fatolive

Quite possibly , but, that doesn’t necessarily mean the border is simple to solve and they aren’t just doing it does it? NI is different on so many levels to the rest of the UK in terms of laws and government already , the Irish Sea suggestion is as good a suggestion as any for now, yet it is refused/ blocked by a party who don’t even represent the majority in NI, who, incidentally voted to stay, they’re a bigger obstacle to Brexit than any technology. As stated before by others that GE that gave them that power was a miscalculation, easy in hindsight of course

Because it doesn’t work in the situation as described previously mate. it only speeds up border checks , it doesn’t remove a border as such. why do th e brexiteers have such an issue in agreeing to the backstop if it’s so simple and works ? It’s a different scenario than the tested situations such as Norway etc, it isn’t just eu who don’t think it will work, hence the probl,s with agreeing to the backstop.

Exactly, so why do you suggest he would have not done the same in regards to a border ? That was my point, you suggested he would not have made such a demand ? the claim over the 6 was as a removed as part of the GFA, of that there’s no doubt. agree with the DUP sentence, they can’t believe their luck, they don’t even have a functioning government workin in Ni because of the scandals involving them yet here they are playing King Maker

That details how things can possibly work but crucially doesn’t state that it can remove the need for a hard border , it just changes the definition of what a hard border is, there would still need to be checks and staff available at the border in the solutions contained in it, it doesn’t deal with the general day to day crossing points of border communities and the problems that brings ( people used to have shopping consficated in the good old days ) and doesn’t deal with agriculture movements, a major sticking point. if that report worked, no one would have an issue with the back stop, just implement it in the time frame and bobs your uncle the fact it’s been taken apart by people on both sides as not acceptable shoes why it’s such a problem, it’s actaully a good solution in termsof speeding border crossings up, puts som points to bed, but, doesn’t remove the need for the checks and a border control which is the crux of the matter

How does it work and what is it’s purpose? Not a trick question, I genuinely don’t know, but, know it probably won’t work for the general public who travel hassle free across the border to the local shop and return at present unhindered, when asked this, the only answer is “ technology “ but present customs technology won’t work for that area and the unique situations and problems it throws up, unless someone can explain how it will work, the answer “ technology” is just a get out of jail card without offering a real solution.

You seem an intelligent bloke, what’s your solution?

So you think that a Fianna Fáil leader of Ireland would not seek to assure that there wouldn’t be a border in Ireland ? And not take measure to seek that assurance ? The imposition of border would also do harm, what position do you think the leaders you mention would take, seeing as the claim for ownership of the 6 counties was given up as part of the GFA Im also not sure why you described him as you did and the relevance but makes no odds, his views on abortion are also irrelevant, such is the way Irish politics works, not like his views change so he can get the government change the constitution or anything and not sure what relevance that has, only the fact he can change his mind?

In border technology ?

The back stop would disappear if the technology was available and could be proved to work. The border is more complex than a usual border as has been done to death, but, if the solution to a hard border was available then the backstop is no issue, that’s my point, people say they can do this and that no problem but don’t they think they can do it in the time frame so see the back stop as an issue.

The backstop is for an assurance that no hard border will be introduced should the solution to it not be found during the negotiations, it’s what his public want ( and NI public) so he’s bound to take than position, not sure if it was him who demanded it but he agreed to it besides, plenty of folk, on here included say the border issue is easily solvable so not sure why the backstop is such an issue, it’s only while the easy problem is solved... Which earlier Irish leaders do you mean and what line do you think the would have taken?

Not in anyone’s interest that, not just Ireland or the EU, no one will benefit from that and it also goes against the GFA, which people seem to forget can’t just be ridden over as it’s a treaty, not a mere agreement.

A lot of people complained that the border shouldnt be a sticking point as it’s easily solvable. a lot the same people saying the backstop is an issue if the border is so simple to solve then why is the backstop such an issue, surley if it’s so simple to solve the border then that gets rid of the backstop ? Or are these people actually now saying the border isn’t that simple and we won’t have time to solve it in the timeframe the deal gives?

no problem at all with this, couldnt care less what happens to the criminal if he gets injured while being knocked off, that should be their concern when deciding to do the crime, however, can see an issue arising whereby the cops knock someone off and the bike then skids across into someone walking past or something. Then all hell will break loose and the practice will be stopped

don't blame him, wouldnt mind one myself