No need for a hard border

[AtW]

Johnson said there was “no need for a hard border” and said checks could be carried out away from the border crossing. May has insisted that a Canada-style free trade agreement would not comply with the need to avoid a hard border in Northern Ireland, forcing the UK to rely on the backstop agreed in December, which would create an unacceptable customs border down the Irish Sea.

Boris Johnson urges Theresa May to scrap Chequers plan | Politics | The Guardian

It’s Still a fooking check you cretin, it’s still a border then

[WTFH]

It's OK, the current PM (as of 10:15am 01/10/18) was very clear with Andrew Marr yesterday:

[original PM]

There only needs to be a border because current traditional thinking means that for some reason a line drawn on a map has some form of real world equivalent.

Why do we need a hard border?

[Yorkie62]

The solution is simple.

We build a wall and charge the EU £39bn to pay for it. No hard or soft border, just a wall with no passage through. We could even use or new free trade agreement with Donald to get him supply knowledge and IP on wall building.

[NotAllThere]

There only needs to be a border because current traditional thinking means that for some reason a line drawn on a map has some form of real world equivalent.

Why do we need a hard border?

Of course, the WTO legal framework could, if all parties are willing, be modified to remove the need for a hard border, but if we leave the EU without a deal, then we fall back to WTO rules, which say there must be a hard border.

Clear enough?

Or are you in favour of leaving the WTO and the EU? Brexit+.

[original PM]

Of course, the WTO legal framework could, if all parties are willing, be modified to remove the need for a hard border, but if we leave the EU without a deal, then we fall back to WTO rules, which say there must be a hard border.

Clear enough?

Or are you in favour of leaving the WTO and the EU? Brexit+.

I am in favour of questioning the status quo.

Just because we have always done something it does not mean we should continue to do it (and by we I mean the Human Race not the UK)

[Eirikur]

I am in favour of questioning the status quo.

Just because we have always done something it does not mean we should continue to do it (and by we I mean the Human Race not the UK)

Why to give up a status quo that works fine for everybody and go to an unknown status which nobody knows what it will look like and what it will mean for them (except some hedgefund managers such as JRM)

[Yorkie62]

Why to give up a status quo that works fine for everybody and go to an unknown status which nobody knows what it will look like and what it will mean for them (except some hedgefund managers such as JRM)

We should always question the status quo. How else would we have evolved technologically to where we are to day. Why do we have or need mobile phones when the standard desk/landline phone worked (to quote yourself) "fine for everybody" for years and years.

As with any process individuals/organisations will find ways of making it work for them. It doesn't mean that that process is right, it just means it has been made to work. Another process will work better for some than others. there is no "one-size fit all". What we need is a border that is fit for our future trading of goods and services bearing in mind that they might not be the same goods and services as they are now.

[Eirikur]

We should always question the status quo. How else would we have evolved technologically to where we are to day. Why do we have or need mobile phones when the standard desk/landline phone worked (to quote yourself) "fine for everybody" for years and years.

As with any process individuals/organisations will find ways of making it work for them. It doesn't mean that that process is right, it just means it has been made to work. Another process will work better for some than others. there is no "one-size fit all". What we need is a border that is fit for our future trading of goods and services bearing in mind that they might not be the same goods and services as they are now.

We're talking about jobs and people's livelihoods here not about mobiles or commercial organisations.

[darmstadt]

There only needs to be a border because current traditional thinking means that for some reason a line drawn on a map has some form of real world equivalent.

Why do we need a hard border?

The UK currently has a 'semi-hard' border with Europe but that hasn't stopped Brexiters moaning about immigration, imagine if there was no border