How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 6)

[amusingduck]

Mrr T said:

Garvin said:

Mrr T said:

PurpleMoonlight said:

Mrr T said:

It’s my view and not seen any analysis but I do not believe a vote in parliament is needed to revoke Art 50.

It took a vote to invoke it so it doesn't seem unreasonable it would take one to revoke it.

I was not saying what was reasonable or not but what is legally required. There was only a vote in parliament on the Art 50 because of the Gina Miller case. Not only do the reasons for the success of that case not apply to revocation, we now know the court decision was incorrect.

The date of 29th March 2019 as the date the UK leaves the EU was enshrined in law was it not? Therefore does Parliament not have to revoke that law in order to then revoke A50? To do so requires a parliamentary vote I believe.

The Withdrawal bill does not mean we leave the EU, that can only be done by Art 50. The Withdrawal Bill should be amended but not sure it has to be.

https://www.theweek.co.uk/fact-check/95547/fact-check-what-a-no-deal-brexit-really-means

theweek said:

What do we know for sure?
The UK is scheduled to leave the EU at 11pm GMT on 29 March 2019. If a formal withdrawal treaty has not been signed by this point, all EU rules and regulations will instantly cease to apply to the UK.

This means there will no remaining agreements between Britain and the EU on how to manage customs, trade, travel or citizens rights.

It's...genius. RINO!

All rules and regulations cease to apply to the UK, but it doesn't mean that we've left the EU! It's brilliant!

Sign me up Mrr T!

[saaby93]

pgh said:

Did all of those worries about queues at Dover just get swept away?

https://order-order.com/2018/12/17/uk-eu-agree-mai...

how come we didnt have a referendum on it

[ITP]

saaby93 said:

JagLover said:

saaby93 said:

Once youve discounted all the alternatives, you end up following the same decision tree that led to the negotiators agreeing the deal

For the purposes of the Tory party perhaps, and even then, only until more of the public figures out what has been signed up to. Certainly not a decision tree where you are assessing the national interest.

To recap the backstop, which is going to be the future relationship or form part of the future relationship, does nothing to safeguard British service exports to the EU, automatically grants third parties with whom the EU reaches a trade agreement access to the UK market with no reciprocal rights for the UK, binds the UK to EU regulations over which it has no say, and prevents any trade agreements being reached with the rest of the world. Finally to cap it all off we cannot legally escape from it.

You seem to think it is some form of compromise that part satisfies both Leavers and Remainers.

Nope
It's a deal that satisfies the border and trade issues on the day we exit the EU.

It satisfies the leave vote because it leaves the EU.

There'll be some leavers and remainers who wont be saitsfied with anything that isnt at one end of the scale or the other, but for everyone else it's a good deal that can be built on for the future outside the EU

It took 460 days to agree it. So far despite much posturing no-one has come up with a better alternative

Why do remainers keep saying may’s deal and the backstop ‘satisfies the leave vote’? It’s just weird.

It’s like getting divorced but your ex can still come into your house unannounced, tell you how to live your life, and not allow you to see other women. You can plan to see them, but aren’t allowed. Until they decide you can. If ever. They can do what they want though.

Edited by ITP on Monday 17th December 17:19

[jonnyb]

loafer123 said:

jonnyb said:

loafer123 said:

jonnyb said:

The Dangerous Elk said:

mattmurdock said:

The backstop is there because we said that under no circumstances can there be a hard border in Ireland.

Anyone who thinks there is any deal which does not include a backstop very similar to this is misguided at best.

Leaving without an agreement on preventing a hard border will not be allowed by Parliament.

Ergo, we will have a backstop whichever way we go - but it can be a backstop in an agreement where we leave the Single Market and Customs Union, or we can end up with a situation where we leave neither.

Waving our fists at 'Johnny Foreigner' and tutting loudly do not a negotiating tactic make.

Then if there is no deal then let them build THEIR wall if that is what THEY think should happen, we have already said that we will not build one.

And how would that work for FOM?
By doing what you say we essentially sign up to FOM. Remember, no passport checks between UK and Northen Ireland.
Also, goods from the EU coming into the UK? The border works both ways.

Oh, god. Not this again.

FOM is actually Freedom of Movement of Labour.

Someone visiting Eire will be able to visit Belfast without being stopped, but will, as with all people, have to prove their right to work if they want to get a job.

Will actually be able to visit London without getting stopped.

So?

So it’s hardly control of our boarders is it?

[loafer123]

jonnyb said:

loafer123 said:

jonnyb said:

loafer123 said:

jonnyb said:

The Dangerous Elk said:

mattmurdock said:

The backstop is there because we said that under no circumstances can there be a hard border in Ireland.

Anyone who thinks there is any deal which does not include a backstop very similar to this is misguided at best.

Leaving without an agreement on preventing a hard border will not be allowed by Parliament.

Ergo, we will have a backstop whichever way we go - but it can be a backstop in an agreement where we leave the Single Market and Customs Union, or we can end up with a situation where we leave neither.

Waving our fists at 'Johnny Foreigner' and tutting loudly do not a negotiating tactic make.

Then if there is no deal then let them build THEIR wall if that is what THEY think should happen, we have already said that we will not build one.

And how would that work for FOM?
By doing what you say we essentially sign up to FOM. Remember, no passport checks between UK and Northen Ireland.
Also, goods from the EU coming into the UK? The border works both ways.

Oh, god. Not this again.

FOM is actually Freedom of Movement of Labour.

Someone visiting Eire will be able to visit Belfast without being stopped, but will, as with all people, have to prove their right to work if they want to get a job.

Will actually be able to visit London without getting stopped.

So?

So it’s hardly control of our boarders is it?

Yes it is, because it controls the ability of people to move to the UK to live and work.

No-one cares if people come on holiday.

[Helicopter123]

mattmurdock said:

JagLover said:

For the purposes of the Tory party perhaps, and even then, only until more of the public figures out what has been signed up to. Certainly not a decision tree where you are assessing the national interest.

To recap the backstop, which is going to be the future relationship or form part of the future relationship, does nothing to safeguard British service exports to the EU, automatically grants third parties with whom the EU reaches a trade agreement access to the UK market with no reciprocal rights for the UK, binds the UK to EU regulations over which it has no say, and prevents any trade agreements being reached with the rest of the world. Finally to cap it all off we cannot legally escape from it.

You seem to think it is some form of compromise that part satisfies both Leavers and Remainers. You may have ben led to this conclusion by all the drivel about "soft " and "hard" Brexit in the media. In reality this WA screws over everyone regardless of how they voted.

I trust there is a core of Tory MPs who will never vote for this agreement.

The backstop is there because we said that under no circumstances can there be a hard border in Ireland.

Anyone who thinks there is any deal which does not include a backstop very similar to this is misguided at best.

Leaving without an agreement on preventing a hard border will not be allowed by Parliament.

Ergo, we will have a backstop whichever way we go - but it can be a backstop in an agreement where we leave the Single Market and Customs Union, or we can end up with a situation where we leave neither.

Waving our fists at 'Johnny Foreigner' and tutting loudly do not a negotiating tactic make.

I can think of a deal that doesn't require a backstop, the one we already have, negotiated by Thatcher and Major, with the rebate, a Veto and opt-outs from both the Euro and Schengen.

Doesn't sound at all bad, does it?

[Mothersruin]

The 'People's Vote' will just be a simple mechanism for the Politicians to absolve themselves of all blame regardless of the outcome and to shirk their responsibilities yet again.

So, it'll probably go ahead then.

[p1stonhead]

loafer123 said:

jonnyb said:

loafer123 said:

jonnyb said:

loafer123 said:

jonnyb said:

The Dangerous Elk said:

mattmurdock said:

The backstop is there because we said that under no circumstances can there be a hard border in Ireland.

Anyone who thinks there is any deal which does not include a backstop very similar to this is misguided at best.

Leaving without an agreement on preventing a hard border will not be allowed by Parliament.

Ergo, we will have a backstop whichever way we go - but it can be a backstop in an agreement where we leave the Single Market and Customs Union, or we can end up with a situation where we leave neither.

Waving our fists at 'Johnny Foreigner' and tutting loudly do not a negotiating tactic make.

Then if there is no deal then let them build THEIR wall if that is what THEY think should happen, we have already said that we will not build one.

And how would that work for FOM?
By doing what you say we essentially sign up to FOM. Remember, no passport checks between UK and Northen Ireland.
Also, goods from the EU coming into the UK? The border works both ways.

Oh, god. Not this again.

FOM is actually Freedom of Movement of Labour.

Someone visiting Eire will be able to visit Belfast without being stopped, but will, as with all people, have to prove their right to work if they want to get a job.

Will actually be able to visit London without getting stopped.

So?

So it’s hardly control of our boarders is it?

Yes it is, because it controls the ability of people to move to the UK to live and work.

No-one cares if people come on holiday.

Isn’t there a significant amount of people who come for a visit then don’t leave? I was sure that was a pretty big problem vs sneaking in.

Edited by p1stonhead on Monday 17th December 17:24

[thetrickcyclist]

Helicopter123 said:

I can think of a deal that doesn't require a backstop, the one we already have, negotiated by Thatcher and Major, with the rebate, a Veto and opt-outs from both the Euro and Schengen.

Doesn't sound at all bad, does it?

[The Dangerous Elk]

jonnyb said:

I know a free boarder in Ireland makes a mockery of trying have “control of our borders”

Also having spoken to quite a few people in and around Northen Ireland about the IRA, it’s a fear a lot of them have. And they would know.

No it does not.

If you believe that you ill believe anything.

Funded by the USA again, not really
Funded by Libya , err
|Funded by Iran ?, good luck with the Catholic/Muslim thing
Funded by the Eu ? maybe...
Where will their weapons come from ? They got rid of them all didn't they ?

[saaby93]

ITP said:

saaby93 said:

JagLover said:

saaby93 said:

Once youve discounted all the alternatives, you end up following the same decision tree that led to the negotiators agreeing the deal

For the purposes of the Tory party perhaps, and even then, only until more of the public figures out what has been signed up to. Certainly not a decision tree where you are assessing the national interest.

To recap the backstop, which is going to be the future relationship or form part of the future relationship, does nothing to safeguard British service exports to the EU, automatically grants third parties with whom the EU reaches a trade agreement access to the UK market with no reciprocal rights for the UK, binds the UK to EU regulations over which it has no say, and prevents any trade agreements being reached with the rest of the world. Finally to cap it all off we cannot legally escape from it.

You seem to think it is some form of compromise that part satisfies both Leavers and Remainers.

Nope
It's a deal that satisfies the border and trade issues on the day we exit the EU.

It satisfies the leave vote because it leaves the EU.

There'll be some leavers and remainers who wont be saitsfied with anything that isnt at one end of the scale or the other, but for everyone else it's a good deal that can be built on for the future outside the EU

It took 460 days to agree it. So far despite much posturing no-one has come up with a better alternative

Why do remainers keep saying may’s deal and the backstop ‘satisfies the leave vote’? It’s just weird.

It's nothing to do with remainers or leavers and if you read what was said there, it's not what you've said


'It satisfies the leave vote' means that when the UK leaves on March 29th, the leaving satisfies the outcome of the referendum to leave.

Does the logic in that make sense?
I cant think what else it can mean

So called Mays deal and the back stop are a separate process that comes into play on the same day
It's nothing to do with the referendum save for thered be no point if the outcome had been remain

[loafer123]

p1stonhead said:

Isn’t there a significant amount of people who come for a visit then don’t leave? I was sure that was a pretty big proble va say sneaking in.

There are increased requirements from both employers and landlords to ensure people have a right to work and live respectively.

[Nickgnome]

The Dangerous Elk said:

No it does not.

If you believe that you ill believe anything.

Funded by the USA again, not really
Funded by Libya , err
|Funded by Iran ?, good luck with the Catholic/Muslim thing
Funded by the Eu ? maybe...
Where will their weapons come from ? They got rid of them all didn't they ?

You may find it hard to believe but in Protestant areas of NI you will see The Jewish Flag whilst in Catholic areas you will find the Palestinian flag.

One of the slightly odd relationships that were formed as part of the troubles.

[Robertj21a]

Helicopter123 said:

I can think of a deal that doesn't require a backstop, the one we already have, negotiated by Thatcher and Major, with the rebate, a Veto and opt-outs from both the Euro and Schengen.

Doesn't sound at all bad, does it?

Sounds utterly terrible, just like staying in he EU........

[ITP]

saaby93 said:

ITP said:

saaby93 said:

JagLover said:

saaby93 said:

Once youve discounted all the alternatives, you end up following the same decision tree that led to the negotiators agreeing the deal

For the purposes of the Tory party perhaps, and even then, only until more of the public figures out what has been signed up to. Certainly not a decision tree where you are assessing the national interest.

To recap the backstop, which is going to be the future relationship or form part of the future relationship, does nothing to safeguard British service exports to the EU, automatically grants third parties with whom the EU reaches a trade agreement access to the UK market with no reciprocal rights for the UK, binds the UK to EU regulations over which it has no say, and prevents any trade agreements being reached with the rest of the world. Finally to cap it all off we cannot legally escape from it.

You seem to think it is some form of compromise that part satisfies both Leavers and Remainers.

Nope
It's a deal that satisfies the border and trade issues on the day we exit the EU.

It satisfies the leave vote because it leaves the EU.

There'll be some leavers and remainers who wont be saitsfied with anything that isnt at one end of the scale or the other, but for everyone else it's a good deal that can be built on for the future outside the EU

It took 460 days to agree it. So far despite much posturing no-one has come up with a better alternative

Why do remainers keep saying may’s deal and the backstop ‘satisfies the leave vote’? It’s just weird.

It's nothing to do with remainers or leavers and if you read what was said there, it's not what you've said


'It satisfies the leave vote' means that when the UK leaves on March 29th, the leaving satisfies the outcome of the referendum to leave.

Does the logic in that make sense?
I cant think what else it can mean

So called Mays deal and the back stop are a separate process that comes into play on the same day
It's nothing to do with the referendum save for thered be no point if the outcome had been remain

No, I doesn’t make sense.
Because the backstop can, and probably will be triggered by the EU, still leaving us partly under their control. With no way out for us. So no, it’s not leave.
The referendum wasn’t remain or leave (but still with the EU having legal control over aspects of our country). It was remain or leave.

[Nickgnome]

The Dangerous Elk said:

One side thinks Free & Democratic, the other Gay throwing Terrorists.

And who do the Eu like today ? Says a lot.

You mean like No gay marriage, No abortion for women. That sort of free

I lived in Israel for a while, your post is ignorant.

[Tony427]

loafer123 said:

pgh said:

Did all of those worries about queues at Dover just get swept away?

https://order-order.com/2018/12/17/uk-eu-agree-mai...

Big news, if true.

Uses the TIR system just like 50 odd other countries so electronically logged/ listed/ no customs requirements at points of entry.

As you say big news, if true. Throws project Fear V2 under a bus. A big red one.

Cheers,

Tony

[don'tbesilly]

ash73 said:

Corbyn tables motion of no confidence in PM.

I think this will focus the minds of the Tories, and Corbyn will fail.

It was interesting and remarkable that Rees-Mogg gave May his full support earlier on today.

[saaby93]

ITP said:

The referendum wasn’t remain or leave (but still with the EU having legal control over aspects of our country). It was remain or leave.

ok well thats good at least youve got that bit right
and the outcome of the referendum was leave and thats happening on the 29th March

Now on that date the UK is going to begin trying to put together various trade deals together with countries around the world,
One of the biggies- is the rest of the EU
The good fellows in the UK and the EU have been piecing together a trade deal which has the same general affect as the current customs arreangement.
It's a new deal because the current arrangements end on March 29th.
It'll mean business in the UK and the EU can continue to trade as they do now.
Parliament is going to decide in January whether or not it thinks thats beneficial for the country

[bitchstewie]

don'tbesilly said:

I think this will focus the minds of the Tories, and Corbyn will fail.

It was interesting and remarkable that Rees-Mogg gave May his full support earlier on today.

I suspect you're right and I also think this shows Corbyn as simply trying to make political capital rather than even attempting to do what's best for the country.

Says it better than I can on Mogg https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/1074706288947...