Brexit discussion thread XI (Please read OP before posting)

Letwin_Larry

J Mysterio wrote: »

Terrible tragedy of smuggled people dying in lorry cargo seems oddly prescient given the debate and trouble over the 'sea border'.

The lorry came to London via Holyhead from Bulgaria via Ireland. Strange route of course.

Thirty-nine people found dead in a container in Essex.
Lorry driver from Northern Ireland has been arrested on suspicion of murder

truly horrific. my guess is they are probably from Syria. as if their lives couldn't get any worse.
immigration going to be a big issue in any GE.

LuckyLloyd

eagle eye wrote: »

There are lots of people who think he is normal and a great man. See the Brexit referendum andreccet polls and the UK European election for proof.
Sp just because you and I disagree with his politics and beliefs that does not make the man a degenerate.
In fact anybody calling him that is closer to being one.

Jaysus even in your boards career of contrary posting, this takes the biscuit. Worth reading more about him if you aren’t that familiar:

https://www.nybooks.com/articles/2019/08/15/boris-johnson-ham-of-fate/

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jun/24/boris-johnson-prime-minister-tory-party-britain

He’s neither a normal nor great man by any stretch.

farmchoice

Letwin_Larry wrote: »

truly horrific. my guess is they are probably from Syria. as if their lives couldn't get any worse.
immigration going to be a big issue in any GE.

we dont know are are living folks, those poor people just trying to have a bit of a life for themselves, hoping against hope to get a small bit of what we have and what we take for granted.
there are Syrian refugees in my town, i know a few of them, decent family people, just trying their best.

lawred2

farmchoice wrote: »

not to go off topic too much but there is obliviously something not right in the details of the story, why the hell go all the way through the england only to leave again to then re-enter through NI.

France Rosslare is what I would guess

Junkyard Tom

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Can ya link to that?

https://www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/db50ce98-55f0-4fad-a51b-d03bc468ccec

Go to 10:33:15 seconds.

Letwin_Larry

farmchoice wrote: »

we dont know are are living folks, those poor people just trying to have a bit of a life for themselves, hoping against hope to get a small bit of what we have and what we take for granted.
there are Syrian refugees in my town, i know a few of them, decent family people, just trying their best.

i really hope they get the people that organised this outrage.
my wife runs a retail outlet. she gets Syrian women in fairly often. they like to haggle. they are always respectful and good humoured.
i'm really very saddened by this awful news.

sondagefaux

tuxy wrote: »

Will amendments have to be approved by the EU?
I guess it depends on what they might be.

The amendments would not be to the Withdrawal Agreement itself but to the Withdrawal Agreement Bill.

Amendments could, for example, force the UK government to seek a 2 year extension to the Withdrawal Agreement (due to expire on 31.12.2020 but can be extended up to 31.12.2022 by mutual agreement between the UK and EU) which the EU would almost certainly agree to.

Amendments could also force a UK government to seek to negotiate a customs union with the EU, and to seek to negotiate continuing alignment with EU rules on workers' rights, environmental law etc, all of which the EU would almost certainly agree to.

An amendment to ensure that the Bill would only become law if approved in a referendum, with a clause that says the UK will remain in the UK if the referendum does not approve the Bill, is also possible, although far less certain to pass.

This may require a longer extension if it does pass, as existing UK electoral law means that about 22 weeks is needed to prepare for and hold a referendum once parliament passes a law to call a referendum.

But an amendment on a referendum on the Withdrawal Agreement Bill could amend existing electoral law and allow for a referendum to be held within 6 weeks, well before the January 31st deadline, as argued by Jessica Simor in the Observer last Sunday.

sondagefaux

Purgative wrote: »

Maybe we get a few Mill from the EU for a few years. It will make a good headline, I'm sure.

Will that be enough to repair the damage to farm incomes?

Enough to unravel the milk processing scheme that zig-zags across the border like a cats cradle?

Enough for the extra Garda for when the North kicks off again?

Apart from a No Deal Brexit, which is now extremely unlikely to happen, any Brexit deal will keep the border as open as it is now for trade in goods.

gooch2k9

Nothing is going to happen until the EU respond to the extension agreement now?

Joe_ Public

sondagefaux wrote: »

The amendments would not be to the Withdrawal Agreement itself but to the Withdrawal Agreement Bill.

Amendments could, for example, force the UK government to seek a 2 year extension to the Withdrawal Agreement (due to expire on 31.12.2020 but can be extended up to 31.12.2022 by mutual agreement between the UK and EU) which the EU would almost certainly agree to.

Amendments could also force a UK government to seek to negotiate a customs union with the EU, and to seek to negotiate continuing alignment with EU rules on workers' rights, environmental law etc, all of which the EU would almost certainly agree to.

An amendment to ensure that the Bill would only become law if approved in a referendum, with a clause that says the UK will remain in the UK if the referendum does not approve the Bill, is also possible, although far less certain to pass.

This may require a longer extension if it does pass, as existing UK electoral law means that about 22 weeks is needed to prepare for and hold a referendum once parliament passes a law to call a referendum.

But an amendment on a referendum on the Withdrawal Agreement Bill could amend existing electoral law and allow for a referendum to be held within 6 weekswell before the January 31st deadline, as argued by Jessica Simor in the Observer last Sunday.

One question i'd have about, say, a cu amendment is you'd be mandating Johnson, assuming he's still pm, to negotiate it with the eu. How can you ensure he does so in good faith? Are their provisions that will force him to do so or that would kick in in the event he failed?

Letwin_Larry

lawred2 wrote: »

France Rosslare is what I would guess

you could well be correct.
perhaps the truck had come from the continent and was enroute to Ireland. could it have been resting-up in Essex before the journey to Holyhead?

sondagefaux

Joe_ Public wrote: »

One question i'd have about, say, a cu amendment is you'd be mandating Johnson, assuming he's still pm, to negotiate it with the eu. How can you ensure he does so in good faith? Are their provisions that will force him to do so or that would kick in in the event he failed?

The Padfield judgment of 1968 by the UK courts makes it illegal for any member of the government, including the Prime Minister, to try to frustrate the aims of an Act of Parliament.

This is why Johnson had to send a letter requesting an extension under the Benn Act even though he didn't want to.

If Johnson is Prime Minister during the negotiations, he must act lawfully. If he doesn't, the courts can step in and order him to do so.

sondagefaux

Letwin_Larry wrote: »

you could well be correct.
perhaps the truck had come from the continent and was enroute to Ireland. could it have been resting-up in Essex before the journey to Holyhead?

Apparently it first entered Britain via Holyhead.

ToBeFrank123

sondagefaux wrote: »

Many affluent areas had a majority vote in favour of Leave too.

The biggest indicator of voting Leave was age, closely followed by formal educational attainment level.

No problem with the age thing, but educational attainment I don't think played a big part.

Leavers range from Oxford educated BoJo down to people who left school at 15 and who probably feel they can no longer compete for jobs because of their lack of education. I'd imagine UK tradesmen for example are upset at competition from eastern Europeans who can do the job just as well but a lot cheaper. Fishermen are not happy having to compete with EU fishermen.

There were more leave conservative constituencies than labour ones, but a good majority of both.

As for the age thing, yes older people shafted the young with Brexit. However the young will be old some day and will probably do the same to the next generation. The old care less about the future and more about enjoying the present.

An Ciarraioch

One wonders about the inadvertent damage that Brexit will have done to Ireland's political image among ordinary Europeans - was in Brussels for a few days, the shopkeepers occasionally inquire about their customers' nationality, and one was vaguely aware about an Irish connection with Brexit, but thought it meant we would be leaving along with the UK! This was only a few streets away from the European Parliament, so one worries about how widespread this impression would be within the member states most distant from Britain.

lawred2

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

One wonders about the inadvertent damage that Brexit will have done to Ireland's political image among ordinary Europeans - was in Brussels for a few days, the shopkeepers occasionally inquire about their customers' nationality, and one was vaguely aware about an Irish connection with Brexit, but thought it meant we would be leaving along with the UK! This was only a few streets away from the European Parliament, so one worries about how widespread this impression would be within the member states most distant from Britain.

I wouldn't really worry about what a shopkeeper in Belgium knows or doesn't know about Ireland.

I doubt too many Irish shopkeepers are familiar with the geopolitical workings of Belgium.

prawnsambo

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

No problem with the age thing, but educational attainment I don't think played a big part.

Leavers range from Oxford educated BoJo down to people who left school at 15 and who probably feel they can no longer compete for jobs because of their lack of education. I'd imagine UK tradesmen for example are upset at competition from eastern Europeans who can do the job just as well but a lot cheaper. Fishermen are not happy having to compete with EU fishermen.

There were more leave conservative constituencies than labour ones, but a good majority of both.

As for the age thing, yes older people shafted the young with Brexit. However the young will be old some day and will probably do the same to the next generation. The old care less about the future and more about enjoying the present.

This is a breakdown on this site.

A majority (57%) of those with a university degree voted to remain, as did 64% of those with a higher degree and more than four in five (81%) of those still in full time education. Among those whose formal education ended at secondary school or earlier, a large majority voted to leave.

Zubeneschamali

BarryD2 wrote: »

It seems that he'll have to go with a 3 month extension at least. If he goes for a short one

I don't understand why people are talking about what Johnson might request.

He already requested a flextension to January 31st.

Tea Shock

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I don't understand why people are talking about what Johnson might request.

He already requested a flextension to January 31st.

Section 3 of the Benn Act obliged Johnson to accept an extension to 31 January 2020 if offered, and allowed him to either accept an offer or ask the House of Commons to accept an offer of any other date.

Zubeneschamali

Tea Shock wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=

Section 3 of the Benn Act obliged Johnson to accept an extension to 31 January 2020 if offered, and allowed him to either accept an offer or ask the House of Commons to accept an offer of any other date.

True, but that does not change the fact that what he asked for was a flextension to Jan 31st:

I am writing therefore to inform the European Council that the United Kingdom is seeking a further extension to the period provided under Article 50(3) of the Treaty on European Union, including as applied by Article 106a of the Euratom Treaty. The United Kingdom proposes that this period should end at 11 p.m. GMT on 31 January 2020. If the parties are able to ratify before this date, the Government proposes that the period should be terminated early.

ToBeFrank123

Onwards to the next cliff edge. Its moving but at a snails pace.

The next question is can Johnson get his election?

Joe_ Public

Corbyn asks Johnson at pmq why if he promises that standards and workers rights will be enhanced they were removed from the legally binding wa. Johnson does not answer the question because the answer is he is almost certainly lying when he makes that promise. There is no logical reason to remove them other than to hold them as bargaining chips in negotiating future trade deals.

ancapailldorcha

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

Onwards to the next cliff edge. Its moving but at a snails pace.

The next question is can Johnson get his election?

If he secures an extension then I would think so. I can't see him winning by the margin he needs to get his deal through comfortably though.

BonnieSituation

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

https://www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/db50ce98-55f0-4fad-a51b-d03bc468ccec

Go to 10:33:15 seconds.

Cheers. Still away supporting the "Boys in (Darker) Green (since we messed up against the Kiwis)" so you guys, for better or worse, are my Brexit eyes and ears.

Tea Shock

No checks between GB and NI says Johnson

The exact opposite of what his own Secretary of State for Exiting the EU said to a select committee hearing less than 2 days ago! :rolleyes:

devnull

Tea Shock wrote: »

No checks between GB and NI says Johnson

The exact opposite of what his own Secretary of State for Exiting the EU said to a select committee hearing less than 2 days ago! :rolleyes:

Truth and Johnson are rather strange bedfellows.

He keeps saying that his deal got through Parliament last night, despite the fact it hasn't.

He's a compulsive liar.

Quin_Dub

devnull wrote: »

Truth and Johnson are rather strange bedfellows.

He keeps saying that his deal got through Parliament last night, despite the fact it hasn't.

He's a compulsive liar.

Well - It is the only vote that he has won as PM , so he's bound to be a bit excited.

From some perspectives the fact that the initial vote was passed by a ~30 majority is probably a sign that the basic support is there, so on some levels he's managed more than May ever did.

But given the defeat of the 2nd vote there are at least 15 or so of those who supported the 1st vote who are worried that there is a gotcha somewhere in the weeds that will make them change their mind and as such want a lot more than 3 days to review the deep level details.

So he's absolutely definitely not in the clear yet.

SeaBreezes

##Mod Snip##

Please don't link dump

Explain the link , give your opinion on it etc. Don't just drop it in the thread.

Thanks

jimmycrackcorm

Tea Shock wrote: »

No checks between GB and NI says Johnson

The exact opposite of what his own Secretary of State for Exiting the EU said to a select committee hearing less than 2 days ago! :rolleyes:

Why do the UK have to have checks between NI and GB though? They can for example use their magic technological solutions.

Letwin_Larry

prawnsambo wrote: »

This is a breakdown on this site.

very interesting graphic.
it would seem the older, less educated and lower one's income the more likely that person voted leave.
conversely younger, more educated with higher incomes voted remain.

but last time i checked each vote cast is of equal importance and validity.