From tweets today:
A car load of cigs and booze intercepted by Repubic of Ireland customs
while crossing from the UK- And Barnier, Coveney and Varadkar et al say
there is no border - The EU is running a scam to keep us in the EU
Why do @EU_Commission and Republic of Ireland Government insist that
there is no border, when there are legitimate seizures of illegal
1000 litres heating oil for £460 in Northern Ireland - 1000 litres
heating oil in Republic of Ireland e710 or £621.43 - A saving of £161
for the fill of UK oil but if the Irish customs catch you bringing the
oil over the border its big trouble - Yet they say there is no border.
If socialism helps the poor, why are the poor in socialist countries so much
poorer than the poor in capitalist countries?
The external customs duty on all of those items is exactly the same in
every EU country, which is what is meant by not having a customs border.
However, each of those goods is also liable to excise duty, which can
vary from country to country. It is attempts to evade excise duty that
lead to such seizures; nothing to do with the customs union.
Still policed by customs officers, however. Who may decide to stop
vehicles crossing the border. To state that its excise duty rather than
customs is just an exercise in pedantry; the effect on the driver is
"The EU Customs Union is a racket that defends producers in rich countries
against producers in poor countries."
They don't routinely stop every vehicle; just the ones they suspect,
often based upon information received, are being used to try to avoid
excise duty. Legitimate carriers of those goods will not be stopped.
It is an important difference. Excise duty is an internal tax and only
applies to alcohol, tobacco and hydrocarbon oils. Customs duty applies
to everything crossing the border.
Only the very few they stop. Most can drive straight across, without let
But hey, let's not let well reasoned argument or fact get in the way
of a fanatical Brexiteer! ;-)
Tim wants out and for reasons many many people wouldn't even consider
valid even if they did consider them in the first place. However, they
wouldn't allow them to justify a complete leap into the dark (and
possibly dark ages). ;-(
I wonder how each of the fanatical Brexiteers would tally up re what
they thought their vote was supposed to represent (other than the
stock 'We want out' mantra) ... if there was actually a price they
wouldn't be willing for us all to pay if it didn't work out as they
guessed / hoped / dreamed it would?
The frightening thought is that for some, there is no cost limit
(financial or otherwise). That's fanaticism for you though eh. ;-(
Cheers, T i m
except that this particular fact gets in the way of the fanatical Remoaner's
The fact that there is currently a hard border, that doesn't actually get
used very often, should mean that a solution to the RoI borer problem of - a
hard bolder that doesn't actually get used very often, should be an
acceptable solution to the problem.
but oh no, the EU/RoI don't see it that way, only a zero border will do.
If that's not having your cake and eating it I don't know what is.
One that only exists in your head, because you are determined to argue
that catching potential evaders of an internal tax is the same thing as
applying external customs duty to everything that crosses the border,
which it isn't. It is probably more convenient for the excise officers
to spot possible offenders where they enter the country but, if they
have similar powers as UK excise officers, they could arrest them anywhere.
with a 100% FTA there will be no external customs duty to collect
But even if there is, it can still be collected the same way cross border
duty is. By shippers supplying the correct details of the load on the
manifest, using sealed transit travelling a pre-registered route and by
customs officials making spot checks for compliance (which because the load
is sealed doesn't have to take place at the border)
Of course there will be a marginal extra cost that companies won't be able
to combine a part load for somewhere in NI with a part load for somewhere in
RoI, but given the small size of NI that's hardly likely to be a major
I haven't heard any yet. The standard fare is sneers, name-calling, and
I'm still waiting to hear why the EU is not an oligarchy and why its
form of government is so wonderful. I also am waiting to be told which
is the official opposition party in the EU Parliament, and where the
Shadow Commission is for us to be able to vote in to replace the
current lot at some point.
"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted" -- Bill of Rights 1689
I'm waiting to hear that it is and *exactly* how we *will* be better
off if you take the *action* of moving from the status quo.
It's not for those 'not interested' in changing from the status quo to
prove it to those who do.
You need to lobby your local MP on that one. That is the democratic
way. Not running away and not having any say in any of it (as we
*will* still be very bound by much of it, no matter what you (and your
minority) *hope* for).
Cheers, T i m
True ... ;-(
The thing is .... we are now several months on and I personally have
no idea if we are near anything that could be considered a 'solution'
or not and if we end up without one, where we stand after that (apart
from 'on our own' I mean).
You might think (hope) that by now it would be clearer what's going on
and because the picture is getting clearer it would be more obvious to
all those who didn't vote the leave (eg ~2/3rds of the electorate) and
more would be behind the leave cause.
But that simply hasn't happened and so many of us are still asking for
the perfectly reasonable democratic opportunity to vote, once we know
the details of what we are voting for represent.
It's only those petrified that that vote won't go their way (the way
of a minority) that are against it as it would simply be real
'educated / sensible' democracy in action (or closer to what it is
supposed to be) ... and further, the duty of those we elected to
represent us to ensure any outcome is actually the best for *us*
(where 'us' would ideally be at least 2/3rds (not 1/3rd) of the
If there isn't enough interest or more importantly, 'good reason' *to*
change from the status quo, we simply don't do it. <shrug>
We shouldn't do anything because a minority of fanatics say (but can't
prove beyond reasonable doubt) that it *will* be the best thing for
Cheers, T i m
well we were
Until this RoI border nonsense reared it head because someone thought that
they could leverage making a big deal of it into getting us to "stay in"
And the end result of which is that we are more likely to end up walking
away with no deal, than we ever were
No deal means 12 hour long queues at Calais as well as at Dover
No BA flights from the UK to Germany will also mean no LH flights from
Germany to the UK
all of the problems of "no deal" are reciprocal
A deal to avoid that will be cobbled together if it looks likely
The problem is that it's not clear, because HMG doesn't have a majority.
And the Parliamentarians *wrongly* think that they are each entitled to a
super vote that overrules the result of the referendum.
But a pre-decision to do that (in the way that you mean it) would just let
the EU decide to give us a poor deal so that we would vote to stay in
I'm sorry but the result of the referendum was that we should leave
IMHO if there is to be a second referendum on the deal then both options on
the ballot must result in leaving. Anything else disrespects the original
It's because it fundamentally disrespects the referendum
I would happily accept a vote for
shall we stay in the SM
shall we stay in the CU
as part of the deal
but all options on a future ballot MUST result in the previously decided
vote to leave.
So you say. I've yet to see anything other than just how much damage
limitation we have negotiated for ourselves? 'The People' are pretty
well just as split / confused / dismayed / frustrated by the whole
farce as they were when it was first sprung on them.
Brilliant. That sounds like the result of an ill thought out and
poorly implemented and supported 'plan' if ever I saw one. ;-(
The practicalities are irrelevant, it's the much bigger question of
'will we *actually* be better off' if / when we leave the EU? As yet,
*no one* of any real credibility has said we will, just that it might
not be out of the question. Great (not). ;-(
See above ... whilst considering we are a very small cog in a very big
wheel and out of the EU, we are just a loose cog in a big box.
See above ... what a brilliant way to be managing our future ...
Quite, just when you thought it couldn't get any more of a
The rules are the rules.
If that is the will of the people then so be it? What is it about the
Brexiteers that they think they have all the *right* answers here ...
especially in light of the complete lack of guarantees to back up any
of their (what is no more than) hopes and dreams (prejudices /
Yes, you should be sorry if you think that farce get's even close to
representing democracy. We, 'the people' did not as a majority (of the
electorate) vote unanimously to leave. A tiny majority voted leave
than actually voted to remain but they still account for only 1/3rd of
the electorate. No matter how you try and call / twist it, that
*isn't'* the will of the people, just a subset therefore and nearly
the same number who actually voted NOT TO leave the EU.
Would I base any major change to anything on that sort of result? No I
f'ing wouldn't, *especially* if it was supposed to be representing the
best outcome for *everyone* (where ITRW, 'everyone' should represent
at least 2/3rds of those affected).
What? What sort of democracy is that FFS!?
Assuming you respect the original vote ... and many don't (especially
Yes ... if not, why not hold a second referendum ... once as many of
the facts are known as possible?You don't want to because you have
picked up a tenner and you hope no one noticed, not because you gained
it honestly. "£360M could go to the NHS instead". Disingenuous slimy
I disrespect the referendum as it was a scam and does not represent
the will of the people. If it did, a second referendum would back up
the result of the first and the Fanatical Brexiteers shouldn't be at
all afraid of that.
I would happily vote on any *fact*, not just some fanatics hopes and
You are weird and would make an excellent Kamikaze pilot. ;-)
Cheers, T i m
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.