Brexit discussion thread VII (Please read OP before posting)

Mr.Nice Guy

Katya Adler on BBC once again:

"EU hasn't budged from its position."

"They did say they'd make assurances."

"What you don't see are any legally binding changes".

"No fixed end date."

"Even the EU not convinced these changes will get it through for the Prime Minister."

Hurrache

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Keir Stamer saying the WA remains unchanged and that making the Tusk/Juncker letter legal is worthless.

Yeah, he's calling out that there's no legal changes, we're well into the semantics game.

I thought Prom night a few years ago was mayhem with regards to what was going on, but Brexit delivers once again.

Enzokk

tuxy wrote: »

Stream of parliament keeps locking up but last thing I head was that both the EU and UK have a legally binding commitment to do everything in their power to find a solution to prevent the backstop. Is that the legal reassurance the EU gave tonight or was that already in place?

You can try it on audio only and it seems to work.

PropJoe10

tuxy wrote: »

Stream of parliament keeps locking up but last thing I head was that both the EU and UK have a legally binding commitment to do everything in their power to find a solution to prevent the backstop. Is that the legal reassurance the EU gave tonight or was that already in place?

Isn't that just a slight rewording of what they had agreed before?

Spanish Eyes

Imreoir2 wrote: »

It's not clear as of now, this joint statement, and the change to the political declaration are weak sauce, there is nothing new there. The only thing that has any real potential to make a significant change is the unilateral declaration, and we have not seen that yet, presumably because the UK can't make their unilateral declaration untill it has been signed off by the EU.

But what is the legality of a unilateral declaration? Is it just a fudge to allow UK to maintain their so called superior status or a mechanism to get the WA vote through or what.

If there is any conflict between the unilateral declaration and the Backstop as the EU and GFA knows it, what might happen?

I have to say I am confused now. But will hold fire for the moment.

Alternative link if Parliament tv is a bit crap


https://www.reuters.tv/l/P015/2019/03/11/uk-brexit-minister-barclay-gives-statement-to-parliament

Kermit.de.frog

Peston saying delay in May/Juncker presser is because they are awaiting approval from all member states (i.e Ireland).

Hurrache

Gintonious wrote: »

https://twitter.com/newschambers/status/1105231291849551873

If this is the case, then its dooms day tomorrow.

Yes
https://twitter.com/patrickwintour/status/1105232091120320512?s=19

WoollyRedHat

Have a good video via Ruptly, on YouTube...type in Parliament Live.

Professor Moriarty

Initial reaction from ERG is dismissive.

prawnsambo

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

But what is the legality of a unilateral declaration? Is it just a fudge to allow UK to maintain their so called superior status or a mechanism to get the WA vote through or what.

If there is any conflict between the unilateral declaration and the Backstop as the EU and GFA knows it, what might happen?

I have to say I am confused now. But will hold fire for the moment.

James O'Brien has it nailed really.

Enzokk

David Lidington seems to be trying hard to convince everyone that what has been secured is changes as May said she would get, but it seems that not a lot of people are biting.

Hurrache

Dodds up in the commons now. edit, and very brief it was, looking for details of the agreement for analysis.

Professor Moriarty

Hurrache wrote: »

Dodds up in the commons now.

Another legal eagle.

An Ciarraioch

http://twitter.com/KevDoyle_Indo/status/1105235128689807362

Mr.Nice Guy

If you were to script this in a way that would get the ERG and DUP on board, the best way to do it would be for the Irish government to call the brakes on it by "expressing reservations."

If the DUP think Varadkar, Coveney and co. aren't happy then their support for the proposals would increase significantly.

Itssoeasy

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Another legal eagle.

Oh there are many terms of endearment for Nigel Dodds but legal eagle is certainly not one of them.

Imreoir2

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

But what is the legality of a unilateral declaration? Is it just a fudge to allow UK to maintain their so called superior status or a mechanism to get the WA vote through or what.

If there is any conflict between the unilateral declaration and the Backstop as the EU and GFA knows it, what might happen?

I have to say I am confused now. But will hold fire for the moment.

According to Sir Edward Leigh MP, speaking in the commons a few weeks ago, a unilateral declaration made as part of the process of ratifying a treaty has legal standing in international law to the effect that unless the decleration made is outright rejected by the other party, then the decleration essentially becomes a binding part of the treaty as ratified.

A unilateral decleration is only supposed to interperet part of a treaty, a deceleration that directly contradicts a section of the treaty presumably would be quite dubious. If for example the UK declares that "temporary" as far as the NI protocall is concerned means "lasts for 12 months" then unless the EU outright rejects that decleration and refuses to ratify the treaty on that basis, then this becomes the binding interpretation.

Water John

If as likely it doesn't get through the HOC, it will not matter.

lawred2

Gintonious wrote: »

https://twitter.com/newschambers/status/1105231291849551873

If this is the case, then its dooms day tomorrow.

But nothing was ever going to change.. what were they actually expecting?

Professor Moriarty

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Oh there are many terms of endearment for Nigel Dodds but legal eagle is certainly not one of them.

He's a barrister. Amongst other things.

Laois_Man

The HoC questions are entertaining as usual. One was a complaint that the EU will in future be able to legislate against UK interests and the UK will have no say!

You couldn't make it up!

Hurrache

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

http://twitter.com/KevDoyle_Indo/status/1105235128689807362

Talking to themselves came up yesterday or early this morning, it's trying to reassure itself as to the temporary-ness of the backstop.

SimonTemplar

Will the vote tomorrow be around 7:00pm like the ones a few weeks ago?

BobbyBobberson

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

http://twitter.com/KevDoyle_Indo/status/1105235128689807362

I actually laughed my hole off at point 3. All of Brexit has been the UK talking to themselves.

gooch2k9

SimonTemplar wrote: »

Will the vote tomorrow be around 7:00pm like the ones a few weeks ago?

Might be delayed a bit as they have to make room for Attorney General's statement.

Atlantic Dawn

SimonTemplar wrote: »

Will the vote tomorrow be around 7:00pm like the ones a few weeks ago?

I think so, BBC2 are going live from House Of Commons from 7-8pm.

Professor Moriarty

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

He's a barrister. Amongst other things.

Don't forget, bigot.

trashcan

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

He's a barrister. Amongst other things.

I've met quite a few barristers. Let's just say they are not all created equal.;)

Hurrache

Here we go, May not looking too pleased.