their door?
That is an issue for the Republic of Ireland, surely? Perhaps a bypass or two might be in order.
So I fail to see how a situation like the Swiss-French border is such a problem.
You fail to see it because your whole position on Brexit depends on your failing to see it.
We are not talking about the end of the Common Travel Area, passport checks on the train from Belfast to Dublin, and long queues to cross the border.
We're talking about a system that - just as on the France-Switzerland border - requires exporters to go to a website ahead of time to log their cargo. (Which, because there will be an FTA between the EU and the UK, will probably be a five minute job.) Now, is that a hassle? A little bit. Will it affect trade on the island? Sure, but only marginally. Will the average Northern Irish or Republic or Ireland resident notice the change? Probably not.
You could make the same argument about the average resident to justify King Herod's policies...
How would someone transporting freight from Clones to Cloverhill operate under the new regime?
Drive via Redhills and Scotshouse? It's 2km longer.
And the people who live alongside that route will just have to lump the fact that they now have lorries driving past their door?
Well, if it's that or the 'RA back in business....
Presumably because we would have a different tariff environment.
Different tariff environment = opportunity to benefit by smuggling from one to the other
Opportunity to smuggle = criminal activity
Criminal activity = potential for undesirable groups to participate
Potential for undesirable groups to participate = 1970s
1970s = Troubles.
Switzerland has a (limited) FTA with China, while the EU does not. Yet smuggling between Switzerland and France is not a major (or even a minor) issue.
The EU's average external tariff is something like 2.7%. We're not - despite the dreams of some - going to meaningfully deviate from it. We're also unlikely to have more FTAs that the EU in the near future (indeed, I suspect we'll have quite a lot fewer for the next decade).
So I fail to see how a situation like the Swiss-French border is such a problem.
The Irish border will be COMPLETELY different from the Swiss-French one. The Swiss have always controlled their borders very firmly and in fact closed them during the Second World War. They separate people who clearly identify themselves as Swiss or French. Physically there are relatively few crossing points.
The Irish border is imposed on people, who in the neighbourbood mostly think it's an abomination and make no distinction between people on one side and the other. The Good Friday Agreement aims to make it ambiguous; the effect of Brexit is to make the border firmer than it has ever been before. Physically the border follows ditches in a line drawn by Edward Carson on a map one evening after the the First World War. The sensible thing would be to put any border controls at the Irish Sea - it's a hard physical border - but that runs against the political realities in Northern Ireland.
I mentioned Transnistria tongue-in-cheek but the Northern Irish setup has more than a passing resemblance to that tinpot territory. Brexit will make the resemblance stronger.
I've crossed from France to Switzerland unchecked many times. Germany to Switzerland is also not an onerous crossing. Italy to Switzerland? Even that can be done in less than a day without 24 hours administrative preparation. Never done Austria or Lichtenstein to Switzerland.
So I fail to see how a situation like the Swiss-French border is such a problem.
You fail to see it because your whole position on Brexit depends on your failing to see it.
We are not talking about the end of the Common Travel Area, passport checks on the train from Belfast to Dublin, and long queues to cross the border.
We're talking about a system that - just as on the France-Switzerland border - requires exporters to go to a website ahead of time to log their cargo. (Which, because there will be an FTA between the EU and the UK, will probably be a five minute job.) Now, is that a hassle? A little bit. Will it affect trade on the island? Sure, but only marginally. Will the average Northern Irish or Republic or Ireland resident notice the change? Probably not.
You could make the same argument about the average resident to justify King Herod's policies...
How would someone transporting freight from Clones to Cloverhill operate under the new regime?
Goods in transit through one country to another are common. Road deliveries go to Turkey, Middle East, all sorts of places where you cross through a country..
Your ability to highlight problems that are non existent is laudable.
What are the trade levels by road across the Turkish eastern border and how do they compare with those across the Irish border now? I don't know the answer to that, but I do know that Irish cross-border trade is significantly higher than that between Sweden and Norway. Brexiteers point to that border as an ideal of frictionless trade, but maybe it's not as good as the Irish border now. And incidentally Norway and Sweden are both in the EU Single Market, unlike NI and RoI on proposed Brexit arrangements.
So I fail to see how a situation like the Swiss-French border is such a problem.
You fail to see it because your whole position on Brexit depends on your failing to see it.
We are not talking about the end of the Common Travel Area, passport checks on the train from Belfast to Dublin, and long queues to cross the border.
We're talking about a system that - just as on the France-Switzerland border - requires exporters to go to a website ahead of time to log their cargo. (Which, because there will be an FTA between the EU and the UK, will probably be a five minute job.) Now, is that a hassle? A little bit. Will it affect trade on the island? Sure, but only marginally. Will the average Northern Irish or Republic or Ireland resident notice the change? Probably not.
You could make the same argument about the average resident to justify King Herod's policies...
How would someone transporting freight from Clones to Cloverhill operate under the new regime?
Goods in transit through one country to another are common. Road deliveries go to Turkey, Middle East, all sorts of places where you cross through a country..
Your ability to highlight problems that are non existent is laudable.
We're not talking about 'all sorts of places'; we're talking about this place. How would it work on the ground?
So I fail to see how a situation like the Swiss-French border is such a problem.
You fail to see it because your whole position on Brexit depends on your failing to see it.
We are not talking about the end of the Common Travel Area, passport checks on the train from Belfast to Dublin, and long queues to cross the border.
We're talking about a system that - just as on the France-Switzerland border - requires exporters to go to a website ahead of time to log their cargo. (Which, because there will be an FTA between the EU and the UK, will probably be a five minute job.) Now, is that a hassle? A little bit. Will it affect trade on the island? Sure, but only marginally. Will the average Northern Irish or Republic or Ireland resident notice the change? Probably not.
You could make the same argument about the average resident to justify King Herod's policies...
How would someone transporting freight from Clones to Cloverhill operate under the new regime?
Goods in transit through one country to another are common. Road deliveries go to Turkey, Middle East, all sorts of places where you cross through a country..
Your ability to highlight problems that are non existent is laudable.
We're not talking about 'all sorts of places'; we're talking about this place. How would it work on the ground?
You create a customs corridor.
Austria had a few weird geographical things like this with Germany in the past because the Alps don't follow an exact dotted line, I think there's a couple between Switzerland and Italy too. For example the train that ran from Salzburg to Innsbruck runs mostly through Germany, so they just called it "sealed" for passport and customs purposes so you could travel from Salzburg to Innsbruck without waving your passport twice at a German guard. And guess what, nobody noticed, and nobody gave a toss.
It really is only a problem if you are determined to make it one.
Presumably because we would have a different tariff environment.
Different tariff environment = opportunity to benefit by smuggling from one to the other
Opportunity to smuggle = criminal activity
Criminal activity = potential for undesirable groups to participate
Potential for undesirable groups to participate = 1970s
1970s = Troubles.
Switzerland has a (limited) FTA with China, while the EU does not. Yet smuggling between Switzerland and France is not a major (or even a minor) issue.
The EU's average external tariff is something like 2.7%. We're not - despite the dreams of some - going to meaningfully deviate from it. We're also unlikely to have more FTAs that the EU in the near future (indeed, I suspect we'll have quite a lot fewer for the next decade).
So I fail to see how a situation like the Swiss-French border is such a problem.
The Irish border will be COMPLETELY different from the Swiss-French one. The Swiss have always controlled their borders very firmly and in fact closed them during the Second World War. They separate people who clearly identify themselves as Swiss or French. Physically there are relatively few crossing points.
The Irish border is imposed on people, who in the neighbourbood mostly think it's an abomination and make no distinction between people on one side and the other. The Good Friday Agreement aims to make it ambiguous; the effect of Brexit is to make the border firmer than it has ever been before. Physically the border follows ditches in a line drawn by Edward Carson on a map one evening after the the First World War. The sensible thing would be to put any border controls at the Irish Sea - it's a hard physical border - but that runs against the political realities in Northern Ireland.
I mentioned Transnistria tongue-in-cheek but the Northern Irish setup has more than a passing resemblance to that tinpot territory. Brexit will make the resemblance stronger.
I've crossed from France to Switzerland unchecked many times. Germany to Switzerland is also not an onerous crossing. Italy to Switzerland? Even that can be done in less than a day without 24 hours administrative preparation. Never done Austria or Lichtenstein to Switzerland.
Indeed. You are talking personal travel between the countries? Very easy thanks to the Freedom of Movement that comes with Switzerland's membership of Schengen. Ummm.
So I fail to see how a situation like the Swiss-French border is such a problem.
You fail to see it because your whole position on Brexit depends on your failing to see it.
We are not talking about the end of the Common Travel Area, passport checks on the train from Belfast to Dublin, and long queues to cross the border.
We're talking about a system that - just as on the France-Switzerland border - requires exporters to go to a website ahead of time to log their cargo. (Which, because there will be an FTA between the EU and the UK, will probably be a five minute job.) Now, is that a hassle? A little bit. Will it affect trade on the island? Sure, but only marginally. Will the average Northern Irish or Republic or Ireland resident notice the change? Probably not.
You could make the same argument about the average resident to justify King Herod's policies...
How would someone transporting freight from Clones to Cloverhill operate under the new regime?
Drive via Redhills and Scotshouse? It's 2km longer.
And the people who live alongside that route will just have to lump the fact that they now have lorries driving past their door?
That is an issue for the Republic of Ireland, surely? Perhaps a bypass or two might be in order.
It won't be necessary, because they have the UK by the short and curlies and have already forced a concession that we will maintain full alignment with the single market and customs union if all else fails.
So I fail to see how a situation like the Swiss-French border is such a problem.
You fail to see it because your whole position on Brexit depends on your failing to see it.
We are not talking about the end of the Common Travel Area, passport checks on the train from Belfast to Dublin, and long queues to cross the border.
We're talking about a system that - just as on the France-Switzerland border - requires exporters to go to a website ahead of time to log their cargo. (Which, because there will be an FTA between the EU and the UK, will probably be a five minute job.) Now, is that a hassle? A little bit. Will it affect trade on the island? Sure, but only marginally. Will the average Northern Irish or Republic or Ireland resident notice the change? Probably not.
You could make the same argument about the average resident to justify King Herod's policies...
How would someone transporting freight from Clones to Cloverhill operate under the new regime?
Goods in transit through one country to another are common. Road deliveries go to Turkey, Middle East, all sorts of places where you cross through a country..
Your ability to highlight problems that are non existent is laudable.
What are the trade levels by road across the Turkish eastern border and how do they compare with those across the Irish border now? I don't know the answer to that, but I do know that Irish cross-border trade is significantly higher than that between Sweden and Norway. Brexiteers point to that border as an ideal of frictionless trade, but maybe it's not as good as the Irish border now. And incidentally Norway and Sweden are both in the EU Single Market, unlike NI and RoI on proposed Brexit arrangements.
You can have Serbia if you like, lots of trucks cross Serbian borders seamlessly. It is a facet of existing international trade. You don't need to invent a whole new complex system or imagine impossibilities.
Sure you can design problems in, but that is a choice not a necessity.
People on here hand waving away the potential problems of the NI border I’m afraid are displaying cake and eat it ignorance Brexiting at its very worst.
Presumably because we would have a different tariff environment.
Different tariff environment = opportunity to benefit by smuggling from one to the other
Opportunity to smuggle = criminal activity
Criminal activity = potential for undesirable groups to participate
Potential for undesirable groups to participate = 1970s
1970s = Troubles.
Switzerland has a (limited) FTA with China, while the EU does not. Yet smuggling between Switzerland and France is not a major (or even a minor) issue.
The EU's average external tariff is something like 2.7%. We're not - despite the dreams of some - going to meaningfully deviate from it. We're also unlikely to have more FTAs that the EU in the near future (indeed, I suspect we'll have quite a lot fewer for the next decade).
So I fail to see how a situation like the Swiss-French border is such a problem.
The Irish border will be COMPLETELY different from the Swiss-French one. The Swiss have always controlled their borders very firmly and in fact closed them during the Second World War. They separate people who clearly identify themselves as Swiss or French. Physically there are relatively few crossing points.
The Irish border is imposed on people, who in the neighbourbood mostly think it's an abomination and make no distinction between people on one side and the other. The Good Friday Agreement aims to make it ambiguous; the effect of Brexit is to make the border firmer than it has ever been before. Physically the border follows ditches in a line drawn by Edward Carson on a map one evening after the the First World War. The sensible thing would be to put any border controls at the Irish Sea - it's a hard physical border - but that runs against the political realities in Northern Ireland.
I mentioned Transnistria tongue-in-cheek but the Northern Irish setup has more than a passing resemblance to that tinpot territory. Brexit will make the resemblance stronger.
I'm sorry, are you on crack?
Have you been to Switzerland in the last decade? There is no separation of Swiss and other nationals at passport control. (And, indeed, passport control only exists for people coming in from outside Schengen.) The border posts are almost entirely unmanned, except to force people to buy the Swiss motorway pass.
So I fail to see how a situation like the Swiss-French border is such a problem.
You fail to see it because your whole position on Brexit depends on your failing to see it.
We are not talking about the end of the Common Travel Area, passport checks on the train from Belfast to Dublin, and long queues to cross the border.
We're talking about a system that - just as on the France-Switzerland border - requires exporters to go to a website ahead of time to log their cargo. (Which, because there will be an FTA between the EU and the UK, will probably be a five minute job.) Now, is that a hassle? A little bit. Will it affect trade on the island? Sure, but only marginally. Will the average Northern Irish or Republic or Ireland resident notice the change? Probably not.
You could make the same argument about the average resident to justify King Herod's policies...
How would someone transporting freight from Clones to Cloverhill operate under the new regime?
Drive via Redhills and Scotshouse? It's 2km longer.
And the people who live alongside that route will just have to lump the fact that they now have lorries driving past their door?
That is an issue for the Republic of Ireland, surely? Perhaps a bypass or two might be in order.
It won't be necessary, because they have the UK by the short and curlies and have already forced a concession that we will maintain full alignment with the single market and customs union if all else fails.
Then why did you bring it up? While I appreciate you're quite keen on the EU, there are much bigger fish to fry than the proverbial man in the Irish lorry wanting to ply their trade from Clones to Cloverhill.
So I fail to see how a situation like the Swiss-French border is such a problem.
You fail to see it because your whole position on Brexit depends on your failing to see it.
We are not talking about the end of the Common Travel Area, passport checks on the train from Belfast to Dublin, and long queues to cross the border.
We're talking about a system that - just as on the France-Switzerland border - requires exporters to go to a website ahead of time to log their cargo. (Which, because there will be an FTA between the EU and the UK, will probably be a five minute job.) Now, is that a hassle? A little bit. Will it affect trade on the island? Sure, but only marginally. Will the average Northern Irish or Republic or Ireland resident notice the change? Probably not.
You could make the same argument about the average resident to justify King Herod's policies...
How would someone transporting freight from Clones to Cloverhill operate under the new regime?
Drive via Redhills and Scotshouse? It's 2km longer.
And the people who live alongside that route will just have to lump the fact that they now have lorries driving past their door?
Well, if it's that or the 'RA back in business....
All of the ones with any operational experience will be getting on a bit now. It would be a hard and long road to regenerate any meaningful capability.
We are not talking about the end of the Common Travel Area, passport checks on the train from Belfast to Dublin, and long queues to cross the border.
We're talking about a system that - just as on the France-Switzerland border - requires exporters to go to a website ahead of time to log their cargo. (Which, because there will be an FTA between the EU and the UK, will probably be a five minute job.)
Anyone who has recently done their self-assessment return will be deeply, deeply sceptical about any solution that involves the British government building a website.
This 6 counties/Republic border control by Snapchat or whatever the fuck they are going to do is going to have the piss taken mightily by criminals and opportunists, there's no doubt about that. But it's not even going to be in the top 50 post-Brexit issues.
Absolutely. This border is a What the Fuck? kind of thing. And Leavers talk about reducing Red Tape !!!!
Presumably because we would have a different tariff environment.
Different tariff environment = opportunity to benefit by smuggling from one to the other
Opportunity to smuggle = criminal activity
Criminal activity = potential for undesirable groups to participate
Potential for undesirable groups to participate = 1970s
1970s = Troubles.
Switzerland has a (limited) FTA with China, while the EU does not. Yet smuggling between Switzerland and France is not a major (or even a minor) issue.
The EU's average external tariff is something like 2.7%. We're not - despite the dreams of some - going to meaningfully deviate from it. We're also unlikely to have more FTAs that the EU in the near future (indeed, I suspect we'll have quite a lot fewer for the next decade).
So I fail to see how a situation like the Swiss-French border is such a problem.
The Irish border will be COMPLETELY different from the Swiss-French one. The Swiss have always controlled their borders very firmly and in fact closed them during the Second World War. They separate people who clearly identify themselves as Swiss or French. Physically there are relatively few crossing points.
The Irish border is imposed on people, who in the neighbourbood mostly think it's an abomination and make no distinction between people on one side and the other. The Good Friday Agreement aims to make it ambiguous; the effect of Brexit is to make the border firmer than it has ever been before. Physically the border follows ditches in a line drawn by Edward Carson on a map one evening after the the First World War. The sensible thing would be to put any border controls at the Irish Sea - it's a hard physical border - but that runs against the political realities in Northern Ireland.
I mentioned Transnistria tongue-in-cheek but the Northern Irish setup has more than a passing resemblance to that tinpot territory. Brexit will make the resemblance stronger.
I've crossed from France to Switzerland unchecked many times. Germany to Switzerland is also not an onerous crossing. Italy to Switzerland? Even that can be done in less than a day without 24 hours administrative preparation. Never done Austria or Lichtenstein to Switzerland.
Indeed. You are talking personal travel between the countries? Very easy thanks to the Freedom of Movement that comes with Switzerland's membership of Schengen. Ummm.
This 6 counties/Republic border control by Snapchat or whatever the fuck they are going to do is going to have the piss taken mightily by criminals and opportunists, there's no doubt about that. But it's not even going to be in the top 50 post-Brexit issues.
Absolutely. This border is a What the Fuck? kind of thing. And Leavers talk about reducing Red Tape !!!!
Presumably because we would have a different tariff environment.
Different tariff environment = opportunity to benefit by smuggling from one to the other
Opportunity to smuggle = criminal activity
Criminal activity = potential for undesirable groups to participate
Potential for undesirable groups to participate = 1970s
1970s = Troubles.
Switzerland has a (limited) FTA with China, while the EU does not. Yet smuggling between Switzerland and France is not a major (or even a minor) issue.
The EU's average external tariff is something like 2.7%. We're not - despite the dreams of some - going to meaningfully deviate from it. We're also unlikely to have more FTAs that the EU in the near future (indeed, I suspect we'll have quite a lot fewer for the next decade).
So I fail to see how a situation like the Swiss-French border is such a problem.
The Irish border will be COMPLETELY different from the Swiss-French one. The Swiss have always controlled their borders very firmly and in fact closed them during the Second World War. They separate people who clearly identify themselves as Swiss or French. Physically there are relatively few crossing points.
The Irish border is imposed on people, who in the neighbourbood mostly think it's an abomination and make no distinction between people on one side and the other. The Good Friday Agreement aims to make it ambiguous; the effect of Brexit is to make the border firmer than it has ever been before. Physically the border follows ditches in a line drawn by Edward Carson on a map one evening after the the First World War. The sensible thing would be to put any border controls at the Irish Sea - it's a hard physical border - but that runs against the political realities in Northern Ireland.
I mentioned Transnistria tongue-in-cheek but the Northern Irish setup has more than a passing resemblance to that tinpot territory. Brexit will make the resemblance stronger.
I'm sorry, are you on crack?
Have you been to Switzerland in the last decade? There is no separation of Swiss and other nationals at passport control. (And, indeed, passport control only exists for people coming in from outside Schengen.) The border posts are almost entirely unmanned, except to force people to buy the Swiss motorway pass.
I'm not on crack, I have lived in Switzerland for two years, specifically the French speaking part of it. And you didn't address the points I made - not that there is any requirement to do so, of course.
So I fail to see how a situation like the Swiss-French border is such a problem.
You fail to see it because your whole position on Brexit depends on your failing to see it.
We are not talking about the end of the Common Travel Area, passport checks on the train from Belfast to Dublin, and long queues to cross the border.
We're talking about a system that - just as on the France-Switzerland border - requires exporters to go to a website ahead of time to log their cargo. (Which, because there will be an FTA between the EU and the UK, will probably be a five minute job.) Now, is that a hassle? A little bit. Will it affect trade on the island? Sure, but only marginally. Will the average Northern Irish or Republic or Ireland resident notice the change? Probably not.
You could make the same argument about the average resident to justify King Herod's policies...
How would someone transporting freight from Clones to Cloverhill operate under the new regime?
Goods in transit through one country to another are common. Road deliveries go to Turkey, Middle East, all sorts of places where you cross through a country..
Your ability to highlight problems that are non existent is laudable.
What are the trade levels by road across the Turkish eastern border and how do they compare with those across the Irish border now? I don't know the answer to that, but I do know that Irish cross-border trade is significantly higher than that between Sweden and Norway. Brexiteers point to that border as an ideal of frictionless trade, but maybe it's not as good as the Irish border now. And incidentally Norway and Sweden are both in the EU Single Market, unlike NI and RoI on proposed Brexit arrangements.
You can have Serbia if you like, lots of trucks cross Serbian borders seamlessly. It is a facet of existing international trade. You don't need to invent a whole new complex system or imagine impossibilities.
Sure you can design problems in, but that is a choice not a necessity.
Unfortunately, Leaver credibility in waving away problems by claiming "it'll be easy" is close to zero. We've heard the same thing on the CU, the SM, trade agreements, membership of supranational bodies, etc, etc, etc. In every case the problem has proven to be significant and often intractable.
Presumably because we would have a different tariff environment.
Different tariff environment = opportunity to benefit by smuggling from one to the other
Opportunity to smuggle = criminal activity
Criminal activity = potential for undesirable groups to participate
Potential for undesirable groups to participate = 1970s
1970s = Troubles.
Switzerland has a (limited) FTA with China, while the EU does not. Yet smuggling between Switzerland and France is not a major (or even a minor) issue.
The EU's average external tariff is something like 2.7%. We're not - despite the dreams of some - going to meaningfully deviate from it. We're also unlikely to have more FTAs that the EU in the near future (indeed, I suspect we'll have quite a lot fewer for the next decade).
So I fail to see how a situation like the Swiss-French border is such a problem.
The Irish border will be COMPLETELY different from the Swiss-French one. The Swiss have always controlled their borders very firmly and in fact closed them during the Second World War. They separate people who clearly identify themselves as Swiss or French. Physically there are relatively few crossing points.
The Irish border is imposed on people, who in the neighbourbood mostly think it's an abomination and make no distinction between people on one side and the other. The Good Friday Agreement aims to make it ambiguous; the effect of Brexit is to make the border firmer than it has ever been before. Physically the border follows ditches in a line drawn by Edward Carson on a map one evening after the the First World War. The sensible thing would be to put any border controls at the Irish Sea - it's a hard physical border - but that runs against the political realities in Northern Ireland.
I mentioned Transnistria tongue-in-cheek but the Northern Irish setup has more than a passing resemblance to that tinpot territory. Brexit will make the resemblance stronger.
I'm sorry, are you on crack?
Have you been to Switzerland in the last decade? There is no separation of Swiss and other nationals at passport control. (And, indeed, passport control only exists for people coming in from outside Schengen.) The border posts are almost entirely unmanned, except to force people to buy the Swiss motorway pass.
There things are not difficult, and are in place in loads of other places such as the world’s longest land border between the USA and Canada.
Where there’s a will there’s a way, but a lot of people don’t want to have the will.
So I fail to see how a situation like the Swiss-French border is such a problem.
You fail to see it because your whole position on Brexit depends on your failing to see it.
We are not talking about the end of the Common Travel Area, passport checks on the train from Belfast to Dublin, and long queues to cross the border.
We're talking about a system that - just as on the France-Switzerland border - requires exporters to go to a website ahead of time to log their cargo. (Which, because there will be an FTA between the EU and the UK, will probably be a five minute job.) Now, is that a hassle? A little bit. Will it affect trade on the island? Sure, but only marginally. Will the average Northern Irish or Republic or Ireland resident notice the change? Probably not.
You could make the same argument about the average resident to justify King Herod's policies...
How would someone transporting freight from Clones to Cloverhill operate under the new regime?
Drive via Redhills and Scotshouse? It's 2km longer.
And the people who live alongside that route will just have to lump the fact that they now have lorries driving past their door?
That is an issue for the Republic of Ireland, surely? Perhaps a bypass or two might be in order.
It won't be necessary, because they have the UK by the short and curlies and have already forced a concession that we will maintain full alignment with the single market and customs union if all else fails.
Then why did you bring it up? While I appreciate you're quite keen on the EU, there are much bigger fish to fry than the proverbial man in the Irish lorry wanting to ply their trade from Clones to Cloverhill.
We still don't know what our long term policy is on the single market and customs union.
If this question doesn't have an answer then the only solution is a border in the Irish Sea, or the UK as a whole stays in the single market and customs union. In broad terms those are the two options. What we cannot do is impose border regimes without considering the political implications or the imbalance in leverage between the UK and EU.
I'm sure Eamon De Valera sat there in 1920 odd and looked in horror at the map and said "Christ boys, we'll have to call this push for independence lark off, we might have a customs problem on the N54 in County Monaghan. I mean look it's all wiggly, so we're stuffed. That's it I'm off to the palace to submit to the Crown and live out my life as a happy subject of King George V and his Customs Union".
We are not talking about the end of the Common Travel Area, passport checks on the train from Belfast to Dublin, and long queues to cross the border.
We're talking about a system that - just as on the France-Switzerland border - requires exporters to go to a website ahead of time to log their cargo. (Which, because there will be an FTA between the EU and the UK, will probably be a five minute job.)
Anyone who has recently done their self-assessment return will be deeply, deeply sceptical about any solution that involves the British government building a website.
The NHS IT system wasn't a good example.
Indeed. There are no good examples. Unfortunately there is a lot of hubris, because the Government now has the much-lauded Government Digital Service, which is terrific at building Silicon Valley-compliant responsive, accessible sites on which it's impossible to find anything.
So I fail to see how a situation like the Swiss-French border is such a problem.
You fail to see it because your whole position on Brexit depends on your failing to see it.
.
You could make the same argument about the average resident to justify King Herod's policies...
How would someone transporting freight from Clones to Cloverhill operate under the new regime?
Goods in transit through one country to another are common. Road deliveries go to Turkey, Middle East, all sorts of places where you cross through a country..
Your ability to highlight problems that are non existent is laudable.
What are the trade levels by road across the Turkish eastern border and how do they compare with those across the Irish border now? I don't know the answer to that, but I do know that Irish cross-border trade is significantly higher than that between Sweden and Norway. Brexiteers point to that border as an ideal of frictionless trade, but maybe it's not as good as the Irish border now. And incidentally Norway and Sweden are both in the EU Single Market, unlike NI and RoI on proposed Brexit arrangements.
You can have Serbia if you like, lots of trucks cross Serbian borders seamlessly. It is a facet of existing international trade. You don't need to invent a whole new complex system or imagine impossibilities.
Sure you can design problems in, but that is a choice not a necessity.
Unfortunately, Leaver credibility in waving away problems by claiming "it'll be easy" is close to zero. We've heard the same thing on the CU, the SM, trade agreements, membership of supranational bodies, etc, etc, etc. In every case the problem has proven to be significant and often intractable.
I tend to see things differently.
If there is no freedom of movement we cannot be in the SM If we want to conduct our own FTAs we cannot be in the CU
There is clarity about the ease and difficulty of each of those four options. The difficulty in accepting and agreeing a common and majority view of FOM vs SM and FTAs vs CU. They are simple binary choices, each one has ramifications.
Supranational bodies will be resolved in the wash. One important factor is that they love collecting membership fees, which is a great motivator at smoothing out problems.
So I fail to see how a situation like the Swiss-French border is such a problem.
You fail to see it because your whole position on Brexit depends on your failing to see it.
We are not talking about the end of the Common Travel Area, passport checks on the train from Belfast to Dublin, and long queues to cross the border.
We're talking about a system that - just as on the France-Switzerland border - requires exporters to go to a website ahead of time to log their cargo. (Which, because there will be an FTA between the EU and the UK, will probably be a five minute job.) Now, is that a hassle? A little bit. Will it affect trade on the island? Sure, but only marginally. Will the average Northern Irish or Republic or Ireland resident notice the change? Probably not.
You could make the same argument about the average resident to justify King Herod's policies...
How would someone transporting freight from Clones to Cloverhill operate under the new regime?
Drive via Redhills and Scotshouse? It's 2km longer.
And the people who live alongside that route will just have to lump the fact that they now have lorries driving past their door?
I'm sure Eamon De Valera sat there in 1920 odd and looked in horror at the map and said "Christ boys, we'll have to call this push for independence lark off, we might have a customs problem on the N54 in County Monaghan. I mean look it's all wiggly, so we're stuffed. That's it I'm off to the palace to submit to the Crown and live out my life as a happy subject of King George V and his Customs Union".
It would all be so much easier if we didn't have a modern, integrated economy...
There things are not difficult, and are in place in loads of other places such as the world’s longest land border between the USA and Canada.
Where there’s a will there’s a way, but a lot of people don’t want to have the will.
Why should the people living near the border have any will to find a way to impose further political separation upon themselves when they don't think there should be a border at all? The whole thing is an absurdity.
@PolhomeEditor: Tory Brexiteers Bernard Jenkin says “there is going to be a customs frontier at the points of entry between the European Union and United Kingdom”, but insists that won’t mean checks on the Irish border. #r4today
Oddly we had freedom of movement and customs controls between the UK and Ireland from 1922 right up to the creation of the EU in 1992 (bar a short period in WWII when FOM was restricted). I remember my father regularly being stopped and asked to open his car boot at ports on either side of the Irish Sea when we travelled their by ferry (pre Ryanair cheap fares) but no one ever even asked to see a driving licence let alone a passport as proof of ID or nationality for any of us.
And that was before the days of the Internet. Odd what we both made work perfectly fine for 70 years - most of which was long before the troubles started - can't be made to work again using modern thechnology.
The EU will impose a hard border on its Celtic satrapy.
We keep hearing this - but can anyone really see the EU enforcing ROI to build a unilateral border ?
Would be the new "Berlin's Wall" - the footage of EU commissioned workmen putting up barriers between the North and South will be terrible optics.
"Hard border" doesn't mean a wall.
It means some sort of physical infrastructure on the RoI side - just the 300 border crossing points to take care of..
It doesn't even need to be that many: like on the Swiss-French border, you would have permanently manned customs posts on the dozen major arteries, and occasional pop up checks on minor roads.
Forget the border controls for a second and ask yourself how the associated bureaucracy is consistent with our commitment to maintain alignment to support the all-island economy?
The GFA does not commit the UK, or any part of it, to remain in the EU, nor to economic harmonisation with the Irish Republic,
Currently, Northern Ireland has a separate currency to the Irish Republic, a separate legal system, different levels of taxation, different employment and planning laws, and a host of distinctions that stand in the way of creating a single economy on the island of Ireland. Yet, for some reason, a few customs posts are supposed to be a deal-breaker.
I'm sure Eamon De Valera sat there in 1920 odd and looked in horror at the map and said "Christ boys, we'll have to call this push for independence lark off, we might have a customs problem on the N54 in County Monaghan. I mean look it's all wiggly, so we're stuffed. That's it I'm off to the palace to submit to the Crown and live out my life as a happy subject of King George V and his Customs Union".
It would all be so much easier if we didn't have a modern, integrated economy...
There things are not difficult, and are in place in loads of other places such as the world’s longest land border between the USA and Canada.
Where there’s a will there’s a way, but a lot of people don’t want to have the will.
Why should the people living near the border have any will to find a way to impose further political separation upon themselves when they don't think there should be a border at all? The whole thing is an absurdity.
Eamon De Valera and Michael Collins imposed a border on them just as much as the British Govt and N Ireland Unionists did.
Now I accept, as I'm sure we all do, the Irish had a right to that. They wanted self determination and to be independent to make their own decisions, free as much as practically possibly from the bigger entity and things like its customs union and single market. I'm sure it wasn't without risks of far greater economic dislocation than the UK would experience due to Brexit of whatever hardness from spongy to diamond.
It's not about the money. If we want independence from the bigger entity it might cost a few quid. It needn't, but the EU is seemingly determined to make it so. So be it. I don't care. I really don't care, and I'm certainly not going to be bullied because of the possible consequences on some road between Monaghan and Cavan.
The GFA does not commit the UK, or any part of it, to remain in the EU, nor to economic harmonisation with the Irish Republic,
Currently, Northern Ireland has a separate currency to the Irish Republic, a separate legal system, different levels of taxation, different employment and planning laws, and a host of distinctions that stand in the way of creating a single economy on the island of Ireland. Yet, for some reason, a few customs posts are supposed to be a deal-breaker.
The phase one agreement commits us to:
1) support North-South cooperation 2) support the all-island economy 3) uphold the GFA
Those are separate strands, which taken together mean there can be no backsliding on the level of economic integration that currently exists.
The GFA does not commit the UK, or any part of it, to remain in the EU, nor to economic harmonisation with the Irish Republic,
Currently, Northern Ireland has a separate currency to the Irish Republic, a separate legal system, different levels of taxation, different employment and planning laws, and a host of distinctions that stand in the way of creating a single economy on the island of Ireland. Yet, for some reason, a few customs posts are supposed to be a deal-breaker.
The phase one agreement commits us to:
1) support North-South cooperation 2) support the all-island economy 3) uphold the GFA
Those are separate strands, which taken together mean there can be no backsliding on the level of economic integration that currently exists.
@PolhomeEditor: Tory Brexiteers Bernard Jenkin says “there is going to be a customs frontier at the points of entry between the European Union and United Kingdom”, but insists that won’t mean checks on the Irish border. #r4today
Oddly we had freedom of movement and customs controls between the UK and Ireland from 1922 right up to the creation of the EU in 1992 (bar a short period in WWII when FOM was restricted). I remember my father regularly being stopped and asked to open his car boot at ports on either side of the Irish Sea when we travelled their by ferry (pre Ryanair cheap fares) but no one ever even asked to see a driving licence let alone a passport as proof of ID or nationality for any of us.
And that was before the days of the Internet. Odd what we both made work perfectly fine for 70 years - most of which was long before the troubles started - can't be made to work again using modern thechnology.
The EU will impose a hard border on its Celtic satrapy.
We keep hearing this - but can anyone really see the EU enforcing ROI to build a unilateral border ?
Would be the new "Berlin's Wall" - the footage of EU commissioned workmen putting up barriers between the North and South will be terrible optics.
"Hard border" doesn't mean a wall.
It means some sort of physical infrastructure on the RoI side - just the 300 border crossing points to take care of..
It doesn't even need to be that many: like on the Swiss-French border, you would have permanently manned customs posts on the dozen major arteries, and occasional pop up checks on minor roads.
Forget the border controls for a second and ask yourself how the associated bureaucracy is consistent with our commitment to maintain alignment to support the all-island economy?
Yet, for some reason, a few customs posts are supposed to be a deal-breaker.
Another 'last straw'.....another one fell away yesterday......
No one can answer until the negotiations with the EU are complete. The arrangements can not be decided by us or (the rest of) the EU alone - it's a negotiation.
If there is no agreement, the EU will follow WTO rules, which it is obliged to do; as is the UK, of course.
The WTO rules do not, as far as I know, make any statement at all about the administrative procedures at borders, and certainly doesn't mandate physical checkpoints. I might be wrong; if so, I'd be interested to see a link to any authoritative source which says otherwise.
The GFA does not commit the UK, or any part of it, to remain in the EU, nor to economic harmonisation with the Irish Republic,
Currently, Northern Ireland has a separate currency to the Irish Republic, a separate legal system, different levels of taxation, different employment and planning laws, and a host of distinctions that stand in the way of creating a single economy on the island of Ireland. Yet, for some reason, a few customs posts are supposed to be a deal-breaker.
The phase one agreement commits us to:
1) support North-South cooperation 2) support the all-island economy 3) uphold the GFA
Those are separate strands, which taken together mean there can be no backsliding on the level of economic integration that currently exists.
That's open to interpretation. After all, when Ireland adopted the Euro, in 1999, it was introducing a degree of economic divergence from the UK, which did not adopt the Euro.
The GFA does not commit the UK, or any part of it, to remain in the EU, nor to economic harmonisation with the Irish Republic,
Currently, Northern Ireland has a separate currency to the Irish Republic, a separate legal system, different levels of taxation, different employment and planning laws, and a host of distinctions that stand in the way of creating a single economy on the island of Ireland. Yet, for some reason, a few customs posts are supposed to be a deal-breaker.
The phase one agreement commits us to:
1) support North-South cooperation 2) support the all-island economy 3) uphold the GFA
Those are separate strands, which taken together mean there can be no backsliding on the level of economic integration that currently exists.
That's open to interpretation. After all, when Ireland adopted the Euro, in 1999, it was introducing a degree of economic divergence from the UK, which did not adopt the Euro.
That was when only one of those strands applied: the GFA.
I see the basic choices as simple. FOM or SM FTAs or CU
Am I wrong, or are those the binary choices that we have?
Agreeing on them and then working to implement is the hard bit. I haven't even expressed a preference for one or the other!
Both questions are far from binary. My original point was that waving away something as easy to do has little credibility from a group - and yes, I'm lumping you with the Leaver 'blob' here - given past assurances. Remember the German car industry, and the global hoards desperate to give us FTAs. Still waiting...
The GFA does not commit the UK, or any part of it, to remain in the EU, nor to economic harmonisation with the Irish Republic,
Currently, Northern Ireland has a separate currency to the Irish Republic, a separate legal system, different levels of taxation, different employment and planning laws, and a host of distinctions that stand in the way of creating a single economy on the island of Ireland. Yet, for some reason, a few customs posts are supposed to be a deal-breaker.
As I've repeatedly pointed out, it also has customs regulations at the border. You can't legally load up a van in Dublin with Jameson Whiskey and drive it to Belfast to sell it, without declaring it to HMRC and paying the excise duty (and vice versa for booze'n'fags in the opposite direction). No one has ever answered my question: given that is the case, how come there aren't customs posts at the border now?
I see the basic choices as simple. FOM or SM FTAs or CU
Am I wrong, or are those the binary choices that we have?
Agreeing on them and then working to implement is the hard bit. I haven't even expressed a preference for one or the other!
Both questions are far from binary. My original point was that waving away something as easy to do has little credibility from a group - and yes, I'm lumping you with the Leaver 'blob' here - given past assurances. Remember the German car industry, and the global hoards desperate to give us FTAs. Still waiting...
Not me Guv on the Germans
I don't understand how they are not binary. We understand that FOM and SM are indivisible. For SM you have FOM It is difficult to argue against membership of CU precludes FTAs outside that CU.
Labour silenced by May's comment about 1928 decision on all women to vote. By a Tory government.
With the exception of the 1832 Act (which ironically, disenfranchised the small number of women who had the vote at the time) the Conservatives have had a very good record when it comes to extending the franchise.
The GFA does not commit the UK, or any part of it, to remain in the EU, nor to economic harmonisation with the Irish Republic,
Currently, Northern Ireland has a separate currency to the Irish Republic, a separate legal system, different levels of taxation, different employment and planning laws, and a host of distinctions that stand in the way of creating a single economy on the island of Ireland. Yet, for some reason, a few customs posts are supposed to be a deal-breaker.
The phase one agreement commits us to:
1) support North-South cooperation 2) support the all-island economy 3) uphold the GFA
Those are separate strands, which taken together mean there can be no backsliding on the level of economic integration that currently exists.
That's open to interpretation. After all, when Ireland adopted the Euro, in 1999, it was introducing a degree of economic divergence from the UK, which did not adopt the Euro.
That was when only one of those strands applied: the GFA.
And If President Macron's proposals for EZ budgets and an EZ Finance Minister were adopted by the EZ, that would be a further divergence between EZ and non-EZ countries, but I think it would be silly for us to argue that this was placing Ireland in breach of the GFA.
Comments
https://twitter.com/manuelaschwesig/status/961186489832038400
But there is a more subtle problem for both -- their media handlers did not adapt to the change of leader so built campaigns based around the old leaders, Blair and Cameron. It is noteworthy that Corbyn's surge came when he started being Corbyn, the veteran campaigner, not when he tried (and largely failed) to follow the Blair/Cameron model. Trump too, perhaps.
CCHQ must build its next campaign around its actual leader, not its ideal one.
Secondly, even if there was some simple way to exploit the subsidy system like that, I suspect it would be pretty easy to detect.
Will there be smuggling of booze and fags across the border to avoid duty? Yes.
Will it be a major issue? No.
https://www.politico.eu/article/brexit-theresa-may-cant-afford-red-lines/
We're talking about a system that - just as on the France-Switzerland border - requires exporters to go to a website ahead of time to log their cargo. (Which, because there will be an FTA between the EU and the UK, will probably be a five minute job.) Now, is that a hassle? A little bit. Will it affect trade on the island? Sure, but only marginally. Will the average Northern Irish or Republic or Ireland resident notice the change? Probably not.
The Northern Ireland issue really is not just about the occurrence or not of smuggling.
A beautiful winter's day in Frankfurt, incidentally.
And they haven't always been so kindly disposed to her. Being a Remainer scrubs away all other failings?
How would someone transporting freight from Clones to Cloverhill operate under the new regime?
Your ability to highlight problems that are non existent is laudable.
The Irish border is imposed on people, who in the neighbourbood mostly think it's an abomination and make no distinction between people on one side and the other. The Good Friday Agreement aims to make it ambiguous; the effect of Brexit is to make the border firmer than it has ever been before. Physically the border follows ditches in a line drawn by Edward Carson on a map one evening after the the First World War. The sensible thing would be to put any border controls at the Irish Sea - it's a hard physical border - but that runs against the political realities in Northern Ireland.
I mentioned Transnistria tongue-in-cheek but the Northern Irish setup has more than a passing resemblance to that tinpot territory. Brexit will make the resemblance stronger.
If we can arrange trade through the Iron Curtain at the height of the Cold War, I think we can cope.....
"It may also explain why homosexuality is more common in men than women."
Recent work suggests that women tend to have more bisexual members of their fraternity. Men, as you say, are more bimodal - one or t'other. However, now we're straying into sociology, a lesser breed of science.
For those interested, the Americans seem very happy to publish their research on-line at an early stage. They tend to pay lip-service to the sociologists eg, "Brain sex differences uniquely affect biochemical processes, may contribute to susceptibility to specific diseases, and may influence specific behaviours. Such biological differences should never be used to justify discrimination or sexism."
Review articles are available, and for them you only need a general background in science.
Can I recommend Wu et al (2009) Estrogen masculinizes Neural Pathways and Sex-Specific Behaviours. Cell, Volume 139, issue 1, 2 October. pps 61 - 72 for a more specific article, as this has many citations.
And you know what? It's not a problem.
Your myopia about the Irish border means you missed something in the Charles Grant piece that has much bigger consequences for Brexit. Some of the EU's existing FTAs contain Most Favoured Nation clauses. So, if the EU were to allow British financial services firms to sell directly to consumers in the bloc, then it might have to offer the same concession to Canadians - with whom there is no regulatory alignment. That is potentially a very serious issue for us.
Germany to Switzerland is also not an onerous crossing.
Italy to Switzerland? Even that can be done in less than a day without 24 hours administrative preparation.
Never done Austria or Lichtenstein to Switzerland.
Austria had a few weird geographical things like this with Germany in the past because the Alps don't follow an exact dotted line, I think there's a couple between Switzerland and Italy too. For example the train that ran from Salzburg to Innsbruck runs mostly through Germany, so they just called it "sealed" for passport and customs purposes so you could travel from Salzburg to Innsbruck without waving your passport twice at a German guard. And guess what, nobody noticed, and nobody gave a toss.
It really is only a problem if you are determined to make it one.
Sure you can design problems in, but that is a choice not a necessity.
Have you been to Switzerland in the last decade? There is no separation of Swiss and other nationals at passport control. (And, indeed, passport control only exists for people coming in from outside Schengen.) The border posts are almost entirely unmanned, except to force people to buy the Swiss motorway pass.
https://twitter.com/BrianSpanner1/status/961202187866136576
Where there’s a will there’s a way, but a lot of people don’t want to have the will.
If this question doesn't have an answer then the only solution is a border in the Irish Sea, or the UK as a whole stays in the single market and customs union. In broad terms those are the two options. What we cannot do is impose border regimes without considering the political implications or the imbalance in leverage between the UK and EU.
@ Sandpit
Quite.
I'm sure Eamon De Valera sat there in 1920 odd and looked in horror at the map and said "Christ boys, we'll have to call this push for independence lark off, we might have a customs problem on the N54 in County Monaghan. I mean look it's all wiggly, so we're stuffed. That's it I'm off to the palace to submit to the Crown and live out my life as a happy subject of King George V and his Customs Union".
If there is no freedom of movement we cannot be in the SM
If we want to conduct our own FTAs we cannot be in the CU
There is clarity about the ease and difficulty of each of those four options.
The difficulty in accepting and agreeing a common and majority view of FOM vs SM and FTAs vs CU. They are simple binary choices, each one has ramifications.
Supranational bodies will be resolved in the wash. One important factor is that they love collecting membership fees, which is a great motivator at smoothing out problems.
Currently, Northern Ireland has a separate currency to the Irish Republic, a separate legal system, different levels of taxation, different employment and planning laws, and a host of distinctions that stand in the way of creating a single economy on the island of Ireland. Yet, for some reason, a few customs posts are supposed to be a deal-breaker.
FOM or SM
FTAs or CU
Am I wrong, or are those the binary choices that we have?
Agreeing on them and then working to implement is the hard bit.
I haven't even expressed a preference for one or the other!
https://twitter.com/ShippersUnbound/status/961204386792919041
5.68
Now I accept, as I'm sure we all do, the Irish had a right to that. They wanted self determination and to be independent to make their own decisions, free as much as practically possibly from the bigger entity and things like its customs union and single market. I'm sure it wasn't without risks of far greater economic dislocation than the UK would experience due to Brexit of whatever hardness from spongy to diamond.
It's not about the money. If we want independence from the bigger entity it might cost a few quid. It needn't, but the EU is seemingly determined to make it so. So be it. I don't care. I really don't care, and I'm certainly not going to be bullied because of the possible consequences on some road between Monaghan and Cavan.
1) support North-South cooperation
2) support the all-island economy
3) uphold the GFA
Those are separate strands, which taken together mean there can be no backsliding on the level of economic integration that currently exists.
#FormerPublicSchoolboyHumour
I hope his cock falls off.
I don't understand how they are not binary.
We understand that FOM and SM are indivisible. For SM you have FOM
It is difficult to argue against membership of CU precludes FTAs outside that CU.