Last week, Boris Johnson came back from Brussels with his new Brexit deal, but he couldn’t win MPs vote as the House of Commons pushed on an amendment that delayed Brexit again. Why? What’s the reason why MPs keep on sabotaging Brexit?

“The first rule of politics is supposed to be – in the words of President Lyndon B. Johnson – learning to count”. BoJo has showed he perfectly knows that. Coming back from Brussels, end of last week, he was gathering the numbers of votes he needed to get Brexit done, but “Super Saturday” (Oct the19th) hid a trap. MPs voted for an amendment tabled by the Tory Oliver Letwin and in response, the government cancelled Saturday’s vote on the actual deal itself. A delay on Bojo’s plan…

Brexit Starts After Brexit

Brexit doesn’t mean only leaving the EU after a deal is voted in the UK’s parliament. This is just the beginning. The political debate, which started 1,200 days ago, is discussing the frame, the divorce starting point. What the separation between the UK and the EU means has yet to be established.

The deal and the bill that parliament is now debating on includes four clear issues; the new organization to monitor the right of EU citizens in UK, Northern Ireland, the supremacy of the European Court of Justice on UK law and the money UK has to pay to leave (Article 50).

When the Parliament approves a deal, all the uncertainty of these last three years will be overcome. But a new uncertainty will rise soon; the one related to the transition period which is supposed to last until January 2021. During this phase, the UK and EU will renegotiate the rules of the game. That means, for example, free trade deals between the UK and the rest of the world and a new Jumbo Free Trade Agreement with the EU, that still wants to be a special partner. Experts say that it will take another five years to work out what the new economic relationship with the EU will be like.

Economic Impact Analysis

40 months have passed since the referendum was voted and Boris Johnson is fighting in his political purgatory for 88 days. “Let’s get Brexit done and let’s move on,” and “this is the biggest democratic exercise in British history” are the strong claims he’s been using to win. His effective propaganda is disruptive and has been able to sell his project well. But the bill that the UK has to pay to leave is still too high.

Some MPs have asked the chancellor for an updated economic analysis of the consequences of Johnson’s deal on UK. The last government’s long-term economic analysis was published in November 2018. The Department for Exiting the EU (DExEU) made a comparison between the rival Brexit scenarios designed by Theresa May’s and Boris Johnson’s deal using information from the Treasury, the Bank of England and the Financial Conduct Authority. The study showed that a deal akin to Johnson’s would cost the economy 6.7% of GDP over 15 years, which is equivalent to around £130 billion ($167.5 billion) in lost income by 2034. This amounts to people on average being £2,250 per year poorer 15 years from now. May’s deal was considered to have a much milder negative effect on the economy, with the report saying the cost would be nearer to 2.5% of GDP over the same period.

Asked about this numbers, PM has always answered that “democracy has a cost and this the bill UK has to pay to regain its sovereignty”.

The independent think tank called UK in a Changing Europe has also published an analysis comparing the Johnson and the May deals. It found the PM’s would be likely to reduce GDP per capita by between 2.3% and 7% over the next ten years, compared with remaining in the EU. That compares with 1,9% to 5,5% under May’s deal.

The lobby group for the engineering and manufacturing industries, Make UK, has also showed its concerns. Members are worried about the lack of commitments to maintaining the closest possible trading relationship with the European partners. Being excluded from EU regulatory institutions could reduce their influence and raising costs of manufacturers working in the aerospace, automotive, food and drink, chemicals and pharmaceuticals sectors.

And what about companies relying on immigrated workers? The Daily Mail published the concerns which emerged in a National Farmers’ Union survey showing that the shortfall, in part fueled by Brexit uncertainty, is striking the industry.

“A third of growers say they have been forced to leave 100 tons of fruit unpicked – around 16 million apples – because of a labour shortfall,” the newspaper said. The shortage of pickers and packers, most of them coming from East Europe, is also hitting vegetables growers ahead of the Christmas period, “with industry leaders fearing supplies of Brussels sprouts, cabbages, cauliflowers, kale and mushrooms could be affected,” the newspaper concluded. (Immigration to the UK for work is fallen to its lowest level: -18% last August, -20% last September).

Bank of England governor, Mark Carney, shows optimism saying the UK is primed to rebound from uncertainty with higher level of investment and growth, though he alerts that lower levels of trade with the EU would restrict any recovery.

Great Britain Could Dwindle Becoming Britannia

Even some of Theresa May’s worst enemies tend to consider her deal better than Johnson’s one. She knows that and that’s the reason why she decided to speak in the House of Commons during the “Super Saturday” debate. “Standing here, I have a distinct sense of déjà vu,” she said, given that her deal had been rejected in the same chamber three times while Johnson’s was about to be killed for the first one.

There’s a big difference, though, between the two options and it is called “Northern Ireland”.

The Backstop issue wrecked May’s deal. Boris overcame it, but is this enough to win the Irish people doubts?

The bill that the Unionist Party has to pay looks too high at the moment; the DUP refused support to the PM’s deal feeling betrayed. Moving the Irish border into the sea to overcome the backstop as suggested by May’s deal wrecked the dream of the integrity of the UK (and betrays the spirit of the 1988 Good Friday Agreement).

“These proposals are not, in our view, beneficial to the economic well-being of Northern Ireland and they undermine the integrity of the Union,” DUP deputy leader Nigel Dodds said.

Experts think that Northern Ireland is on its way out from the UK feeling a semi-detached part of it. The softer Brexit envisaged only for Northern Ireland looks like a soft offer to stay in the EU. The EU is just waiting for that and the UK is risking to start losing pieces. The second piece to get lost soon could be Scotland, as Scottish people didn’t vote for leaving the EU in 2016 (62% wanted to remain). Scotland is threatening to leave the UK and is working on a new referendum.

The conclusion is: how much will it cost this democratic process called Brexit?

L'articolo Why is Brexit starting after Brexit? proviene da InsideOver.

The “Irish backstop” has been the major impediment towards the success of Brexit negotiations, between the EU and the UK. The controversy surrounding this stems from the 1998 Good Friday Agreement that was signed as part of the Northern Ireland peace process. To achieve and maintain peace, the agreement called for the enhancement of cross border cooperation between Ireland and Northern Ireland, and the “‘normalisation'” of relations between Protestant and Catholic communities within and across the two territories after years of conflicts.

This led to the withdrawal of British troops from the Irish border, to allow free movement of goods and people between Ireland and Northern Ireland. However the results of the 2016 Brexit referendum, presented a new challenge to the Irish open border as UK began taking steps to take control of its borders.

This sparked fear among Irish leaders who felt that the introduction of border checks after Brexit could revive old divisions and jeopardise the peace process. After taking note of the complaints, both the UK and EU agreed that any Brexit deal should include a “backstop” to keep the border open, for the sake of the Good Friday Agreement.

The issue of the backstop became a major obstacle when the former British Prime Minister, Theresa May, brought to parliament an agreement she had negotiated. The agreement stated that after Brexit, the UK was to remain a member of the EU single market and custom’s union for a certain duration of time for businesses to adjust and also enable the Government to negotiate for new trade deals with the European Union.

The Irish backstop was to be introduced after this transition period and before the conclusion of negotiations on new trade agreements. According to the backstop, Northern Ireland was to remain a member of the EU single market until new trade deals to keep the border invisible were reached. This essentially meant that no checks were to be carried on the Irish border for a certain duration. The only downside of this was that, although the aim was to keep Northern Irish border open for the sake of peace and also to minimise economic damage, it also meant that the UK was to remain under EU laws for some time after Brexit.

The deal was, however, rejected by many Conservatives who argued that the backstop would trap the UK in the EU and also block it from making trade agreements with non-EU countries. The Democratic Unionist Party of Northern Ireland also refused to endorse it claiming it would leave Northern Ireland in a different customs arrangement to the rest of the UK. Boris Johnson who was then serving as Foreign Minister resigned from the government claiming that the UK was headed “for the status of a colony” if Theresa May’s soft Brexit proposal sailed through.

“Since I cannot in all conscience champion these proposals, I have sadly concluded that I must go,” said Boris in his resignation letter. The impasse over led to the eventual resignation of Theresa May as Prime Minister in mid this year.

On 19 August, the new Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, after failing to make any headway in his attempts to deliver Brexit, attacked the Northern Irish backstop describing it as “anti-democratic and inconsistent with the sovereignty of the UK” and a risk to the delicate balance embodied in the Good Friday Agreement. In his letter to the EU, he urged the Union to come up with new terms which would allow the UK to achieve a Brexit deal, pointing out that the backstop could not form part of an agreed Withdrawal Agreement. Instead, he proposed replacing the backstop with what he called “flexible and creative” arrangements which would ensure a soft border between Ireland and Northern Ireland after Brexit.

For a time it seemed as if a deal was unlikely as Boris maintained his do or die stance of delivering Brexit by the 31 October. But now more than ever, there’s a glimmer of hope following the successful talks between him and Ireland’s Prime Minister, Leo Varadkar on the question of the backstop. In what could signal a major concession both the British Government and the European Union have now agreed to intensify negotiations over Boris Johnson’s proposal to see if it could lead to a Brexit deal over the remaining weeks. Although the backstop proposal has remained a secret, the Times stated that under it, Britain would collect tariffs on behalf of the EU for goods ending up in Northern Ireland and companies could claim rebates. “Northern Ireland effectively stays in the EU’s customs union but for trade, it’s in the UK’s customs union,” a source familiar with the proposal told the Times.

But in what could be a major blow to the British Prime Minister’s efforts to get a last-minute deal, Mr Nigel Dodds the deputy leader of Northern Ireland’s unionist party DUP, has trashed the proposal saying “it cannot work.” In an interview with an Italian paper La Repubblica, he said “ Northern Ireland must stay in a full UK customs union. Full stop.” This is contrary to the reconciliatory note struck by Boris and Mr Varadkar, Ireland’s Prime Minister.

Whether a deal is achievable within the few remaining days, is still subject of debate. The EU Council Donald Tusk although expressing some optimism warned”. No guarantee of success and the time is practically up.” The truth is that in case Boris Johnson fails to get a deal, Northern Ireland would come under the same customs and regulatory standards as the UK, while its neighbour, Ireland, remain under the EU. This would lead to a hard border thus undermining the Good Friday agreement according to experts.

L'articolo The “Irish Backstop” Problem Hindering Brexit proviene da InsideOver.

The Brexit process has been dragging for a while now. After many months – even years – of assemblies, meetings and negotiations, the withdrawal process of the United Kingdom from the European Union has not covered nor resolved all of its main disputes. Despite rumours and claims, there are yet many topics to be discussed and, most importantly, agree on. Therefore, the issue today still seems far from over, even if time is running out.

In this messy and very open situation, it might be easy to lose track of events and developments; so, how did we get exactly to where we are today?

Once upon a time

Since the very early beginnings, when in 1973 the United Kingdom joined the three European Communities, the relations between these two parties have always been uncertain and resentful at least. Even though the UK agreed to the creation of the European Single Market, which would allow the free movement of goods, capital, services and labour within Member States, it was immediately clear they were not particularly satisfied with any meddling acts from outsiders in their internal politics. Margaret Thatcher was the face of this British fierce opposition to what were perceived as excessive duties.

After her resignation, these tensions loosened: John Major signed the ’92 Maastricht Agreement creating the European Union, and with the labour governments under Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, a new period of more relaxed relations seemed approaching. However, internal anti-European pressures were lurking underneath, and ultimately culminated with the following conservative government.

In order to make Brussels counterparts more flexible, adaptable and yielding, the then PM David Cameron announced a popular referendum on the British permanence within the European Union. This choice was a pure demonstrative act and not a true attainable political objective, nor even a threat, as he remarked. Nevertheless, the referendum had a huge impact and polarised British society into two separate and opposite groups: on one side, the Remain alliance for the permanence in the EU, made of by the Labour, the Lib Dems, the Green Party of England and Wales, the Scottish National Party and half of the Tories (among which Cameron himself); on the other side, the Leave front, with the other half of the Conservative party led by Boris Johnson and the UK Independence Party of Nigel Farage.

Said referendum took place on June 23rd 2016 and saw the slight yet unexpected win of the Leave over the Remain. Again, the referendum was purely consultive and not legally binding; nonetheless, the then government decided to follow up the popular opinion and tried to turn it into effective political agenda.

The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom stated afterwards that, in order to proceed and apply Article 50 (the one concerning exit procedures for Member States willing to withdraw from the EU), the British Parliament alone must be consulted, without intromissions by any of the four national assemblies. The Parliament was consulted indeed and the formal notification of the Article 50 exit procedure was successful, starting the official Brexit process in 2017, on March 29th.

The start of Brexit negotiations

The beginning of these negotiations saw new conservative PM Theresa May informing the President of the European Council Donald Tusk about the British government’s intention to abandon both the customs union and the European Single Market, to withdraw from the European Communities joined in 1973 and to adapt EU laws into UK laws (and not the other way around). The date for said withdrawal was set on March 29th 2019, two years after the presentation of the notification as required by Article 50.

Right after receiving the notification letter, the European Parliament agreed to negotiate the withdrawal procedures, and on June 19th 2017, British Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union Davis Davis joined in Brussels Chief Negotiator Michel Barnier and started discussing together a withdrawal agreement, involving a transitional period and the future of the relations between UK and EU. From the very beginning, there was utmost concern about the many different outcomes and prospects of this controversial situation.

But what seemed to be a rapidly-evolving an unstoppable process turned out to be much slower than expected due to many factors, including anticipated British elections. Finally, in November 2018, the binding withdrawal agreement and the non-binding Declaration on Future Relations were stipulated and presented to the British Parliament in the following months; however, the British Parliament was internally divided and eventually rejected to ratify them on three different occasions during the first months of 2019. While the Labour wanted to remain a part of the customs union, the Tories refused its financial obligations towards the EU. Three years later, the same ideological polarisation within Britain was still untouched.

Brexit today: new leaders, old issues and potential outcomes

A new deadline was then set – and still is today – for October 31st 2019. Having failed to deliver Brexit as promised, May resigned as leader of the Tories and has been succeeded by Boris Johnson during the summer of 2019. Loyal to his stoical position throughout the whole Brexit process, Johnson is now determined to finally leave the EU on the newest deadline, with or without an agreement.

This no-deal outcome also involves the rejection by the EU to abrogate the Northern Ireland Protocol (or “Irish Backstop”) as requested by Johnson in order to re-open negotiations. The EU wants to maintain a soft border between Republic of Ireland (EU) and Northern Ireland (potential non-EU), two countries historically marked by bloody fights now striving for peace; according to Johnson instead, this soft border potentially undermines the effectiveness of Brexit itself.

According to many experts, Brexit – and especially its the no-deal outcome – would significantly jeopardise the internal British economy as well as the London status quo on a global scale, entering into an unprecedented recession; this theory is widespread among the Remain (whose campaign has always supported an economical and technical basis, rather than an emotional one), who are willing to drag the debate further in the hope of a profitable future agreement.

Whether or not Johnson is aware of this (and he is), his resolute standpoint on the issue is a critical turning point in what seemed to be indeed a decelerating process directing towards further negotiations between parties; but if, on the one hand, the European Union seemed to gain the upper hand due to the internal division of the British Parliament, on the other one, Johnson’s latest harsh initiatives to suspend the Parliament and to expel the dissident Tories might be just another demonstrative act of force in order to get more leverage with EU counterparts – just like the 2016 referendum.

The geopolitical and economic scenarios of both the United Kingdom and the European Union will be determined by the turn of events that Brexit will take in the next months; as today, the issue is still open for many possible outcomes.

L'articolo Brexit for Dummies proviene da InsideOver.

As the Conservative Party Conference came to an end, Prime Minister Boris Johnson set out the details of his ‘final’ negotiating offer to Brussels in pursuit of a ‘fair and reasonable’ Brexit compromise. If he can achieve this, he will be able to resolve the stumbling block that caused the Conservative Party’s European Research Group (ERG) and the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) to abandon Theresa May’s Withdrawal Agreement. He told a DUP fringe meeting at the conference that this will enable the UK to ‘move on’ after October 31st and ensure the public are ‘no longer taken for fools.’ He also said he hopes to agree a deal with the EU over the next few days.

The new plan will aim to avoid creating customs posts on either side of the border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. Boris stated that Britain wanted ‘clearance zones’ for goods as part of a package of alternative arrangements. Once the UK leaves the EU, customs checks will be inevitable, but new technology should enable them to be kept to an absolute minimum, as the Prime Minister suggests.

Despite this, Boris faces many hurdles in persuading the EU to accept this new deal. The BBC reports that the mood in Brussels is ‘not optimistic.’ But this has been the main issue throughout the entire Brexit process; Brussels has demonstrated its unwillingness to compromise. By abandoning the threat of no-deal, May had no trump card during the negotiations. This has meant she was forced to surrender on many of the red lines the EU issued from the beginning; protecting EU citizens’ rights, the divorce bill and the Irish border. This was a deliberate attempt by Brussels to force Westminster to accept any deal that they offer them. Though EU leaders have insisted from the beginning that they offered May a free trade deal, if they were serious about their argument, they would have discussed how trade would continue post-Brexit, and then aim to resolve those three issues once it was clear what the UK’s future trading relationship with the EU looked like.

Nonetheless, there is still the possibility the EU could agree a deal at the very last minute at the next European Council meeting on October 17th. Brussels is aware that a no-deal Brexit threatens them more than the UK. With Chancellor Sajid Javid and the Duchy of Lancaster, Michael Gove, assuring Tory delegates that Britain is prepared for leaving the EU without a deal, the Government can ease the damage it could cause by offering VAT and corporate tax cuts and by reaching settlements, like it has with France, that ensures the smooth flow of goods over the English Channel.

This is why it is in Ireland’s best interest to resolve the backstop. It is predicted that 2 to 2.5 per cent of their GDP could be wiped out in 2030. Their GDP could also be 1.5 per cent lower in 2021. With Italy €2 trillion in debt, and a slowdown in the German economy and US tariffs crippling their trade, the EU cannot afford anymore economic disruption. They have three choices on October 17th: accept Boris’s new deal, veto it or agree upon an extension. The Prime Minister has vowed to accept no delay to the Halloween deadline, and if he exploits the loopholes in the Benn Act that The Spectator discussed, he would have to leave with no deal.

The EU is renowned for being notoriously slow at concluding trade agreements. Even if the Council cannot agree on Boris’s deal, the Prime Minister could still persuade them that no-deal would be a short-term solution, and then they can agree upon a trade deal after October 31st. But will the 27 member states agree? The chances of avoiding an extension are slim, but if Brussels has any sense, they would accept the UK’s final offer.

L'articolo Has Boris Found A Brexit Breakthrough With The Irish Backstop? proviene da InsideOver.

Until Prime Minister Johnson suspended the UK Parliament, the Irish border posed the biggest question in the Brexit negotiations. The topic has become known as the ‘Irish Backstop’. Currently, citizens of both Irelands enjoy a seamless transition when driving between Northern Ireland (‘NI’) and the Republic, their change in location marked only when the road signs morph from ‘miles’ (NI) to ‘kilometres’ (Republic). This fluidity of movement, and the resultant erasure of fences, is a result of the Peace Process. But this hard-earned progress of the past twenty years is now under threat by possible Brexit policies.

When Northern Ireland, as part of the UK, exits the EU, it will share a border with an EU member state, necessitating what is known as Hard Border. Hard border would entail customs checks for citizens and goods moving between the Irelands, as well as the resurrection of fences. As hallmarks of the British rule in Northern Ireland, it is feared that fences would inflame tensions anew and cause the island of Ireland to return to the decades of fighting known as The Troubles. In the space of three decades, The Troubles brought 15,000 bombs, 3,800 fatalities and 36,000 shootings. There was an average of ten killings per month. No surprise then, that negotiators and diplomats have been thinking up every possible solution to avoid a hard border in Ireland. One suggestion is to scan lorries using technology, so that no physical customs checks need stand between the two Irelands. Another option is to scan the goods vehicles away from the border, but the remote scanning points may become targets for attacks instead.

While British politicians are desperately trying to resolve the Irish Backstop, something has been happening that could save them the task.

The Belfast Agreement, more commonly known as the Good Friday Agreement, was finally reached on April 10th, 1998. It permits those born in Northern Ireland to choose British citizenship, Irish citizenship or both. In 2017, the year following the Brexit referendum, over 80,000 Northern Irish residents applied for Irish passports, the highest annual figure on record. While the backstop has complicated the Brexit process, it may achieve what William Gladstone never could: the reunification of Ireland. Naturally and intrinsically, simply from people voting with their feet.

What do the Irish passport applications reveal?

To answer this, we must consider Benedict Anderson’s definition of a nation: ‘an imagined political community’.

Their record applications for Irish citizenship shows how Northern Irish citizens see their homeland as unconfined to the six counties of Ulster. Rather, they identify and connect with a geographical space that transcends the Irish border, as well as the wider family of the European Union. While they used to say, ‘Ulster says ‘No’’, their line is now, ‘No border’ and the Irish

question of the 1990s has remodelled into a new Irish idea of progressivism, Freedom of Movement and –crucially- as part of the EU.

The Irish MEPs and diplomatic core in Brussels secured the Irish border as one of the three red line issues in the Brexit negotiations. This alone demonstrates Ireland’s eagerness to engage with the EU. Given that Northern Ireland voted 55.8% in favour of remaining in the EU, the two Irelands appear to be on the same page in matters of foreign policy.

So why is the above enough to reunite Ireland?

When debating whether or not Britain should join the Euro, people on both sides mentioned something called the Eurocreep. This was the argument that the Euro was already operating in the UK because big firms with UK bases already conducted their business in and –more importantly- thought in Euros. It is a similar situation with Ireland. By rejecting Hard Border and binding each other closer together by imagined –or rather, mental,- association, it’s easy to see how a reunited Ireland would form in the collective mind of the island’s inhabitants and return a positive result if NI held a referendum on reunification with the Republic. The Good Friday Agreement permits such a poll to take place if ‘it appears likely’ that most voters (in Northern Ireland) would want to ‘form part of a united Ireland’ and give up their part in the UK. As well as a shared mentality between its peoples, Strand Three of the Good Friday Agreement could do a lot to reunite Ireland.

The third Strand ‘established the British–Irish Council and the British–Irish Intergovernmental Conference to encourage co-operation and develop good relations between Britain and Ireland. These are forums where the two Governments discuss Reserved Matters which are not the responsibility of the Northern Ireland Assembly.’ In having a platform for the discussion of matters that exclusively affect the two Irelands, they have laid the foundations for operating together politically if they ever reunited. Since both are very pro-EU nations, taking their shared affairs to Brussels would be unlikely to cause any problems. They may benefit from the Union’s support for minority languages and allow Ulster-Scots to flourish alongside Irish Gaelic.

The new and shared progressive Irish idea can only have been helped by the recent gay marriage and abortion referendums in the Republic that saw the country turn its back on its traditional Catholic values, thus eroding the religious divide that once defined Irish division. It seems the island of Ireland is heading towards reunification and, like the current border arrangements, its transition will be seamless.

L'articolo Could Brexit Reunite Ireland? proviene da InsideOver.

Following his recent visit to Ireland, Boris Johnson told Irish Taoiseach Leo Varadkar that a no-deal Brexit would be a failure that both their respective governments would be responsible for. The Irish backstop remains a sticking point for the British government as they try to use the time remaining before October 31st to avoid leaving the EU without a deal. Dublin is insistent that the backstop must remain part of the Withdrawal Agreement Theresa May negotiated during her premiership, but they have not suggested a suitable alternative to this proposal whilst London has stressed the backstop must be removed.

The EU has said it will consider other solutions to the Irish border problem, but only once the Withdrawal Agreement has been signed off. However, there could be a ‘Norwegian-Swedish solution’ to the Irish backstop that both London and Brussels should consider.

Both May and Johnson stressed that the UK is leaving the EU’s Single Market and Customs Union, and if this happens, it will be impossible for Britain to imitate the Norwegian-Swedish border arrangement as Norway is a member of the European Economic Area (EEA). This means it has to abide by many of the EU’s rules regarding the free movement of people, goods, capital and services, though it can pick and choose which ones it wants to implement. It is also a member of the Schengen zone that disables all passport controls between EU and EEA states. But because Norway is not part of the Customs Union, this means border checks are necessary, which proves neither Ireland nor Britain can hope to retain an ‘invisible border’ post-Brexit.

Despite this, one advantage of being outside the Customs Union for Britain is that it can impose taxes on goods being smuggled into the UK illegally. Politico reported on Swedish smugglers loading their vans with alcohol ready to transport to Norway’s black market. Within the EU, citizens can load up as much alcohol as their vehicles can safely carry and legally drive it over internal borders, as long as they can credibly claim it is for private consumption. But because Norway is outside the Customs Union, it imposes higher tariffs on cigarettes and alcohol. In 2017, Norwegian customs seized 322,000 litres of beer and 47,000 litres of spirits. Post-Brexit, it would be the UK’s discretion which goods receive heavy tariffs (if any) and which don’t.

There have been many arguments for deploying technology to ease British-Irish border tensions. The Svinesund customs office located to the south of Orje, Norway, told Voa News that frictionless borders do work, but they require development and lots of legislation. Much export information is available to Norwegian customs houses digitally, but the problem is they all use different computer systems. Also, export checks are difficult to operate when goods in one vehicle are not uniform. For the UK to mimic such a system, it would take a considerable period of time and it would be costly. A report by Kommerskollegium, the trade board for Sweden, compiled a 2017 report based on a survey of 2,000 Swedish companies that identified customs as the main problem hampering trade with Norway.

Therefore, the Norwegian-Swedish border is one possible model the UK and Ireland could imitate to a certain extent. It demonstrates the advantages leaving the Customs Union has for Britain as they can impose their own customs checks on goods they do not want to enter their borders. Though it could encourage illegal trading in the short-term, the success Norwegian customs officials have had in clamping down on alcohol in 2017 highlights how effective customs checks can be in discouraging this sort of behaviour. It is almost impossible to argue that border checks will not be necessary post-Brexit. It will take time to build the technology necessary to allow for frictionless trade. This is why it is in both Brussels’ and London’s best interests to reach a free trade deal, and fast. As Johnson said, both the British and the Irish governments can avoid a hard border.

L'articolo Is There a Norwegian-Swedish Solution To The Irish Backstop? proviene da InsideOver.

The Guardian reports that Ireland’s Deputy Prime Minister Simon Coveney recently told a Paris conference that the EU has no intention of revising its plans for an Irish backstop. He told his audience, which included Brexit Secretary Stephen Barclay, that the backstop is an agreement with the UK on the basis of a ‘shared understanding’ of the peculiar situation in Ireland. Coveney also blamed Boris Johnson for failing to produce a credible alternative to the backstop and shifted the blame onto the British for escalating this situation.

The reality is that the Irish Government has no intention of assisting the British with forming a post-Brexit free trade deal. Irish Taoiseach Leo Varadkar has opposed Brexit from the beginning. Speaking on Ireland Unfiltered, he told the TV channel that Britain’s EU exit has ‘unleashed the forces of populism and nationalism.’ He has also formed an alliance with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to ensure the Democrats vote against a US-UK trade deal if Britain leaving the EU means that the Good Friday Agreement is jeopardised. With the reality of no-deal creeping nearer, instead of refusing to cooperate with the UK Government on producing suitable alternatives to the backstop, the Irish must seize the initiative and produce their own imaginative solution to the border issue.

Boris is optimistic that he can still reach a deal with the EU, but he is preparing for no-deal at the same time. The Prime Minister’s decision to prorogue Parliament until 14th October last week proves that he is serious about preventing MPs from thwarting Britain’s EU exit on Halloween. Oxford Economics says the chances of Britain leaving the EU without a deal increased by 30 per cent once Boris prorogued Parliament. Although there are other issues with the Withdrawal Agreement, the backstop remains the main stumbling block to a smooth exit on 31st October. The Times reports that Britain’s International Development Minister Grant Shapps has complained the British Government has produced alternatives to the backstop, but that he is receiving little in return from Brussels. With the October deadline fast approaching and the British Government proving it has never been so serious about no-deal, it is time for Dublin to start compromising, and fast.

Markets Insider suggests Ireland will be one of the worst affected countries by a no-deal Brexit. They predict that 2 to 2.5 per cent of GDP could be wiped out in 2030. For Ireland, the UK accounts for over half of Irish exports and over 40 per cent of imports. 31 per cent of Ireland’s exports consisted of food and drinks in 2018. Cross-border goods trade with Northern Ireland in 2018 was worth around €3.5 billion. Martin Beck, lead economist at Oxford Economics, told Markets Insider that in the event of a no-deal Brexit, Irish GDP would be around 1.5 per cent lower by the end of 2021. This is why Varadkar would be making a terrible mistake if he keeps shunning Britain’s solutions to the border crisis and fails to produce his own.

Furthermore, Irish businesses are requesting their politicians assist them following a no-deal Brexit. They want a slice of Ireland’s unprecedented €10.4 billion corporate tax intake reserved for businesses trading in both directions that could be hit by tariffs after Halloween. John McGrane, the Director General of the British Irish Chamber Commerce, told The Guardian the Irish Government can shore up indigenous companies most at risk from Brexit. Varadkar would be wise to prevent Ireland’s tax intake from being redirected to an outcome he should be aiming to avoid instead of trying to preserve this backstop.

With Irish businesses worried about the impact Brexit will have on their ability to trade and its economic effects becoming more apparent, there is still time for the Irish Government to seize the initiative and suggest their own solution to the border crisis. But it will be the Irish who will suffer the most from no-deal and the ball is in their court to stop it.

L'articolo Ireland Looking For a Quick Alternative to the Backstop proviene da InsideOver.