Discussion:
And now, the Boris Burrow
Add Reply
Recliner
2021-02-14 11:56:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Having had another of his mad bridge ideas rebuffed, Boris is now likely to
push for the Strarne Tunnel.

<https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/think-britain-to-belfast-is-a-bridge-too-far-try-tunnelling-across-instead-2kbqs0jxm?shareToken=673b91a1a06f78f84b4e3658667e41f1>
Graeme Wall
2021-02-14 13:17:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Having had another of his mad bridge ideas rebuffed, Boris is now likely to
push for the Strarne Tunnel.
<https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/think-britain-to-belfast-is-a-bridge-too-far-try-tunnelling-across-instead-2kbqs0jxm?shareToken=673b91a1a06f78f84b4e3658667e41f1>
He's been reading Jules Verne again!
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.
Sam Wilson
2021-02-14 14:19:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Having had another of his mad bridge ideas rebuffed, Boris is now likely to
push for the Strarne Tunnel.
<https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/think-britain-to-belfast-is-a-bridge-too-far-try-tunnelling-across-instead-2kbqs0jxm?shareToken=673b91a1a06f78f84b4e3658667e41f1>
Nothing if not ambitious. HS4 between Carlisle and Belfast, anyone?

“A generation ago, as the European Union opened the single market, the
Channel tunnel reduced journey times between London and Paris to two hours
and 16 minutes. As Brexit brings a renewed focus on the British Isles, this
scheme promises to bring Belfast within four hours of the capital, and
Dublin within six hours.

“For the rail industry, it is part of a long-term ambition to reduce
journeys by rail between London and Glasgow and Edinburgh to below three
hours, which it is also advocating in the review. Trains to Belfast would
turn west near Carlisle, around the Scottish border, and lorries bound for
Ireland could be loaded there.”

Sam
--
The entity formerly known as ***@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply
Certes
2021-02-14 16:39:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Sam Wilson
Post by Recliner
Having had another of his mad bridge ideas rebuffed, Boris is now likely to
push for the Strarne Tunnel.
<https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/think-britain-to-belfast-is-a-bridge-too-far-try-tunnelling-across-instead-2kbqs0jxm?shareToken=673b91a1a06f78f84b4e3658667e41f1>
Nothing if not ambitious. HS4 between Carlisle and Belfast, anyone?
“A generation ago, as the European Union opened the single market, the
Channel tunnel reduced journey times between London and Paris to two hours
and 16 minutes. As Brexit brings a renewed focus on the British Isles, this
scheme promises to bring Belfast within four hours of the capital, and
Dublin within six hours.
“For the rail industry, it is part of a long-term ambition to reduce
journeys by rail between London and Glasgow and Edinburgh to below three
hours, which it is also advocating in the review. Trains to Belfast would
turn west near Carlisle, around the Scottish border, and lorries bound for
Ireland could be loaded there.”
It would be a useful strategic link, if Stranraer-Carlisle can be
rebuilt and Stranraer-Glasgow upgraded. In a world with unlimited
money, I'd love to see it happen. Unfortunately, Ireland is a lot
smaller than Europe, and Belfast has fewer customers than Paris.
Dublin is a similar size to Brussels, but Brussels is the gateway to a
thriving network of cities rather than a field of sheep.
Recliner
2021-02-14 16:54:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Certes
Post by Sam Wilson
Post by Recliner
Having had another of his mad bridge ideas rebuffed, Boris is now likely to
push for the Strarne Tunnel.
<https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/think-britain-to-belfast-is-a-bridge-too-far-try-tunnelling-across-instead-2kbqs0jxm?shareToken=673b91a1a06f78f84b4e3658667e41f1>
Nothing if not ambitious. HS4 between Carlisle and Belfast, anyone?
“A generation ago, as the European Union opened the single market, the
Channel tunnel reduced journey times between London and Paris to two hours
and 16 minutes. As Brexit brings a renewed focus on the British Isles, this
scheme promises to bring Belfast within four hours of the capital, and
Dublin within six hours.
“For the rail industry, it is part of a long-term ambition to reduce
journeys by rail between London and Glasgow and Edinburgh to below three
hours, which it is also advocating in the review. Trains to Belfast would
turn west near Carlisle, around the Scottish border, and lorries bound for
Ireland could be loaded there.”
It would be a useful strategic link, if Stranraer-Carlisle can be
rebuilt and Stranraer-Glasgow upgraded. In a world with unlimited
money, I'd love to see it happen. Unfortunately, Ireland is a lot
smaller than Europe, and Belfast has fewer customers than Paris.
Dublin is a similar size to Brussels, but Brussels is the gateway to a
thriving network of cities rather than a field of sheep.
Yes, there's almost no chance this will happen — it's even less likely than
the mythical Boris Island Airport ever was. It'll be talked about and
subject to studies for the rest of his premiership, then be quietly
forgotten.
Sam Wilson
2021-02-14 23:14:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by Certes
Post by Sam Wilson
Post by Recliner
Having had another of his mad bridge ideas rebuffed, Boris is now likely to
push for the Strarne Tunnel.
<https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/think-britain-to-belfast-is-a-bridge-too-far-try-tunnelling-across-instead-2kbqs0jxm?shareToken=673b91a1a06f78f84b4e3658667e41f1>
Nothing if not ambitious. HS4 between Carlisle and Belfast, anyone?
“A generation ago, as the European Union opened the single market, the
Channel tunnel reduced journey times between London and Paris to two hours
and 16 minutes. As Brexit brings a renewed focus on the British Isles, this
scheme promises to bring Belfast within four hours of the capital, and
Dublin within six hours.
“For the rail industry, it is part of a long-term ambition to reduce
journeys by rail between London and Glasgow and Edinburgh to below three
hours, which it is also advocating in the review. Trains to Belfast would
turn west near Carlisle, around the Scottish border, and lorries bound for
Ireland could be loaded there.”
It would be a useful strategic link, if Stranraer-Carlisle can be
rebuilt and Stranraer-Glasgow upgraded. In a world with unlimited
money, I'd love to see it happen. Unfortunately, Ireland is a lot
smaller than Europe, and Belfast has fewer customers than Paris.
Dublin is a similar size to Brussels, but Brussels is the gateway to a
thriving network of cities rather than a field of sheep.
Yes, there's almost no chance this will happen — it's even less likely than
the mythical Boris Island Airport ever was. It'll be talked about and
subject to studies for the rest of his premiership, then be quietly
forgotten.
Dead cat. What are we not supposed to be looking at (apart from the Brexit
shambles, the COVID shambles, the devolution shambles, etc)?

Sam
--
The entity formerly known as ***@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply
Recliner
2021-02-14 23:23:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Sam Wilson
Post by Recliner
Post by Certes
Post by Sam Wilson
Post by Recliner
Having had another of his mad bridge ideas rebuffed, Boris is now likely to
push for the Strarne Tunnel.
<https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/think-britain-to-belfast-is-a-bridge-too-far-try-tunnelling-across-instead-2kbqs0jxm?shareToken=673b91a1a06f78f84b4e3658667e41f1>
Nothing if not ambitious. HS4 between Carlisle and Belfast, anyone?
“A generation ago, as the European Union opened the single market, the
Channel tunnel reduced journey times between London and Paris to two hours
and 16 minutes. As Brexit brings a renewed focus on the British Isles, this
scheme promises to bring Belfast within four hours of the capital, and
Dublin within six hours.
“For the rail industry, it is part of a long-term ambition to reduce
journeys by rail between London and Glasgow and Edinburgh to below three
hours, which it is also advocating in the review. Trains to Belfast would
turn west near Carlisle, around the Scottish border, and lorries bound for
Ireland could be loaded there.”
It would be a useful strategic link, if Stranraer-Carlisle can be
rebuilt and Stranraer-Glasgow upgraded. In a world with unlimited
money, I'd love to see it happen. Unfortunately, Ireland is a lot
smaller than Europe, and Belfast has fewer customers than Paris.
Dublin is a similar size to Brussels, but Brussels is the gateway to a
thriving network of cities rather than a field of sheep.
Yes, there's almost no chance this will happen — it's even less likely than
the mythical Boris Island Airport ever was. It'll be talked about and
subject to studies for the rest of his premiership, then be quietly
forgotten.
Dead cat. What are we not supposed to be looking at (apart from the Brexit
shambles, the COVID shambles, the devolution shambles, etc)?
He started this months ago, so it was probably meant to distract attention
from the Covid mess. Or maybe it's his signature way of keeping the union
together?
Marland
2021-02-15 00:30:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by Sam Wilson
Post by Recliner
Post by Certes
Post by Sam Wilson
Post by Recliner
Having had another of his mad bridge ideas rebuffed, Boris is now likely to
push for the Strarne Tunnel.
<https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/think-britain-to-belfast-is-a-bridge-too-far-try-tunnelling-across-instead-2kbqs0jxm?shareToken=673b91a1a06f78f84b4e3658667e41f1>
Nothing if not ambitious. HS4 between Carlisle and Belfast, anyone?
“A generation ago, as the European Union opened the single market, the
Channel tunnel reduced journey times between London and Paris to two hours
and 16 minutes. As Brexit brings a renewed focus on the British Isles, this
scheme promises to bring Belfast within four hours of the capital, and
Dublin within six hours.
“For the rail industry, it is part of a long-term ambition to reduce
journeys by rail between London and Glasgow and Edinburgh to below three
hours, which it is also advocating in the review. Trains to Belfast would
turn west near Carlisle, around the Scottish border, and lorries bound for
Ireland could be loaded there.”
It would be a useful strategic link, if Stranraer-Carlisle can be
rebuilt and Stranraer-Glasgow upgraded. In a world with unlimited
money, I'd love to see it happen. Unfortunately, Ireland is a lot
smaller than Europe, and Belfast has fewer customers than Paris.
Dublin is a similar size to Brussels, but Brussels is the gateway to a
thriving network of cities rather than a field of sheep.
Yes, there's almost no chance this will happen — it's even less likely than
the mythical Boris Island Airport ever was. It'll be talked about and
subject to studies for the rest of his premiership, then be quietly
forgotten.
Dead cat. What are we not supposed to be looking at (apart from the Brexit
shambles, the COVID shambles, the devolution shambles, etc)?
He started this months ago, so it was probably meant to distract attention
from the Covid mess. Or maybe it's his signature way of keeping the union
together?
Shades of building the Canadian Pacific Railway 140 years ago , though
there I think the population on the whole wanted to stay together against
the influence of the neighbours.
This time they may decide that joining with the neighbours is more
desirable.


GH
MB
2021-02-15 07:57:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Recliner
He started this months ago, so it was probably meant to distract attention
from the Covid mess. Or maybe it's his signature way of keeping the union
together?
Or someone could have asked a question at a press conference and he gave
a neutral answer, not trying to be too specific?

I posted last night that it seems less likely after the EU's meddling in
the Northern Ireland situation. I think they would have to be prepared
to fund it fully and I doubt that can afford that. Also news reports in
the last couple of months that even the Germans are getting dissatisfied
with the EU.
Marland
2021-02-14 18:51:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Certes
Post by Sam Wilson
Post by Recliner
Having had another of his mad bridge ideas rebuffed, Boris is now likely to
push for the Strarne Tunnel.
<https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/think-britain-to-belfast-is-a-bridge-too-far-try-tunnelling-across-instead-2kbqs0jxm?shareToken=673b91a1a06f78f84b4e3658667e41f1>
Nothing if not ambitious. HS4 between Carlisle and Belfast, anyone?
“A generation ago, as the European Union opened the single market, the
Channel tunnel reduced journey times between London and Paris to two hours
and 16 minutes. As Brexit brings a renewed focus on the British Isles, this
scheme promises to bring Belfast within four hours of the capital, and
Dublin within six hours.
“For the rail industry, it is part of a long-term ambition to reduce
journeys by rail between London and Glasgow and Edinburgh to below three
hours, which it is also advocating in the review. Trains to Belfast would
turn west near Carlisle, around the Scottish border, and lorries bound for
Ireland could be loaded there.”
It would be a useful strategic link, if Stranraer-Carlisle can be
rebuilt and Stranraer-Glasgow upgraded. In a world with unlimited
money, I'd love to see it happen. Unfortunately, Ireland is a lot
smaller than Europe, and Belfast has fewer customers than Paris.
Dublin is a similar size to Brussels, but Brussels is the gateway to a
thriving network of cities rather than a field of sheep.
Brexit has meant that investment in ferry facilities direct from the
European mainland to the part of Ireland that is still a member of the EU
to avoid the UK land bridge has been considerable. While ferries can be
withdrawn just as easily and old habits like using the land bridge die hard
by the time a tunnel is built bypassing the UK for most goods to and from
Ireland could well have become the normal method and changing habits again
to use a tunnel link could be a challenge.
Through rail freight will have the gauge problem as well which while that
can be overcome to an extent by various means adds further cost to
developing rail flows.

GH
Graeme Wall
2021-02-14 19:08:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Marland
Post by Certes
Post by Sam Wilson
Post by Recliner
Having had another of his mad bridge ideas rebuffed, Boris is now likely to
push for the Strarne Tunnel.
<https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/think-britain-to-belfast-is-a-bridge-too-far-try-tunnelling-across-instead-2kbqs0jxm?shareToken=673b91a1a06f78f84b4e3658667e41f1>
Nothing if not ambitious. HS4 between Carlisle and Belfast, anyone?
“A generation ago, as the European Union opened the single market, the
Channel tunnel reduced journey times between London and Paris to two hours
and 16 minutes. As Brexit brings a renewed focus on the British Isles, this
scheme promises to bring Belfast within four hours of the capital, and
Dublin within six hours.
“For the rail industry, it is part of a long-term ambition to reduce
journeys by rail between London and Glasgow and Edinburgh to below three
hours, which it is also advocating in the review. Trains to Belfast would
turn west near Carlisle, around the Scottish border, and lorries bound for
Ireland could be loaded there.”
It would be a useful strategic link, if Stranraer-Carlisle can be
rebuilt and Stranraer-Glasgow upgraded. In a world with unlimited
money, I'd love to see it happen. Unfortunately, Ireland is a lot
smaller than Europe, and Belfast has fewer customers than Paris.
Dublin is a similar size to Brussels, but Brussels is the gateway to a
thriving network of cities rather than a field of sheep.
Brexit has meant that investment in ferry facilities direct from the
European mainland to the part of Ireland that is still a member of the EU
to avoid the UK land bridge has been considerable. While ferries can be
withdrawn just as easily and old habits like using the land bridge die hard
by the time a tunnel is built bypassing the UK for most goods to and from
Ireland could well have become the normal method and changing habits again
to use a tunnel link could be a challenge.
Through rail freight will have the gauge problem as well which while that
can be overcome to an extent by various means adds further cost to
developing rail flows.
Also more than an outside chance that neither end of the tunnel will be
in the UK by the time they start, never mind finish, building it.
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.
Roland Perry
2021-02-14 16:01:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Having had another of his mad bridge ideas rebuffed, Boris is now likely to
push for the Strarne Tunnel.
<https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/think-britain-to-belfast-is-a-bridge
-too-far-try-tunnelling-across-instead-2kbqs0jxm?shareToken=673b91a1a06f
78f84b4e3658667e41f1>
I heard this on the radio this morning. April 1st has come early!
--
Roland Perry
Mark Goodge
2021-02-14 19:58:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sun, 14 Feb 2021 11:56:57 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
Post by Recliner
Having had another of his mad bridge ideas rebuffed, Boris is now likely to
push for the Strarne Tunnel.
<https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/think-britain-to-belfast-is-a-bridge-too-far-try-tunnelling-across-instead-2kbqs0jxm?shareToken=673b91a1a06f78f84b4e3658667e41f1>
It's worth pointing out, for the benefit of those who haven't read the
article, that this is not the PM's suggestion but, rather, the
submission of the High-Speed Rail Group to the Union Connectivity Review
of transport links within the UK (which is about long-distance transport
generally, and not specifically about links between Northern Ireland and
Great Britain).

Equally, the HSRG's submission didn't just include a suggestion for a
Scotland-NI tunnel, but also various other rail schemes that they would
like to see constructed. And the reason it's news now, is because the
consultation period closed in December and the submissions made to the
consultation are now in the process of being published.

You can read the HSRG's response to the consultation here:

https://www.rail-leaders.com/publications/hsrgs-response-to-the-union-connectivity-review/
or https://tinyurl.com/5h5va7st

https://www.rail-leaders.com/wp-content/uploads/HSRG-Union-Connectivity-Review-Submission.pdf
or https://tinyurl.com/jnqpnch4

Mark
D A Stocks
2021-02-15 14:29:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Having had another of his mad bridge ideas rebuffed, Boris is now likely to
push for the Strarne Tunnel.
<https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/think-britain-to-belfast-is-a-bridge-too-far-try-tunnelling-across-instead-2kbqs0jxm?shareToken=673b91a1a06f78f84b4e3658667e41f1>
I notice the Norwegians have started construction of a bored road tunnel
link at Rogfast which is on a similar scale in terms of length and depth to
that required to cross the North Channel. They have also proposed submerged
floating tunnels to eliminate ferries on the E39:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_route_E39#Future

Probably best to wait a decade or two to see how they get on ...

--
DAS
Recliner
2021-02-15 17:08:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by D A Stocks
Post by Recliner
Having had another of his mad bridge ideas rebuffed, Boris is now likely to
push for the Strarne Tunnel.
<https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/think-britain-to-belfast-is-a-bridge-too-far-try-tunnelling-across-instead-2kbqs0jxm?shareToken=673b91a1a06f78f84b4e3658667e41f1>
I notice the Norwegians have started construction of a bored road tunnel
link at Rogfast which is on a similar scale in terms of length and depth to
that required to cross the North Channel. They have also proposed submerged
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_route_E39#Future
Probably best to wait a decade or two to see how they get on ...
Or wait a year or two, when Boris is no longer PM, and it can be quietly
forgotten.
MB
2021-02-16 09:51:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by D A Stocks
I notice the Norwegians have started construction of a bored road tunnel
link at Rogfast which is on a similar scale in terms of length and depth
to that required to cross the North Channel. They have also proposed
I hope they ban cheese! :-)
Certes
2021-02-16 11:29:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by D A Stocks
I notice the Norwegians have started construction of a bored road
tunnel link at Rogfast which is on a similar scale in terms of length
and depth to that required to cross the North Channel. They have also
I hope they ban cheese!  :-)
The EU will certainly require us to have a customs queue leaving the NI
tunnel, where everyone is carefully searched for cheese sandwiches which
they might smuggle into the Republic of Ireland and onwards to France.
Graeme Wall
2021-02-16 12:25:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Certes
Post by D A Stocks
I notice the Norwegians have started construction of a bored road
tunnel link at Rogfast which is on a similar scale in terms of length
and depth to that required to cross the North Channel. They have also
I hope they ban cheese!  :-)
The EU will certainly require us to have a customs queue leaving the NI
tunnel, where everyone is carefully searched for cheese sandwiches which
they might smuggle into the Republic of Ireland and onwards to France.
By the time it is built, neither end of the tunnel will be in the UK.
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.
MB
2021-02-16 19:30:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Graeme Wall
By the time it is built, neither end of the tunnel will be in the UK.
That is why it will probably never built. The EU and Southern Ireland
are trying to get control of Northern Ireland (though not convinced
Southern Ireland really want all the problems it would give them.

I can't see Southern Ireland being able to afford it and the UK should
not contribute to it.

It would also need a lot spending in Scotland and if Sturgeon goes for
partition (if she has not gone by then) again the UK should not get
involved.

There are also a lot of doubts about the future of the EU so they cannot
be relied on to fund it.
Graeme Wall
2021-02-16 19:45:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Graeme Wall
By the time it is built, neither end of the tunnel will be in the UK.
That is why it will probably never built.  The EU and Southern Ireland
are trying to get control of Northern Ireland (though not convinced
Southern Ireland really want all the problems it would give them.
I can't see Southern Ireland being able to afford it and the UK should
not contribute to it.
It would also need a lot spending in Scotland and if Sturgeon goes for
partition (if she has not gone by then) again the UK should not get
involved.
In that case there won't be a United Kingdom any more so your point is moot.
There are also a lot of doubts about the future of the EU so they cannot
be relied on to fund it.
Not as many as you might want.
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.
Jeremy Double
2021-02-16 20:32:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Graeme Wall
By the time it is built, neither end of the tunnel will be in the UK.
That is why it will probably never built.  The EU and Southern Ireland
are trying to get control of Northern Ireland (though not convinced
Southern Ireland really want all the problems it would give them.
I can't see Southern Ireland being able to afford it and the UK should
not contribute to it.
It would also need a lot spending in Scotland and if Sturgeon goes for
partition (if she has not gone by then) again the UK should not get
involved.
In that case there won't be a United Kingdom any more so your point is moot.
United Kingdom of England and Wales?
Post by Graeme Wall
There are also a lot of doubts about the future of the EU so they cannot
be relied on to fund it.
Not as many as you might want.
--
Jeremy Double
Graeme Wall
2021-02-16 20:44:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Jeremy Double
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Graeme Wall
By the time it is built, neither end of the tunnel will be in the UK.
That is why it will probably never built.  The EU and Southern Ireland
are trying to get control of Northern Ireland (though not convinced
Southern Ireland really want all the problems it would give them.
I can't see Southern Ireland being able to afford it and the UK should
not contribute to it.
It would also need a lot spending in Scotland and if Sturgeon goes for
partition (if she has not gone by then) again the UK should not get
involved.
In that case there won't be a United Kingdom any more so your point is moot.
United Kingdom of England and Wales?
Wales is not a kingdom
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.
Arthur Figgis
2021-02-16 22:16:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Jeremy Double
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Graeme Wall
By the time it is built, neither end of the tunnel will be in the UK.
That is why it will probably never built.  The EU and Southern Ireland
are trying to get control of Northern Ireland (though not convinced
Southern Ireland really want all the problems it would give them.
I can't see Southern Ireland being able to afford it and the UK should
not contribute to it.
It would also need a lot spending in Scotland and if Sturgeon goes for
partition (if she has not gone by then) again the UK should not get
involved.
In that case there won't be a United Kingdom any more so your point is moot.
United Kingdom of England and Wales?
Wales is not a kingdom
Nor are England or Scotland. The UK is the kingdom. Ask Queen Anne.
Except we can't because she's dead.
--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK
Mark Goodge
2021-02-17 09:43:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 16 Feb 2021 22:16:59 +0000, Arthur Figgis
Post by Arthur Figgis
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Jeremy Double
Post by Graeme Wall
In that case there won't be a United Kingdom any more so your point is moot.
United Kingdom of England and Wales?
Wales is not a kingdom
Nor are England or Scotland. The UK is the kingdom. Ask Queen Anne.
Except we can't because she's dead.
But England and Scotland once were, unlike Wales, which never was.

The United Kingdom of Great Britain was formed by the union of the
Kingdom of Scotland and the Kingdom of England. Should that union ever
be dissolved, we will revert back to two separate kingdoms. Or,
possibly, one kingdom and a republic. But neither separate kingdom could
claim to be a "united" kingdom, as it would not have been united with
any other kingdom. Northern Ireland is not, and never has been, a
kingdom either.

Mark
Basil Jet
2021-02-17 11:20:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mark Goodge
Northern Ireland is not, and never has been, a
kingdom either.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_kings_of_Ulster
--
Basil Jet recently enjoyed listening to
1977 - Kill City (Yellow & Red cover) - Iggy Pop & James Williamson
Mark Goodge
2021-02-17 12:02:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Basil Jet
Post by Mark Goodge
Northern Ireland is not, and never has been, a
kingdom either.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_kings_of_Ulster
The historic kingdom of Ulaid, from which we get the name "Ulster", is
not the same thing as Northern Ireland, though. Nor is it the same as
the modern province of Ulster. Even the modern province of Ulster is not
the same as Northern Ireland. The territory now known as Northern
Ireland had no separate existence prior to partition.

Mark
MB
2021-02-17 14:30:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mark Goodge
The historic kingdom of Ulaid, from which we get the name "Ulster", is
not the same thing as Northern Ireland, though. Nor is it the same as
the modern province of Ulster. Even the modern province of Ulster is not
the same as Northern Ireland. The territory now known as Northern
Ireland had no separate existence prior to partition.
Can't that be said of most countries. Is modern England or Scotland the
same as it was in the past?
Mark Goodge
2021-02-17 14:40:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by MB
Post by Mark Goodge
The historic kingdom of Ulaid, from which we get the name "Ulster", is
not the same thing as Northern Ireland, though. Nor is it the same as
the modern province of Ulster. Even the modern province of Ulster is not
the same as Northern Ireland. The territory now known as Northern
Ireland had no separate existence prior to partition.
Can't that be said of most countries. Is modern England or Scotland the
same as it was in the past?
They both still have the same boundaries as when they were individual
kingdoms, yes.

Mark
Charles Ellson
2021-02-17 19:36:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Wed, 17 Feb 2021 14:40:46 +0000, Mark Goodge
Post by Mark Goodge
Post by MB
Post by Mark Goodge
The historic kingdom of Ulaid, from which we get the name "Ulster", is
not the same thing as Northern Ireland, though. Nor is it the same as
the modern province of Ulster. Even the modern province of Ulster is not
the same as Northern Ireland. The territory now known as Northern
Ireland had no separate existence prior to partition.
Can't that be said of most countries. Is modern England or Scotland the
same as it was in the past?
They both still have the same boundaries as when they were individual
kingdoms, yes.
The maritime boundary in the North Sea has been fiddled with a few
times, Monmouthshire was in an uncertain state until 1973 and Berwick
on Tweed has never been formally incorporated into England since last
changing hands in the 15th century.
Mark Goodge
2021-02-17 20:34:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Wed, 17 Feb 2021 19:36:43 +0000, Charles Ellson
Post by Charles Ellson
On Wed, 17 Feb 2021 14:40:46 +0000, Mark Goodge
Post by Mark Goodge
Post by MB
Post by Mark Goodge
The historic kingdom of Ulaid, from which we get the name "Ulster", is
not the same thing as Northern Ireland, though. Nor is it the same as
the modern province of Ulster. Even the modern province of Ulster is not
the same as Northern Ireland. The territory now known as Northern
Ireland had no separate existence prior to partition.
Can't that be said of most countries. Is modern England or Scotland the
same as it was in the past?
They both still have the same boundaries as when they were individual
kingdoms, yes.
The maritime boundary in the North Sea has been fiddled with a few
times, Monmouthshire was in an uncertain state until 1973 and Berwick
on Tweed has never been formally incorporated into England since last
changing hands in the 15th century.
The Kingdom of England included Wales (and therefore the status of
Monmouth was irrelevant vis-a-vis the kingdom). Maritime boundaries are
always somewhat fluid. And Berwick last changed hands before the Acts of
Union. So, repealing the Acts of Union would simply take us back to the
pre-1707 state, when the land border between England and Scotland was in
exactly the same place that it is now.

Mark
Charles Ellson
2021-02-18 01:32:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Wed, 17 Feb 2021 20:35:32 +0000, Graeme Wall
Post by Charles Ellson
On Wed, 17 Feb 2021 14:40:46 +0000, Mark Goodge
Post by Mark Goodge
Post by MB
Post by Mark Goodge
The historic kingdom of Ulaid, from which we get the name "Ulster", is
not the same thing as Northern Ireland, though. Nor is it the same as
the modern province of Ulster. Even the modern province of Ulster is not
the same as Northern Ireland. The territory now known as Northern
Ireland had no separate existence prior to partition.
Can't that be said of most countries. Is modern England or Scotland the
same as it was in the past?
They both still have the same boundaries as when they were individual
kingdoms, yes.
The maritime boundary in the North Sea has been fiddled with a few
times, Monmouthshire was in an uncertain state until 1973 and Berwick
on Tweed has never been formally incorporated into England since last
changing hands in the 15th century.
Wales and Berwick Act 1746
Local Government Act 1972
Neither of which involved a specific incorporation or transfer. The
1746 Act (now repealed) merely deemed that mentions of England in an
Act were to be understood as including Berwick and Wales. The 1972 Act
merely excludes Monmouthshire and Newport from "England"; the 1746 Act
was repealed WRT Wales by the Welsh Language Act 1967 (i.e. not 1973).
Bearing in mind that both places' changes post-date "time immemorial"
the legislation has places arriving or mentioned as present in one
country without having left another.
Marland
2021-02-17 12:08:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Basil Jet
Post by Mark Goodge
Northern Ireland is not, and never has been, a
kingdom either.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_kings_of_Ulster
You of all people being of Paddy stock should know the state of Northern
Ireland is only part of the Ulster of those times.

GH
Charles Ellson
2021-02-18 02:01:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Wed, 17 Feb 2021 19:19:40 +0000, Arthur Figgis
Post by Mark Goodge
On Tue, 16 Feb 2021 22:16:59 +0000, Arthur Figgis
Post by Arthur Figgis
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Jeremy Double
Post by Graeme Wall
In that case there won't be a United Kingdom any more so your point is moot.
United Kingdom of England and Wales?
Wales is not a kingdom
Nor are England or Scotland. The UK is the kingdom. Ask Queen Anne.
Except we can't because she's dead.
But England and Scotland once were, unlike Wales, which never was.
The United Kingdom of Great Britain was formed by the union of the
Kingdom of Scotland and the Kingdom of England.
Which it replaced. The idea that two kingdoms still exist,
One kingdom, more than one country.
OTOH nobody told whoever drew up the Treason (Ireland) Act 1821 :-
"...any treason or misprision of treason that shall be committed or
done within the Kingdom of England, Dominion of Wales, or Town of
Berwick-upon-Tweed,..." which ISTR was not the only post-1707
legislation mentioning the Kingdom of England as a contemporary
entity.
or that the
UK replaced England and Scotland has some kind of federation with the
UK, seems to be a fairly recent nationalist idea, rather than firmly
based in reality.
Should that union ever
Post by Mark Goodge
be dissolved, we will revert back to two separate kingdoms.
That would depend on the systems of government chosen. Or someone could
upgrade Wales or NI to a kingdom; I'm sure HM must have some German
relatves whose families knew how to do that kind of thing.
Or,
Post by Mark Goodge
possibly, one kingdom and a republic. But neither separate kingdom could
claim to be a "united" kingdom, as it would not have been united with
any other kingdom.
Freedom for Elmet!
Northern Ireland is not, and never has been, a
Post by Mark Goodge
kingdom either.
AIUI Ireland has never been a single entity outside the sphere of Great
Britain/England/Anglo-French empire/etc.
United under Brian Boru in the early 11th century before England was
in a position to stick its oar in.
Charles Ellson
2021-02-18 02:45:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Thu, 18 Feb 2021 02:01:32 +0000, Charles Ellson
Post by Charles Ellson
On Wed, 17 Feb 2021 19:19:40 +0000, Arthur Figgis
Post by Mark Goodge
On Tue, 16 Feb 2021 22:16:59 +0000, Arthur Figgis
Post by Arthur Figgis
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Jeremy Double
Post by Graeme Wall
In that case there won't be a United Kingdom any more so your point is moot.
United Kingdom of England and Wales?
Wales is not a kingdom
Nor are England or Scotland. The UK is the kingdom. Ask Queen Anne.
Except we can't because she's dead.
But England and Scotland once were, unlike Wales, which never was.
The United Kingdom of Great Britain was formed by the union of the
Kingdom of Scotland and the Kingdom of England.
Which it replaced. The idea that two kingdoms still exist,
One kingdom, more than one country.
OTOH nobody told whoever drew up the Treason (Ireland) Act 1821 :-
"...any treason or misprision of treason that shall be committed or
done within the Kingdom of England, Dominion of Wales, or Town of
Berwick-upon-Tweed,..." which ISTR was not the only post-1707
legislation mentioning the Kingdom of England as a contemporary
entity.
Having now found it in full on legislation.gov.uk, that is the 1821
Act quoting from an earlier one :-(. It does however link up with the
matter of Berwick upon Tweed mentioned elsewhere as it distinguishes
it from England and Wales.
Post by Charles Ellson
or that the
UK replaced England and Scotland has some kind of federation with the
UK, seems to be a fairly recent nationalist idea, rather than firmly
based in reality.
Should that union ever
Post by Mark Goodge
be dissolved, we will revert back to two separate kingdoms.
That would depend on the systems of government chosen. Or someone could
upgrade Wales or NI to a kingdom; I'm sure HM must have some German
relatves whose families knew how to do that kind of thing.
Or,
Post by Mark Goodge
possibly, one kingdom and a republic. But neither separate kingdom could
claim to be a "united" kingdom, as it would not have been united with
any other kingdom.
Freedom for Elmet!
Northern Ireland is not, and never has been, a
Post by Mark Goodge
kingdom either.
AIUI Ireland has never been a single entity outside the sphere of Great
Britain/England/Anglo-French empire/etc.
United under Brian Boru in the early 11th century before England was
in a position to stick its oar in.
Basil Jet
2021-02-18 09:27:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Charles Ellson
AIUI Ireland has never been a single entity outside the sphere of Great
Britain/England/Anglo-French empire/etc.
United under Brian Boru in the early 11th century before England was
in a position to stick its oar in.
I.e. "The English never gave the Irish any grief, it was the Normans who
gave the English grief and then gave the Irish grief"
--
Basil Jet recently enjoyed listening to
1984 - The Smiths - The Smiths
MB
2021-02-17 20:40:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Both England and Scotland were kingdoms, Wales wasn't.
Gruffydd ap Llywelyn ?
ColinR
2021-02-16 22:21:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Jeremy Double
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Graeme Wall
By the time it is built, neither end of the tunnel will be in the UK.
That is why it will probably never built.  The EU and Southern Ireland
are trying to get control of Northern Ireland (though not convinced
Southern Ireland really want all the problems it would give them.
I can't see Southern Ireland being able to afford it and the UK should
not contribute to it.
It would also need a lot spending in Scotland and if Sturgeon goes for
partition (if she has not gone by then) again the UK should not get
involved.
In that case there won't be a United Kingdom any more so your point is moot.
United Kingdom of England and Wales?
Wales is not a kingdom
Is not, but was (albeit briefly)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gruffydd_ap_Llywelyn
--
Colin
Marland
2021-02-16 23:48:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Jeremy Double
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Graeme Wall
By the time it is built, neither end of the tunnel will be in the UK.
That is why it will probably never built.  The EU and Southern Ireland
are trying to get control of Northern Ireland (though not convinced
Southern Ireland really want all the problems it would give them.
I can't see Southern Ireland being able to afford it and the UK should
not contribute to it.
It would also need a lot spending in Scotland and if Sturgeon goes for
partition (if she has not gone by then) again the UK should not get
involved.
In that case there won't be a United Kingdom any more so your point is moot.
United Kingdom of England and Wales?
Wales is not a kingdom
England might not have a Queen or King as head of state on a few decades
either.

GH
MB
2021-02-16 22:22:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Jeremy Double
United Kingdom of England and Wales?
It keeps cropping up, the Remoaners seem to think they own the name
"United Kingdom" when we can use it as long as we want.
Roland Perry
2021-02-17 06:30:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by MB
Post by Jeremy Double
United Kingdom of England and Wales?
It keeps cropping up, the Remoaners seem to think they own the name
"United Kingdom" when we can use it as long as we want.
I noticed a TV reporter yesterday (when talking about potential changes
in lockdown policy) refer to the differences at the moment between
"Scotland" and "the UK". Freudian slip perhaps.

Meanwhile, here in E&W, we get almost no news about what the lockdown in
NI is like.
--
Roland Perry
tim...
2021-02-17 10:38:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by MB
Post by Jeremy Double
United Kingdom of England and Wales?
It keeps cropping up, the Remoaners seem to think they own the name
"United Kingdom" when we can use it as long as we want.
I noticed a TV reporter yesterday (when talking about potential changes in
lockdown policy) refer to the differences at the moment between "Scotland"
and "the UK". Freudian slip perhaps.
Meanwhile, here in E&W, we get almost no news about what the lockdown in
NI is like.
why would we?
Charles Ellson
2021-02-17 19:42:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by tim...
Post by MB
Post by Jeremy Double
United Kingdom of England and Wales?
It keeps cropping up, the Remoaners seem to think they own the name
"United Kingdom" when we can use it as long as we want.
I noticed a TV reporter yesterday (when talking about potential changes in
lockdown policy) refer to the differences at the moment between "Scotland"
and "the UK". Freudian slip perhaps.
Meanwhile, here in E&W, we get almost no news about what the lockdown in
NI is like.
why would we?
Wasn't it still part of the UK this morning ?
Sam Wilson
2021-02-16 23:11:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Graeme Wall
By the time it is built, neither end of the tunnel will be in the UK.
That is why it will probably never built.  The EU and Southern Ireland
are trying to get control of Northern Ireland (though not convinced
Southern Ireland really want all the problems it would give them.
I can't see Southern Ireland being able to afford it and the UK should
not contribute to it.
It would also need a lot spending in Scotland and if Sturgeon goes for
partition (if she has not gone by then) again the UK should not get
involved.
In that case there won't be a United Kingdom any more so your point is moot.
That depends on whether independence is gained or whether there are tanks
on the lawn at Holyrood.

Sam
--
The entity formerly known as ***@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply
Arthur Figgis
2021-02-16 23:35:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Sam Wilson
That depends on whether independence is gained or whether there are tanks
on the lawn at Holyrood.
Given how many nationalists are convinced their granny was shot at by
"English" tanks which were supposedly killing (communists in the
past/nationalists nowadays) in George Square in Glasgow 1919 (it never
happened; that picture they use as "proof" is actually of a WWI
fundraising event), they will probably just claim there are tanks anyway.

One of my favourite bits of plague fake news was the picture of a French
military convoy which was said to be the English/unionists arriving to
put Glagsow until military occupation for... reasons. The fact the
convoy was on the right-hand side of the road simply proved how the
dastardly English were driving along the wrong side of the motorway so
that any photos would get dismissed as takren elsewhere.
--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK
Charles Ellson
2021-02-18 00:58:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 16 Feb 2021 23:35:14 +0000, Arthur Figgis
Post by Arthur Figgis
Post by Sam Wilson
That depends on whether independence is gained or whether there are tanks
on the lawn at Holyrood.
Given how many nationalists are convinced their granny was shot at by
"English" tanks which were supposedly killing (communists in the
past/nationalists nowadays) in George Square in Glasgow 1919 (it never
happened;
That maybe explains why I've never heard that tale.
Post by Arthur Figgis
that picture they use as "proof" is actually of a WWI
fundraising event), they will probably just claim there are tanks anyway.
There were, six of them but parked elsewhere.
https://winstonchurchill.hillsdale.edu/glasgow-tanks-george-square/

The "Tanks in George Square" tale was kicked off by Manny Shinwell
(not known as a Scottish nationalist) in the 1970s by which time most
of the people actually in George Square would have been beyond
repeating the tale to their grandchildren.
Post by Arthur Figgis
One of my favourite bits of plague fake news was the picture of a French
military convoy which was said to be the English/unionists arriving to
put Glagsow until military occupation for... reasons.
Got a URL? That is something else I have never heard of.
Post by Arthur Figgis
The fact the
convoy was on the right-hand side of the road simply proved how the
dastardly English were driving along the wrong side of the motorway so
that any photos would get dismissed as takren elsewhere.
MB
2021-02-16 12:31:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Certes
Post by D A Stocks
I notice the Norwegians have started construction of a bored road
tunnel link at Rogfast which is on a similar scale in terms of length
and depth to that required to cross the North Channel. They have also
I hope they ban cheese! :-)
The EU will certainly require us to have a customs queue leaving the NI
tunnel, where everyone is carefully searched for cheese sandwiches which
they might smuggle into the Republic of Ireland and onwards to France.
Nothing to do with smuggling cheese sandwiches!


2013
Burning Cheese Closes Norwegian Road For Days
It was probably a first for Norway when a truck trailer full of sweet
goat cheese caught fire near the town of Narvik late last week, blocking
a road tunnel. it took four days for firefighters to put out the flames.
No one was hurt. Norwegian Broadcasting says the tunnel was so badly
damaged that geologists are checking it for safety, and any lingering
toxic gases.
Graeme Wall
2021-02-16 12:32:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by MB
Post by Certes
Post by D A Stocks
I notice the Norwegians have started construction of a bored road
tunnel link at Rogfast which is on a similar scale in terms of
length and depth to that required to cross the North Channel. They
have also proposed submerged floating tunnels to eliminate ferries
I hope they ban cheese! :-)
The EU will certainly require us to have a customs queue leaving the NI
tunnel, where everyone is carefully searched for cheese sandwiches which
they might smuggle into the Republic of Ireland and onwards to France.
Nothing to do with smuggling cheese sandwiches!
2013
Burning Cheese Closes Norwegian Road For Days
It was probably a first for Norway when a truck trailer full of sweet
goat cheese caught fire near the town of Narvik late last week, blocking
a road tunnel. it took four days for firefighters to put out the flames.
No one was hurt. Norwegian Broadcasting says the tunnel was so badly
damaged that geologists are checking it for safety, and any lingering
toxic gases.
The ultimate fondue.
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.
Basil Jet
2021-02-16 14:09:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by MB
2013
Burning Cheese Closes Norwegian Road For Days
It was probably a first for Norway when a truck trailer full of sweet
goat cheese caught fire near the town of Narvik late last week, blocking
a road tunnel. it took four days for firefighters to put out the flames.
No one was hurt. Norwegian Broadcasting says the tunnel was so badly
damaged that geologists are checking it for safety, and any lingering
toxic gases.
A rare bit of excitement for them.
--
Basil Jet recently enjoyed listening to
The Lost Tapes - Can
Sam Wilson
2021-02-16 19:09:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Basil Jet
Post by MB
2013
Burning Cheese Closes Norwegian Road For Days
It was probably a first for Norway when a truck trailer full of sweet
goat cheese caught fire near the town of Narvik late last week, blocking
a road tunnel. it took four days for firefighters to put out the flames.
No one was hurt. Norwegian Broadcasting says the tunnel was so badly
damaged that geologists are checking it for safety, and any lingering
toxic gases.
A rare bit of excitement for them.
I don’t suppose it could ever happen on the A55 or the A40?

Sam
--
The entity formerly known as ***@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply
bob
2021-02-16 12:36:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Certes
Post by D A Stocks
I notice the Norwegians have started construction of a bored road
tunnel link at Rogfast which is on a similar scale in terms of length
and depth to that required to cross the North Channel. They have also
I hope they ban cheese! :-)
The EU will certainly require us to have a customs queue leaving the NI
tunnel, where everyone is carefully searched for cheese sandwiches which
they might smuggle into the Republic of Ireland and onwards to France.
The EU was perfectly happy to have an arrangement with no customs border in
the Irish Sea, it was written into the agreement with Theresa May. The
decision to have a customs border in the Irish Sea was the decision of the UK
parliament.

Robin
Roland Perry
2021-02-16 13:20:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
In message
Post by bob
Post by Certes
Post by D A Stocks
I notice the Norwegians have started construction of a bored road
tunnel link at Rogfast which is on a similar scale in terms of length
and depth to that required to cross the North Channel. They have also
I hope they ban cheese! :-)
The EU will certainly require us to have a customs queue leaving the NI
tunnel, where everyone is carefully searched for cheese sandwiches which
they might smuggle into the Republic of Ireland and onwards to France.
The EU was perfectly happy to have an arrangement with no customs border in
the Irish Sea, it was written into the agreement with Theresa May. The
decision to have a customs border in the Irish Sea was the decision of the UK
parliament.
The new one under Boris, who had previously said that no such revised
agreement was possible.
--
Roland Perry
Recliner
2021-02-16 14:34:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
In message
Post by bob
Post by Certes
Post by D A Stocks
I notice the Norwegians have started construction of a bored road
tunnel link at Rogfast which is on a similar scale in terms of length
and depth to that required to cross the North Channel. They have also
I hope they ban cheese! :-)
The EU will certainly require us to have a customs queue leaving the NI
tunnel, where everyone is carefully searched for cheese sandwiches which
they might smuggle into the Republic of Ireland and onwards to France.
The EU was perfectly happy to have an arrangement with no customs border in
the Irish Sea, it was written into the agreement with Theresa May. The
decision to have a customs border in the Irish Sea was the decision of the UK
parliament.
The new one under Boris, who had previously said that no such revised
agreement was possible.
Specifically, he flatly denied that there would need to be a customs border between GB and NI. Even he must have been
well aware when he told the blatant lie that a hard Brexit meant that there would inevitably have to be a customs border
between GB and the EU, and the GF treaty prevented it being between NI and Ireland, while the EU would certainly stop it
being between Ireland and the rest of the EU. That meant that it logically had to be between GB and NI.

May's deal avoided that problem by keeping GB on the EU customs union, but that form of Brexit was much too soft for the
Vote Leave team that ran Boris for his first year in office (now largely gone).
Graeme Wall
2021-02-16 14:49:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
In message
Post by bob
Post by Certes
Post by D A Stocks
I notice the Norwegians have started construction of a bored road
tunnel link at Rogfast which is on a similar scale in terms of length
and depth to that required to cross the North Channel. They have also
I hope they ban cheese! :-)
The EU will certainly require us to have a customs queue leaving the NI
tunnel, where everyone is carefully searched for cheese sandwiches which
they might smuggle into the Republic of Ireland and onwards to France.
The EU was perfectly happy to have an arrangement with no customs border in
the Irish Sea, it was written into the agreement with Theresa May. The
decision to have a customs border in the Irish Sea was the decision of the UK
parliament.
The new one under Boris, who had previously said that no such revised
agreement was possible.
Specifically, he flatly denied that there would need to be a customs border between GB and NI. Even he must have been
well aware when he told the blatant lie that a hard Brexit meant that there would inevitably have to be a customs border
between GB and the EU, and the GF treaty prevented it being between NI and Ireland, while the EU would certainly stop it
being between Ireland and the rest of the EU. That meant that it logically had to be between GB and NI.
May's deal avoided that problem by keeping GB on the EU customs union, but that form of Brexit was much too soft for the
Vote Leave team that ran Boris for his first year in office (now largely gone).
The simple answer, not just for the NI problem but also all the other
problems now killing small businesses, the fishing industry and the
music industry, is to apply to join the Single Market and the Customs Union.
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.
Recliner
2021-02-16 15:28:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
In message
Post by bob
Post by Certes
Post by D A Stocks
I notice the Norwegians have started construction of a bored road
tunnel link at Rogfast which is on a similar scale in terms of length
and depth to that required to cross the North Channel. They have also
I hope they ban cheese! :-)
The EU will certainly require us to have a customs queue leaving the NI
tunnel, where everyone is carefully searched for cheese sandwiches which
they might smuggle into the Republic of Ireland and onwards to France.
The EU was perfectly happy to have an arrangement with no customs border in
the Irish Sea, it was written into the agreement with Theresa May. The
decision to have a customs border in the Irish Sea was the decision of the UK
parliament.
The new one under Boris, who had previously said that no such revised
agreement was possible.
Specifically, he flatly denied that there would need to be a customs border between GB and NI. Even he must have been
well aware when he told the blatant lie that a hard Brexit meant that there would inevitably have to be a customs border
between GB and the EU, and the GF treaty prevented it being between NI and Ireland, while the EU would certainly stop it
being between Ireland and the rest of the EU. That meant that it logically had to be between GB and NI.
May's deal avoided that problem by keeping GB on the EU customs union, but that form of Brexit was much too soft for the
Vote Leave team that ran Boris for his first year in office (now largely gone).
The simple answer, not just for the NI problem but also all the other
problems now killing small businesses, the fishing industry and the
music industry, is to apply to join the Single Market and the Customs Union.
I'm not sure that a soft Brexit like that would appeal to anyone. You can either be a full EU member, and play a part in
setting and agreeing the rules, or be completely out. I would have preferred the former, but now we must make the most
of the latter. There's little benefit in being an associate member, subject to the rules, but not having any say over
them.

I think many of the customs issues are short-term and soluble. Some simply require more familiarity with the rules (both
for traders and the authorities), while others need business to change how they sell to the EU, to make it more like
they sell to others. This might mean having distributors within the EU to deal with individual customers, rather than
doing it directly.

For the bivalve molluscs, the EU should probably be more flexible, as it had apparently promised, or we need to set up
the purifying facilities on our side. So, for example, we could set up export purification tanks in Kent to handle all
live mollusc UK exports via the Tunnel and Dover, replacing the EU plants that currently do the job on the other side of
the Channel. In other words, we should add the value on our side of the Channel, rather than exporting a lower value
product to be purified by plants on the other side. It looks like a business opportunity for someone, and let's hope we
are the ones to take it, rather than expecting, say, the Dutch to set up such plants in Kent.

The touring musicians problem need some accommodation by both sides. Our Home Office was too adamant about restricting
such visits to the UK, and didn't think through the consequences for our own touring performers; but the EU is also
being too bureaucratic. This seems like an easy problem to solve if both sides weren't so pig-headed.
Roland Perry
2021-02-16 16:35:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 16 Feb 2021 14:49:48 +0000, Graeme Wall
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
In message
Post by bob
Post by Certes
Post by D A Stocks
I notice the Norwegians have started construction of a bored road
tunnel link at Rogfast which is on a similar scale in terms of length
and depth to that required to cross the North Channel. They have also
I hope they ban cheese! :-)
The EU will certainly require us to have a customs queue leaving the NI
tunnel, where everyone is carefully searched for cheese sandwiches which
they might smuggle into the Republic of Ireland and onwards to France.
The EU was perfectly happy to have an arrangement with no customs border in
the Irish Sea, it was written into the agreement with Theresa May. The
decision to have a customs border in the Irish Sea was the
decision of the UK
parliament.
The new one under Boris, who had previously said that no such revised
agreement was possible.
Specifically, he flatly denied that there would need to be a customs
border between GB and NI. Even he must have been
well aware when he told the blatant lie that a hard Brexit meant
that there would inevitably have to be a customs border
between GB and the EU, and the GF treaty prevented it being between
NI and Ireland, while the EU would certainly stop it
being between Ireland and the rest of the EU. That meant that it
logically had to be between GB and NI.
May's deal avoided that problem by keeping GB on the EU customs
union, but that form of Brexit was much too soft for the
Vote Leave team that ran Boris for his first year in office (now largely gone).
The simple answer, not just for the NI problem but also all the other
problems now killing small businesses, the fishing industry and the
music industry, is to apply to join the Single Market and the Customs Union.
I'm not sure that a soft Brexit like that would appeal to anyone.
It was what the leave campaign promised gullible floating voters would
be the worst possible outcome, in the sense of lower-bound friction
rather than least pandering to the BRINO brigade.

And what did Gove mean when he said: "There is a free trade zone
stretching from Iceland to Turkey that all European nations have access
to - after we vote to leave we will remain in this zone."
You can either be a full EU member, and play a part in setting and
agreeing the rules, or be completely out. I would have preferred the
former, but now we must make the most of the latter. There's little
benefit in being an associate member, subject to the rules, but not
having any say over them.
Although that solution, "Norway style", was commonly mentioned.

I agree of course that it's problematic, having as I've said many times
before, worked with the outside-of-the-tent
man-from-the-telecoms-ministry from Norway, as he tried to get as much
possible grip on the proceedings in Brussels. Not least of course
because telecoms (and privacy, which these days is almost entirely about
online privacy) regulation has been one of the main items on the table.
--
Roland Perry
Recliner
2021-02-16 17:14:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
On Tue, 16 Feb 2021 14:49:48 +0000, Graeme Wall
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
In message
Post by bob
Post by Certes
Post by D A Stocks
I notice the Norwegians have started construction of a bored road
tunnel link at Rogfast which is on a similar scale in terms of length
and depth to that required to cross the North Channel. They have also
I hope they ban cheese! :-)
The EU will certainly require us to have a customs queue leaving the NI
tunnel, where everyone is carefully searched for cheese sandwiches which
they might smuggle into the Republic of Ireland and onwards to France.
The EU was perfectly happy to have an arrangement with no customs border in
the Irish Sea, it was written into the agreement with Theresa May. The
decision to have a customs border in the Irish Sea was the decision of the UK
parliament.
The new one under Boris, who had previously said that no such revised
agreement was possible.
Specifically, he flatly denied that there would need to be a customs
border between GB and NI. Even he must have been
well aware when he told the blatant lie that a hard Brexit meant
that there would inevitably have to be a customs border
between GB and the EU, and the GF treaty prevented it being between
NI and Ireland, while the EU would certainly stop it
being between Ireland and the rest of the EU. That meant that it
logically had to be between GB and NI.
May's deal avoided that problem by keeping GB on the EU customs
union, but that form of Brexit was much too soft for the
Vote Leave team that ran Boris for his first year in office (now largely gone).
The simple answer, not just for the NI problem but also all the other
problems now killing small businesses, the fishing industry and the
music industry, is to apply to join the Single Market and the Customs Union.
I'm not sure that a soft Brexit like that would appeal to anyone.
It was what the leave campaign promised gullible floating voters would
be the worst possible outcome, in the sense of lower-bound friction
rather than least pandering to the BRINO brigade.
And what did Gove mean when he said: "There is a free trade zone
stretching from Iceland to Turkey that all European nations have access
to - after we vote to leave we will remain in this zone."
Well, strictly speaking, he was right. We do have free trade with that EU
zone, but are outside the customs union, just like Switzerland, Norway or
Turkey. Trade will get smoother once everyone gets used to the new
formalities, but it won't ever be as frictionless as it used to be until
two months ago.
Post by Roland Perry
You can either be a full EU member, and play a part in setting and
agreeing the rules, or be completely out. I would have preferred the
former, but now we must make the most of the latter. There's little
benefit in being an associate member, subject to the rules, but not
having any say over them.
Although that solution, "Norway style", was commonly mentioned.
I agree of course that it's problematic, having as I've said many times
before, worked with the outside-of-the-tent
man-from-the-telecoms-ministry from Norway, as he tried to get as much
possible grip on the proceedings in Brussels. Not least of course
because telecoms (and privacy, which these days is almost entirely about
online privacy) regulation has been one of the main items on the table.
One clear difference is that we have the stated intention of diverging from
the EU, whereas the other non-EU European members are hoping to converge
with the EU. The EU is taking that to mean that we've already diverged,
which clearly is not the case, and not likely any time soon.
Roland Perry
2021-02-17 06:33:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
And what did Gove mean when he said: "There is a free trade zone
stretching from Iceland to Turkey that all European nations have access
to - after we vote to leave we will remain in this zone."
Well, strictly speaking, he was right. We do have free trade with that EU
zone, but are outside the customs union, just like Switzerland, Norway or
Turkey. Trade will get smoother once everyone gets used to the new
formalities, but it won't ever be as frictionless as it used to be until
two months ago.
The Free Trade deal at the moment is quite limited (agricultural
products seem especially difficult, then there's the business of
Carnets), and of course doesn't cover things like banking.
--
Roland Perry
Recliner
2021-02-17 09:51:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
And what did Gove mean when he said: "There is a free trade zone
stretching from Iceland to Turkey that all European nations have access
to - after we vote to leave we will remain in this zone."
Well, strictly speaking, he was right. We do have free trade with that EU
zone, but are outside the customs union, just like Switzerland, Norway or
Turkey. Trade will get smoother once everyone gets used to the new
formalities, but it won't ever be as frictionless as it used to be until
two months ago.
The Free Trade deal at the moment is quite limited (agricultural
products seem especially difficult, then there's the business of
Carnets), and of course doesn't cover things like banking.
Free trade deals usually only cover trade in goods, not services. Even
within the EU, the single market never properly covered services, which was
a pain for the UK: it covered goods, where we always had a large deficit,
but not services, where we run a surplus. That surplus would have been
larger if the Single Market had fully developed for services.

We don't want the trade deal to cover banking, and are not seeking
'equivalence' status if that would mean conforming to EU banking
regulations, as the EU seems to want. However, the EU is currently in clear
violation of WTO rules in this area, which we've chosen not to act on just
yet.
Recliner
2021-02-17 10:45:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Recliner
We don't want the trade deal to cover banking, and are not seeking
'equivalence' status if that would mean conforming to EU banking
regulations, as the EU seems to want.
The wording of the "euqivalence" status implies that it would mean
conforming to EU regulations but not being governed by the EU watchdog.
So why does the EU grant equivalence to countries with completely different
banking rules, such as Australia, but not to the UK with identical rules?
Given that the EU banking regulation are mostly written by the UK, I am
not quite sure what's so bad about it.
The UK expects EU rules to change in ways that don't work for a world
banking centre, while the UK rules are likely to change in ways that
strengthen it as a world banking centre.
Post by Recliner
However, the EU is currently in clear violation of WTO rules in this
area, which we've chosen not to act on just yet.
As far as I understand it, WTO provides rules for goods, not for
services. What WTO rules can there be on banking?
Quite from (ie, the article author's opinion, not necessarily mine)
<https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2021/02/12/europes-war-equivalence-risks-violating-international-law/>

The EU risks violating international law if it continues to deny the UK
“equivalence” in financial services already granted to a string of other
countries.

Selective treatment of one state for political reasons breaches the
non-discrimination principle of the World Trade Organisation. It is
strictly forbidden.

Lorand Bartels, an expert in international trade law at Cambridge
University, said: “A good lawyer would reach for Article VII of General
Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS). It is not a slam dunk but it would
be a good case.”

Switzerland explored legal recourse under WTO law after the EU singled out
Swiss exchanges for punitive treatment, although it ultimately stopped
short of pulling the trigger.

Equivalence is a normal courtesy among developed OECD states and even some
that are not. The EU grants Brazil recognition in areas such as insurance,
auditing, credit institutions, exchanges, investment firms, though it would
be a stretch to argue that Brazil’s regulators have higher standards than
their British counterparts.

The UK has unilaterally granted equivalence to the EU across 28 sectors.
Brussels has refused to reciprocate except in two areas, chiefly in
counterparty clearing where the European financial system would otherwise
have been in danger.

Andrew Bailey, Governor of the Bank of England, suggested this week that
Brussels is weaponising equivalence to lock Britain into its system as a
regulatory satellite. “I'm afraid a world in which the EU dictates and
determines what rules and standards we have in the UK is not going to
work,” he said.

The EU says its ties to the UK are fundamentally different from ties to any
other third country, and that equivalence was never designed for such
circumstances. It cannot safely outsource financial stability - and 80pc of
its capital markets - to a hub outside its legal nexus.

But that is a political argument and cuts little ice under WTO rules. “All
WTO members with equivalent standards have to be treated equally. Refusal
to do so goes against the whole Most Favoured Nation principle,” said one
expert advising the Government.

Article VII states that members “shall not accord recognition in a manner
which would constitute a means of discrimination between countries ... or a
disguised restriction on trade in services. Unless an exemption applies, a
WTO member must treat service suppliers from all other WTO members
equally.”

The EU case is hollow since the UK has rolled over existing European
regulations and is 100pc aligned at this point. Where equivalence is
granted, it can be withdrawn within 30 days. Under any reading, the EU is
engaging in a “disguised restriction on trade in services”.

… continues
Certes
2021-02-17 12:23:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by Recliner
We don't want the trade deal to cover banking, and are not seeking
'equivalence' status if that would mean conforming to EU banking
regulations, as the EU seems to want.
The wording of the "euqivalence" status implies that it would mean
conforming to EU regulations but not being governed by the EU watchdog.
So why does the EU grant equivalence to countries with completely different
banking rules, such as Australia, but not to the UK with identical rules?
Because it can. The EU needs to make our life as unpleasant as it can
to discourage others from leaving, and some (je vous regarde, la France)
just enjoy hurting the UK on principle.
Roland Perry
2021-02-17 12:06:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
And what did Gove mean when he said: "There is a free trade zone
stretching from Iceland to Turkey that all European nations have access
to - after we vote to leave we will remain in this zone."
Well, strictly speaking, he was right. We do have free trade with that EU
zone, but are outside the customs union, just like Switzerland, Norway or
Turkey. Trade will get smoother once everyone gets used to the new
formalities, but it won't ever be as frictionless as it used to be until
two months ago.
The Free Trade deal at the moment is quite limited (agricultural
products seem especially difficult, then there's the business of
Carnets), and of course doesn't cover things like banking.
Free trade deals usually only cover trade in goods, not services. Even
within the EU, the single market never properly covered services, which was
a pain for the UK: it covered goods, where we always had a large deficit,
but not services, where we run a surplus. That surplus would have been
larger if the Single Market had fully developed for services.
We don't want the trade deal to cover banking,
Mainly because the people bankrolling the Leave campaign didn't want to
get caught up in upcoming EU regulation.
Post by Recliner
and are not seeking 'equivalence' status if that would mean conforming
to EU banking regulations, as the EU seems to want. However, the EU is
currently in clear violation of WTO rules in this area, which we've
chosen not to act on just yet.
--
Roland Perry
tim...
2021-02-17 12:07:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 16 Feb 2021 14:49:48 +0000, Graeme Wall
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
In message
Post by bob
Post by Certes
Post by D A Stocks
I notice the Norwegians have started construction of a bored road
tunnel link at Rogfast which is on a similar scale in terms of length
and depth to that required to cross the North Channel. They have also
I hope they ban cheese! :-)
The EU will certainly require us to have a customs queue leaving the NI
tunnel, where everyone is carefully searched for cheese sandwiches which
they might smuggle into the Republic of Ireland and onwards to France.
The EU was perfectly happy to have an arrangement with no customs border in
the Irish Sea, it was written into the agreement with Theresa May. The
decision to have a customs border in the Irish Sea was the decision of the UK
parliament.
The new one under Boris, who had previously said that no such revised
agreement was possible.
Specifically, he flatly denied that there would need to be a customs
border between GB and NI. Even he must have been
well aware when he told the blatant lie that a hard Brexit meant that
there would inevitably have to be a customs border
between GB and the EU, and the GF treaty prevented it being between NI
and Ireland, while the EU would certainly stop it
being between Ireland and the rest of the EU. That meant that it
logically had to be between GB and NI.
May's deal avoided that problem by keeping GB on the EU customs union,
but that form of Brexit was much too soft for the
Vote Leave team that ran Boris for his first year in office (now largely gone).
The simple answer, not just for the NI problem but also all the other
problems now killing small businesses, the fishing industry and the
music industry, is to apply to join the Single Market and the Customs Union.
I'm not sure that a soft Brexit like that would appeal to anyone.
It was what the leave campaign promised gullible floating voters would be
the worst possible outcome, in the sense of lower-bound friction rather
than least pandering to the BRINO brigade.
no it wasn't

they very clearly said "we will be leaving the Customs Union" "we will be
leaving the Single Market"
Jeremy Double
2021-02-17 13:30:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by tim...
On Tue, 16 Feb 2021 14:49:48 +0000, Graeme Wall
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
In message
Post by bob
Post by Certes
Post by D A Stocks
I notice the Norwegians have started construction of a bored road
tunnel link at Rogfast which is on a similar scale in terms of length
and depth to that required to cross the North Channel. They have also
I hope they ban cheese! :-)
The EU will certainly require us to have a customs queue leaving the NI
tunnel, where everyone is carefully searched for cheese sandwiches which
they might smuggle into the Republic of Ireland and onwards to France.
The EU was perfectly happy to have an arrangement with no customs border in
the Irish Sea, it was written into the agreement with Theresa May. The
decision to have a customs border in the Irish Sea was the decision of the UK
parliament.
The new one under Boris, who had previously said that no such revised
agreement was possible.
Specifically, he flatly denied that there would need to be a customs
border between GB and NI. Even he must have been
well aware when he told the blatant lie that a hard Brexit meant that
there would inevitably have to be a customs border
between GB and the EU, and the GF treaty prevented it being between NI
and Ireland, while the EU would certainly stop it
being between Ireland and the rest of the EU. That meant that it
logically had to be between GB and NI.
May's deal avoided that problem by keeping GB on the EU customs union,
but that form of Brexit was much too soft for the
Vote Leave team that ran Boris for his first year in office (now largely gone).
The simple answer, not just for the NI problem but also all the other
problems now killing small businesses, the fishing industry and the
music industry, is to apply to join the Single Market and the Customs Union.
I'm not sure that a soft Brexit like that would appeal to anyone.
It was what the leave campaign promised gullible floating voters would be
the worst possible outcome, in the sense of lower-bound friction rather
than least pandering to the BRINO brigade.
no it wasn't
they very clearly said "we will be leaving the Customs Union" "we will be
leaving the Single Market"
That was certainly not the impression given by many Leave proponents before
the referendum, where they implied, if not stated explicitly, that we would
retain the same access to the single market as we had as an EU member...
--
Jeremy Double
tim...
2021-02-17 19:27:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Jeremy Double
Post by tim...
On Tue, 16 Feb 2021 14:49:48 +0000, Graeme Wall
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
In message
Post by bob
Post by Certes
Post by D A Stocks
I notice the Norwegians have started construction of a bored road
tunnel link at Rogfast which is on a similar scale in terms of length
and depth to that required to cross the North Channel. They have also
I hope they ban cheese! :-)
The EU will certainly require us to have a customs queue leaving
the
NI
tunnel, where everyone is carefully searched for cheese sandwiches which
they might smuggle into the Republic of Ireland and onwards to France.
The EU was perfectly happy to have an arrangement with no customs border in
the Irish Sea, it was written into the agreement with Theresa May. The
decision to have a customs border in the Irish Sea was the decision of the UK
parliament.
The new one under Boris, who had previously said that no such revised
agreement was possible.
Specifically, he flatly denied that there would need to be a customs
border between GB and NI. Even he must have been
well aware when he told the blatant lie that a hard Brexit meant that
there would inevitably have to be a customs border
between GB and the EU, and the GF treaty prevented it being between NI
and Ireland, while the EU would certainly stop it
being between Ireland and the rest of the EU. That meant that it
logically had to be between GB and NI.
May's deal avoided that problem by keeping GB on the EU customs union,
but that form of Brexit was much too soft for the
Vote Leave team that ran Boris for his first year in office (now largely gone).
The simple answer, not just for the NI problem but also all the other
problems now killing small businesses, the fishing industry and the
music industry, is to apply to join the Single Market and the Customs Union.
I'm not sure that a soft Brexit like that would appeal to anyone.
It was what the leave campaign promised gullible floating voters would be
the worst possible outcome, in the sense of lower-bound friction rather
than least pandering to the BRINO brigade.
no it wasn't
they very clearly said "we will be leaving the Customs Union" "we will be
leaving the Single Market"
That was certainly not the impression given by many Leave proponents before
the referendum, where they implied, if not stated explicitly, that we would
retain the same access to the single market as we had as an EU member...
they will have said that we would retain access to the single market
(because every country in the world, except perhaps North Korea, has *access
to* the SM), and some may have egged the pudding by saying (erroneously) the
same access when they might have meant similar access (though I agree even
that wasn't achieved)

but it was perfectly clear that that access was not to be achieved by
remaining part of the SM, but by some to-be-negotiated deal

Which due to the EU playing hardball with the NI border didn't quite go to
plan

It should be noted that the EU's position on NI was unexpected. The UK had
sounded this out with Enda Kenny and he was amenable to a simper solution to
the NI Border. The EU's position on that changed considerably when Leo
Varadkar took over the role of Taoiseach. He was much more insistent on
making life hard for the UK, and he did
Roland Perry
2021-02-17 13:37:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by tim...
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Graeme Wall
The simple answer, not just for the NI problem but also all the other
problems now killing small businesses, the fishing industry and the
music industry, is to apply to join the Single Market and the Customs Union.
I'm not sure that a soft Brexit like that would appeal to anyone.
It was what the leave campaign promised gullible floating voters
would be the worst possible outcome, in the sense of lower-bound
friction rather than least pandering to the BRINO brigade.
no it wasn't
they very clearly said "we will be leaving the Customs Union" "we will
be leaving the Single Market"
No doubt you can find a cite for that, to contradict the many
pre-referendum cites implying the complete opposite.
--
Roland Perry
Recliner
2021-02-17 21:18:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
Post by tim...
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Graeme Wall
The simple answer, not just for the NI problem but also all the other
problems now killing small businesses, the fishing industry and the
music industry, is to apply to join the Single Market and the Customs Union.
I'm not sure that a soft Brexit like that would appeal to anyone.
It was what the leave campaign promised gullible floating voters would
be the worst possible outcome, in the sense of lower-bound friction
rather than least pandering to the BRINO brigade.
no it wasn't
they very clearly said "we will be leaving the Customs Union" "we will be
leaving the Single Market"
No doubt you can find a cite for that, to contradict the many
pre-referendum cites implying the complete opposite.
No
this has been done to death 100s of times (most notably by Andrew Neil on
his show- when he had one)
He still does have a weekly news show on Thurday evenings, and will soon
have a daily show on his own GB News channel.

<https://pressgazette.co.uk/what-is-gb-news-everything-you-need-to-know/>
tim...
2021-02-18 10:36:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by tim...
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Graeme Wall
The simple answer, not just for the NI problem but also all the other
problems now killing small businesses, the fishing industry and the
music industry, is to apply to join the Single Market and the
Customs
Union.
I'm not sure that a soft Brexit like that would appeal to anyone.
It was what the leave campaign promised gullible floating voters would
be the worst possible outcome, in the sense of lower-bound friction
rather than least pandering to the BRINO brigade.
no it wasn't
they very clearly said "we will be leaving the Customs Union" "we will be
leaving the Single Market"
No doubt you can find a cite for that, to contradict the many
pre-referendum cites implying the complete opposite.
No
this has been done to death 100s of times (most notably by Andrew Neil on
his show- when he had one)
He still does have a weekly news show on Thurday evenings,
does he?

I've missed that
Post by Recliner
and will soon
have a daily show on his own GB News channel.
<https://pressgazette.co.uk/what-is-gb-news-everything-you-need-to-know/>
well yes. (I am engaged in a discussion on this elsewhere, so I know all
about it)

but then he won't need to be impartial any more

So his style might change a little

Aside - having watched him for the past 4 years (and longer, but not
relevant) I really cannot work out if he is pro or anti Brexit

Obviously his work on right leading newspapers shows that his is politically
on the right, but that didn't stop him giving the Tories as hard a time as
labour (and the others)

Though it does occasionally slip through that he appears to be anti-Monarchy
(I wont use the term republican, as that has additional connotations)

Maybe that was also already know from his time on newspapers
Roland Perry
2021-02-18 06:48:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
Post by tim...
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Graeme Wall
The simple answer, not just for the NI problem but also all the other
problems now killing small businesses, the fishing industry and the
music industry, is to apply to join the Single Market and the Customs Union.
I'm not sure that a soft Brexit like that would appeal to anyone.
It was what the leave campaign promised gullible floating voters
would be the worst possible outcome, in the sense of lower-bound
friction rather than least pandering to the BRINO brigade.
no it wasn't
they very clearly said "we will be leaving the Customs Union" "we
will be leaving the Single Market"
No doubt you can find a cite for that, to contradict the many
pre-referendum cites implying the complete opposite.
No
this has been done to death 100s of times (most notably by Andrew Neil
on his show- when he had one)
if you insist on acting like an ostrich that you haven't seen them, No
I am not playing your game of I pretend
I'm not pretending anything. Just trying to make sure people don't
re-write history by claiming, for example, that no-one mentioned getting
a "Norway style" deal.

eg: @Arron_banks Dec 30, 2015. "Increasingly the Norway option looks the
best for the UK" [Tweet from Leave.uk]

And after:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-46024649
--
Roland Perry
tim...
2021-02-18 10:43:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Roland Perry
Post by tim...
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Graeme Wall
The simple answer, not just for the NI problem but also all the other
problems now killing small businesses, the fishing industry and the
music industry, is to apply to join the Single Market and the Customs Union.
I'm not sure that a soft Brexit like that would appeal to anyone.
It was what the leave campaign promised gullible floating voters would
be the worst possible outcome, in the sense of lower-bound friction
rather than least pandering to the BRINO brigade.
no it wasn't
they very clearly said "we will be leaving the Customs Union" "we will
be leaving the Single Market"
No doubt you can find a cite for that, to contradict the many
pre-referendum cites implying the complete opposite.
No
this has been done to death 100s of times (most notably by Andrew Neil on
his show- when he had one)
if you insist on acting like an ostrich that you haven't seen them, No I
am not playing your game of I pretend
I'm not pretending anything. Just trying to make sure people don't
re-write history by claiming, for example, that no-one mentioned getting a
"Norway style" deal.
I accept that some people did

I am saying that it wasn't the official campaign opinion

tim
Graeme Wall
2021-02-17 17:43:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by tim...
Post by Roland Perry
On Tue, 16 Feb 2021 14:49:48 +0000, Graeme Wall
Post by Graeme Wall
On Tue, 16 Feb 2021 13:20:20 +0000, Roland Perry
Post by Roland Perry
In message
Post by bob
Post by Certes
Post by D A Stocks
I notice the Norwegians have started construction of a bored road
tunnel link at Rogfast which is on a similar scale in terms of length
and depth to that required to cross the North Channel. They have also
I hope they ban cheese! :-)
The EU will certainly require us to have a customs queue leaving the NI
tunnel, where everyone is carefully searched for cheese
sandwiches which
they might smuggle into the Republic of Ireland and onwards to France.
The EU was perfectly happy to have an arrangement with no customs border in
the Irish Sea, it was written into the agreement with Theresa May. The
decision to have a customs border in the Irish Sea was the decision of the UK
parliament.
The new one under Boris, who had previously said that no such revised
agreement was possible.
Specifically, he flatly denied that there would need to be a
customs border between GB and NI. Even he must have been
well aware when he told the blatant lie that a hard Brexit meant
that there would inevitably have to be a customs border
between GB and the EU, and the GF treaty prevented it being between
NI and Ireland, while the EU would certainly stop it
being between Ireland and the rest of the EU. That meant that it
logically had to be between GB and NI.
May's deal avoided that problem by keeping GB on the EU customs
union, but that form of Brexit was much too soft for the
Vote Leave team that ran Boris for his first year in office (now largely gone).
The simple answer, not just for the NI problem but also all the other
problems now killing small businesses, the fishing industry and the
music industry, is to apply to join the Single Market and the Customs Union.
I'm not sure that a soft Brexit like that would appeal to anyone.
It was what the leave campaign promised gullible floating voters would
be the worst possible outcome, in the sense of lower-bound friction
rather than least pandering to the BRINO brigade.
no it wasn't
they very clearly said "we will be leaving the Customs Union" "we will
be leaving the Single Market"
They also very clearly said we wouldn't' be leaving leave the SM and CU.
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.
tim...
2021-02-17 19:32:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by tim...
Post by Roland Perry
On Tue, 16 Feb 2021 14:49:48 +0000, Graeme Wall
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
In message
Post by bob
Post by Certes
Post by D A Stocks
I notice the Norwegians have started construction of a bored road
tunnel link at Rogfast which is on a similar scale in terms of length
and depth to that required to cross the North Channel. They have also
I hope they ban cheese! :-)
The EU will certainly require us to have a customs queue leaving the NI
tunnel, where everyone is carefully searched for cheese sandwiches which
they might smuggle into the Republic of Ireland and onwards to France.
The EU was perfectly happy to have an arrangement with no customs border in
the Irish Sea, it was written into the agreement with Theresa May. The
decision to have a customs border in the Irish Sea was the decision of the UK
parliament.
The new one under Boris, who had previously said that no such revised
agreement was possible.
Specifically, he flatly denied that there would need to be a customs
border between GB and NI. Even he must have been
well aware when he told the blatant lie that a hard Brexit meant that
there would inevitably have to be a customs border
between GB and the EU, and the GF treaty prevented it being between
NI and Ireland, while the EU would certainly stop it
being between Ireland and the rest of the EU. That meant that it
logically had to be between GB and NI.
May's deal avoided that problem by keeping GB on the EU customs
union, but that form of Brexit was much too soft for the
Vote Leave team that ran Boris for his first year in office (now largely gone).
The simple answer, not just for the NI problem but also all the other
problems now killing small businesses, the fishing industry and the
music industry, is to apply to join the Single Market and the Customs Union.
I'm not sure that a soft Brexit like that would appeal to anyone.
It was what the leave campaign promised gullible floating voters would
be the worst possible outcome, in the sense of lower-bound friction
rather than least pandering to the BRINO brigade.
no it wasn't
they very clearly said "we will be leaving the Customs Union" "we will be
leaving the Single Market"
They also very clearly said we wouldn't' be leaving leave the SM and CU.
cite

bet you can't
ColinR
2021-02-17 21:03:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by tim...
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by tim...
Post by Roland Perry
On Tue, 16 Feb 2021 14:49:48 +0000, Graeme Wall
Post by Graeme Wall
On Tue, 16 Feb 2021 13:20:20 +0000, Roland Perry
Post by Roland Perry
In message
Post by bob
Post by Certes
Post by D A Stocks
I notice the Norwegians have started construction of a bored road
tunnel link at Rogfast which is on a similar scale in terms of length
and depth to that required to cross the North Channel. They have also
I hope they ban cheese! :-)
The EU will certainly require us to have a customs queue leaving the NI
tunnel, where everyone is carefully searched for cheese sandwiches which
they might smuggle into the Republic of Ireland and onwards to France.
The EU was perfectly happy to have an arrangement with no customs border in
the Irish Sea, it was written into the agreement with Theresa May. The
decision to have a customs border in the Irish Sea was the
decision of the UK
parliament.
The new one under Boris, who had previously said that no such revised
agreement was possible.
Specifically, he flatly denied that there would need to be a
customs border between GB and NI. Even he must have been
well aware when he told the blatant lie that a hard Brexit meant
that there would inevitably have to be a customs border
between GB and the EU, and the GF treaty prevented it being
between NI and Ireland, while the EU would certainly stop it
being between Ireland and the rest of the EU. That meant that it
logically had to be between GB and NI.
May's deal avoided that problem by keeping GB on the EU customs
union, but that form of Brexit was much too soft for the
Vote Leave team that ran Boris for his first year in office (now largely gone).
The simple answer, not just for the NI problem but also all the other
problems now killing small businesses, the fishing industry and the
music industry, is to apply to join the Single Market and the Customs Union.
I'm not sure that a soft Brexit like that would appeal to anyone.
It was what the leave campaign promised gullible floating voters
would be the worst possible outcome, in the sense of lower-bound
friction rather than least pandering to the BRINO brigade.
no it wasn't
they very clearly said "we will be leaving the Customs Union" "we
will be leaving the Single Market"
They also very clearly said we wouldn't' be leaving leave the SM and CU.
cite
bet you can't
Several cites, but long after the event. Customs union little mention,
but clearly leaving the single market was mentioned.

However, as usual with political claptrap from both sides, nowt was laid
out with absolute clarity.

http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/briefing_newdeal.html

https://theferret.scot/single-market-eu-brexit-vote/

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/voting-leave-meant-leaving-the-single-market---and-most-voters-knew-it

https://fullfact.org/europe/what-was-promised-about-customs-union-referendum/
--
Colin
tim...
2021-02-18 10:24:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by tim...
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by tim...
Post by Roland Perry
On Tue, 16 Feb 2021 14:49:48 +0000, Graeme Wall
Post by Graeme Wall
On Tue, 16 Feb 2021 13:20:20 +0000, Roland Perry
Post by Roland Perry
In message
Post by bob
Post by Certes
Post by D A Stocks
I notice the Norwegians have started construction of a bored road
tunnel link at Rogfast which is on a similar scale in terms of
length
and depth to that required to cross the North Channel. They
have also
proposed submerged floating tunnels to eliminate ferries on
I hope they ban cheese! :-)
The EU will certainly require us to have a customs queue leaving the NI
tunnel, where everyone is carefully searched for cheese
sandwiches which
they might smuggle into the Republic of Ireland and onwards to France.
The EU was perfectly happy to have an arrangement with no customs
border in
the Irish Sea, it was written into the agreement with Theresa May. The
decision to have a customs border in the Irish Sea was the
decision of the UK
parliament.
The new one under Boris, who had previously said that no such revised
agreement was possible.
Specifically, he flatly denied that there would need to be a
customs border between GB and NI. Even he must have been
well aware when he told the blatant lie that a hard Brexit meant
that there would inevitably have to be a customs border
between GB and the EU, and the GF treaty prevented it being between
NI and Ireland, while the EU would certainly stop it
being between Ireland and the rest of the EU. That meant that it
logically had to be between GB and NI.
May's deal avoided that problem by keeping GB on the EU customs
union, but that form of Brexit was much too soft for the
Vote Leave team that ran Boris for his first year in office (now
largely gone).
The simple answer, not just for the NI problem but also all the other
problems now killing small businesses, the fishing industry and the
music industry, is to apply to join the Single Market and the Customs Union.
I'm not sure that a soft Brexit like that would appeal to anyone.
It was what the leave campaign promised gullible floating voters would
be the worst possible outcome, in the sense of lower-bound friction
rather than least pandering to the BRINO brigade.
no it wasn't
they very clearly said "we will be leaving the Customs Union" "we will
be leaving the Single Market"
They also very clearly said we wouldn't' be leaving leave the SM and CU.
cite
bet you can't
Several cites, but long after the event. Customs union little mention, but
clearly leaving the single market was mentioned.
the challenge is for Graeme (or anybody who wants to try) to come up with a
cite that the Leave *campaign* explicitly said that a Leave vote would NOT
mean that we would be leaving the SM/CU.

Because he and Roland are continually claiming that such things exists

But I don't believe it

There may be historic (pre referendum) discussion on the subject by people
who changed their mind by the date of the referendum's announcement and
there may be some outlying leave supporters, not involved in the campaign,
who expressed it as their desired Leave outcome.

But I don't believe that there is any official campaign material (or media
briefings) that said it
Bob Martin
2021-02-18 08:44:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by tim...
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by tim...
they very clearly said "we will be leaving the Customs Union" "we will be
leaving the Single Market"
They also very clearly said we wouldn't' be leaving leave the SM and CU.
cite
bet you can't

tim...
2021-02-18 10:45:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Bob Martin
Post by tim...
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by tim...
they very clearly said "we will be leaving the Customs Union" "we will be
leaving the Single Market"
They also very clearly said we wouldn't' be leaving leave the SM and CU.
cite
bet you can't
http://youtu.be/vkof9CVerrQ
so where's the context for that

and when was it said (You can't rely on the youtube date)
MB
2021-02-16 22:17:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Recliner
I think many of the customs issues are short-term and soluble.
Many of the border issues seem to being produced by the EU amd French in
particular.
Jeremy Double
2021-02-16 22:31:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by MB
Post by Recliner
I think many of the customs issues are short-term and soluble.
Many of the border issues seem to being produced by the EU amd French in
particular.
No, the border issues arise because the UK is now a third country, and
outside the single market and customs union. This was predicted before the
referendum, but it was waved aside as “project fear”.
--
Jeremy Double
Recliner
2021-02-17 03:08:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by MB
Post by Recliner
I think many of the customs issues are short-term and soluble.
Many of the border issues seem to being produced by the EU amd French in
particular.
The worst border issues are between GB and NI. How do you blame France for
those?
Roland Perry
2021-02-17 06:35:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by MB
Post by Recliner
I think many of the customs issues are short-term and soluble.
Many of the border issues seem to being produced by the EU amd French
in particular.
It's not surprising that most of the issues are visible at our closest
and busiest border.
--
Roland Perry
Arthur Figgis
2021-02-16 23:39:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Recliner
The touring musicians problem need some accommodation by both sides. Our Home Office was too adamant about restricting
such visits to the UK, and didn't think through the consequences for our own touring performers; but the EU is also
being too bureaucratic. This seems like an easy problem to solve if both sides weren't so pig-headed.
Is there any truth in the suggestion that the intial plans would have
allowed anyone to procure an old guitar or some panpipes and then claim
to be a touring musician, and go and steal the other side of the
border's jobs and houses and women or whatever?
--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK
Recliner
2021-02-17 00:12:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Arthur Figgis
Post by Recliner
The touring musicians problem need some accommodation by both sides. Our
Home Office was too adamant about restricting
such visits to the UK, and didn't think through the consequences for our
own touring performers; but the EU is also
being too bureaucratic. This seems like an easy problem to solve if both
sides weren't so pig-headed.
Is there any truth in the suggestion that the intial plans would have
allowed anyone to procure an old guitar or some panpipes and then claim
to be a touring musician, and go and steal the other side of the
border's jobs and houses and women or whatever?
I don't know, but it's probably the sort of thing the Home Office felt
obliged to block. You can just imagine the complicated rule book that could
be created to define which performers and support teams can tour freely,
and which cannot.

Should the freedoms cover amateurs as well as professionals? How would we
decide which performers were free to turn up and try out their acts at the
Edinburgh Festival? Should Covent Garden buskers qualify? What about
licensed LU buskers? Or a first-time self-published author planning a long
book signing tour, itinerary as yet undecided?
MB
2021-02-17 06:51:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Recliner
I don't know, but it's probably the sort of thing the Home Office felt
obliged to block. You can just imagine the complicated rule book that could
be created to define which performers and support teams can tour freely,
and which cannot.
Perhaps they would take advice from the EU and particularly the French
on how to devise over-complicated rules.
Graeme Wall
2021-02-17 17:39:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by MB
Post by Recliner
I don't know, but it's probably the sort of thing the Home Office felt
obliged to block. You can just imagine the complicated rule book that could
be created to define which performers and support teams can tour freely,
and which cannot.
Perhaps they would take advice from the EU and particularly the French
on how to devise over-complicated rules.
Traditionally that is British area of (in)competence.
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.
ColinR
2021-02-17 21:18:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by MB
Post by Recliner
I don't know, but it's probably the sort of thing the Home Office felt
obliged to block. You can just imagine the complicated rule book that could
be created to define which performers and support teams can tour freely,
and which cannot.
Perhaps they would take advice from the EU and particularly the French
on how to devise over-complicated rules.
Traditionally that is British area of (in)competence.
Tend to disagree. The French are experts at over-complication (if to
their advantage) and ignoring (if to their disadvantage). The British
are (were?) experts at gold-plating EU legislation, whether a Regulation
or a Directive.
--
Colin
Roland Perry
2021-02-18 06:51:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
The French are experts at over-complication (if to their advantage) and
ignoring (if to their disadvantage). The British are (were?) experts at
gold-plating EU legislation, whether a Regulation or a Directive.
That's because the UK governments concerned agreed with the legislation
(and in many cases had initiated it), so rather than being 'imposed on
us by Brussels' it was welcomed. Sometimes parts of the legislation
didn't go as far as the UK hoped, and there's no rule about adding to it
- they are merely a lower bound, or minimum amount that has to be
implemented.
--
Roland Perry
tim...
2021-02-18 10:38:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
The French are experts at over-complication (if to their advantage) and
ignoring (if to their disadvantage). The British are (were?) experts at
gold-plating EU legislation, whether a Regulation or a Directive.
That's because the UK governments concerned agreed with the legislation
(and in many cases had initiated it), so rather than being 'imposed on us
by Brussels' it was welcomed. Sometimes parts of the legislation didn't go
as far as the UK hoped, and there's no rule about adding to it - they are
merely a lower bound, or minimum amount that has to be implemented.
though the weren't a supporer of the WTD, and yet still over legislated
there
Marland
2021-02-17 00:41:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Arthur Figgis
Post by Recliner
The touring musicians problem need some accommodation by both sides. Our
Home Office was too adamant about restricting
such visits to the UK, and didn't think through the consequences for our
own touring performers; but the EU is also
being too bureaucratic. This seems like an easy problem to solve if both
sides weren't so pig-headed.
Is there any truth in the suggestion that the intial plans would have
allowed anyone to procure an old guitar or some panpipes and then claim
to be a touring musician, and go and steal the other side of the
border's jobs and houses and women or whatever?
Though in this instance the concerns are from UK performers wishing to
tour abroad hopefully
the rules can be applied in reverse when England and Scotland go their
separate ways and we can keep those itinerant Scotsman and the racket they
make with their bagpipes away.
They have their place , in Scotland or on a battlefield. Not stood on a
corner in an English town or city
sounding like testing time in a car horn factory.

GH
Anna Noyd-Dryver
2021-02-18 07:09:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Marland
Post by Arthur Figgis
Post by Recliner
The touring musicians problem need some accommodation by both sides. Our
Home Office was too adamant about restricting
such visits to the UK, and didn't think through the consequences for our
own touring performers; but the EU is also
being too bureaucratic. This seems like an easy problem to solve if both
sides weren't so pig-headed.
Is there any truth in the suggestion that the intial plans would have
allowed anyone to procure an old guitar or some panpipes and then claim
to be a touring musician, and go and steal the other side of the
border's jobs and houses and women or whatever?
Though in this instance the concerns are from UK performers wishing to
tour abroad hopefully
the rules can be applied in reverse when England and Scotland go their
separate ways and we can keep those itinerant Scotsman and the racket they
make with their bagpipes away.
They have their place , in Scotland or on a battlefield. Not stood on a
corner in an English town or city
sounding like testing time in a car horn factory.
Perhaps they'd take up the Northumbrian Pipes instead?


Anna Noyd-Dryver
Marland
2021-02-18 10:19:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Post by Marland
Post by Arthur Figgis
Is there any truth in the suggestion that the intial plans would have
allowed anyone to procure an old guitar or some panpipes and then claim
to be a touring musician, and go and steal the other side of the
border's jobs and houses and women or whatever?
Though in this instance the concerns are from UK performers wishing to
tour abroad hopefully
the rules can be applied in reverse when England and Scotland go their
separate ways and we can keep those itinerant Scotsman and the racket they
make with their bagpipes away.
They have their place , in Scotland or on a battlefield. Not stood on a
corner in an English town or city
sounding like testing time in a car horn factory.
Perhaps they'd take up the Northumbrian Pipes instead?
I was actually thinking about those as I wrote the above but decided it
would complicate things.

From the occasions I have heard them they are a mellower sound and easier
to listen to.
Possibly part of the trouble is those who play the Scottish pipes are
probably more numerous
and not all of them are actually skilled enough to get the best out of them
but get away with a rendition of well known Scottish tunes though many of
the Busker types you get in tourist towns
haven’t tuned up properly and substitute sound volume for skill.
Proponents of the less well know Northumbrian version tend to play to a
different audience in Folk clubs etc and have to be more proficient.

A friend actually played the Scottish pipes, he tried tuning up in the back
of a Minibus we had hired
which resulted in him being evicted onto a lay-by on the A34 near Newbury
with the offer he stopped that lark or walked from then on. OTOH when he
played them from the ramparts of Caen Castle in Normandy some of locals
liked it so much the nearby bar he and his companions were using gave them
free beer to go and do an encore, I missed that as they were on a cycling
/camping holiday which I don’t do.

GH
.
tim...
2021-02-17 10:42:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
In message
Post by bob
Post by Certes
Post by D A Stocks
I notice the Norwegians have started construction of a bored road
tunnel link at Rogfast which is on a similar scale in terms of length
and depth to that required to cross the North Channel. They have also
I hope they ban cheese! :-)
The EU will certainly require us to have a customs queue leaving the NI
tunnel, where everyone is carefully searched for cheese sandwiches which
they might smuggle into the Republic of Ireland and onwards to France.
The EU was perfectly happy to have an arrangement with no customs border in
the Irish Sea, it was written into the agreement with Theresa May. The
decision to have a customs border in the Irish Sea was the decision of the UK
parliament.
The new one under Boris, who had previously said that no such revised
agreement was possible.
Specifically, he flatly denied that there would need to be a customs
border between GB and NI. Even he must have been
well aware when he told the blatant lie that a hard Brexit meant that
there would inevitably have to be a customs border
between GB and the EU, and the GF treaty prevented it being between NI
and Ireland, while the EU would certainly stop it
being between Ireland and the rest of the EU. That meant that it
logically had to be between GB and NI.
May's deal avoided that problem by keeping GB on the EU customs union,
but that form of Brexit was much too soft for the
Vote Leave team that ran Boris for his first year in office (now largely gone).
The simple answer, not just for the NI problem but also all the other
problems now killing small businesses, the fishing industry and the music
industry, is to apply to join the Single Market and the Customs Union.
and thus not to have left the EU at all

how does that respect the result of the referendum?
Graeme Wall
2021-02-17 17:42:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by tim...
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
In message
Post by bob
Post by Certes
Post by D A Stocks
I notice the Norwegians have started construction of a bored road
tunnel link at Rogfast which is on a similar scale in terms of length
and depth to that required to cross the North Channel. They have also
I hope they ban cheese! :-)
The EU will certainly require us to have a customs queue leaving the NI
tunnel, where everyone is carefully searched for cheese sandwiches which
they might smuggle into the Republic of Ireland and onwards to France.
The EU was perfectly happy to have an arrangement with no customs border in
the Irish Sea, it was written into the agreement with Theresa May. The
decision to have a customs border in the Irish Sea was the decision of the UK
parliament.
The new one under Boris, who had previously said that no such revised
agreement was possible.
Specifically, he flatly denied that there would need to be a customs
border between GB and NI. Even he must have been
well aware when he told the blatant lie that a hard Brexit meant that
there would inevitably have to be a customs border
between GB and the EU, and the GF treaty prevented it being between
NI and Ireland, while the EU would certainly stop it
being between Ireland and the rest of the EU. That meant that it
logically had to be between GB and NI.
May's deal avoided that problem by keeping GB on the EU customs
union, but that form of Brexit was much too soft for the
Vote Leave team that ran Boris for his first year in office (now largely gone).
The simple answer, not just for the NI problem but also all the other
problems now killing small businesses, the fishing industry and the
music industry, is to apply to join the Single Market and the Customs Union.
and thus not to have left the EU at all
how does that respect the result of the referendum?
First of all you have to work out what the result of the referendum was…
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.
tim...
2021-02-17 10:41:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
In message
Post by bob
Post by Certes
Post by D A Stocks
I notice the Norwegians have started construction of a bored road
tunnel link at Rogfast which is on a similar scale in terms of length
and depth to that required to cross the North Channel. They have also
I hope they ban cheese! :-)
The EU will certainly require us to have a customs queue leaving the NI
tunnel, where everyone is carefully searched for cheese sandwiches which
they might smuggle into the Republic of Ireland and onwards to France.
The EU was perfectly happy to have an arrangement with no customs border in
the Irish Sea, it was written into the agreement with Theresa May. The
decision to have a customs border in the Irish Sea was the decision of the UK
parliament.
The new one under Boris, who had previously said that no such revised
agreement was possible.
Specifically, he flatly denied that there would need to be a customs
border between GB and NI. Even he must have been
well aware when he told the blatant lie that a hard Brexit meant that
there would inevitably have to be a customs border
between GB and the EU,
and the GF treaty prevented it being between NI and Ireland,
Oh no it doesn't

(that not to say that there aren't plenty of other reason for this not to
happen
Jeremy Double
2021-02-17 13:30:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by bob
Post by Certes
Post by D A Stocks
I notice the Norwegians have started construction of a bored road
tunnel link at Rogfast which is on a similar scale in terms of length
and depth to that required to cross the North Channel. They have also
I hope they ban cheese! :-)
The EU will certainly require us to have a customs queue leaving the NI
tunnel, where everyone is carefully searched for cheese sandwiches which
they might smuggle into the Republic of Ireland and onwards to France.
The EU was perfectly happy to have an arrangement with no customs border in
the Irish Sea,
as long as the UK remained the SM/CU
of course
the problem is that we weren't prepared to do that
We, the electorate, were never asked that question.
--
Jeremy Double
ColinR
2021-02-17 21:20:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Jeremy Double
Post by bob
Post by Certes
Post by D A Stocks
I notice the Norwegians have started construction of a bored road
tunnel link at Rogfast which is on a similar scale in terms of length
and depth to that required to cross the North Channel. They have also
I hope they ban cheese! :-)
The EU will certainly require us to have a customs queue leaving the NI
tunnel, where everyone is carefully searched for cheese sandwiches which
they might smuggle into the Republic of Ireland and onwards to France.
The EU was perfectly happy to have an arrangement with no customs border in
the Irish Sea,
as long as the UK remained the SM/CU
of course
the problem is that we weren't prepared to do that
We, the electorate, were never asked that question.
See the cites in my message at 2103hrs above.
--
Colin
tim...
2021-02-18 10:41:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by ColinR
Post by Jeremy Double
Post by bob
Post by Certes
Post by D A Stocks
I notice the Norwegians have started construction of a bored road
tunnel link at Rogfast which is on a similar scale in terms of length
and depth to that required to cross the North Channel. They have also
I hope they ban cheese! :-)
The EU will certainly require us to have a customs queue leaving the NI
tunnel, where everyone is carefully searched for cheese sandwiches which
they might smuggle into the Republic of Ireland and onwards to France.
The EU was perfectly happy to have an arrangement with no customs
border
in
the Irish Sea,
as long as the UK remained the SM/CU
of course
the problem is that we weren't prepared to do that
We, the electorate, were never asked that question.
See the cites in my message at 2103hrs above.
the Naysayers don't accept that campaigning material counts here

they insist that the wording of the question must include it

like it's that's a reasoned expectation that a ballot paper that's a 24 page
booklet, is reasonable
h***@yahoo.co.uk
2021-02-15 20:10:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Having had another of his mad bridge ideas rebuffed, Boris is now likely to
push for the Strarne Tunnel.
<https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/think-britain-to-belfast-is-a-bridge-too-far-try-tunnelling-across-instead-2kbqs0jxm?shareToken=673b91a1a06f78f84b4e3658667e41f1>
I thought that the main problem with prospective building of a fixed
link between Britain and Ireland was the fact that the earth between the
two islands is mainly sand.
Dudbridge Donkey
2021-02-16 10:48:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Having had another of his mad bridge ideas rebuffed, Boris is now likely to
push for the Strarne Tunnel.
<https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/think-britain-to-belfast-is-a-bridge-too-far-try-tunnelling-across-instead-2kbqs0jxm?shareToken=673b91a1a06f78f84b4e3658667e41f1>
I would rather he pushed for a new Severn Tunnel.

Peter (Stroud, Glos)
--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com
Recliner
2021-02-16 14:36:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Dudbridge Donkey
Post by Recliner
Having had another of his mad bridge ideas rebuffed, Boris is now likely to
push for the Strarne Tunnel.
<https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/think-britain-to-belfast-is-a-bridge-too-far-try-tunnelling-across-instead-2kbqs0jxm?shareToken=673b91a1a06f78f84b4e3658667e41f1>
I would rather he pushed for a new Severn Tunnel.
As the mythical tunnel won't be built, does it matter where the line on the map went? He might just as well have
proposed a Hebridean Tunnel.
ColinR
2021-02-16 15:13:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by Dudbridge Donkey
Post by Recliner
Having had another of his mad bridge ideas rebuffed, Boris is now likely to
push for the Strarne Tunnel.
<https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/think-britain-to-belfast-is-a-bridge-too-far-try-tunnelling-across-instead-2kbqs0jxm?shareToken=673b91a1a06f78f84b4e3658667e41f1>
I would rather he pushed for a new Severn Tunnel.
As the mythical tunnel won't be built, does it matter where the line on the map went? He might just as well have
proposed a Hebridean Tunnel.
Why the "he"?? See Mark Googe's post of 14th February which shows the
real origination of the idea....

Just because you have a down on Boris and, incorrectly, titled the
thread accordingly, showing your bias!
--
Colin
Recliner
2021-02-16 15:48:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by ColinR
Post by Recliner
Post by Dudbridge Donkey
Post by Recliner
Having had another of his mad bridge ideas rebuffed, Boris is now likely to
push for the Strarne Tunnel.
<https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/think-britain-to-belfast-is-a-bridge-too-far-try-tunnelling-across-instead-2kbqs0jxm?shareToken=673b91a1a06f78f84b4e3658667e41f1>
I would rather he pushed for a new Severn Tunnel.
As the mythical tunnel won't be built, does it matter where the line on the map went? He might just as well have
proposed a Hebridean Tunnel.
Why the "he"?? See Mark Googe's post of 14th February which shows the
real origination of the idea....
Just because you have a down on Boris and, incorrectly, titled the
thread accordingly, showing your bias!
Boris has been pushing for this for a while, which is why it was added to the list to be considered. Peter Hendy knows
how to placate his old boss. It wasn't on anyone's list before that.
Loading...