Theresa May (Vol.2)

Author
Discussion

B'stard Child

16,615 posts

184 months

Tuesday 22nd January
quotequote all
Elysium said:
paulrockliffe said:
Elysium said:
Unfortunately, it’s not an effective threat.

It is a matter of some debate if the EU or the U.K. has the most to lose in a ‘no deal’ situation. I personally think it’s likely to be worse for us because any impacts will be spread across several individual member states.

Regardless - the EU know that the threat has no teeth, because if the moment comes they can simply grant an extension to the a50 notification period, which we would almost certainly agree.
It's not an effective threat because the EU do not take May seriously and have the likes of Blair telling them what's 'really' going on in the UK. Plus it hasn't been used as a threat at all by our 'good faith' negotiators.

I think the spread argument is over-played, though it's hard to say to what extent. Although the whole of the EU is big, most of our trade imbalance is concentrated in Germany, France etc, the economic picture is far less spread than the basic numbers would suggest.

That's obvious when you consider the impact on Ireland, they will be affected far more than the UK and any of the other 26 EU countries, especially if the EU start playing silly buggers as the impact on the UK gets passed on to Ireland on both imports and exports and at two borders. There are no cheap mitigations for Ireland.

Your last point is quite weak too, because we are leaving under UK Law on the 29th of March. Any change to that position is rapidly running out of time to change UK Law. Again the EU may be projecting their approaches to the Law on the UK, but over here the Government sits beneath the Law. While Parliament may change the law, it is bound by the law and cannot change it on a whim. It simply isn't the case that all can agree to extend.
Extending the article 50 deadline would be incredibly straightforward with no significant changes in UK law required:

1. The European Council can decide to extend the article 50 period 'in agreement with the member state'.

Article 50 said:
The Treaties shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of entry into force of the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after the notification referred to in paragraph 2, unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned, unanimously decides to extend this period.
2. The Withdrawal Act includes a simple mechanism to allow 'exit day' to be changed in response:

Withdrawl Act said:
A Minister of the Crown may by regulations—
(a)amend the definition of “exit day” in subsection (1) to ensure that the day and time specified in the definition are the day and time that the Treaties are to cease to apply to the United Kingdom



Edited by Elysium on Monday 21st January 23:55
Question is who will blink first or even will they!!!

Vanden Saab

1,585 posts

12 months

Tuesday 22nd January
quotequote all
Elysium said:
paulrockliffe said:
Elysium said:
Unfortunately, it’s not an effective threat.

It is a matter of some debate if the EU or the U.K. has the most to lose in a ‘no deal’ situation. I personally think it’s likely to be worse for us because any impacts will be spread across several individual member states.

Regardless - the EU know that the threat has no teeth, because if the moment comes they can simply grant an extension to the a50 notification period, which we would almost certainly agree.
It's not an effective threat because the EU do not take May seriously and have the likes of Blair telling them what's 'really' going on in the UK. Plus it hasn't been used as a threat at all by our 'good faith' negotiators.

I think the spread argument is over-played, though it's hard to say to what extent. Although the whole of the EU is big, most of our trade imbalance is concentrated in Germany, France etc, the economic picture is far less spread than the basic numbers would suggest.

That's obvious when you consider the impact on Ireland, they will be affected far more than the UK and any of the other 26 EU countries, especially if the EU start playing silly buggers as the impact on the UK gets passed on to Ireland on both imports and exports and at two borders. There are no cheap mitigations for Ireland.

Your last point is quite weak too, because we are leaving under UK Law on the 29th of March. Any change to that position is rapidly running out of time to change UK Law. Again the EU may be projecting their approaches to the Law on the UK, but over here the Government sits beneath the Law. While Parliament may change the law, it is bound by the law and cannot change it on a whim. It simply isn't the case that all can agree to extend.
Extending the article 50 deadline would be incredibly straightforward with no significant changes in UK law required:

1. The European Council can decide to extend the article 50 period 'in agreement with the member state'.

Article 50 said:
The Treaties shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of entry into force of the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after the notification referred to in paragraph 2, unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned, unanimously decides to extend this period.
2. The Withdrawal Act includes a simple mechanism to allow 'exit day' to be changed in response:

Withdrawl Act said:
A Minister of the Crown may by regulations—
(a)amend the definition of “exit day” in subsection (1) to ensure that the day and time specified in the definition are the day and time that the Treaties are to cease to apply to the United Kingdom
Edited by Elysium on Monday 21st January 23:55
As I understand it your point two only applies if an agreement has been reached with the EU over leaving and passed as a bill in parliament and more time is needed to enact it. With respect to point number one. The agreement to extend Art50 has to be agreed with the EU and by secondary legislation in Parliament to include extending the date. It cannot be done purely by the government.
The whole thing has undergone so many changes though it is difficult to ascertain the current position...

Elysium

2,200 posts

125 months

Tuesday 22nd January
quotequote all
Vanden Saab said:
Elysium said:
paulrockliffe said:
Elysium said:
Unfortunately, it’s not an effective threat.

It is a matter of some debate if the EU or the U.K. has the most to lose in a ‘no deal’ situation. I personally think it’s likely to be worse for us because any impacts will be spread across several individual member states.

Regardless - the EU know that the threat has no teeth, because if the moment comes they can simply grant an extension to the a50 notification period, which we would almost certainly agree.
It's not an effective threat because the EU do not take May seriously and have the likes of Blair telling them what's 'really' going on in the UK. Plus it hasn't been used as a threat at all by our 'good faith' negotiators.

I think the spread argument is over-played, though it's hard to say to what extent. Although the whole of the EU is big, most of our trade imbalance is concentrated in Germany, France etc, the economic picture is far less spread than the basic numbers would suggest.

That's obvious when you consider the impact on Ireland, they will be affected far more than the UK and any of the other 26 EU countries, especially if the EU start playing silly buggers as the impact on the UK gets passed on to Ireland on both imports and exports and at two borders. There are no cheap mitigations for Ireland.

Your last point is quite weak too, because we are leaving under UK Law on the 29th of March. Any change to that position is rapidly running out of time to change UK Law. Again the EU may be projecting their approaches to the Law on the UK, but over here the Government sits beneath the Law. While Parliament may change the law, it is bound by the law and cannot change it on a whim. It simply isn't the case that all can agree to extend.
Extending the article 50 deadline would be incredibly straightforward with no significant changes in UK law required:

1. The European Council can decide to extend the article 50 period 'in agreement with the member state'.

Article 50 said:
The Treaties shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of entry into force of the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after the notification referred to in paragraph 2, unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned, unanimously decides to extend this period.
2. The Withdrawal Act includes a simple mechanism to allow 'exit day' to be changed in response:

Withdrawl Act said:
A Minister of the Crown may by regulations—
(a)amend the definition of “exit day” in subsection (1) to ensure that the day and time specified in the definition are the day and time that the Treaties are to cease to apply to the United Kingdom
As I understand it your point two only applies if an agreement has been reached with the EU over leaving and passed as a bill in parliament and more time is needed to enact it. With respect to point number one. The agreement to extend Art50 has to be agreed with the EU and by secondary legislation in Parliament to include extending the date. It cannot be done purely by the government.
The whole thing has undergone so many changes though it is difficult to ascertain the current position...
The Withdrawal Act is already UK law and it includes a mechanism to allow 'a minister of the crown' to amend the exit date. I don't see anything in the text that makes this conditional on a deal having been reached.

Extension of a50 requires a unanimous decision by the EU council. It is not difficult to see that this might be possible and that it could happen very quickly. Parliament does not legislate on international treaties, so no 'secondary legislation' is required.

The international treaties and the Withdrawal Act sit separately, one under international law, the second under UK law. The exit date acts as a trigger point between them.


Vanden Saab

1,585 posts

12 months

Tuesday 22nd January
quotequote all
Elysium said:
The Withdrawal Act is already UK law and it includes a mechanism to allow 'a minister of the crown' to amend the exit date. I don't see anything in the text that makes this conditional on a deal having been reached.

Extension of a50 requires a unanimous decision by the EU council. It is not difficult to see that this might be possible and that it could happen very quickly. Parliament does not legislate on international treaties, so no 'secondary legislation' is required.

The international treaties and the Withdrawal Act sit separately, one under international law, the second under UK law. The exit date acts as a trigger point between them.
This seems to suggest otherwise ….. http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/docum...

Escapegoat

3,897 posts

73 months

Tuesday 22nd January
quotequote all
Elysium said:
Extension of a50 requires a unanimous decision by the EU council. It is not difficult to see that this might be possible and that it could happen very quickly.
Really? Extending opens a new can of worms.

Some EU countries - unfettered by the nice, simple trade benefits that Germany sees - will want something in return for agreeing to an extension. Something political to help their own popularity. Maybe Spain wants some aspect of Gibraltar back on the negotiating table. Etc.
Advertisement

Elysium

2,200 posts

125 months

Tuesday 22nd January
quotequote all
Vanden Saab said:
Elysium said:
The Withdrawal Act is already UK law and it includes a mechanism to allow 'a minister of the crown' to amend the exit date. I don't see anything in the text that makes this conditional on a deal having been reached.

Extension of a50 requires a unanimous decision by the EU council. It is not difficult to see that this might be possible and that it could happen very quickly. Parliament does not legislate on international treaties, so no 'secondary legislation' is required.

The international treaties and the Withdrawal Act sit separately, one under international law, the second under UK law. The exit date acts as a trigger point between them.
This seems to suggest otherwise ….. http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/docum...
That document fully supports the position I have set out.

Sections 3.5 and 4 note the mechanisms for the extension of a50 and the exit date, almost exactly as I have described.

It could be done very quickly and the secondary legislation in respect of the withdrawal act would not even need to go through parliament.

Elysium

2,200 posts

125 months

Tuesday 22nd January
quotequote all
Escapegoat said:
Elysium said:
Extension of a50 requires a unanimous decision by the EU council. It is not difficult to see that this might be possible and that it could happen very quickly.
Really? Extending opens a new can of worms.

Some EU countries - unfettered by the nice, simple trade benefits that Germany sees - will want something in return for agreeing to an extension. Something political to help their own popularity. Maybe Spain wants some aspect of Gibraltar back on the negotiating table. Etc.
https://www.express.co.uk/videos/572981/EU-to-use-powers-to-extend-Brexit-deadline-claims-expert

amusingduck

3,781 posts

74 months

Tuesday 22nd January
quotequote all
Elysium said:
Escapegoat said:
Elysium said:
Extension of a50 requires a unanimous decision by the EU council. It is not difficult to see that this might be possible and that it could happen very quickly.
Really? Extending opens a new can of worms.

Some EU countries - unfettered by the nice, simple trade benefits that Germany sees - will want something in return for agreeing to an extension. Something political to help their own popularity. Maybe Spain wants some aspect of Gibraltar back on the negotiating table. Etc.
https://www.express.co.uk/videos/572981/EU-to-use-powers-to-extend-Brexit-deadline-claims-expert
That's only half of the equation though, isn't it?

My understanding is that either A50 expiring, or the withdrawl act coming into force, will result in our EU membership ending. A50 by graceful means, Withdrawal act by treaty breach.

How does extending A50 stop our membership being terminated by withdrawal act treaty breach?

Escapegoat

3,897 posts

73 months

Tuesday 22nd January
quotequote all
Elysium said:
So does it need unanimity or not?

Elysium

2,200 posts

125 months

Tuesday 22nd January
quotequote all
amusingduck said:
Elysium said:
Escapegoat said:
Elysium said:
Extension of a50 requires a unanimous decision by the EU council. It is not difficult to see that this might be possible and that it could happen very quickly.
Really? Extending opens a new can of worms.

Some EU countries - unfettered by the nice, simple trade benefits that Germany sees - will want something in return for agreeing to an extension. Something political to help their own popularity. Maybe Spain wants some aspect of Gibraltar back on the negotiating table. Etc.
https://www.express.co.uk/videos/572981/EU-to-use-powers-to-extend-Brexit-deadline-claims-expert
That's only half of the equation though, isn't it?

My understanding is that either A50 expiring, or the withdrawl act coming into force, will result in our EU membership ending. A50 by graceful means, Withdrawal act by treaty breach.

How does extending A50 stop our membership being terminated by withdrawal act treaty breach?
The Withdrawal Act has no impact on our membership or compliance with EU treaties. It simply writes EU Law into UK Law on 'exit day'. There is no 'withdrawal act treaty breach'.

The timescale in article 50 is the only thing that is relevant to our membership of the EU. If that is extended, our membership continues.





amusingduck

3,781 posts

74 months

Tuesday 22nd January
quotequote all
Elysium said:
amusingduck said:
Elysium said:
Escapegoat said:
Elysium said:
Extension of a50 requires a unanimous decision by the EU council. It is not difficult to see that this might be possible and that it could happen very quickly.
Really? Extending opens a new can of worms.

Some EU countries - unfettered by the nice, simple trade benefits that Germany sees - will want something in return for agreeing to an extension. Something political to help their own popularity. Maybe Spain wants some aspect of Gibraltar back on the negotiating table. Etc.
https://www.express.co.uk/videos/572981/EU-to-use-powers-to-extend-Brexit-deadline-claims-expert
That's only half of the equation though, isn't it?

My understanding is that either A50 expiring, or the withdrawl act coming into force, will result in our EU membership ending. A50 by graceful means, Withdrawal act by treaty breach.

How does extending A50 stop our membership being terminated by withdrawal act treaty breach?
The Withdrawal Act has no impact on our membership or compliance with EU treaties. It simply writes EU Law into UK Law on 'exit day'. There is no 'withdrawal act treaty breach'.

The timescale in article 50 is the only thing that is relevant to our membership of the EU. If that is extended, our membership continues.
Withdrawal Act said:
The European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 (c. 16) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that provides for repealing the European Communities Act 1972, and for Parliamentary approval of the withdrawal agreement being negotiated between HM Government and the European Union.
European Communities Act 1972 said:
The Act provided for the incorporation into UK law of the whole of European Community law and its "acquis communautaire": its Treaties, Regulations and Directives, together with judgments of the European Court of Justice.

By the Act, Community Law (subsequently European Union Law) became binding on all legislation passed by the UK Parliament (and also upon the UK's devolved administrations—the Northern Ireland Assembly, Scottish Parliament and National Assembly for Wales—although none of these institutions existed at the time of the passing of the Act). Arguably the most significant statute to be passed by the Heath government of 1970-74, the Act is also one of the most significant UK constitutional statutes ever passed.

The act has been significantly amended from its original form, incorporating the changes wrought by the Single European Act, the Maastricht Treaty, the Amsterdam Treaty, the Nice Treaty, and the Treaty of Lisbon.

On 13 July 2017, the then Brexit Secretary, David Davis, introduced what became the European Union (Withdrawal) Act to Parliament which, as enacted, makes provision for repealing the 1972 Act on "exit day", defined as 29 March 2019 (at 11 pm).
What am I missing? No ECA1972, EU law is no longer binding, no?

Murph7355

21,283 posts

194 months

Tuesday 22nd January
quotequote all
Elysium said:
The Withdrawal Act has no impact on our membership or compliance with EU treaties. It simply writes EU Law into UK Law on 'exit day'. There is no 'withdrawal act treaty breach'.

The timescale in article 50 is the only thing that is relevant to our membership of the EU. If that is extended, our membership continues.
AIUI the Withdrawal Act also means the ECJ has no further oversight after "exit day" - we don't just transfer all the laws over and leave everything else the same (what would be the point in that). So am pretty sure it does have a bearing on our membership of the EU.

Whether "exit day" can be changed really quickly...I guess we'll see in the next 60 days or so.

Extending Art50, no matter what the minimal text says, has already been noted by the EU as needing unanimous agreement by the member states. They have already said they won't extend it without good reason, the sub-text of that being a GE or another vote on membership. Rescinding it is different (in every way!).

Of course it's quite possible that everything said to date by politicians on both sides is bks - man made the rules, man can unmake them. But then that pretty much torpedoes the whole EU argument on most topics to date. And it also leaves our political classes in a bit of a pickle - they voted for the ref, they voted for the Withdrawal Bill (and all the twists and turns it went through - including being firm on "exit day"). There will be a price to pay for pissing about now. The time for that was over a year ago.

Mark Benson

4,952 posts

207 months

Tuesday 22nd January
quotequote all
Murph7355 said:
Extending Art50, no matter what the minimal text says, has already been noted by the EU as needing unanimous agreement by the member states. They have already said they won't extend it without good reason, the sub-text of that being a GE or another vote on membership. Rescinding it is different (in every way!).
There's also the little problem of EU elections in May, member states need to return MEPs by June IIRC. In February last year, the European Parliament voted to decrease the number of MEPs from 751 to 705 following Brexit.

So either we'd need to find a way to remain in the EU with no MEPs (and I would guess no voting rights, which if it wasn't end-dated wouldn't be popular, for good reason) or find a way to reverse the vote on reduction, have an election and return MEPs by june and have them in place until A50 comes into effect again and we leave.

Tricky.

Elysium

2,200 posts

125 months

Tuesday 22nd January
quotequote all
amusingduck said:
Elysium said:
amusingduck said:
Elysium said:
Escapegoat said:
Elysium said:
Extension of a50 requires a unanimous decision by the EU council. It is not difficult to see that this might be possible and that it could happen very quickly.
Really? Extending opens a new can of worms.

Some EU countries - unfettered by the nice, simple trade benefits that Germany sees - will want something in return for agreeing to an extension. Something political to help their own popularity. Maybe Spain wants some aspect of Gibraltar back on the negotiating table. Etc.
https://www.express.co.uk/videos/572981/EU-to-use-powers-to-extend-Brexit-deadline-claims-expert
That's only half of the equation though, isn't it?

My understanding is that either A50 expiring, or the withdrawl act coming into force, will result in our EU membership ending. A50 by graceful means, Withdrawal act by treaty breach.

How does extending A50 stop our membership being terminated by withdrawal act treaty breach?
The Withdrawal Act has no impact on our membership or compliance with EU treaties. It simply writes EU Law into UK Law on 'exit day'. There is no 'withdrawal act treaty breach'.

The timescale in article 50 is the only thing that is relevant to our membership of the EU. If that is extended, our membership continues.
Withdrawal Act said:
The European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 (c. 16) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that provides for repealing the European Communities Act 1972, and for Parliamentary approval of the withdrawal agreement being negotiated between HM Government and the European Union.
European Communities Act 1972 said:
The Act provided for the incorporation into UK law of the whole of European Community law and its "acquis communautaire": its Treaties, Regulations and Directives, together with judgments of the European Court of Justice.

By the Act, Community Law (subsequently European Union Law) became binding on all legislation passed by the UK Parliament (and also upon the UK's devolved administrations—the Northern Ireland Assembly, Scottish Parliament and National Assembly for Wales—although none of these institutions existed at the time of the passing of the Act). Arguably the most significant statute to be passed by the Heath government of 1970-74, the Act is also one of the most significant UK constitutional statutes ever passed.

The act has been significantly amended from its original form, incorporating the changes wrought by the Single European Act, the Maastricht Treaty, the Amsterdam Treaty, the Nice Treaty, and the Treaty of Lisbon.

On 13 July 2017, the then Brexit Secretary, David Davis, introduced what became the European Union (Withdrawal) Act to Parliament which, as enacted, makes provision for repealing the 1972 Act on "exit day", defined as 29 March 2019 (at 11 pm).
What am I missing? No ECA1972, EU law is no longer binding, no?
You are mixing up 'international treaties', which are binding legal agreements between countries and 'Acts of Parliament', which are the basis for UK legislation.

The Govt enters into treaties and Parliament creates legislation that aligns them with our law.

The a50 process relates to our international treaties with the EU. That process dictates the date our membership ends. The Withdrawal Act is purely a response to that.

In any event, this is something of a moot point as secondary legislation to change the exit date could be put in place very quickly.

There is no chance that the two processes will end up with different dates.


Escapegoat

3,897 posts

73 months

Wednesday 23rd January
quotequote all
Escapegoat said:
Elysium said:
Extension of a50 requires a unanimous decision by the EU council. It is not difficult to see that this might be possible and that it could happen very quickly.
Really? Extending opens a new can of worms.

Some EU countries - unfettered by the nice, simple trade benefits that Germany sees - will want something in return for agreeing to an extension. Something political to help their own popularity. Maybe Spain wants some aspect of Gibraltar back on the negotiating table. Etc.
And, right on cue, an example of the "what's in it for us" aggro that's ahead for intra-EU negotiations ... https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/01/23/sp...

Elysium

2,200 posts

125 months

Wednesday 23rd January
quotequote all
Escapegoat said:
Escapegoat said:
Elysium said:
Extension of a50 requires a unanimous decision by the EU council. It is not difficult to see that this might be possible and that it could happen very quickly.
Really? Extending opens a new can of worms.

Some EU countries - unfettered by the nice, simple trade benefits that Germany sees - will want something in return for agreeing to an extension. Something political to help their own popularity. Maybe Spain wants some aspect of Gibraltar back on the negotiating table. Etc.
And, right on cue, an example of the "what's in it for us" aggro that's ahead for intra-EU negotiations ... https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/01/23/sp...
Interesting. I guess it is human nature that people will attempt to capitalise on our weakness if 'no deal' actually happens.

The EU would have full control over any decisions around temporary arrangements to reduce disruption and I am sure some people will want to use that to their advantage.

Escapegoat

3,897 posts

73 months

Wednesday 23rd January
quotequote all
Elysium said:
Interesting. I guess it is human nature that people will attempt to capitalise on our weakness if 'no deal' actually happens.

The EU would have full control over any decisions around temporary arrangements to reduce disruption and I am sure some people will want to use that to their advantage.
It's not just our weakness. It's also Germany's; populists in 'lesser' EU countries get instant leverage if unanimity is required.

Not just countries, either. If an EU country's assent has to be ratified locally, there's a whole extra bag of spanners available to throw in the works. Remember that the Walloonia regional government blocked the whole EU-Canada CETA trade deal until it got what it wanted.

JagLover

24,732 posts

173 months

Saturday 26th January
quotequote all
Telegraphs lead article today is that Tory donors are withholding donations as long as May remains PM.

One consideration overlooked in discussions of how each party would fare in a snap election is how ready each of them are for it. If the Tories are short on funds then they will not be well placed, ignoring other considerations like a fractured party.

Halb

45,850 posts

121 months

Saturday 26th January
quotequote all
The talking heads on PL this week mentioned how in the background there are preparations going on for a possible election.
Maybot may not really want to win the next election so much?

techiedave

5,533 posts

48 months

Saturday 26th January
quotequote all
Halb said:
The talking heads on PL this week mentioned how in the background there are preparations going on for a possible election.
Maybot may not really want to win the next election so much?
She has stated that she will not go into the next election as leader