Brexit discussion thread XI (Please read OP before posting)

Varta

Water John wrote: »

Will it be the first time, a democratically elected parliament, voted voluntarily for a recession? What they choose I'm not overly worried about once, No Deal is off the table. Can't see how some Lb MPs think it's still around and thus thinking of voting for this Deal.

There are hints that Lb/Corbyn won't expel dissidents. That's why I raised the issue. I agree couldn't see how they wouldn't.

If they expel the dissidents those are seats that they are unlikely to get back. It's a real mess that labour is in and it is self-inflicted.

blanch152

CelticRambler wrote: »

Yes, it's a possibility ... but one that, at the moment, seems to be as much of a unicorn as the greater Brexit project. I have yet to see anything that indicates that NI will enjoy more advantageous access to the GB market than any EU country. This deal adds two levels of extra bureaucracy to internal (UK) market trade - customs declarations and VAT declarations - for no demonstrable benefit whatsoever.

Even if there was a functioning government in NI, I can't see how it could sell the region as a better place to do business than either a pure GB or a pure EU location. Keeping the land border "invisible" is great for the RoI, for ordinary cross-border daily life and very good for NI farmers (compared to a hard border), but that's about the extent of it. All the wonderful new FTAs that the UK is going to get are
(a) probably going to be no better than those that the EU has already agreed with the same countries;
(b) based overwhelmingly on what's good for London/GB, not NI; and
(c) not signed until long after NI has lost all of its EU subventions and been locked out of the EU agencies that generate so much of the added value that influences FDI decisions.

Those are all fair points, but until we see the details, we have no way of knowing, and even then it all depends on the ability of NI to exploit its unique situation.

LeinsterDub

https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1185153763318874112

An excellent point , there appears to be very few MPs with any moral standing .

GM228

blanch152 wrote: »

I don't think that case has a hope in hell.

Government's sign deals that are illegal all the time, that is why most international treaties need implementing legislation - to change the law.

Well no they don't really, yes agreements often need implementing legislation, but it's a bit different when the agreement itself is contrary to what is permitted in law as is the alleged case here.

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

Nothing that can't be fixed with an amendment to change the law.

Oh indeed and that has been recognised by both sides in the court, but the issue is that it is alleged it is unlawful as the law stands today.

Assuming the court held in the petitioners favour then (emergency) legislation would be required to rectify.

blanch152

GM228 wrote: »

Well no they don't really, yes agreements often need implementing legislation, but it's a bit different when the agreement itself is contrary to what is permitted in law as is the alleged case here.





Oh indeed and that has been recognised by both sides in the court, but the issue is that it is alleged it is unlawful as the law stands today.

Assuming the court held in the petitioners favour then (emergency) legislation would be required to rectify.

If you are correct, every time our Irish government signed a new European agreement, they were not only acting illegally but also unconstitutionally, as a referendum is needed to change the Constitution to accept the Agreement.

Signature and ratification are two different concepts in international law. In this case, all we have is signature, and whatever relevant amendments to the law are required will form part of the ratification process.

GM228

blanch152 wrote: »

If you are correct, every time our Irish government signed a new European agreement, they were not only acting illegally but also unconstitutionally, as a referendum is needed to change the Constitution to accept the Agreement.

Signature and ratification are two different concepts in international law. In this case, all we have is signature, and whatever relevant amendments to the law are required will form part of the ratification process.

How do you come to that conclusion? The authority to conclude international agreements is already given to the Government under our Constitution, this is a different issue.

The issue is not about signatures or ratification or even implementation, as it stands, the law does not allow the Government to enter into any arrangements which will see NI in a separate customs territory than the rest of the UK, if the court uphold this it makes any "arrangement" unlawful until the law is changed.

The WA is nothing more than an arrangement with the EU which then needs various forms of legislation for implementation.

Strazdas

humberklog wrote: »

I was listening to Andrew Bridgen (Con. MP, Nth. Lcst. Little Englander, Farage Mole) on the BBC this morning espousing the great bright future for GB.
He was talking up being master of their domain and now how they'll be able to compete with ireland re taxation and how he can't wait for the likes of FB, Amazon etc. to leave Ireland in their droves for the green and pleasant land of Blighty.

Neighbourly sort of fella.

He's deluded on this score. I haven't heard anyone talk of Brexit UK being an attractive place for FDI.

listermint

Strazdas wrote: »

He's deluded on this score. I haven't heard anyone talk of Brexit UK being an attractive place for FDI.

Is he aware Amazon and the like pay Next to zero tax in the UK.

That may have passed him by. They already have all these benefits.

beggars_bush

How much will the DUP have to be given to change their stance?

Seems to be the only thing that turns their heads anymore

L1011

beggars_bush wrote: »

How much will the DUP have to be given to change their stance?

Seems to be the only thing that turns their heads anymore

It would look like they refused a massive bribe already.

FrancieBrady

beggars_bush wrote: »

How much will the DUP have to be given to change their stance?

Seems to be the only thing that turns their heads anymore

Money is no good to them on this one.

Snookered all ends up.

writhen

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Money is no good to them on this one.

Snookered all ends up.

You may be underestimating their lust for money.

Tea Shock

humberklog wrote: »

I was listening to Andrew Bridgen (Con. MP, Nth. Lcst. Little Englander, Farage Mole) on the BBC this morning espousing the great bright future for GB.
He was talking up being master of their domain and now how they'll be able to compete with ireland re taxation and how he can't wait for the likes of FB, Amazon etc. to leave Ireland in their droves for the green and pleasant land of Blighty.

Neighbourly sort of fella.

Here's an even better one. The genius that is Dominic Raab crowed this morning about what "a cracking deal Northern Ireland would be getting" as it would keep frictionless access to the single market!

Erm....remind me again why you want the rest of the UK to lose this "cracking" deal?


https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m0009d0s

The relevant part is at 2hrs 17 minutes

reslfj

lightspeed wrote: »

can you provide a source stating EU members will continue to have access to UK fishing waters?

View Michel Barnier from about 21:25 in this video talking about fishing grounds and the UK's future export of fish to the EU.
https://video.consilium.europa.eu/en/webcast/0041558c-b668-4b33-85ae-d73234cc6315

The new political declaration https://ec.europa.eu/commission/publications/revised-political-declaration_en says:

73. Within the context of the overall economic partnership the Parties should establish a new fisheries agreement on, inter alia, access to waters and quota shares.

lightspeed wrote: »

Also please provide same source stating britain cannot restrict movement of people from EU who wish to work ans live in UK?

Until the end of the transition period(s) everything FoM continues as now including new migrants from the EU26 (Irish citizens can settle freely in the UK). The agreed transition period in the TM/Boris deal is rest of 2019 and all of 2020.

This first period can (and surely will) be extended until the end of 2022.

Looking at the typical time to negotiate and agree FTAs some form of an even longer transition period will be needed by the UK and therefore - IMHO - likely.

Lars

PS! The demographics of Europe - more older people, fewer in working ages - will make it very likely the UK will want all the migrants they can persuade to come and work in the NHS, education and many,m many other places.
But they are few and will be fewer looking 5-10 years or more ahead. Migration for non European countries has always been above migration from the EU and will have to grow even more.

That's just the way it is.

robinph

Tea Shock wrote: »

Here's an even better one. The genius that is Dominic Raab crowed this morning about what "a cracking deal Northern Ireland would be getting" as it would keep frictionless access to the single market!

Erm....remind me again why you want the rest of the UK to lose this "cracking" deal?


https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m0009d0s

The relevant part is at 2hrs 17 minutes

Was watching that bit live and couldn't understand why the interviewer let that comment slide by.

Raab was also clearly under instructions to smile all the way through and whenever he wasn't talking you could see him straining to smile rather than smirk, was not quite as bad as Gordon Browns fake smile whenever he noticed a camera on him, but along those lines.

trashcan

Tea Shock wrote: »

Here's an even better one. The genius that is Dominic Raab crowed this morning about what "a cracking deal Northern Ireland would be getting" as it would keep frictionless access to the single market!

Erm....remind me again why you want the rest of the UK to lose this "cracking" deal?


https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m0009d0s

The relevant part is at 2hrs 17 minutes

Exactly. Why are they not pulled up on this sort of nonsense. And on Bridgen and competing for tax with Ireland, again, why was it not pointed out to him that if Ireland can do that as an EU Membee Stata, what’s stopping the UK exactly? James O’Brien is the only UK journalist I’ve heard asking this sort of questions.

Jim2007

blanch152 wrote: »

Those are all fair points, but until we see the details, we have no way of knowing, and even then it all depends on the ability of NI to exploit its unique situation.

Goods imported into NI from <snip - Great Britain> will be subject to EU tariffs which can be claimed back if the goods are not shipped onward to Ireland.... good luck with exploiting that unique situation.

ToBeFrank123

beggars_bush wrote: »

How much will the DUP have to be given to change their stance?

Seems to be the only thing that turns their heads anymore

Lord Nigel Dodds?
Lady Arlene Foster?

Damehoods and knighthoods for services to UK politics?

There are numerous bribes inducements available to any Prime Minister to use as has happened in the past.

FrancieBrady

writhen wrote: »

You may be underestimating their lust for money.

I'm not doubting that. What I am saying it is no out for them in this situation.

ToBeFrank123

gooch2k9 wrote: »

At this point surely the DUP have to backtrack and support revoke? Two deals negotiated, both differentiating NI from the rest of UK. Brexit is only going one way for them. The best thing they can do "for the union" is to swallow their pride and change tack.

They've said No to all 3 votes on Mays WA and look likely to say the same this time. They've said No I think to another referendum and probably said No to revoke. I think they also said No to the Benn Act.

Going back further they said No to the Good Friday Agreement and the Anglo Irish Agreement, and back further again, Paisley said No to Sunningdale.

They also want to say No to abortion. And have said No to pretty much everything else.

History tells us if you put a question before the DUP, they will answer with a No, including if the question was to revoke article 50.

Professor Moriarty

trashcan wrote: »

Exactly. Why are they not pulled up on this sort of nonsense. And on Bridgen and competing for tax with Ireland, again, why was it not pointed out to him that if Ireland can do that as an EU Membee Stata, what’s stopping the UK exactly? James O’Brien is the only UK journalist I’ve heard asking this sort of questions.

You must always understand what a person says in the context of who they are. Andrew Bridgen MP stated categorically that every English person is entitled to an Irish passport. I can't decide whether Mr Bridgen is stupid or wilfully ignorant.

J Mysterio

I think there is an element that everyone is kind of in shock that a deal was reached. Also that there are so many new elements to the deal that seem to contradict prior statements by multiple parties. There is a sense of relief at the same time, Brexit fatigue is a thing.

I have a feeling the vote will pass tomorrow. Johnson will be a hero for the short term, but ultimately Britain will suffer for the deal. Scotland will still seek independence and there seems to be the fast track path back to the EU for them.

I think the NI arrangements will still lead to a UI in the near future - 5,10, 15 years.

Water John

His vote was the easiest to secure. They just left him have a meeting with the PM.
He was so chuffed to be granted that.

trellheim

I've been wrong before but I think this will pass, unless Labour impose a 3-line whip and the DUP vote against.

The lack of the level playing field in the WA is angering me as I think much like Macron, somewhat too much may have been conceded here.

Professor Moriarty

Telegraph reporting that two ministers might resign. Would be a serious spanner in the works.

hometruths

Bit late now to be complaining about the intransigence of the DUP

https://twitter.com/alexwickham/status/1185168667102855178

If you lie down with dogs, you get up with fleas...

"Wilson in particular is being "annoying" is a damning understatement of him and the DUP!

Professor Moriarty

trellheim wrote: »

I've been wrong before but I think this will pass, unless Labour impose a 3-line whip and the DUP vote against.

The lack of the level playing field in the WA is angering me as I think much like Macron, somewhat too much may have been conceded here.

Labour intend to impose a three line whip and the DUP will vote against.

robinph

J Mysterio wrote: »

I think there is an element that everyone is kind of in shock that a deal was reached.

Why is it a surprise that Johnson came back with Mays deal and that he caved in on the backstop and called it something different in the hope that nobody would notice?

It is a surprise that the media are making out that it is a surprise, and that then plays into Johnson/ Cummings hands as if they have managed to do something remarkable. They really haven't done anything.

Strazdas

J Mysterio wrote: »

I think there is an element that everyone is kind of in shock that a deal was reached. Also that there are so many new elements to the deal that seem to contradict prior statements by multiple parties. There is a sense of relief at the same time, Brexit fatigue is a thing.

I have a feeling the vote will pass tomorrow. Johnson will be a hero for the short term, but ultimately Britain will suffer for the deal. Scotland will still seek independence and there seems to be the fast track path back to the EU for them.

I think the NI arrangements will still lead to a UI in the near future - 5,10, 15 years.

It might be the only sensible outcome though. I think even the EU are now sick of the UK and of Brexit.

Junkyard Tom

The DUP have been a complete gift to progressive Irish nationalism. In a matter of months we'll likely have equal marriage, reproductive rights, and a new all-Ireland paradigm.

Incredible.