Brexit - whats the difference.....

[ChopleyIOM]

I don't think anyone realistically stated the UK would be in a better position post-EU. Only thing we've had is those with a penchant for Remain reminding people how much worse everything'd be after the fact!

Oh come now Mr Goatwack, I can't even begin to believe you typed that with a straight face

 

[Playford7]

That's work in progress. When there is something to report we'll let you know.

FTR those we are upset by comments like yours are under no obligation to inform or discuss it with you. IMO given your outspoken position(s) of hatred and intolerance they would be unwise to do so. The Report system is there for their use and, as always, I encourage them to use it.

So after all the thoughts I’m taking it I’ll not be banned. That’s good.

As you have a hatred of me anyway this would of been a biased venture from the outset.

you already took away my free speech from the North Korea thread as it is max.

yes I get you don’t like me, but again rather than flex your banning muscles how about reaching out to me via email or PM And maybe start a discussion?

if you hated me that much then I’d happily have a phonecall and discuss why. Your bias and dislike of me you have stated yourself many times, and as a so called liberal mod it’s not fair, I’ve never called you max, yet you can call me a racist, a bigot and lowest of the low with no response, kind of bullying isn’t it?...

It’s easy to virtue signal about certain subjects when they don’t affect you or your family or those close to you.

not Flaming or wherever you internet people call it when adults have issue, I’d just like to know where I stand here please, and furthermore I’d love to have a open conversation with you regarding why you hate me and disagree with me so much.

best regards
Ben

 

[goatwack]

So after all the thoughts I’m taking it I’ll not be banned. That’s good.

As you have a hatred of me anyway this would of been a biased venture from the outset.

you already took away my free speech from the North Korea thread as it is max.

yes I get you don’t like me, but again rather than flex your banning muscles how about reaching out to me via email or PM And maybe start a discussion?

if you hated me that much then I’d happily have a phonecall and discuss why. Your bias and dislike of me you have stated yourself many times, and as a so called liberal mod it’s not fair, I’ve never called you max, yet you can call me a racist, a bigot and lowest of the low with no response, kind of bullying isn’t it?...

It’s easy to virtue signal about certain subjects when they don’t affect you or your family or those close to you.

not Flaming or wherever you internet people call it when adults have issue, I’d just like to know where I stand here please, and furthermore I’d love to have a open conversation with you regarding why you hate me and disagree with me so much.

best regards
Ben

"then I’d happily have a phonecall and discuss why"

You might wanna reverse the charges Benjamin. Could get expensive

 

[The Dude]

It's thread like this that make me want to shut down the political rant section of the forum. I am f*&^ing fed up with the tit for tat racist bullshit that I am seeing here.

From here on out, if you want to have a political discussion - fine. Once you start bring race and bigoted comments in. It's toast.

I try to be as tolerant as possible. But some of you just take the piss. If you want to have a political rant where you can talk trash about refugees, or people of color, gays, or whatever the fuck - start your own website.

 

[The Dude]

Reopening this thread due to popular request. Please behave. Thank you.

 

[geordiecolin]

What is Barnpot Barnier on? He has stated

'Obviously the UK will recover the full sovereignty of their waters. No doubt. No question.

'But it is another thing, another story, speaking about the fish which are inside those waters.'

What How on earth does he work that one out?

The OECD states " An Exclusive Economic Zone is a concept adopted at the Third United Nations Cmference on The Law Of The Sea (1982) whereby a coastal state assumes juristiction over the exploration of marine resourses in its adjacent section of the continental shelf,taken to be a band extending 200 miles from the shore"

So what Barmy Barnier is stating is utter nonsense.

Furthermore,if what he is attempting to claim is lawful- fishing in English waters- where valid then he is advocating the pillaging of all other Euro member states waters by any Country that wants too.
Or does it only extend to EU Countries fishing in UK waters?
What he is saying is unlawful

What a pollock eh?

 

[Mr_Slot5]

What is Barnpot Barnier on? He has stated

'Obviously the UK will recover the full sovereignty of their waters. No doubt. No question.

'But it is another thing, another story, speaking about the fish which are inside those waters.'

What How on earth does he work that one out?

The OECD states " An Exclusive Economic Zone is a concept adopted at the Third United Nations Cmference on The Law Of The Sea (1982) whereby a coastal state assumes juristiction over the exploration of marine resourses in its adjacent section of the continental shelf,taken to be a band extending 200 miles from the shore"

So what Barmy Barnier is stating is utter nonsense.

Furthermore,if what he is attempting to claim is lawful- fishing in English waters- where valid then he is advocating the pillaging of all other Euro member states waters by any Country that wants too.
Or does it only extend to EU Countries fishing in UK waters?
What he is saying is unlawful

What a pollock eh?

But the remainers will defend everything he says, just like they defended him saying the EU will have done a good job if they give us a deal that would make no other member want to leave the 'club'

Do these sound like the utterances of someone who has democracy in the forefront of their mind??

 

[mack341]

If you think about it in the long run the EU is an obsession about transnational territory, and having power over it and the resources therein. Therefore they're setting their stall out early and making a permanent claim for our fish now

 

[geordiecolin]

But the remainers will defend everything he says, just like they defended him saying the EU will have done a good job if they give us a deal that would make no other member want to leave the 'club'

Do these sound like the utterances of someone who has democracy in the forefront of their mind??

I think that Barmy Barnier is planning on modifying submarines with fishing nets to get around any obstacles.
When was the EU ever about democracy?

 

[geordiecolin]

If you think about it in the long run the EU is an obsession about transnational territory, and having power over it and the resources therein. Therefore they're setting their stall out early and making a permanent claim for our fish now

It seems that given the UK's stance that is never going to happen. The UK paid into the EU infrastructure for decades what with their multi billion pound offices and headquarters which we are going to give them without even taking away a trinket for nostalgic purposes.

 

[goatwack]

What so we don't even get a parting gift? Can't we just nick the French minister's fountain pen?

 

[Kroffe]

What so we don't even get a parting gift? Can't we just nick the French minister-

His name is Fontaine le pen.

 

[geordiecolin]

What so we don't even get a parting gift? Can't we just nick the French minister's fountain pen?

I would be too scared about finding myself writing in French

 

[ChopleyIOM]

Let's avail ourselves with the facts of the case

ARTICLE LINK -

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

Yes it's a bit of a dull and technical read, (as is the case with so many Brexit realities once you strip away the jingoistic chest-thumping), but it also contains the truth of the situation.

Beyond that however, fishing is, if you'll pardon the pun, such a red herring. It represents about 0.12% of the UK economy and employs less than 0.1% national workforce.

Plus, even in a TAKING BACK FULL CONTROL OF OUR WATERS scenario and catching all the fish, we'd still be fucked on selling it (see the analysis linked above).

In terms of stuff we should be getting frothed up about when it comes to Brexit, fishing rights are a totemic willy-waving issue that in the grand scheme of things, doesn't much matter.

 

[mack341]

fishing rights in uk waters seem to matter to the EU

 

[ChopleyIOM]

There's another decent read here that explains the whole subject in substantial detail.

As ever, it's a very complex situation that can't be summed up in catchy soundbites.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[mack341]

23 pages - basically it's a book - you want us to read, about the politics of fish

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

barnier:

“The British used a tactic – and to me it is a bad tactic: postpone to the end the issues that matter most for the Europeans: One, fisheries; two, [a] supervision [structure to ensure enforcement]; and three, the level playing field. They didn’t want to cope with them until now and they are the three issues that are currently stalled.”

And what if they remain stalled? I asked. What would be the consequences of a no-deal?

“In any case, there will now be controls at the borders. But in case of a no-deal, we’ll put tariffs and quotas on their products. And they will put tariffs and quotas on ours. That is why Brexit has no sense... Brexit is a lose-lose situation and we are in a situation of damage limitation anyhow. In four years, nobody has ever been able to show me the advantages of Brexit. Nobody.”

--------

I can think of quite a few advantages, £10 billion tax money sliding over to the EU for one. 'supervision: structure to ensure enforcement'

Where's the level playing field with china? The majority of consumer products for sale in the uk and eu are made in china/far east. Dressed up humbug.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

23 pages - basically it's a book - you want us to read, about the politics of fish

With all due respect mack, that's how one comes to understand the complexities and trade-offs inherent in a process such as Brexit.

Turns out there's far more to it than slogans on the side of a bus and Daily Express headlines.

I know you know that already, but sometimes the correct answer to a question honestly is, 'It's really quite long-winded and complex, this 23 page document explains it'.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

barnier:

“The British used a tactic – and to me it is a bad tactic: postpone to the end the issues that matter most for the Europeans: One, fisheries; two, [a] supervision [structure to ensure enforcement]; and three, the level playing field. They didn’t want to cope with them until now and they are the three issues that are currently stalled.”

And what if they remain stalled? I asked. What would be the consequences of a no-deal?

“In any case, there will now be controls at the borders. But in case of a no-deal, we’ll put tariffs and quotas on their products. And they will put tariffs and quotas on ours. That is why Brexit has no sense... Brexit is a lose-lose situation and we are in a situation of damage limitation anyhow. In four years, nobody has ever been able to show me the advantages of Brexit. Nobody.”

--------

I can think of quite a few advantages, £10 billion tax money sliding over to the EU for one. 'supervision: structure to ensure enforcement'

Where's the level playing field with china? The majority of consumer products for sale in the uk and eu are made in china/far east. Dressed up humbug.

He's right though, there are no advantages to Brexit, and it is just a damage limitation exercise.

I don't understand why anyone is even remotely expecting Barnier to be anything other than a relatively robust negotiator, that's literally his job. Fisheries is a totemic issue on both sides of the debate though, truth be told I think the EU are leaning into it more than they need to, and so are we.

As for economic advantages to Brexit, as has already been noted, multiple times, and verified from multiple external sources, Brexit has already the cost UK more than its entire lifetime EU contributions, and that's before you even factor in what we got out of being a member, so £10 billion is, unbelievably but truthfully, pretty small beer at this stage.

I've done the LPF stuff several times already mack, so I'll refer the honourable gentleman to my previous answers on the topic

 

[mack341]

Fisheries is a totemic issue on both sides of the debate though, truth be told I think the EU are leaning into it more than they need to, and so are we.

I agree it seems to have taken on a significance beyond what I expected.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

For the European Union, the fear is that not reaching a deal that favors its fishermen would devastate coastal countries that deeply depend on access to British waters. The Commission, therefore, declared during a briefing with EU diplomats last week that there must be a “direct link” between trade negotiations and fisheries talks.

The U.K., meanwhile, has turned the issue into one of national sovereignty — a symbolic way for the country to assert its new independence from the bloc its people voted to leave.

“Fisheries has always been politically important,” said Emiel Brouckaert, director of Belgian fishing industry group Rederscentrale. “It’s symbolic. Just like Ireland, it’s about territory, and granting each other access to each other territories.”

^ I wasn't too far wrong with my post yesterday. But it sounds like a powerful bargaining chip if the fear about EU coastal countries being devastated is correct. [belgium and netherland's fishermen seem to be the most likely affected]:

The water that is in front of our coast is basically a post stamp. Two-thirds of our fishing happens in U.K. waters,” said Johan Nooitgedagt, president of the Dutch Fishermen’s Association. “You can imagine the mood among Dutch fishermen is very bad, as it’s theoretically possible that U.K. waters would be closed off.”

-------------

Has brexit cost the uk govt more than £40 billion in lost tax receipts? [2016-20 assuming we stopped paying the money ]

And we've been trading as normal with the EU for the last 4 years afaik, so trade should have remained similar to before?

It is a guaranteed £10 billion every year the uk govt now does not need to send to the EU, and I doubt they will have given members a discount for the covid lockdown effect on their economies.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

PROMISE - Take Back Control, Sunlit Uplands, Easiest Trade Deal Ever, We Hold All The Cards, Etc

REALITY - We're going to turn your front garden into a lorry park by government diktat

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

I think the refusal of Johnson's government to extend the transition will go down in history as a truly monumental act of political folly.

(If you click on the tweet below you will see the links to the articles in the pics.)

 

[mack341]

I think the monumental folly was two fold, theresa may, a tory remainer, trying to negotiate a weak brexit plan that at least a third of her own party didn't agree with, then having to rely on labour votes; and liberal/left MPs in parliament trying their best over three years to reverse and cancel brexit.

4 years should've been ample time for the boffins in the civil service to come up with workable solutions in the event of quotas and tariffs for EU trade.

I'm sorry but some carparks being laid near shipping ports is not the end of the world, we're tearing up ancient woodland to build HS2.

 

[mack341]

Blimey this is a bit of a 180 by the EU member states, barnier to be sidelined? [and frosty]

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

European Union is set to 'sideline chief negotiator Michel Barnier' to crack Brexit deadlock as 'heads of member states take over'

An EU diplomat told the

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

Mrs von der Leyen is expected to 'set the scene to sideline Barnier and [the UK's David] Frost to find a high level political solution'.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

I wonder if this will be on anyone's Christmas shopping list?

Pinched from the latest Private Eye

 

[dunover]

I wonder if this will be on anyone's Christmas shopping list?

Pinched from the latest Private Eye

View attachment 140949

Lol...good job that was Private Eye as when @Playford7 said that in jest he was pilloried.
What does Farage do now anyway?

I see there were demonstrations today in Dover at the government's failure to stop the illegal economic migrants from crossing the channel.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[sufferinsilence]

Lol...good job that was Private Eye as when @Playford7 said that in jest he was pilloried.
What does Farage do now anyway?

I see there were demonstrations today in Dover at the government's failure to stop the illegal economic migrants from crossing the channel.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

It's not like illegal immigration will stop once GB isn't part of the EU anymore... If anything it might get worse, but then again the system in GB where you don't need a passport and all that seems to be geared towards inviting (illegal) immigrants in. Or atleast it seems that way to me.

 

[goatwack]

Very biting 'satirical' cover of course, but had we not covered this? And again I ask - other than at least attempting to maintain a country's borders, so as not to allow a complete free-for-all from unvetted arrivals, is the U.K supposed to allow anyone and everyone in, for fear of being labelled 'racist'?

What happened to the first safe point of refuge, does that not apply anymore? Are all arrivals genuine asylum seekers, so no need to vet anyone I take it? And what happens when we actually can't take anymore?

Thing is we already have a system in place for asylum seekers to make official applications via that route. But apparently that's also no longer applicable

 

[ChopleyIOM]

Lol...good job that was Private Eye as when @Playford7 said that in jest he was pilloried.

The joke was would it be on Playford's Christmas list without actually mentioning his name

Anyway Private Eye is satire so it gets away with pretty much anything.

Well, apart from the Princess Diana front cover..... That issue is worth quite a lot of money now I believe, which is annoying, as I actually had it back in the day,,,,

 

[ChopleyIOM]

Very biting 'satirical' cover of course, but had we not covered this? And again I ask - other than at least attempting to maintain a country's borders, so as not to allow a complete free-for-all from unvetted arrivals, is the U.K supposed to allow anyone and everyone in, for fear of being labelled 'racist'?

It isn't a cover, it's just one of the throwaway jokes in this issue's 'GnomeMart' section

 

[dunover]

With the looming world slump, printing of money, quantitative easing etc. and real chance of stagflation, has anyone been investing their savings in gold bullion? As you'll be lucky to get 100 quid per year in interest from 100k in the bank now, it might be an idea. I recently had a dabble, have already made 3-4%.

In the UK due to a quirk that we still mint some legal tender in Gold, unlike Silver (commemorative or collector sets), Platinum and Palladium there is no VAT levied on Gold. You can buy £100 Gold Britannias at 1oz .999 gold weight for example, as well as sovereigns. You can get Aussie gold Koalas, or Krugerrands for 1oz too.

There has been a run on gold recently with the Royal Mint running out of all but the really expensive 400oz bars, OK if you have 560k to spend lol.

You are exempt from tax on the first 11k of annual gold profit too.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

So this is..... slightly alarming.

Rumours abound that this is a prelude to a No Deal, and would effectively set the UK at near 'rogue state' status on the international stage.

We'll have to wait to see if the story is confirmed or not in the next week or so.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[goatwack]

Yes, just saw it plastered everywhere. Just what we need in fact.

"Goody"

 

[mack341]

I always thought that deal he struck last year was ****, the other leaders were jubilant and all smiles. They said it was a transitional deal to be in place while we negotiated the real final deal, so I don't know if tearing part of it up is illegal or wrong. Probably a warning shot to the EU, we're not mucking around - but who knows?

At the end of the day the EU's rules should not come before trading between european countries, the trade is more important to the countries than these rules dreamt up in brussels.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

I always thought that deal he struck last year was ****,

The problem with this argument is it's the same as Iain Duncan Smith's revisionism. If the deal was so shit, why was it presented as an 'oven ready deal', why were we told it would GET BREXIT DONE? Why did anyone vote for it if they could see it was a load of shit?

Or was it an elaborate double bluff? 'I shall vote for this oven ready deal and GET BREXIT DONE, even though I think the deal is shit and I don't agree with it at all, because I am absolutely confident that the UK will then go on to rip up an internationally binding legal agreement and shit all over its commitments to its neighbours to do something I approve of more'.

I'll just remind you again how IDS reacted in the Commons when this 'shit' deal was passed..... This is the man who promoted the same shit deal endlessly, lest we forget. (Perhaps he didn't read it? And/or understand it?)

 

[ChopleyIOM]

All part of the plan.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

I'm sure this has all been thought through.

 

[mack341]

The problem with this argument is it's the same as Iain Duncan Smith's revisionism. If the deal was so shit, why was it presented as an 'oven ready deal', why were we told it would GET BREXIT DONE? Why did anyone vote for it if they could see it was a load of shit?

Or was it an elaborate double bluff? 'I shall vote for this oven ready deal and GET BREXIT DONE, even though I think the deal is shit and I don't agree with it at all, because I am absolutely confident that the UK will then go on to rip up an internationally binding legal agreement and shit all over its commitments to its neighbours to do something I approve of more'.

I'll just remind you again how IDS reacted in the Commons when this 'shit' deal was passed..... This is the man who promoted the same shit deal endlessly, lest we forget. (Perhaps he didn't read it? And/or understand it?)

View attachment 141088

wasn't IDS reaction a part of westminster's sort of tribal atmosphere, two fingers as it were to the lab/lib/snp members sat opposite that had been trying to block any form of brexit from happening, rather than celebrating it as a great deal. I think even rees mogg was persuaded to vote for it, there was a danger to the conservative party itself [from nigel's new party] due to the 3 year inability to get the brexit departure bills passed. I expect the deal brought a lot of relief politically.

I read an opinion on twitter last night that the agreement with the EU was based on the fact that the negotiations happening now would be carried out in good faith, and there is an argument to be had that the EU has not been doing that.

 

[goatwack]

Say what you want about Referendum-duping, it all becomes secondary on either side of the divide if politicians decide to do last-minute U-turns.

It's all becoming rather unsavoury, but then it's always been a game to these people, from their plush abodes

 

[ChopleyIOM]

'Unforseen' as in Theresa May knew full well that the WA Johnson agreed to would put a border down the Irish Sea and leave NI in a perilous position.

So 'unforseen' as in completely well understood by Johnson's predecessor, which is why she wouldn't agree to it.

For clarity, when Johnson 're-negotiated' the WA and passed it off as a success, he basically threw NI under the bus (in a fashion Theresa May point blank refused to), sold it as his 'fantastic oven ready deal', got elected on that basis, and now wants to go back on what he explicitly agreed to, and lied to the British public about.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

A few reminders of just how awfully the UK government is behaving.

Do note please that this isn't just a domestic issue, many other countries around the world are paying full attention to what an untrustworthy and unreliable negotiator the UK has turned out to be, and will modify their behaviour to us accordingly.

It's like the mate who's always cadging drinks off you on a promise he'll get the rounds in next time, but he never does. Eventually, you'll just stop buying him drinks.

This one hasn't aged well.

 

[goatwack]

The posturing is real. The bravado is real. Even Johnson's hair has taken on a poker-face all of its own.

"Yoohoo guys, we're over here! We're that troublesome island that do more U-turns than Pacman. You will respect our authori-tieh!"

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

Pop Quiz - who said this?

--------------

Britain does not break Treaties. It would be bad for Britain, bad for our relations with the rest of the world and bad for any future treaty on trade we may need to make.

--------------






Margaret Thatcher.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

From the same speech:


The choice is clear. We can play a role in developing Europe, or we can turn our backs on the Community.

By turning our backs we would forfeit our right to influence what happens in the Community. But what happens in the Community will inevitably affect us. The European Community is a powerful group of nations. With Britain as a member, it is more powerful; without Britain it will still be powerful. We can play a leading role in Europe, but if that leadership is not forthcoming Europe will develop without Britain.

Britain, if she denounced a treaty, cannot then complain if Europe develops in conflict with Britain's interests.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

Just so we understand where we're at, the Northern Ireland Secretary just stood up in the House of Commons and said:

'Yes, this does break international law in a very specific and limited way.'

We're all OK with this? Really? Price worth paying for Brexit?

At least we can get a giggle out of it, I suppose.

 

[mack341]

Barnier's 'The waters are yours but the fish are ours' logic must fit the criteria of negotiating in bad faith ?

Apparently another bone of contention on top of fish, are the level playing field provisions on state aid, where typically the uk already spends less than half the average EU member:

As things stand, the UK spends considerably less on state aid than most other EU countries. In 2016 the UK spent 0.36% of GDP on state aid excluding railways compared to 0.65% in France and 1.31% in Germany. Only five countries spent less. [LSE brexit blog]

Dominic cummings wants to up govt investment into the technology sector, seems eminently sensible, and therefore we can't run the risk of the EU and its courts interfering & deciding what we can and can't do in this regard.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

Yes I remember that being a really hot topic during the referendum, the freedom for the UK to allocate more state aid to an as yet doesn't exist hi tech sector. (PRO TIP - I predict that these new hi tech companies will all be run by pals of Cummings and other senior Tories.)

Also, EU members already have substantial freedoms on state aid and how to allocate it, as demonstrated by your numbers above

When governments start admitting they're deliberately setting off down a path of breaking international law, there's a problem.

 

[goatwack]

So we've ruled out Johnson playing hardball and forcing their hand then, as a general rule? Though at least on initial glance it does look like E.U negotiators are in a bit of a tizzy

 

[mack341]

Yes I remember that being a really hot topic during the referendum, the freedom for the UK to allocate more state aid to an as yet doesn't exist hi tech sector. (PRO TIP - I predict that these new hi tech companies will all be run by pals of Cummings and other senior Tories.)

Well that should keep the journalists [and private eye] busy finding out about it and telling the public.

I don't think that lewis bloke had much of a choice, some things can't be dressed up, but the logic and any explanation are just as important. Weasel words would just have given the remainer pundits [esp legal professionals] more ammunition and reason to pursue it until the govt admitted it. [and then look worse for the initial denial]

 

[ChopleyIOM]

I don't think that lewis bloke had much of a choice, some things can't be dressed up, but the logic and any explanation are just as important.

I'm not really sure that's how breaking the law works mack, try that with the police should you ever get arrested for something. 'Well you see officer, I only broke the law in a specific and limited way, and I told everyone I was going to do it'.

'Ahhh right you are mack, on your way then!'

On a wider note, it's worth remembering what the NI Protocol was for, it wasn't a terrible Brussels ploy to break up the UK or impose rules on us or punish us, it was a plan to prevent customs posts getting blown up which is what happened in the days before peace in Ireland.

Customs posts aren’t just a target or provocation, they’re also a visceral reminder of centuries of imperialism, a land divided and a community denied the right to assert its identity. Fuck the government forever for subordinating that to ERG nationalism and Boris Johnson’s ego.

 

[mack341]

Customs posts aren’t just a target or provocation, they’re also a visceral reminder of centuries of imperialism, a land divided and a community denied the right to assert its identity.

That is an interesting juxtaposition to hold alongside strongly supporting the EU, where laws are being made centrally by unelected bureaucrats, even a choice of president isn't given to the people.

Also what about the way the EU responded to the catalan situation and spain, how does that fit with upholding this no doubt noble principle?

I believe the issue the uk govt face is having internal trade between the UK and NI attract tariffs, which is obviously madness, so they want to make sure that cannot happen. That's my understanding, but I could be wrong, hopefully all will be revealed tomorrow.