We need your help now
Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.
You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.
If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.
Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
By continuing, you are indicating that you accept our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
A UK REPORT looking into potential alternative arrangements to prevent a hard border in Ireland has recommended that a working arrangement “should be fully up and running within three years”.
The report is by the Alternative Arrangements Commission, a group which is backed by two Remain-supporting MPs Nicky Morgan and Greg Hands.
The report noted that the Brady amendment to the Withdrawal Agreement which sought to replace the backstop with alternative arrangements passed the House of Commons in January.
In looking at the potential for alternative arrangements to be found, the report states that “new technology has a role to support policy” but that methods used at the beginning of the process “should already be in use elsewhere”.
To ensure that standards are maintained in the area food and agricultural produce, the report recommends that checks be carried out “by mobile units away from the border”.
This would potentially mean checks at farms or at food production facilities.
Writing today in The Times, Morgan and Hands said it is “ludicrous” to suggest that an alternative arrangement is “some sort of high-tech unicorn”.
“While we should always be open to innovation, these solutions can be implemented within three years, with some measures introduced much sooner, subject to political agreement, ensuring the backstop is not triggered, or if it is, there is a clear route map out of it,” they say.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
This seems nuts – how can we protect our sovereign border if it is open to a country which is out of the EU and with whom we have no agreement. We cannot become a back door for the UK to flood us with unregulated trade. If there is no proper border then where does UK end and the Republic of Ireland begin. Also without the EU the quality of products is going to free fall in the UK and be prey to rampant capitalism with no interest in consumer safety.
@On the Up: You’ve got that the wrong way around. Goods are going to be more expensive in the UK and as such, the direction of smuggling will be South to North.
@On the Up: I’m assuming the 3 year timeline mentioned in the article is to allow for those agreements to be reached. Just imagine if they’d started this when they 1st voted to leave, it’d be sorted and in place by now?
@On the Up: ‘our sovereign border’! Not any more. It’s now the EU sovereign Border.
@On the Up: ‘our sovereign border’! Not any more. It’s now the EU sovereign Border. :(
Translated from an original brief of:
“These solutions which don’t exist yet, that we have no idea what they are, and have no clue if they’ll work, and have no notion that anyone will want them can be implemented in… Um… Let’s say 3 years for the craic… And to give some short term comfort let’s add that some parts can be implemented… Um… “sooner” .
There that bound to keep the stupid paddys happy. ”
What nonsense.
@Aidan Mitchell: The Brits where using tech on the border 40 yrs ago during the troubles that monitor people and vehicles going back and forward across the border . It was very effective in the fight against terrorism. Don’t see why they can’t do the same today with more advanced technology .
@John Smith: Because John, those measures were actually extremely expensive, in the order of billions per year, not to mention the costs in lives.
And no, the measures weren’t at all effective, the border still leaked like a sieve. No amount of money or technology will secure that border and saying so is just pro Brexit fudge and waffle.
@John Smith: nonsense
@John Smith: Tell us John, where in the world, on what border does this technology exist?
The US-Canada border? The US is one of the most tech advanced countries in the world but they don’t have it.
The Norway-Swedish border? Not there either. The Swiss-French/German/Austrian/Italian border? Nope not there either.
@John Smith: aye dead on it was very effective! I remember crossing the border through a farmers field regularly not a Brit in sight. They could never seal the border. You’re living in dream land
@John Smith: Are you delusional as usual, the border had more illegal crossing than legal.
@John Smith: So they collect reg numbers of the thousands of vehicles that cross every day. What do they do then go to every home and business connected to those numbers, north and south and search for contraband. They’re going to be very busy, north and south.
@John Smith: Jeez, you really advocating going backwards 40 years? This “technology” was backed up by thousands of troops, GAA pitches being turned in to helicopter pads, checkpoints, house raids, etc, etc. and it still didn’t work. Why don’t we just tear up the Good Friday Agreement?
@John Smith: You do understand the brits were the biggest terrorists during the troubles. Between the murders carried out by their soldiers and agents and proxy paramilitary forces, they murdered fare more civilians than all the republican paramilitary combined. The CAIN reports attributed 100s of murders to the IRA that have subsequently been found out to have actually been carried out by british agents within the IRA.
@Mick.: The tech already exists . The haulage industry in the UK has been using it for yrs. A truck goes to a pallet line depot and gets loaded up . He then goes to a scanning area which consists of a number of scanning bays . He drives into the bay and a guy walks around the trailer and scans every pallet . Each pallet has a barcode . The contents of the trailer is then automatically downloaded onto a computer . A piece of paper is then printed out with a barcode that’s giving to the driver . That barcode is the full contents of the trailer and weight . The driver gets to the border and hands the barcode to the customs who scans it . The full contents of the trailer and weight is downloaded onto his computer screen . All the work is done before he gets to the border .
@Juan Fangio: Actually no it was all part of gathering intelligence about who was crossing the border . It’s call surveillance. It play a part in defeating terrorism.
@Cal Mooney: The security forces had to deal with 50 terrorists attacks a day . 1500 a month . 18000 a yr . https://youtu.be/yrO-Pdi2h8E
@John Smith: “The Brits” John yeah?
That’s be you then.
@John Smith: That works inside the EU as full member. Something the UK will not be. As I explained elsewhere. The UK will by necessary have to lower it’s goods
and food standards to trade outside the EU. So nothing coming out of the UK after Brexit can be trusted not to have come from a third party. As such everything coming into the EU from the UK will require phyical checks to ensure it meets EU Standards and that the correct tarriffs are applied for those goods. Now Norway is in the EEA, it is in the Customs Union, it has accepted EU rules on Goods Standards yet still has to have physical customs posts with the EU (Sweden + Finland) because of its trade agreements with third countries. Switzerland is in EFTA it too requires border infrastructure for goods entering the EU. The simple fact that the Technology that is required is not in use anywhere in the world is because it does not currently exist.
The US have put a man on the Moon, they have sent Rovers to Mars, the can control a satellite that is in the Heliosphere. But even they haven’t invented a technical solution to customs checks. Yet you think the UK can invent, test and install this equipment in a few years?
@Mick.: Maybe in your mind you just don’t want to believe it exists .
@John Smith: Speaking of fantasies, I just watched the entire drivel in that video link you posted. Time I will never get back. That hypocrite starts off by saying the Police went after the loyalists in equal measure to the IRA and then spent the whole time talking about how the IRA were his focus. He denied collusion between the Brits and their Loyalist paramilitary forces and suggested that members of the army and police killed less than 300 people during the conflict and that they were terrorists. Man, you didn’t watch any of the BBC documentaries I posted links to last week. Those factual documentaries make your guy out as either deluded or a liar. I will let you figure that one out for yourself.
@Cal Mooney: I think he was speaking about you call with all the fake rubbish and conspiracy theories you constantly put up . Off course your always right . You know more about the security forces then they do including myself that served there for two yrs .
@John Smith: yes very effective i dont remember any incidents at all during the 30 years of the troubles when the British were monitoring the border last time and actually had the physical barriers in roads – none at all – cant think of any – what could possibly be the problem at all i wonder – it was all amazeballs and efficient… hmmmmm
@Dave Hammond: Well there where patrol bases all along the border . A veh would drive through a PB and the plate would be checked . Surveillance played a big part in intelligence gathering .
@John Smith: it was also very effective in identifying & following Irish Customs officials on regular trips to see their families. Cars stopped at checkpoints, wheels, doors & seats removed. All to ensure their visit was made as uncomfortable as possible. I won’t talk about the British soldiers in the front garden with guns pointed at everyone inside the house.
there maybe no border in three years it would be unrealistic to have the european frontier three quarters ways up our island of ireland ,a united ireland is getting nearer every day;
The UK Brexiteers keep referring to “Technology” as a solution to the Northern Border but the reality is that is simply wishful thinking.
The technology that is required has yet to be invented and successfully tested. Nowhere on this planet, on no border does this technology exist. So to say that it can be invented and tested in under 3 years is pure fantasy and even at 5 years it would be a stretch. In reality it would take a Decade or more being realistic.
@Mick.: The article agrees with you. The two guys quoted say that relying on technology that doesn’t exist yet is ludicrous and that the three-year target can be achieved with existing technologies.
@El_Duderino: The don’t. In fact theý think 3 years is eminently feasible. “Writing today in The Times, Morgan and Hands said it is “ludicrous” to suggest that an alternative arrangement is “some sort of high-tech unicorn”. They actually believe that a new technology can be invented, tested and installed in a 3 year period.
How is it always the Irish border. It is a British border in Ireland. One which we never wanted and never will.
@Michael Leonard: The British removed the Border. There is free movement of people and goods across the 32 counties A border only exists in the mines of people . The new border is a EU one .
While they’re at it, can I please have the flying car that their BBC promised me 30 years ago on Tomorrow’s World? It is reasonable to expect that such technological innovations should be possible in that timeframe.
Jeez, anyone in tech will tell you that letting politicians talk tech will lead to pipe dreams, lies, and Bertie’s voting machines.
@Aidan Finn: Berties voting machines did actually exist. They were stored in warehouses in limerick and Dublin for years before being sold off to some African country for peanuts.
If the Brits decide to leave without a deal and they say acceptable alternatives to the back stop can be in place in three years then they should have no worries about entering the back stop since it will be temporary. Believe that one if you like!
I don’t see why a 5 year time limit can’t be added to the backstop. Gives the EU and UK 5 years to agree a, presumably free, trade agreement.
@Mushy Peas: yes, because we’ve seen his effective they were with a two year deadline.
@Mushy Peas: Because the Uk has a long tradition of reneging on or ignoring treaty’s with Ireland.
A case in point is the 1922 1925 Border Commission. The border was supposed to be a temporary arrangement until the UK Government could persuade the Unionists that they had nothing to fear in aUnited Ireland.
When the Torres won the 1925 general election, and the Unionist’s took over in the North they ignored the Border Commission.
This led to nearly 100 years of Loyalist oppression of the Nationalist population in NI.
Perfidious Albion cannot be trusted.
@Mushy Peas: If a free trade agreement can be agreed in 5years then the backstop wont be a problem it will be removed when that happens, pretty simple for most apart from the paranoid little englanders…
@Mushy Peas: Because by the very definition of backstop. Any agreement the UK can pull out of unilaterally is not a backstop.
The backstop is a non-issue so long as the UK successfully concludes trade negotiations with the EU. It never has to be inforced so long as those negotiations continue in good faith. Given the UK’s performance over last 3 years, who can blame them for not having confidence in themselves to manage that. That shouldn’t be on us though and not at the risk of the hard won peace in NI.
@Kevin Barry: Republicans started four conflicts on the island of Ireland in the last century and never had the support of the Irish people in any of them .
@John Smith: Brexit has even less support.
@John Smith: were you not at the 2016 centenary celebrations in Dublin like the rest of us?
@John Smith: does that 4 included the Republican conflict that at least got independence for 26 of the counties, or are we only starting to count after that one?
@Kendra Jackson: the big point of contention was the backstop though. If it had a time limit, May’s deal would have made it through the Commons. Thus, problem solved.
I’m proposing a solution, when others seem content with erecting problems.
@Kevin Barry: while I don’t fully trust them, you have referenced a situation that occurred almost 100 years ago.
I cannot take them as serious examples in the context of this argument.
@Mushy Peas: Time limit is only a solution if an agreement is done ahead of its expiry and going by the carry on in Westminster the last few years no one can take any guarantees that will happen and Ireland wont risk trouble on a UK never never promise, we’ve been there before… If the UK is honest in saying it will agree a deal to keep an open border then the backstop is not a problem or shouldn’t be to anyone who understands it…
@MickN: I agree, and that’s the frustration with the hardline Brexiteers.
But if we know what will appease them, we can get this pushed over the line.
We are inundated with the pending catastrophe that is No Deal, yet “our side” doesn’t seem to want to avoid it.
@Mushy Peas: I think you need to read up on the backstop. Once their is a trade agreement between the UK and the EU, be it 5 years, 1 year or 5 months, the backstop ends if it’s been invoked already. The backstop is the incentive to reach an agreement. The reason the UK politicians want shot of it is to remove the pressure upon themselves to reach an agreement and because they know historically the UK has never been great at adhering to agreements.
@Patrick Kearns: while I agree, the idea that you cannot give a “nation” unilateral prerogative is absurd. A principle of democracy is that previous executives cannot tie the hands of future incumbents.
The situation in NI is obviously complex, but we can’t forget these basic guiding principles.
To them, NI receiving
@MickN: the only way the UK can agree to keep an open border is to exclude NI from the rest of the UK in the event of a no deal. Otherwise NI’s border is a border between the UK and the EU. Hence the issue. While I agree that the further back in time we go, the less relevance other past, broken agreements have, given the UK’s inability to come to an agreement amongst themselves, then past agreements between the UK and Ireland, particularly to do with NI are very relevant.
@MickN: I understand that, but as I’ve said elsewhere, my argument centres around avoid the perceived catastrophe that is a No Deal. Maintaining no time limit on the backstop makes total sense, if we as a country didn’t stand to be affected so harshly by No Deal.
@Mushy Peas: I don’t doubt a no deal is as bad for Ireland as it is UK but a hard border could be worse and that risk just isnt worth taking .. Any Irish gov that agrees to time limit will be gone next election and suffer a similar fate FF did in the crash.. I heard a few brexiteers mention checks to be done in Larne I have a sneaking suspicion that the border will be on the sea , where it was supposed to be on day1 of this until May/DUP pipped up and drew red lines that could not be accommodated..
@MickN: I’d be shocked if an Irish government fell in relation to Brexit.
This government is like Teflon in relation to scandals, and in this case they can blame the Brits no matter what.
A grownup Irish government would do what it can to stop No Deal, unfortunately that includes reviewing the backstop with respect to a time limit.
@Mushy Peas: Risking peace imo is not a solution to the UK’s mess…
@John Smith: The butt end of my bo licks knows more about history than you ever will.
Please refrain from coming on an Irish site and spouting caca.
@Mushy Peas: if it has a 5yr limit it is not a backstop..it is a five year agreement after which UK can change/ignore/amend it.
@Mushy Peas: If there’s a time limit, we could end up with a hard border. If the UK are confident they can sort things out within a certain time period, then they don’t need the backstop. And if it takes a bit longer than expected, that’s fine. Putting a time limit on it doesn’t help anyone.
@John Smith: if the Brits weren’t here in the first place there would be no conflict. To say there was no support is nonsense and lies but that is something that you repeatedly spout here. There was plenty of support but the fear of the majority of the Irish people was greater as they knew the brutality that would be inflicted upon them by the Brits after any rebellion
@Vocal Outrage: NiceOne!
@Kevin Barry: Is that the 1916 version of Irish history or the 2016 version .
Should, could, might, may…. another unicorn..
Many of eu standards are based on UK policies UK from my time there and some of my family living there since the 50s. UK without the eu always seam to have good consumer and goods policies.
You rarely here shops here or markets been raided trading standards and the police are always sezing goods in the UK they even do check points to catch out rouge traders.
Our ports and UK ports every day stop bad goods comming in from China, and other goods from South America. We both get and the majority of the eu get goods from.
Even at present there are differents in goods between the UK and Ireland yet you dont see them in our market.
I doubt the UK would dropped its standards and I doubt our trading and revenue customs are going to overwhelm with goods not approved for our market.
There may be more international brands available in the UK but dont think it will be enough to be a risk to Ireland or the eu.
It may increase people going there but it be no different when people go on hoilday and bring back a bottle.
Also dont think there a huge market for criminals to start smuggling stuff across , there wouldn’t be enough buyers to make viable.
@Life is short enjoy it: English is not your first language is it!!
Currently the EU and UK goods standards are aligned. But that will change when the UK leave the EU. By necessity they will be trading with the world market under WTO rules. And if the want trade deals outside of the EU they are going to have to accept lower standards of goods as part of those trade deals. That is inevitable. And because those standards will not meet EU Standards the UK exports to the EU will be limited. And as such checks at the border will be necessary. The Solution is an economic border down the Irish Sea. Where all goods coming off shipping could be checked without the need for border infrastructures.
@Mick.: Still haven’t found a cure for the
dyslexia.
That is true , but would you really think it be an issue.
Also why are big eu business buying up big buildings in UK , it seams it for a UK Hq for the UK market. Many eu have international Hqs for the local market.
@Life is short enjoy it: Of course it will be an issue. When the UK lower it’s standards to meet with its commitments to Global trade then all goods from the UK would by necessity be required to be checked at point of entry to ensure that they meet EU Standards. Which means physical infrastructure to do so. There is no way around it. And Customs infrastructure on the Northern side of the Border would require a heavy Security presence to insure the safety of the Customs Officers. And the Police and Army would themselves require hardend bunkers and watch towers. So it would be as of the GFA never existed. We would have gone back 30 years.
There is 3 solutions, the UK can jump up and down and throw their toys out of the pram all they like, there is 3 choices and they need to choose..
A border on the Irish sea
A crash out
Revoke article 50 and find some grown ups to start again
They could practice with the Welsh border; then it’ll be ready when the Welsh want independence.
Would be so much easier if Ireland left Eu same time as UK. Easier to sort border and and we can bring back control to Ireland.
@Padraig Salah: That wouldn’t be at all easier for Ireland it would crash our economy…
@Padraig Salah: By control do you mean widespread poverty and thousands of people leaving the country again?
The two remain MP’s weren’t the only ones on this non governmental committee. Can the journal tell us who else was on it?
Weren’t there international experts?
@wattsed56: Both of these MP’s are Conservative. And as such have one eye on their own party membership as they do on how they may feel about Brexit. They are trying to be all things to all men.
@Mick.: Just checked :
Hans Maesen – Dutch Customs expert
Graham Gudgeon – UK
Lars Karlssin – Swedish Customs expert
Shanker Singham – UK Trade Lawyer
Peter Algeier – US ex WTO ambassador
Frank Dunsmuir – Fujitsu
Seems to be some folk with knowledge. At this stage, anything is worth exploring. The cost is only time and thought. This piece by the Journal doesn’t carry all the suggestions btw.
@wattsed56: Two simple questions for you. (1)Where else in the world is this technology being used on borders?
(2)If it currently exists why is it not used on the US-Canada Border or the US-Mexico border? The US has Free Trade Agreements with both countries.
@Mick.: Don’t think it is, but within a 3 year window anything is possible I guess. That’s why Fujitsu were there, they already are involved in these projects with the Swiss and Nordics.
Me? – I still have a VHS recorder
@wattsed56: So we are agreed it doesn’t currently exist. Now think this through logically. How does technology confirm what is on paper is what atctually is on the back of the Truck or in the Container? That is the problem that has confounded the search for a useable and realistic technological solution so far.
All current technology relies the honesty of the exporter/importer and the haulage company. That works to a point in the EU because there are no tarriffs involved and equal standards apply across the Union. But it won’t work with a third party. Diffrent standards and multiple tarriffs make it necessary to confirm by physical check that what is declared is what it is.
So from conception to drawing board to manufacture through stringent testing to full rollout will be a decade or more.
The purpose of the backstop is to keep the border open until the as yet unspecified arrangements can be made. If that can be done in three years then there’s no problem. The agreed deal can go ahead, and in three years the backstop will no longer be needed.
Have a look at the border on Google and term need how this can work! I have seen most of these crossing, some through a house (Pettigo). When the EU do a study, interview the retired customs officers then I’ll Street believing in In Unicorns
Interesting your mixture of EU and ‘our sovereign border’! I don’t think you mean to imply it’s the same thing, do you? In any case, Dev and the lads must be all turning in their graves.
have your say