When will the UK rejoin the EU?

[littleyellowbirdie 2,547]

7 minutes ago, TheGunnShow said:

Weren't they all counterfeit products though, according to that link? Drugs and weapons got mentioned as well.

I don't actually know what they mean by 'counterfeit' in this context, but as they're talking about high value electrical goods such as smartphones, I believe that counterfeit means a genuine product intended for another market passing into the market illegally. But I can't find any articles that are more specific, so I don't know. 

Edited June 21, 2022 by littleyellowbirdie

[canarydan23 4,060]

Welcome to Brexit Britain, where businesses that engage in crime can survive and the ones that don't go bust in a flurry of avoidable bureaucracy!

If that doesn't get you all patriotic I don't know what will.

 

[littleyellowbirdie 2,547]

3 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

Welcome to Brexit Britain, where businesses that engage in crime can survive and the ones that don't go bust in a flurry of avoidable bureaucracy!

If that doesn't get you all patriotic I don't know what will.

 

Smuggling to the EU is not a crime in the UK. 

[TheGunnShow 5,940]

4 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

I don't actually know what they mean by 'counterfeit' in this context, but as they're talking about high value electrical goods such as smartphones, I believe that counterfeit means a genuine product passing into the market illegally. But I can't find any articles that are more specific, so I don't know. 

I dunno, it looks quite prevalent when it comes to counterfeit smartphones if we use the meaning of "made to look like the original of something, usually for dishonest or illegal purposes".

Counterfeit mobile phones are everywhere - DeviceAssure Blog - which includes this nice link, so thought I'd pop it in separately.

smartphone_sector_summary_en.pdf (europa.eu)

In short, I doubt these are genuine products going off that report.

[Herman 9,756]

1 minute ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

Smuggling to the EU is not a crime in the UK. 

I don't think that statement would stand up in a UK court though. 

[littleyellowbirdie 2,547]

1 minute ago, Herman said:

I don't think that statement would stand up in a UK court though. 

I don't think a UK court would even consider the question. 

[littleyellowbirdie 2,547]

12 minutes ago, TheGunnShow said:

I dunno, it looks quite prevalent when it comes to counterfeit smartphones if we use the meaning of "made to look like the original of something, usually for dishonest or illegal purposes".

Counterfeit mobile phones are everywhere - DeviceAssure Blog - which includes this nice link, so thought I'd pop it in separately.

smartphone_sector_summary_en.pdf (europa.eu)

In short, I doubt these are genuine products going off that report.

Maybe. Put it this way though, I have an American-spec Apple laptop that was manufactured in China and I purchased at a ridiculously cheap price on Amazon UK when we were still in the EU, which was subsequently repaired under product recall by Apple, so genuine products do make it between places in a dubious way,without a shadow of a doubt. 

Edited June 21, 2022 by littleyellowbirdie

[duke63 542]

4 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

Sorry I missed this. Now here we are with you on one hand suggesting that sending goods on a 40-hour customs free trip via Ireland in the event of a major trade war would be farcical, but apparently having a section of GB voluntarily put up a hard land border on the island of GB with the area that accounts for 60% of its exports, then float it's own currency from nowhere overnight is not only feasible, but 'inevitable'. Way to go. 

The Commonwealth weakening is more to do with China's belt and road initiative than anything to do with the UK leaving the EU, which is irrelevant to the entire Commonwealth other than the possibility of strengthening economic ties directly with the UK. China's tacit support for Russia as it starves Africa will likely improve our position on that score. 

Firstly my point was that neither the republican side of NI which is now the leading party there, would want anything other than a reunited Ireland and to have no ties with England and that Scotland and the Scottish people will no doubt feel the same way. 
 

I have at no point commented on the trade difficulties caused by Brexit though they are considerable and are a big reason why inflation is spiralling out of control. 
 

and secondly the break up of the Commonwealth is more to do with those Nations not wanting to have any reminders of Britain’s Empirical past in their laws and make up. 
 

 

[littleyellowbirdie 2,547]

2 minutes ago, duke63 said:

Firstly my point was that neither the republican side of NI which is now the leading party there, would want anything other than a reunited Ireland and to have no ties with England and that Scotland and the Scottish people will no doubt feel the same way. 
 

I have at no point commented on the trade difficulties caused by Brexit though they are considerable and are a big reason why inflation is spiralling out of control. 
 

and secondly the break up of the Commonwealth is more to do with those Nations not wanting to have any reminders of Britain’s Empirical past in their laws and make up. 
 

 

Firstly, the Commonwealth isn't really breaking up as yet, given the only country to voluntarily leave is Zimbabwe at this point, but what's your explanation for this not having been the case over many decades and only suddenly being the case now?

Edited June 21, 2022 by littleyellowbirdie

[TheGunnShow 5,940]

4 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

Maybe. Put it this way though, I have an American-spec Apple laptop that was manufactured in China and I purchased at a ridiculously cheap price on Amazon UK when we were still in the EU, which was subsequently repaired under product recall by Apple, so genuine products do make it between places in a dubious way,without a shadow of a doubt. 

Agree with the last bit, but if Apple were happy to repair your product under product recall, then by definition it was not a counterfeit.

[canarydan23 4,060]

9 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

Smuggling to the EU is not a crime in the UK. 

But it is your solution though, isn't it? For big companies to engage, directly or indirectly, in smuggling operations? And that a trade route via Liverpool - Belfast - Cork - Cherbourg wouldn't require massive infrastructure projects before it could replace the Dover - Calais, Dover - Dunkirk and Folkestone - Calais routes? Or that if it could suitably replace those routes, the additional costs and time of using the alternative trade (smuggling?) route would not be prohibitive to the point that it would but many exporting companies out of business?

Here's some numbers for you, as words don't appear to be your strong point.

At peak times, the Channel Tunnel takes 3,500 trucks a day. A car ferry on the large end of the scale can take 240 trucks. That's an additional 14 ferries A DAY to be accommodated. In short, more than Belfast could handle with just the stuff going via train.

Let's look at ferry freight; Dover has an annual freight tonnage of almost 14 million. Belfast is at around 11 million and Cork at 9. They would need to double their capacity overnight, just to take the Dover stuff. And this is just the vans. What about the 3,000 container ships that come through Felixstowe? The vast majority of which between European destinations?

Send it all to Belfast?!

[Herman 9,756]

26 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

I don't think a UK court would even consider the question. 

Of course they would.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,547]

24 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

But it is your solution though, isn't it? For big companies to engage, directly or indirectly, in smuggling operations? And that a trade route via Liverpool - Belfast - Cork - Cherbourg wouldn't require massive infrastructure projects before it could replace the Dover - Calais, Dover - Dunkirk and Folkestone - Calais routes? Or that if it could suitably replace those routes, the additional costs and time of using the alternative trade (smuggling?) route would not be prohibitive to the point that it would but many exporting companies out of business?

Here's some numbers for you, as words don't appear to be your strong point.

At peak times, the Channel Tunnel takes 3,500 trucks a day. A car ferry on the large end of the scale can take 240 trucks. That's an additional 14 ferries A DAY to be accommodated. In short, more than Belfast could handle with just the stuff going via train.

Let's look at ferry freight; Dover has an annual freight tonnage of almost 14 million. Belfast is at around 11 million and Cork at 9. They would need to double their capacity overnight, just to take the Dover stuff. And this is just the vans. What about the 3,000 container ships that come through Felixstowe? The vast majority of which between European destinations?

Send it all to Belfast?!

As previously mentioned, ferry routes from Ireland to the continent have grown enormously as a direct result of new customs barriers on GB. These ferry crossings take over 20 hours, but it's still considered easier than dealing with Customs through the UK landbridge. This is fact and has already happened. Where there's demand, supply will take care of itself very quickly.

Moreover, your calculations rely on imports through Dover also stopping, which wouldn't happen, because the UK government isn't remotely interested in impeding imports from the EU and the rest of the world. Equally, exports from the UK to elsewhere. would continue from Dover. 

Other than that, do bore off with trying to misrepresent me by suggesting I'm raising these as 'solutions'. 

 

Edited June 21, 2022 by littleyellowbirdie

[sonyc 5,516]

29 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

Smuggling to the EU is not a crime in the UK. 

Now there you've found a Brexit bonus LYB! Back to the carefree times perhaps of **** Turpin?........A kind of early 1700s Britain. I'm liking the idea even as a remainer😄

https://www.expatforum.com/threads/the-ladybird-books-practical-advice-tips-for-preparing-for-a-hard-brexit.1470034/

These are good practical and handy Ladybird books on how to handle our hard Brexit😉 ...and there's something in there for both Brexiters and Remainers - no discrimination by Ladybird. No nasty division.

 

[canarydan23 4,060]

1 minute ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

As previously mentioned, ferry routes from Ireland to the continent have grown enormously as a direct result of new customs barriers on GB. This is fact and has already happened. Where there's demand, supply will take care of itself very quickly.

Other than that, do bore off with trying to misrepresent me by suggesting I'm raising these as 'solutions'. 

 

Grown enormously?! They'd need to increase capacity at least tenfold almost overnight for the fantasy you're espousing to become reality.

Picture a car park that has 20 spaces and is getting 13 or 14 cars a day in it. It's custom grows enormously and it starts getting 19 to 20 cars a day in it. If it suddenly needs another 4 or 5 spaces to meet growing demand, it can probably cope with that.

If it suddenly needs 200 spaces, it's not going to happen. Or it will take many, many years and huge amounts of investment. And no one will be willing to stump up the investment because as each day goes on, more and more in the UK wake up to the fact that in Brexit they were sold an absolute sham and the closer and closer the country gets to an inevitable tighter integration with the EU. Once common sense prevails, there will be no need for fantastical ideas about re-routing millions and millions of tonnes of goods through the island of Ireland.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,547]

4 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

Grown enormously?! They'd need to increase capacity at least tenfold almost overnight for the fantasy you're espousing to become reality.

Picture a car park that has 20 spaces and is getting 13 or 14 cars a day in it. It's custom grows enormously and it starts getting 19 to 20 cars a day in it. If it suddenly needs another 4 or 5 spaces to meet growing demand, it can probably cope with that.

If it suddenly needs 200 spaces, it's not going to happen. Or it will take many, many years and huge amounts of investment. And no one will be willing to stump up the investment because as each day goes on, more and more in the UK wake up to the fact that in Brexit they were sold an absolute sham and the closer and closer the country gets to an inevitable tighter integration with the EU. Once common sense prevails, there will be no need for fantastical ideas about re-routing millions and millions of tonnes of goods through the island of Ireland.

Well, to be fair, I am entertaining an extreme hypothetical in response to the idea pushed by some that the EU suspending the FTA is a serious threat rather than your own daft fantasy. But again, existing smuggling does expose the threat presented to the customs union if the EU chooses to really get dirty. 

Edited June 21, 2022 by littleyellowbirdie

[Herman 9,756]

10 minutes ago, sonyc said:

Now there you've found a Brexit bonus LYB! Back to the carefree times perhaps of **** Turpin?........A kind of early 1700s Britain. I'm liking the idea even as a remainer😄

https://www.expatforum.com/threads/the-ladybird-books-practical-advice-tips-for-preparing-for-a-hard-brexit.1470034/

These are good practical and handy Ladybird books on how to handle our hard Brexit😉 ...and there's something in there for both Brexiters and Remainers - no discrimination by Ladybird. No nasty division.

 

 

 

This one reminds me of times at the East German border. We as kids rather enjoyed it. It was much later that I realised my old man was probably scared witless.

[Yellow Fever 3,776]

29 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

But it is your solution though, isn't it? For big companies to engage, directly or indirectly, in smuggling operations? And that a trade route via Liverpool - Belfast - Cork - Cherbourg wouldn't require massive infrastructure projects before it could replace the Dover - Calais, Dover - Dunkirk and Folkestone - Calais routes? Or that if it could suitably replace those routes, the additional costs and time of using the alternative trade (smuggling?) route would not be prohibitive to the point that it would but many exporting companies out of business?

Here's some numbers for you, as words don't appear to be your strong point.

At peak times, the Channel Tunnel takes 3,500 trucks a day. A car ferry on the large end of the scale can take 240 trucks. That's an additional 14 ferries A DAY to be accommodated. In short, more than Belfast could handle with just the stuff going via train.

Let's look at ferry freight; Dover has an annual freight tonnage of almost 14 million. Belfast is at around 11 million and Cork at 9. They would need to double their capacity overnight, just to take the Dover stuff. And this is just the vans. What about the 3,000 container ships that come through Felixstowe? The vast majority of which between European destinations?

Send it all to Belfast?!

 

Sorry for this nonsense still going on. I have better things to do usually (exporting UK manufactured goods globally). 

The point is that in the event of EU imposing tariffs or limits and the like on UK origin products, trying to circumvent them via an EU unguarded open NI border is clear idiocy of the highest order. Any such goods smuggled (there is no other word for it) across such a border would not have paid by definition EU duty and tax, perhaps not meet EU standards and be simply contraband. As such there would be criminal charges for those engaged in such activity in the EU - and extradition requests for those engaged as such still in the UK.  

Of course as with all borders there will be some small scale leakage but not wholesale 'commercial' smuggling and certainly not with the connivance of the responsible companies involved. It would be organised crime no more and no less. If the UK was to promote, threaten or even turn a blind eye to such we would deservedly be classed and treated as a rogue nation.

Simpy I'm very surprised it was even mentioned as an option even if there was the infrastructure to support it but then quite clearly some people live in a fantasy world.

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

1 hour ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

Firstly, the Commonwealth isn't really breaking up as yet, given the only country to voluntarily leave is Zimbabwe at this point, but what's your explanation for this not having been the case over many decades and only suddenly being the case now?

And the Gambia

[littleyellowbirdie 2,547]

1 hour ago, Yellow Fever said:

 

Sorry for this nonsense still going on. I have better things to do usually (exporting UK manufactured goods globally). 

The point is that in the event of EU imposing tariffs or limits and the like on UK origin products, trying to circumvent them via an EU unguarded open NI border is clear idiocy of the highest order. Any such goods smuggled (there is no other word for it) across such a border would not have paid by definition EU duty and tax, perhaps not meet EU standards and be simply contraband. As such there would be criminal charges for those engaged in such activity in the EU - and extradition requests for those engaged as such still in the UK.  

Of course as with all borders there will be some small scale leakage but not wholesale 'commercial' smuggling and certainly not with the connivance of the responsible companies involved. It would be organised crime no more and no less. If the UK was to promote, threaten or even turn a blind eye to such we would deservedly be classed and treated as a rogue nation.

Simpy I'm very surprised it was even mentioned as an option even if there was the infrastructure to support it but then quite clearly some people live in a fantasy world.

The only reason we're responsible for EU's border with the UK is because the FTA stipulates we run a border in our own territory in the Irish sea. Article 16 gives us recourse to adapt measures unilaterally in response to political problems in Northern Ireland that are a consequence of the NI protocol. 

If we make changes unilaterally, citing article 16 and the EU response is to suspend the FTA, then the NI protocol is also completely suspended, including enforcing a border in the Irish Sea. That means the ROI will be responsible for enforcing a border protecting the EU's customs union between the ROI and NI. It's very doubtful that the Republic would do that, but if they don't and criminals take advantage of it then that is 100% the EU's problem and does not remotely cast the UK as a 'rogue nation'. 

The fact the EU even talks about suspending the deal in its entirety proves that the EU never cared a jot about NI in the first place, but was purely playing games for political leverage. 

Edited June 21, 2022 by littleyellowbirdie

[littleyellowbirdie 2,547]

14 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

And the Gambia

Gambia left in 2013 and rejoined in 2018; hardly supports the case for the Commonwealth 'falling apart' really does it? 

Edited June 21, 2022 by littleyellowbirdie

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

8 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

Gambia left in 2013 and rejoined in 2018; hardly supports the case for the Commonwealth 'falling apart' really does it? 

No

[canarydan23 4,060]

49 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

The only reason we're responsible for EU's border with the UK is because the FTA stipulates we run a border in our own territory in the Irish sea. Article 16 gives us recourse to adapt measures unilaterally in response to political problems in Northern Ireland that are a consequence of the NI protocol. 

If we make changes unilaterally, citing article 16 and the EU response is to suspend the FTA, then the NI protocol is also completely suspended, including enforcing a border in the Irish Sea. That means the ROI will be responsible for enforcing a border protecting the EU's customs union between the ROI and NI. It's very doubtful that the Republic would do that, but if they don't and criminals take advantage of it then that is 100% the EU's problem and does not remotely cast the UK as a 'rogue nation'. 

Keep at it, you *almost* sound like you've convinced yourself.

Don't hold your breath on convincing anyone else mind you.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,547]

20 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

Keep at it, you *almost* sound like you've convinced yourself.

Don't hold your breath on convincing anyone else mind you.

I don't care if anyone's convinced or not. It's a fact that countries are responsible for protecting their own borders, and if they don't then that's their own problem, just as you'll doubtless gleefully argue the human trafficking from France is the UK's problem. If you want to kid yourself otherwise then that's your problem. 

Edited June 21, 2022 by littleyellowbirdie

[How I Wrote Elastic Man 1,187]

22 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

I don't care if anyone's convinced or not. It's a fact that countries are responsible for protecting their own borders, and if they don't then that's their own problem, just as you'll doubtless gleefully argue the human trafficking from France is the UK's problem. If you want to kid yourself otherwise then that's your problem. 

If the EU has to put checks on the Irish border because the UK has unilaterally rewritten parts of an agreement, how do you think this makes the UK look to the rest of the world?

[littleyellowbirdie 2,547]

5 minutes ago, How I Wrote Elastic Man said:

If the EU has to put checks on the Irish border because the UK has unilaterally rewritten parts of an agreement, how do you think this makes the UK look to the rest of the world?

It makes it look to the rest of the world like the UK has invoked article 16 of the NI protocol in the treaty with the EU and the EU has reacted disproportionately. Beyond that, I doubt they'll care that much, seeing as it's not their problem. 

The ROI will never allow checks on the ROI/NI border though, whatever the EU says. 

Edited June 21, 2022 by littleyellowbirdie

[How I Wrote Elastic Man 1,187]

1 minute ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

It makes it look to the rest of the world like the UK has invoked article 16 of the NI protocol in the treaty with the EU. Beyond that, I doubt they'll care that much, seeing as it's not their problem .

Do you think it would make other countries think twice before signing any agreement or treaty with the UK?

[littleyellowbirdie 2,547]

16 minutes ago, How I Wrote Elastic Man said:

Do you think it would make other countries think twice before signing any agreement or treaty with the UK?

Nope. People sign treaties with infinitely far worse actors than the UK and unionist discontent coupled with the provisions of article 16 give a credible defence for the UK's threatened actions regarding NI. 

The treaty has dispute resolution provisions built into it that are perfect for this scenario. The fact that the EU is going so big on threats to pull the plug on the treaty instead of relying on those provisions underlines that they're afraid the UK case is good enough to win.

Edited June 21, 2022 by littleyellowbirdie

[benchwarmer 625]

1 hour ago, How I Wrote Elastic Man said:

Do you think it would make other countries think twice before signing any agreement or treaty with the UK?

It would depend on how desperate they were to sign an agreement with us, and how desperate we were to sign one with them.

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

4 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

I don't care if anyone's convinced or not. It's a fact that countries are responsible for protecting their own borders, and if they don't then that's their own problem, just as you'll doubtless gleefully argue the human trafficking from France is the UK's problem. If you want to kid yourself otherwise then that's your problem. 

Its any country that has a border with them having a problem as well. Whether or not ROI said no hard border, they would have a problem with the EU. Just saying no is not an option or else we would still be in the EU in the single market but saying no to freedom of movement etc.