Brexit discussion thread X (Please read OP before posting)

Zubeneschamali

Derek Eager Registrar wrote: »

Johnson is proving himself to be just an economic threat.

Mostly to the UK.

gooch2k9

GM228 wrote: »

Actually no they can't, the process is strictly in relation to a vacancy caused by "resignation, compulsory retirement or death".

The situation it would create is not covered under the TFEU, and even if it was the numbers can only be reduced with unanimous agreement of the European Council, the EC is made up of the EU28 heads of state, agreement would be required by Johnson himself.

It might get him what he wants short term. Long term it would cost him though. It would lose the UK a lot of good will.

Also don't know if it's been posted here but Tories are running a candidate against Bercow.

Link

firemansam4

cryptocurrency wrote: »

Depends, the UK needs to use stronger language. The UK wants a deal and keep trade going. If their "friends and partners" in Europe want to put barriers and threaten food and medicine supplies then these are hostile acts.

UK needs to work with their partners in Washington to make clear that these hostile acts against it by NATO and Security partners go strongly spirit of their security arrangements.

UK needs to also stand with their american partners and get very vocal to the questionable commitments and pathetic contributions to NATO and security arrangements by these members

Maybe the UK should threaten starvation on one of the EU members? You know it has past history in helping cause a famine in that country and all that.

cryptocurrency

firemansam4 wrote: »

Maybe the UK should threaten starvation on one of the EU members? You know it has past history in helping cause a famine in that country and all that.

Why would they do that? They are asking for a free trade deal, that is it. Only people being difficult is the EU.

Tippex

cryptocurrency wrote: »

Depends, the UK needs to use stronger language. The UK wants a deal and keep trade going. If their "friends and partners" in Europe want to put barriers and threaten food and medicine supplies then these are hostile acts.

UK needs to work with their partners in Washington to make clear that these hostile acts against it by NATO and Security partners go strongly spirit of their security arrangements.

UK needs to also stand with their american partners and get very vocal to the questionable commitments and pathetic contributions to NATO and security arrangements by these members

Lets not forget it was the UK who have decided to remove themselves from the EU.

For 3 years they have not got their **** together in agreeing what way they want to leave.

It is 100% up to the UK to propose how they want to leave. It is not up to the EU as they would prefer the UK to remain.

The UK cannot work together internally but you expect them to be pandered to by others. They are looked upon by the outside world as a total joke-shop.

You keep saying the UK want a deal (all we keep hearing is the same guff “we want a deal or we crash out on october 31st”) there has been constant denials not just from the EU but also within the Tory party that there are any real negotiations going on.

Honestly this is all going back to hundreds of years of arrogance of “rule britannia” and the UK are nowhere near the superpower they once were.

If there was a real wish to leave do you not think that over the last 3 years they could have agreed on the terms rather that waiting to the last minute in the hope that the decision is taken out of their hands and made by the EU. It’s the UK that do not have the bottle.

Christy42

cryptocurrency wrote: »

Depends, the UK needs to use stronger language. The UK wants a deal and keep trade going. If their "friends and partners" in Europe want to put barriers and threaten food and medicine supplies then these are hostile acts.

UK needs to work with their partners in Washington to make clear that these hostile acts against it by NATO and Security partners go strongly spirit of their security arrangements.

UK needs to also stand with their american partners and get very vocal to the questionable commitments and pathetic contributions to NATO and security arrangements by these members

Not bending over backwards for the UK is not an act of aggression.

The UK has been given options to keep trade going. Instead they are hell bent on ripping up its own peace agreements. The UK have no suggested any arrangements that do not involve borders on this island and this is from its own studies. Not the EU putting up borders, the UK.

As for barriers. This was all about taking control of borders. The fact that the UK has put itself in a situation where it can't secure its own supply lines is its own problem. Either it can survive on no deal no matter what the EU does or it needs to sign a deal. At this point it is complaining other countries are hostile because they are not sending aid to the UK.

The US has one side talking about taking advantage of the UKs weakness and the other refusing to deal with the UK because the UK is ditching it's commitment to peace in NI.

murphaph

cryptocurrency wrote: »

Japan is one country of a shrinking population yet can handle themselves on the global stage, as does NZ and Australia.

UK would be far better with a five eyes security, trade partnership that is truly global. The EU is a fly in comparison.

Seriously, have you ever been to Japan?

It's a highly advanced country that invents all sorts of things the world wants to buy. The UK economy is based on financial services. Britain was the birthplace of the industrial revolution but something went wrong along the way. Maybe Britain got lazy after it got its empire (through its industrial manufacturing of weapons) and thought it could live off the toil of the citizens of said empire indefinitely.

There is no comparison with Japan.

firemansam4

cryptocurrency wrote: »

Why would they do that? They are asking for a free trade deal, that is it. Only people being difficult is the EU.

I think you'll find that they have already.

https://www.thejournal.ie/brexit-threat-food-shortages-ireland-4381228-Dec2018/

Mortelaro

GM228 wrote: »

Actually no they can't, the process is strictly in relation to a vacancy caused by "resignation, compulsory retirement or death".

The situation it would create is not covered under the TFEU, and even if it was the numbers can only be reduced with unanimous agreement of the European Council, the EC is made up of the EU28 heads of state, agreement would be required by Johnson himself.

Not appointing is compulsory retirement
If Johnson disagrees, take them to the European court
Anyway my point is,creative ways around will be found
Brexit central is now spreading rubbish about ringing Hungary to veto extension
As if Hungary wanted to bring on the resentment such a move would start against Hungary

murphaph

If Johnson takes the UK down the road of being an actively hostile member state then the EU may well refuse any further extensions. So what could parliament do then? Only one option left: compel the government to revoke A50 or crash out. Risky game.

Jizique

cryptocurrency wrote: »

Why would they do that? They are asking for a free trade deal, that is it. Only people being difficult is the EU.

A free trade deal with no regulatory alignment is what they want - no chance of that

Mortelaro

murphaph wrote: »

If Johnson takes the UK down the road of being an actively hostile member state then the EU may well refuse any further extensions. So what could parliament do then? Only one option left: compel the government to revoke A50 or crash out. Risky game.

Or
The UK Parliament can simply legislate again to force Johnson to appoint a commissioner and to set guidelines on what that commissioner can do
The commission just puts the UK on notice long enough for the end of the current prorogue
He wont be able to prorogue again

Cummings is at nothing

alentejo

I am now of the option that Britain will crash out of the EU on the 31st of Oct or the 1st of Feb.

There has been alot of talk that the UK would come back to the EU to negotiate after a crash out. I am now of a view that the ultra Brexiteers will talk to anybody except the EU about trading relationships etc. The UK wont necessarily implode in the first few months post a no deal scenario and a Tory/BP government will seek deals with anybody except the EU.

The one thing which might change this are the regulations relating to civil air travel - if the EU were to not to renew the proposed stop gap measure to allow British airlines fly into the EU, i believe that if commercial flights start being impacted, this will result in a future UK government crawl back to the EU seeking a deal.

The simple fact is that there is a group of politicians who hate the EU and have managed over decades managed to spread their ideas to a large swathe of the UK general public. The realization of the UK public leaving the EU and the consequences of such will take 2 to 3 years before the penny starts to drop....only then may things start to change

20silkcut

cryptocurrency wrote: »

Why would they do that? They are asking for a free trade deal, that is it. Only people being difficult is the EU.

No they are not. They are actively seeking to undermine the EU. A UK free trade deal with the US and concurrent free trade deal with the EU is not possible without checks at the border. Which undermines the GFA. We are blue in the face repeating this. Three years down the road from the referendum.
Put the border in the Irish Sea and problem solved.

A Shropshire Lad

Some interesting stuff being said by Rudd this morning about whats going on in Downing Street. Basicallly that cabinet is not having discussions about policy, does not know who is running the country.

GM228

Mortelaro wrote: »

Not appointing is compulsory retirement
If Johnson disagrees, take them to the European court
Anyway my point is,creative ways around will be found
Brexit central is now spreading rubbish about ringing Hungary to veto extension
As if Hungary wanted to bring on the resentment such a move would start against Hungary

Not appointing is not compulsory retirement. Compulsory retirement is something which can only be done by the European Court of Justice and only where the member concerned no longer fulfills the conditions required for the performance of their duties or if they have been guilty of serious misconduct.

The ECJ is bound to operate within the confines of the TFEU and the TEU which dictates these matters, there is no provision for the ECJ to alter them, that is beyond it's competence.

The matters surrounding the membership and operation of the Commission is set by the TFEU and the TEU, there are no creative ways around those treaties and for good reason.

Whoever thought this idea up is actually very smart and obviously well versed in EU law as it really could hold the EU to ransom.

Infini

gooch2k9 wrote: »

It might get him what he wants short term. Long term it would cost him though. It would lose the UK a lot of good will.

Also don't know if it's been posted here but Tories are running a candidate against Bercow.

Link

Should be no suprise at this point that this government has no shame, no ideas and no intelligence. This is nothing more than petty spite plain and simple, Bercow is the only one keeping order in that place and they're only doing this out of pure spite nothing more because they can't deal with people who don't bend to their delusions.

Igotadose

murphaph wrote: »

Seriously, have you ever been to Japan?

It's a highly advanced country that invents all sorts of things the world wants to buy. The UK economy is based on financial services. Britain was the birthplace of the industrial revolution but something went wrong along the way. Maybe Britain got lazy after it got its empire (through its industrial manufacturing of weapons) and thought it could live off the toil of the citizens of said empire indefinitely.

There is no comparison with Japan.

Two world wars led to Germany and Japan retooling completely and modernizing their industrial infrastructure. They basically jumped way past what was done in the UK. Overly powerful unions in the UK kept their productivity behind their German/Japanese counterparts.

Typical UK worker isn't a 'producer' working in manufacturing, fishing, farming, but rather is in a 'service' job - government employees, retail, accountants/lawyers/... . German workers do a lot of manufacturing, Japanese a lot of 'tech' manufacturing. Anecdote: I go to the gym most mornings around the same time, have been getting there in time to watch 'The Weakest Link.' For the last few months, I've been noting what the contestants do for a living. At best, 5% of them are involved with 'producing'. The rest? Government employees (police, teachers, firefighters), retail (a service job essentially), unemployed (homemakers, retired).

I think this reflective of the UK society - it's service based. They're in for a very rude awakening if and when the UK leaves the EU, the 'service' jobs depend on the 'manufacturing' jobs for a reason to exist, or in the case of, say, financial services, other countries for their income. Both of those will be hammered.

Professor Moriarty

alentejo wrote: »

I am now of the option that Britain will crash out of the EU on the 31st of Oct or the 1st of Feb.

There has been alot of talk that the UK would come back to the EU to negotiate after a crash out. I am now of a view that the ultra Brexiteers will talk to anybody except the EU about trading relationships etc. The UK wont necessarily implode in the first few months post a no deal scenario and a Tory/BP government will seek deals with anybody except the EU.

The one thing which might change this are the regulations relating to civil air travel - if the EU were to not to renew the proposed stop gap measure to allow British airlines fly into the EU, i believe that if commercial flights start being impacted, this will result in a future UK government crawl back to the EU seeking a deal.

The simple fact is that there is a group of politicians who hate the EU and have managed over decades managed to spread their ideas to a large swathe of the UK general public. The realization of the UK public leaving the EU and the consequences of such will take 2 to 3 years before the penny starts to drop....only then may things start to change

The only hope that No Deal doesn't happen sooner or later is for Corbyn to be replaced. Johnson, who has been revealed to be a dishonest glove puppet continues to be much more popular than Corbyn. As was May.

beggars_bush

murphaph wrote: »

Seriously, have you ever been to Japan?

It's a highly advanced country that invents all sorts of things the world wants to buy. The UK economy is based on financial services. Britain was the birthplace of the industrial revolution but something went wrong along the way. Maybe Britain got lazy after it got its empire (through its industrial manufacturing of weapons) and thought it could live off the toil of the citizens of said empire indefinitely.

There is no comparison with Japan.

You can see the British intellectual capital from the events of the last few weeks

Infini

A Shropshire Lad wrote: »

Some interesting stuff being said by Rudd this morning about whats going on in Downing Street. Basicallly that cabinet is not having discussions about policy, does not know who is running the country.

To be honest it's not really a suprise is it, the lunatics have taken over the assylum and alienated or driven away their best people who would give them realistic ideas that would work. It's all full steam ahead towards the cliffedge on the unicorn express.

It actually makes me wonder if at some point if the sheer disaster of a no deal were about to become a reality would parliment use the only nuclear option left and essentially pass an A50 withdrawal rather than go off thar cliff?

Mortelaro

GM228 wrote: »

Not appointing is not compulsory retirement. Compulsory retirement is something which can only be done by the European Court of Justice and only where the member concerned no longer fulfills the conditions required for the performance of their duties or if they have been guilty of serious misconduct.

The ECJ is bound to operate within the confines of the TFEU and the TEU which dictates these matters, there is no provision for the ECJ to alter them, that is beyond it's competence.

The matters surrounding the membership and operation of the Commission is set by the TFEU and the TEU, there are no creative ways around those treaties and for good reason.

That's your opinion
Until you prove that you are a constitutional lawyer or privy to the inner workings of the commission that's all it is as is mine
Regardless, I'm not concerned for the reasons I posted earlier
The UK parliament is well able to legislate to undo mr Cummings plans and the EU commission are well able to accommodate that

Joe_ Public

Strazdas wrote: »

I wouldn't be as harsh on her. She was never in the Grieve-Clarke camp and may have been struggling a lot more with the idea of rebelling or quitting the party.

Sorry, just to go back on this. I was harsh on Rudd and a day on, and listening to her on Marr this morning, i'm not sure how far or if at all i'd row back on my verdict. She talks about solidarity with her stricken colleagues this morning, but when they were steadily mobilising against a no deal exit a month ago, as Johnson began to put the most right wing, hard brexity cabinet possible together, she was satisfying herself with the (i believe) delusion that the pm was somehow going to cobble some deal together with the EU. Where did she think or expect this was all going to go? At the absolute very least, and this to be as kind as possible to her, she is merely guilty of grossly poor political judgement.

She also says she had stern talks with the PM last week about the actions he would take against the rebels, but did she still go in to the chamber and vote to keep no deal on the table? As i said, this attack of the guilty conscience has come far too late for me to have any sympathy for her.

cryptocurrency

20silkcut wrote: »

No they are not. They are actively seeking to undermine the EU. A UK free trade deal with the US and concurrent free trade deal with the EU is not possible without checks at the border. Which undermines the GFA. We are blue in the face repeating this. Three years down the road from the referendum.
Put the border in the Irish Sea and problem solved.

Problem solved for Ireland but the EU don't want britain free and it will kill the EU with trade

GM228

Mortelaro wrote: »

That's your opinion
Until you prove that you are a constitutional lawyer or privy to the inner workings of the commission that's all it is as is mine

What part is my opinion exactly?

This is all set out very specifically in the TEU and TFEU.

Joe_ Public

Enzokk wrote: »

I have been giving this some thought today. I am sure others can help me but I cannot see how the deal for Labour would be any different than the deal May got. Maybe the negotiations are done in a friendlier spirit as Labour would not see the EU as the enemy so there is less friction from the negotiations, but I don't see the substance of the deal changing much at all.

There is definitely the question of the EU saying over and over that the WAB cannot be reopened, so its impossible to say for certain that that position would change in the event of a Labour renegotiation. Nevertheless, i think the EU would acknowledge the imperative of having an agreement that can pass through parliament so however it would be done, whether through amendments or add ons, i do believe the bill could be altered to take in elements like CU, environmental regulations etc, while also specifying the need to have it go back to the people, thus guaranteeing the cross party support it needs.

I thought John McDonnell gave a decent performance on Marr this morning. One of the things he was personally strong on was not having no deal as an option in any referendum. I think that's very tricky territory for any government to be dealing with, but if parliament wont countenance it, then i cant see how it could go ahead. Any deal that goes back to the people has simply to be passed by parliament first, otherwise you're just recreating the same recipe for chaos.

CelticRambler

cryptocurrency wrote: »

Depends, the UK needs to use stronger language. The UK wants a deal and keep trade going. If their "friends and partners" in Europe want to put barriers and threaten food and medicine supplies then these are hostile acts.

Again the inherent contradiction: the UK needs to use "stronger language" but somehow it's the EU that's being seen as hostile? And in case you've forgotten, earlier this morning you suggested that "no deal" had to be a credible threat from the UK - but now you're saying that if the UK suffers shortages of food and medicines because of not having a deal, it's a hostile act on the part of the EU?

If the UK wants a deal, there are plenty on offer - the diffferent types are all there on the Barnier Staircase. The UK could pick any one of those models and have it in place by the end of October.Or, you know, they could even opt to continue the "Germany minus" EU membership they've enjoyed for the last 40 years. :rolleyes:

So what's the problem? Perhaps it's not so much a lack of "strong language" but that the UK seems to reverted to communicating only by means of neanderthal grunts.

20silkcut

cryptocurrency wrote: »

Problem solved for Ireland but the EU don't want britain free and it will kill the EU with trade

Trade generally doesn’t kill anyone.
Border in the sea and we can all live happily ever after.
Britain can do as it pleases and we can do as we please. And we can freely trade without putting anyone or anything in jeopardy. And we can all be friends again.

Joe_ Public

One point i think worth remembering: Theresa May had at all times the capacity to have her bill passed at any time of her choosing simply by ensuring a mechanism to have it back to the people for the final say. That's how easy it would have been. When the caterwauling started from her backbenches, she could then have pointed out that people like Dominic Cummings and, I think, Rees Mogg had said before that this was a reasonable thing to do. They'd likely be having a referendum around about now or maybe just finished it. Frightfully appalling misjudgement if you ask me, but we are where etc etc

Enzokk

cryptocurrency wrote: »

The EU is an economic threat to the UK so its best the separate.

EU wants tax harmonisation, federalisation, EU army...the US support of Brexit is not a coincidence. I expect the US and UK to work closer with their regime change plans for Brussels over the coming years.

You are the embodiment of the Leave argument, you make it up as you go along and move from one point to another between posts just minutes apart. And then people complain when you get hostile posts on this thread when this tactic is applied.

Take your post above, it is arguing two points you have made before against each other. Firstly you have said that the EU is a failed state and will crumble, but at the same time you need the UK and US to work together to stop the EU from becoming more harmonized. So which one is it? Will the UK leaving the EU mean its demise, or does the US and UK need to work together to stop the EU?

As for the rubbish being spouted by the UK government, this is a good reply to their talk on the Irish Border question.

https://twitter.com/DmitryOpines/status/1170618363674091520?s=20