Brexit

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Muddy Retriever

EU and Irish Government decided to weaponize the Irish border for their own ends.

---

Are you saying the people of N.I, who voted 56% remain, are not that bothered about a hard border? The poll discussed in the FT article below would seem to disagree with you.

https://www.ft.com/content/aa2f4368-...4-2218e7146b04

You will now talk about "technical solutions". How long will it take for a a few republicans to go on a grand tour of border crossings with an angle grinder, and that will be the end of those cameras. Never mind the fact that I am not sure there is a camera yet that can detect that agricultural products crossing the border meet EU or UK standards.

You will need customs officials to protect the cameras and soldiers to protect the customs officials. Then all of a sudden, we are 20 years in the past.

In a House of Commons committee hearing George Hamilton the PSNI Chief Constable accused some Westminster politicians of failing to understand the dangers of terrorism in Northern Ireland post Brexit.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-45461120

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/n...-36174545.html

But apparently Muddy Retriever knows better. Now why don't you enlighten us and tell us why the PSNI Police Chief and the Garda Siochana Commissioner Donal O Culain are both wrong?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DrPatrickBarry

Absolutely, look at Labour & Corbyn, Five Star in Italy, Trump, Putin, and no end of other mistakes.

---

Five Star is interesting. They've only come into being because of the failed euro project that has stuck Italy in a deflationary trap. The euro is another example of EU hubris that has impoverished much of southern Europe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Muddy Retriever

Five Star is interesting. They've only come into being because of the failed euro project that has stuck Italy in a deflationary trap. The euro is another example of EU hubris that has impoverished much of southern Europe.

---

While I agree the Euro hasn't helped much of Southern Europe, as they can't devalue their way out of debt, I'd be interested to see some figures on the overall effects of the Eurozone on Southern Europe. Presumably they get more spent on them too?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Muddy Retriever

stuck Italy in a deflationary trap.

---

Now you are getting desperate, the Lire was such a becon of stability before the Euro.
Historical Chart of British Pound to Italian Lire: Year 1975 - 2001
https://www.poundsterlinglive.com/ba...gbp/GBP-to-ITL

I think the Italian problems are a lot closer to home.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DrPatrickBarry

Are you saying the people of N.I, who voted 56% remain, are not that bothered about a hard border?

---

I've said nothing of the sort. You already know my position so i'm not sure why you are trying to suggest something else. There is no need for a hard border at all. So all that stuff about needing soldiers to protect border posts etc is totally irrelevant.

Quote:

---

But apparently Muddy Retriever knows better. Now why don't you enlighten us and tell us why the PSNI Police Chief and the Garda Siochana Commissioner Donal O Culain are both wrong?

---

They might be correct if lots of border infrastructure was to be erected but nobody is suggesting doing that. Even in the event of no deal both the Irish Government and EU have said they wouldn't do it and the UK Government certainly wouldn't.

- The WTO have made it clear they don't require checks to be carried out at the border.
- HMRC has repeatedly said that there is no need for new border infrastructure.
- As I mentioned to you a few weeks ago, the Dutch customs expert Hans Maessen has called the Irish border a "fictitious problem". Last month he gave evidence to a House of Commons committee saying that it could be avoided by the comprehensive use of electronic declarations, use of customs brokers and HMRC carrying out customs inspection at company premises.

The truth of the Irish backstop was revealed a couple of weeks ago when Emmanuel Macron inadvertently let the cat out of the bag. He said that the EU wouldn't release the UK from it unless EU fisherman were given access to British waters. This demonstrates the true purpose of the Backstop. It is a device to control the UK and extort even more concessions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DrPatrickBarry

Now you are getting desperate, the Lire was such a becon of stability before the Euro.
Historical Chart of British Pound to Italian Lire: Year 1975 - 2001
https://www.poundsterlinglive.com/ba...gbp/GBP-to-ITL

I think the Italian problems are a lot closer to home.

---

Not desperate at all. On the contrary, in the past it was the flexibility of having a fluctuating currency that helped the Italian economy when it got into trouble. Before being in the euro, Italian growth was strong, it had quite an impressive industrial sector. Since the euro was introduced the Italian economy has barely grown at all and GDP remains below the levels it was before the financial crisis. Italy needs both a currency devaluation and the ability to set its own monetary policy, both of which are denied to it by being in the euro.

The euro has been a monumental failure setting a one size all currency strait-jacket on a very diverse group of countries. The next financial downturn may well hammer in the death nail.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by noel

While I agree the Euro hasn't helped much of Southern Europe, as they can't devalue their way out of debt, I'd be interested to see some figures on the overall effects of the Eurozone on Southern Europe. Presumably they get more spent on them too?

---

Quite a good article here.

https://gefira.org/en/2016/11/19/hig...uling-classes/

Your last point is very important Muddy. The diversity of the countries and their economy made the whole structure of the EU impossible to manage once a certain size was reached. Instead, a wise course may have been to introduce 3 Euro zones, North, South and East, with their own economies reflecting their positions but subject to a project to produce convergence over, say, 25 years. As it was, bringing countries like Bulgaria into a level playing field was neither fair to the current member states or the new states who, like Greece, found it impossible to keep up to the standards suddenly applied.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Muddy Retriever

Quite a good article here.

https://gefira.org/en/2016/11/19/hig...uling-classes/

---

Questionable source that https://medium.com/dfrlab/electionwa...e-198e80253644

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shaunaneto

Questionable source that https://medium.com/dfrlab/electionwa...e-198e80253644

---

How about this source?
https://www.theguardian.com/business...oseph-stiglitz

Or this one?
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/03/o...disasters.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Muddy Retriever

How about this source?
https://www.theguardian.com/business...oseph-stiglitz

---

Have you read any of the comments at the bottom of that article? To say he is getting a ringing endorsment of his view would be a stretch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DrPatrickBarry

Have you read any of the comments at the bottom of that article? To say he is getting a ringing endorsment of his view would be a stretch.

---

I have read his article in full. I think it is very damning. If you can read it and not think so then I'm staggered. The comment just below the headline says it all really about the euro.

"It was supposed to bring shared prosperity, but instead it has slowed growth and sown discord"

Don't you think it is interesting that in 2000 the US economy was 13% larger than the eurozone but by 2016 it was 26% bigger? He also confirms my point about Italian growth (or lack of) since euro inception.

Then there is the other article I linked by Paul Krugman. He is a nobel prize winning economist. I thought you might like him because he is left of centre in his leanings. He lists a number of countries that have struggled with the euro and says:

"What all of these economies have in common, however, is that by joining the eurozone they put themselves into an economic straitjacket."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Muddy Retriever

I have read his article in full. I think it is very damning.

---

It is becasue it is what you want to hear.

In an earlier post you mentioned that everybody says there is no need for border checks on the island of Ireland, but I posted this article before, which blantly contradicts that. So you just pretend it does not exit. Fourtantly there are negotiators out there representing the UK and EU that do than have your luxury of ignoring difficult issues and have to find solutions, with the withdrawal agreement being the answer.


https://www.politico.eu/article/brex...norway-sweden/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Muddy Retriever

How about this source?
https://www.theguardian.com/business...oseph-stiglitz

Or this one?
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/03/o...disasters.html

---

Couldn’t say to be honest, I’m too ridden with Bubonic Man Flu to look at the articles and authors you’ve linked to. Can barely manage to change the tv channel!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DrPatrickBarry

It is becasue it is what you want to hear.

In an earlier post you mentioned that everybody says there is no need for border checks on the island of Ireland, but I posted this article before, which blantly contradicts that. So you just pretend it does not exit. Fourtantly there are negotiators out there representing the UK and EU that do than have your luxury of ignoring difficult issues and have to find solutions, with the withdrawal agreement being the answer.


https://www.politico.eu/article/brex...norway-sweden/

---

Patrick I do think that's a bit rich coming from you. You leave many of the points I raise unanswered. That's fine, it's entirely up to you. But I do try to answer your points as clearly as I can, you just don't like my answer.

I don't say that there will be no checks at all but it is clear that they don't need to take place at the border. I'm not making this up, reputable bodies and people have expressly said so. If intelligence arouses suspicion about smuggling, the vehicle can be stopped. Whatever problems you think there are between Norway and Sweden, there are no plans to tear up the arrangement.

Don't forget there is already a border at the moment, Ireland and the UK have different VAT and excise rates and a different currency. The issue of the border could easily be overcome by friendly countries working together and showing goodwill and commonsense. In fact in the months after the Brexit vote this is exactly what was happening. The previous Taoiseach Enda Kenny had initiated contacts between Irish and British officials to make preparations and minimise disruption. That all changed when Leo Varadker took over and decided to weaponize the issue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DrPatrickBarry

It is becasue it is what you want to hear.

---

Well if you think that Stiglitz is wrong (or Krugman for that matter) I'd be interested in knowing why.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Muddy Retriever

I don't say that there will be no checks at all but it is clear that they don't need to take place at the border
The issue of the border could easily be overcome by friendly countries working together and showing goodwill and commonsense.

---

In that article "there were 229,286 checks on vehicles crossing in 2016, up slightly on the previous two years." Once again you only see what you want to see.

You are not appreciating the difference between N.I/republic and Sweeden/Norway. Those scandinavian countries have the relationship as you oulined above as does the UK and Irish Goverments. The same cannot be said of the nationalist/republician and unionist/loyalists in N.I.
The are many anti-good friday agreement people in the unionist side that would see the establishmnet of a hard border as a victory, that reduces Eire's influence on N.I. Conversly the republicans would see that same border as driving a wedge between two halves of the same people and would see it as a target.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DrPatrickBarry

The are many anti-good friday agreement people in the unionist side that would see the establishmnet of a hard border as a victory, that reduces Eire's influence on N.I. Conversly the republicans would see that same border as driving a wedge between two halves of the same people and would see it as a target.

---

But there are suggestion of a border between the UK and Northern Ireland in the Irish sea as even with the backstop Northern Ireland is to be kept fully inside the Single Market. Surely that will inflame Unionist opinion who will see that as a breach of the Belfast agreement.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Muddy Retriever

But there are suggestion of a border between the UK and Northern Ireland in the Irish sea as even with the backstop Northern Ireland is to be kept fully inside the Single Market. Surely that will inflame Unionist opinion who will see that as a breach of the Belfast agreement.

---

Logistically that would be the simplist solution, easier to "quietly" carry out customs checks on trucks/containers that are heading towards a port. But as you say "that will inflame Unionist opinion".

Many years ago, I remember a young unionist lad saying in a TV interview that "they were more English than the English themselves", I was just a kid myself at the time but I still remember my thought, "but you are Irish"
You will be only too aware of the issue of flags and marches in N.I.
The Unionist are not in a happy place with demographic changes due to birth rates and so many young unionist moving to GB they are seeing their majority (and Britishness) slowly errorded.

Recent figures show there are around 50% more students from a Catholic/nationalist background going into higher education here as there are from a Protestant/unionist background
http://www.judecollins.com/2016/01/a...er-university/
It is terrible for the Unionist tradition to see their bright young people deciding they have had enough and leaving.

In the now suspended Stormont government the DUP had one one member more than Sinn Fein. When (if) Stormont is restablished, it is only a matter of time before there is a Sinn Fein first minister.

Before brexit N.I had fallen out of national news, but it is still a very troubled place and will be for many years to come.

Don't blame Leo Varadkar for trying to find a way of lessening the tensions up there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DrPatrickBarry

Don't blame Leo Varadkar for trying to find a way of lessening the tensions up there.

---

I'm afraid I doubt his motives.

Tell me this Patrick, why hasn't Varadkar's Government legislated to restore the Voisinage agreement? For those that don't know, this is an agreement that has been in place for over 50 years between Northern Ireland and the Republic, which grants reciprocal access to fishermen from each jurisdiction to fish in the other's 0 to 6 mile territorial waters. In 2016 the Irish Supreme Court ruled that the agreement wasn't properly enshrined in law. Fisherman from Northern Ireland haven't been able access to the waters of the Republic of Ireland since although the Republic's fisherman continue to have access to Northern Irish waters from which they catch 40% of their total intake.

The Irish Government was supposed to legislate to enshrine the agreement in law but this has stalled in the face of opposition from Irish fishing groups. But if Leo Varadkar is so high minded and concerned with avoiding a hard border with Northern Ireland shouldn't he be making strenuous efforts to remove the hard border against Northern Irish fishermen?

Don't know.
Had to google it.
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/irel...ters-1.2908724
EDIT
bit more googling
11 Mar 2017 - looks like it is going though the parliment. Afraid I can't comment any more than that.
https://www.thejournal.ie/sea-fisher...78835-Mar2017/

It's amazing how vicious the comments are about this proposed change. Probably all fisherman.
Just one example

"Because we’re lick arse nation to anyone our gov think will look favourably on, just like when sarcozy slapped Enda on head for being good boy and doing what we’re told, lapdogs"

Why would Customs Posts be on a border?
To collect the duty and other taxes due on goods entering.

Now on behalf of HMFC and UK Gov I collect VAT and make a return and if necessary a payment every quarter. I also collect PAYE and make a payment if necessary every month. I submit a Corporation Tax return annually and any payment due.

All this is done on trust.

Since 1990 I have had 3 HMRC visits to check my accounts. All were pre 2000. Since then I have been asked to send down my books for a stated period in around 2007.

I have been "clean" in those checks and maybe they now see me as low risk and have bigger fish to fry.

But the point is, the technology solution may not even be necessary if our civil servants used their noggin.

Why couldn't I declare an import duty and VAT on imports along with my quarterly VAT return?

That would end the debate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Witton Park

But the point is, the technology solution may not even be necessary if our civil servants used their noggin.

Why couldn't I declare an import duty and VAT on imports along with my quarterly VAT return?

That would end the debate.

---

In fact companies in Northern Ireland and the Republic will already be filling out forms for exports to each other. It is called Intrastat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Witton Park

Why would Customs Posts be on a border?

---

Illegal movement of goods - i.e. smuggling?

Actually that's a thought, I wonder how the "scotland's minimum price of alcohol" is going? Suppose there is loads of smuggling from England.

Ireland's minimum price of alcohol law is on hold, untial N.I gets it parliment back so that they can sync the law in the two countries, otherwise it would be yet another item for the gangs/terrorists groups to make money from.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DrPatrickBarry

Don't know.
Had to google it.
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/irel...ters-1.2908724

---

Revealing quote form the Irish Times article from Francis O'Donnell CEO of the IFPO:

“There should be no rush in bringing in such legislation as we believe that strategically Ireland is weakening its own hand prior to Brexit negotiations,” Mr O’Donnell says, and his board is seeking an urgent meeting with Mr Creed. (Minister for Marine).

The Irish Government has obviously agreed and shelved its plans to legislate. It is all about leverage. Doesn't appear to be much in the way of concerns for easing tensions with Northern Ireland.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Muddy Retriever

The Irish Government has obviously agreed and shelved its plans to legislate. It is all about leverage. Doesn't appear to be much in the way of concerns for easing tensions with Northern Ireland.

---

Probably true.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DrPatrickBarry

Illegal movement of goods - i.e. smuggling?

Actually that's a thought, I wonder how the "scotland's minimum price of alcohol" is going? Suppose there is loads of smuggling from England.

Ireland's minimum price of alcohol law is on hold, untial N.I gets it parliment back so that they can sync the law in the two countries, otherwise it would be yet another item for the gangs/terrorists groups to make money from.

---

So is anybody suggesting that there should be a hard border between England and Scotland?

Doesn't Ireland already have different excise rates on alcohol and tobacco from the UK. So smuggling could be going on now. Why is it we don't need a hard border at the moment?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DrPatrickBarry

Illegal movement of goods - i.e. smuggling?

Actually that's a thought, I wonder how the "scotland's minimum price of alcohol" is going? Suppose there is loads of smuggling from England.

Ireland's minimum price of alcohol law is on hold, untial N.I gets it parliment back so that they can sync the law in the two countries, otherwise it would be yet another item for the gangs/terrorists groups to make money from.

---

I remember a scam to import illegal cigarettes via the Canaries and then road from Spain.

HMRC got them - in Bacup!! That darn border post proved it's worth ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Witton Park

HMRC got them - in Bacup!! That darn border post proved it's worth ;)

---

I presume that's the border post at the top of the Todmorden-Bacup road, where the Lancastrians stop people smuggling stuff in from Yorkshire. :)

What I like about this interview with Rees-Mogg is the way he quietly and patiently discusses Brexit. Compare with the shouting mid-way from protesters so he couldn't be heard. That's the difference here. One Man talks, the others shout, deliberately drowning him out. Even the reporter mentions it (just after 8 minutes).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aysqBSWCQYE

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Muddy Retriever

Why is it we don't need a hard border at the moment?

---

Single market and customs union, you know the thing the UK want's to leave.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DrPatrickBarry

Single market and customs union, you know the thing the UK want's to leave.

---

I've already answered that. We can be out of both and trading under WTO rules. Extra border infrastructure could be avoided by using electronic declarations, use of customs brokers and HMRC carrying out customs inspection at company premises. This is perfectly acceptable to the WTO - they have said so.

Your objection was that this didn't get round the issue of smuggling. My question is why is that an issue if it isn't an issue now under current arrangements? Ireland and the UK have different excise rates on a number of things at present so there could be smuggling go on at the moment. Why don't we need a hard border now?

By the way I noticed this article this morning from the Irish Independent, which suggests that some people in Ireland recognise that the backstop goes too far.

https://www.independent.ie/opinion/c...-37622042.html

Ok then, tell me in detail how the N.I/Eire can avoid avoid physical border infrastructure between the two countries when one is outside the customs union, when Norway/Sweeden who are both in the customs union require physical infastructure?

Just read the article. Dan, like many people, knows it is a problem (me included), but also like many people does not provide a solution.

It is so easy to criticize from the sidelines.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Muddy Retriever

I've already answered that. We can be out of both and trading under WTO rules. Extra border infrastructure could be avoided by using electronic declarations, use of customs brokers and HMRC carrying out customs inspection at company premises. This is perfectly acceptable to the WTO - they have said so.

Your objection was that this didn't get round the issue of smuggling. My question is why is that an issue if it isn't an issue now under current arrangements? Ireland and the UK have different excise rates on a number of things at present so there could be smuggling go on at the moment. Why don't we need a hard border now?

By the way I noticed this article this morning from the Irish Independent, which suggests that some people in Ireland recognise that the backstop goes too far.

https://www.independent.ie/opinion/c...-37622042.html

---

I would suggest we can go farther with quarterly duty declarations just like we do with VAT.

We can have a sensible de minimis level, which would take non VAT registered businesses and individuals out of the need to declare.
USA has a $800 level currently, the EU one is 22 Euro.
A de minimis level is a daily allowance. I have customers in the USA who order and keep below the level, so goods just ship and clear seamlessly.

I've been involved with imports (and exports) since the 80s and I have never been present to hand over some dosh or sign a form at a border post.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DrPatrickBarry

Ok then, tell me in detail how the N.I/Eire can avoid avoid physical border infrastructure between the two countries when one is outside the customs union, when Norway/Sweeden who are both in the customs union require physical infastructure?

---

I already have. The modern trend is for these transactions to be processed electronically. The article you allude to seems to be mainly be related to smuggling but as I keep saying we could just as easily have that now. Have a look at this article from July. First thing to say is it is from the website Brexit Central so clearly there is no doubt what it's stance is going to be. But it is a really good piece, which I think explains clearly how the issue can be overcome. It makes the point that we have divergence now, which has not been a threat to the peace process so why should it in the future. It also notes that the position of the Irish Government suddenly changed. What wasn't an issue before suddenly became a problem.

https://brexitcentral.com/avoid-hard...single-market/

Smuggling within the common market/customs union is an issue of revenue loss and it is down to the Irish/N.I authorities to manage that, which the decision has been to use intelligence to try to crack down on the most serious offenders.

But once N.I leaves the common market/customs union, that is a whole different ball game. Any products say food or medicines has to conform to EU standards. Anything produced in the EU can be inspected by EU verified inspectors so it is allowed to travel freely around the EU.

Now the UK wants to "take back control", so the EU has to take it on trust when the UK says their products meet EU standards. As you say they will sort that out so company X will be able to export product Y into the EU. At the ports they can clear that product to allow it to pass through with little or no delay.

Now how do you do that with a random truck driving across the N.I land border?
Now this is an EU matter, as the integerity of the Single Market comes into play, and the tolorance of a certain amount of illegeal activity is no longer acceptable

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DrPatrickBarry

Now this is an EU matter, as the integerity of the Single Market comes into play, and the tolorance of a certain amount of illegeal activity is no longer acceptable

---

And yet before Leo Varadkar became premier this maximalist, ultra-legalistic approach was not being taken. Under Enda Kenny UK and Irish civil servants were examining Authorised Economic Operator (AEO) and trusted trader schemes to cope with cross-border trade flows. In May 2017 Niall Cody the chairman of Ireland's Revenue Commissions said he was "practically 100% certain" that there would be no need for additional border posts. This approach all changed under Varadkar who immediately disbanded the working groups.

So do you think that in the event of a no-deal Brexit, Ireland will put up new border posts? In fact given that the possibility of no-deal is now more likely than before, shouldn't they be making preparations to do so?

Interesting, I googled Niall Cody and found the article you probably referenced for your comment.

But then in other search results his departement said the complete opposite.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...s-irish-report

But just think about a completly open border. A UK company imports some dodgy foodstuffs from Brazil for example, into Liverpool sends it across to Belfast and then by truck down to Dublin, where it can be distributed throughout the EU, without any checks. The EU would have to rely on on a 3rd country to ensure that products entering their jurisdiction meet their standards.

In reverse would the UK allow that?
Why should the EU?

If ireland does not enforce the single market border then Ireland itself would be kicked out.


All your comments about "Trusted Trader" works fine at ports.
As I said earlier a truck arrives at a port and if everything checkout he is allowed to board the boat.
A truck arrives at a N.I border crossing and a camera, (that has not had a visit from a dissentient angle grinder) reads the number plate and if all checks out he continues on his journey and if it does not check out he continues on his journey.

Never mind that there are 275 crossing points, it would be impossible to police.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-40949424

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DrPatrickBarry

Interesting, I googled Niall Cody and found the article you probably referenced for your comment.

But then in other search results his departement said the complete opposite.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...s-irish-report

But just think about a completly open border. A UK company imports some dodgy foodstuffs from Brazil for example, into Liverpool sends it across to Belfast and then by truck down to Dublin, where it can be distributed throughout the EU, without any checks. The EU would have to rely on on a 3rd country to ensure that products entering their jurisdiction meet their standards.

In reverse would the UK allow that?
Why should the EU?

If ireland does not enforce the single market border then Ireland itself would be kicked out.

---

According to this article the leaked report you refer to related to their thinking in 2016 but their views had moved on

https://capx.co/185884-2/

It states:

"But this was based on the Revenue’s initial thinking in 2016, that was discarded as the possibilities of the EU’s modernised customs procedures became more clearly understood. The Guardian reported the RTÉ story, but did not mention that the Irish Revenue Chairman Niall Cody said as far back as May that the authority’s thinking had moved on and they were not looking at sites for customs posts, as technological fixes and checks away from the border would suffice. Indeed, RTÉ reported that Mr Cody was “almost 100 per cent certain” there would be no need for border posts."

Mind you the author was wrong with is his prediction that Leo Varadkar would become more accommodating.

With regard to your doggy foodstuffs example, do you think the UK will have no standards of its own? They may even become tougher after Brexit such as banning the exports of live animals. In any case the UK and EU start from a position of regulatory equivalence. The Eu already has agreements with Canada and New Zealand based on mutual recognition of standards. Why couldn't it do that with the UK?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DrPatrickBarry

Interesting, I googled Niall Cody and found the article you probably referenced for your comment.

But then in other search results his departement said the complete opposite.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...s-irish-report

---

Here you go. Confirmation that the report related to 2016, was no longer the Revenue's view and was superseded in May 2017.

https://www.revenue.ie/en/corporate/...sh-customs.pdf

Wonder why the Guardian didn't report that?