Brexited | the worst threads live the longest

Do you think there will be a Deal or No Deal?

  • Total voters
    194
  • Poll closed .
I'm stunned at what a poor administration this is. They are in for a very big shock.
 
Its unusual for a minister to admit the government is going to break the law


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-54073836

And its probably incompetence... but part of me wonders if it isn't to push the eu into taking them to court... its the one thing sure to galvanise the brexit vote into blaming the eu

And if the government does go ahead with legislation which appears to contradict the withdrawal agreement?

"There is a chance," says Prof Barnard, "that the EU will decide to trigger the dispute resolution mechanism in the withdrawal agreement, which could lead to arbitration and a case before the European Court of Justice."
Click to expand...
 
sun_tzu said:
Its unusual for a minister to admit the government is going to break the law


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-54073836

And its probably incompetence... but part of me wonders if it isn't to push the eu into taking them to court... its the one thing sure to galvanise the brexit vote into blaming the eu
Click to expand...
Wouldn't put it past this government. Can't blame Labour, so shift the blame on the EU
 
But the UK government have always blamed the EU for their own incompetence. They can fool the Brexiters but outside of Brexiters who cares - the whole world can see how incompetent and untrustworthy the UK government is - global insular Britain.
 
Internal Market Bill published: https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/58-01/0177/20177.pdf

Important text:

Certain provisions to have effect notwithstanding inconsistency or incompatibility with international or other domestic law
Click to expand...

45 Further provision related to sections 42 and 43 etc

(1)The following have effect notwithstanding any relevant international ordomestic law with which they may be incompatible or inconsistent—
(a)section 42;
(b)any regulations made under section 42(1);
(c)section 43;
(d)any regulations made under section 43(1);
(e)this section;
(f)any other provision of this Act so far as relating to the provisions in paragraphs (a) to (e)
Click to expand...
 
So as expected, the Bill allows a Minister to make secondary legislation to disapply the Withdrawal Agreement's provisions on customs arrangements between Northern Ireland, the Republic of Ireland and Great Britain, allows for the UK to disapply the state aid provisions found in the Withdrawal Agreement, and states that no dispute caused by these provisions can end up in EU courts.

Even though in the Withdrawal Agreement the UK agreed that any dispute over the WA would be adjudicated by the Court of Justice of the European Union.

What is more, clause 45(2)(a) states:

regulations under section 42(1) or 43(1) are not to be regarded asunlawful on the grounds of any incompatibility or inconsistency with relevant international or domestic law;
Click to expand...

This is concerning, for the simple reason it sets the legal precedent that any statute law can be immune from challenge in the courts simply because Parliament wills it. It runs roughshod over judicial review. Although, perhaps that was the point?
 
Frosty said:
So as expected, the Bill allows a Minister to make secondary legislation to disapply the Withdrawal Agreement's provisions on customs arrangements between Northern Ireland, the Republic of Ireland and Great Britain, allows for the UK to disapply the state aid provisions found in the Withdrawal Agreement, and states that no dispute caused by these provisions can end up in EU courts.

Even though in the Withdrawal Agreement the UK agreed that any dispute over the WA would be adjudicated by the Court of Justice of the European Union.

What is more, clause 45(2)(a) states:



This is concerning, for the simple reason it sets the legal precedent that any statute law can be immune from challenge in the courts simply because Parliament wills it. It runs roughshod over judicial review. Although, perhaps that was the point?
Click to expand...
Very strange. Will all governments from now on just write at the end of each bill 'this is not to be regarded as unlawful'? Makes a mockery of the whole thing.
 
feck knows what Ireland are supposed to do if the UK goes ahead with this stupid plan.
 
Worst breakup ever.

I had completely forgotten this was still happening :lol: Hardly anything in the news for months and months.
 
MikeUpNorth said:
The UK is circling the drain, but will we drag Ireland down with us?
Click to expand...

No, I don't think the EU would allow it. They would spend whatever is needed to secure the Irish economy for two reasons - one, to show smaller states that the Union is not going to be about what France and Germany want, and two - to secure the bonds between EU member states, and to show that the EU's longer-term security is more important than being bullied into a trade deal by the UK.
 
nickm said:
here is no way the EU is going to allow the UK to access the single market with subsidised industries that can unfairly compete with their own
Click to expand...
Agreed, but this already happens in the EU, e.g the dumping of steel by China.
Most countries support either directly or indirectly their various industries that allow them to keep what they see as 'vital' industries going, for all sorts of reasons; security, militarily, market presence, over production, technological benefits, etc. the so called level playing field is a myth, 'protectionism' is what it should be called out as. Until both sides in the Brexit debate begin to talk in straightforward language nothing will get decided, because in many case effectively they are talking to the back of the heads of the other side.
 
The lack of leadership and responsibility Boris and his cabinet take is shocking. It's such a mess, the future is so murky at the moment. The lack of clarity on future trade in Ireland worries me. It's not something that people should take lightly either. I never thought I would like a leader as much as Trump, Boris is a buffoon.
 
g2afxv4q02m51.jpg
 
Maticmaker said:
Agreed, but this already happens in the EU, e.g the dumping of steel by China.
Most countries support either directly or indirectly their various industries that allow them to keep what they see as 'vital' industries going, for all sorts of reasons; security, militarily, market presence, over production, technological benefits, etc. the so called level playing field is a myth, 'protectionism' is what it should be called out as. Until both sides in the Brexit debate begin to talk in straightforward language nothing will get decided, because in many case effectively they are talking to the back of the heads of the other side.
Click to expand...

So your example is with a country that doesn't have an FTA with the EU?
 
MikeUpNorth said:
The UK is circling the drain, but will we drag Ireland down with us?
Click to expand...

The EU will protect Ireland, the integrity of the single market is paramount. Ireland has 26 mates, I was finding it difficult to see how the UK functions post the transition period (even with some kind of deal) but if this transpires my circuits will have blown.
 
This doesn't really make sense as politics for an internal audience. You can only assume they're looking to force the EU into action that allows no deal to be presented as forced upon us.

Scrambling to save face in the midst of disaster.
 
The thing that I don't get is that, this move will make every other negotiations incredibly difficult. In general trade negotiations are long and tedious but here every other country will demand extra guarantees and protections because the UK can't be trusted.
 
Smores said:
This doesn't really make sense as politics for an internal audience. You can only assume they're looking to force the EU into action that allows no deal to be presented as forced upon us.

Scrambling to save face in the midst of disaster.
Click to expand...
I think it's more ill-conceived brinkmanship and trying to threaten a kind of mutually assured destruction if the EU don't agree to a FTA on the terms Britain wants.

Varadkar said today:

“I think going back to a year ago, certainly the strategy and behaviour of the British government was one of brinkmanship, was one of threatening to crash out, ‘if we don’t get an agreement we might go kamikaze on you’, that sort of thing.

“I kind of hope this is just another instalment of this, that the most benign assessment that this is brinkmanship, this is sabre rattling if we don’t get an FTA this is what we’ll do, that’s my benign interpretation and perhaps this is just part of the negotiating process in order to come to a free trade agreement with the EU, but I don’t think we can assume it’s that,” the Tánaiste said.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/pol...about-uk-s-intention-to-breach-deal-1.4350482
Click to expand...

I can't see it helping the negotiations in the slightest.
 
Maticmaker said:
Agreed, but this already happens in the EU, e.g the dumping of steel by China.
Most countries support either directly or indirectly their various industries that allow them to keep what they see as 'vital' industries going, for all sorts of reasons; security, militarily, market presence, over production, technological benefits, etc. the so called level playing field is a myth, 'protectionism' is what it should be called out as. Until both sides in the Brexit debate begin to talk in straightforward language nothing will get decided, because in many case effectively they are talking to the back of the heads of the other side.
Click to expand...

The EU introduced tariffs on a sudden excess of Chinese/Indonesian/Taiwanese steel imports between 2018 and 2019 as did the USA. The UK hardly uses state aid, they can use it in certain circumstances under EU and WTO rules. Brexiteers like WTO rules, if only they knew what they were.
Don't think the talks will go on much longer if UK pull this stunt.
 
Paul the Wolf said:
The EU will protect Ireland, the integrity of the single market is paramount. Ireland has 26 mates, I was finding it difficult to see how the UK functions post the transition period (even with some kind of deal) but if this transpires my circuits will have blown.
Click to expand...
Protecting the integrity of the single market, while also protecting Ireland, will be a pretty difficult thing to achieve if the UK decides to go full rogue state and not implement the WA border or customs controls between the UK and NI.
 
MikeUpNorth said:
Protecting the integrity of the single market, while also protecting Ireland, will be a pretty difficult thing to achieve if the UK decides to go full rogue state and not implement the WI border or customs controls between the UK and NI.
Click to expand...

Do you think that NI could be the ones going rogue against Westminster? We have talked about it in the past and most irish thought that it wasn't an option but it has been 3-4 years now.
 
MikeUpNorth said:
Protecting the integrity of the single market, while also protecting Ireland, will be a pretty difficult thing to achieve if the UK decides to go full rogue state and not implement the WI border or customs controls between the UK and NI.
Click to expand...

If the UK go full rogue state they will be paralysed, they need agreements to fly planes, move ships, road travel and so on. Brexiteers wanted to be self-sufficient.
 
MikeUpNorth said:
Protecting the integrity of the single market, while also protecting Ireland, will be a pretty difficult thing to achieve if the UK decides to go full rogue state and not implement the WA border or customs controls between the UK and NI.
Click to expand...

JPRouve said:
Do you think that NI could be the ones going rogue against Westminster? We have talked about it in the past and most irish thought that it wasn't an option but it has been 3-4 years now.
Click to expand...

Paul the Wolf said:
If the UK go full rogue state they will be paralysed, they need agreements to fly planes, move ships, road travel and so on. Brexiteers wanted to be self-sufficient.
Click to expand...

The EU will have powers under the WA to impose tariffs on UK imports and exports if the UK does not adhere to the Agreement.

I suspect that would be the way forward to try and bring the UK back into line with its international law commitments.
 
Paul the Wolf said:
If the UK go full rogue state they will be paralysed, they need agreements to fly planes, move ships, road travel and so on. Brexiteers wanted to be self-sufficient.
Click to expand...
As stupid and incomprehensible as it is, if I were the EU or Ireland, I wouldn't rule out the UK doing anything at this point and would be preparing for the worst. No matter how insane it might sound. We have morons in charge.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.