How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 9)

How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 9)

Author
Discussion

Amateurish

5,824 posts

161 months

Friday 15th March
quotequote all
psi310398 said:
Amateurish said:
In my opinion, the DUP (and therefore the ERG) will get behind May's deal on the basis of Cox's new legal advice that we can exit the backstop unilaterally.

That should be enough to get it over the line.
The DUP might, just might, change their minds but the ERG lawyers have already shot down the new (and very thin) Cox line of argument.
Ah, I was not aware. I thought this was all JRM's idea?

don'tbesilly

7,171 posts

102 months

Friday 15th March
quotequote all
Amateurish said:
andymadmak said:
rolleyes

Do keep up at the back! hehe
The Lib Dems DID NOT stand on a manifesto pledge to remain (much to my chagrin). Their manifesto was for a referendum on the deal.

In my opinion, they should have stood on the basis of cancel brexit. In any event, everyone seems to think they did.
The second referendum manifesto pledge coupled with Farron's stated aims was akin to having a manifesto pledge to Remain, whilst it wasn't explicit (Farron was), the perception would be to cancel Brexit.

psi310398

2,589 posts

142 months

Friday 15th March
quotequote all
PurpleMoonlight said:
psi310398 said:
See today's Telegraph. Not sure I'm allowed to link.
Please do.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/03/14/exclusive-geoffrey-cox-legal-advice-theresa-may-hopes-will-save/

mattmurdock

1,675 posts

172 months

Friday 15th March
quotequote all
PurpleMoonlight said:
What new advice?
That the UK can use Article 62 of the Vienna Convention as a legal basis to unilaterally withdraw from the backstop.

Essentially, rather than just relying on the joint interpretive instrument and having to prove bad faith, we claim that the EU holding us in the backstop is an unforeseeable change of circumstance and therefore invoke Article 62 to withdraw.

Which is kind of like getting out of an exam by blowing up the exam hall. It is also almost guaranteed to fail, as attempts to invoke Article 62 in the past have. If the fall of the Soviet Union was not regarded as an unforeseeable change of circumstance, I think we may have trouble arguing that the backstop is.

PurpleMoonlight

14,845 posts

96 months

Friday 15th March
quotequote all
psi310398 said:
Ta.

That's paywalled but I found a summary elsewhere.

I note prominent leavers have already rubbished it though.
Advertisement

paulrockliffe

8,060 posts

166 months

Friday 15th March
quotequote all
alfie2244 said:
Don't you think UKIP may be moving that way and leaving a hole for a new"not so far" right party to fill.....perhaps with Brexit as it's main, if not only issue?
Maybe even with Brexit in it's name.

This smearing of people that voted for Brexit as far right and what not is pretty pathetic.

jonnyb

2,356 posts

191 months

Friday 15th March
quotequote all
mattmurdock said:
PurpleMoonlight said:
What new advice?
That the UK can use Article 62 of the Vienna Convention as a legal basis to unilaterally withdraw from the backstop.

Essentially, rather than just relying on the joint interpretive instrument and having to prove bad faith, we claim that the EU holding us in the backstop is an unforeseeable change of circumstance and therefore invoke Article 62 to withdraw.

Which is kind of like getting out of an exam by blowing up the exam hall. It is also almost guaranteed to fail, as attempts to invoke Article 62 in the past have. If the fall of the Soviet Union was not regarded as an unforeseeable change of circumstance, I think we may have trouble arguing that the backstop is.
It might give the ERG a ladder to climb down, but I think everyone knows the advice is wrong, and invoking that article will not work.

paulrockliffe

8,060 posts

166 months

Friday 15th March
quotequote all
jonnyb said:
mattmurdock said:
PurpleMoonlight said:
What new advice?
That the UK can use Article 62 of the Vienna Convention as a legal basis to unilaterally withdraw from the backstop.

Essentially, rather than just relying on the joint interpretive instrument and having to prove bad faith, we claim that the EU holding us in the backstop is an unforeseeable change of circumstance and therefore invoke Article 62 to withdraw.

Which is kind of like getting out of an exam by blowing up the exam hall. It is also almost guaranteed to fail, as attempts to invoke Article 62 in the past have. If the fall of the Soviet Union was not regarded as an unforeseeable change of circumstance, I think we may have trouble arguing that the backstop is.
It might give the ERG a ladder to climb down, but I think everyone knows the advice is wrong, and invoking that article will not work.
The problem with all these ideas and mechanisms is that if they really worked legally then there'd be no reason for the EU not to include their effects in the WA explicitly. I'm sure you can work out why they haven't.

I don't think much of the ERG is really looking for a ladder, they're looking to leave the EU.

PurpleMoonlight

14,845 posts

96 months

Friday 15th March
quotequote all
mattmurdock said:
That the UK can use Article 62 of the Vienna Convention as a legal basis to unilaterally withdraw from the backstop.

Essentially, rather than just relying on the joint interpretive instrument and having to prove bad faith, we claim that the EU holding us in the backstop is an unforeseeable change of circumstance and therefore invoke Article 62 to withdraw.

Which is kind of like getting out of an exam by blowing up the exam hall. It is also almost guaranteed to fail, as attempts to invoke Article 62 in the past have. If the fall of the Soviet Union was not regarded as an unforeseeable change of circumstance, I think we may have trouble arguing that the backstop is.
Except it is publicly recorded everywhere that he previously said we could be locked in so 'unforeseeable' would appear to be somewhere between an embellishment and a down right lie.

biggrin

don'tbesilly

7,171 posts

102 months

Friday 15th March
quotequote all
mattmurdock said:
PurpleMoonlight said:
What new advice?
That the UK can use Article 62 of the Vienna Convention as a legal basis to unilaterally withdraw from the backstop.

Essentially, rather than just relying on the joint interpretive instrument and having to prove bad faith, we claim that the EU holding us in the backstop is an unforeseeable change of circumstance and therefore invoke Article 62 to withdraw.

Which is kind of like getting out of an exam by blowing up the exam hall. It is also almost guaranteed to fail, as attempts to invoke Article 62 in the past have. If the fall of the Soviet Union was not regarded as an unforeseeable change of circumstance, I think we may have trouble arguing that the backstop is.
Yet the ERG will get the blame for voting down May's deal for the third time, because Cox is desperate to get the DUP onside, and then the ERG will follow suit.

I'll wager that if the deal gets voted down by the ERG/DUP, the media will then blame same for it all falling to pieces.


Vanden Saab

1,877 posts

13 months

Friday 15th March
quotequote all
psi310398 said:
As we have our crystal balls out, might one possible unforeseen consequence of entering into the WA or remaining locked to the EU be to provoke the rise of an English independence movement?

The only legal unilateral way out of the backstop that I can see is for England to leave the UK.

One of the arguments from the time of the Scottish Referendum was that if it was OK for Scotland to have a referendum to leave the UK, then surely it was equally possible for England to do the same.

Following the logic of this (and the EU's pronouncements at the time) rUK would be Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales (if they didn't go with England) and it (rUK) would continue to hold the legal obligations to observe the backstop etc.

At the same time, NI could be offered a referendum (per the GFA) on whether to unite with Ireland or, failing that, join with England or stay with rUK.

But, assuming a positive vote, England (as a "new" nation) would be free and clear of any obligations to the EU.
What a great idea.

paulrockliffe

8,060 posts

166 months

Friday 15th March
quotequote all
If May's deal does get through I doubt that'll be the great outcome that May thinks it will be. To some extent it's the easy option for Parliament now, but does anyone really believe that something that has little support with the public and was thrashed repeatedly in Parliament has any legitimacy? I don't think even putting it to a third vote has legitimacy given Erskine May prohibits another go anyway.

It won't survive an electoral cycle if it passes, it just prolongs the pissing about.

paulrockliffe

8,060 posts

166 months

Friday 15th March
quotequote all
Vanden Saab said:
What a great idea.
I'm in. You have my vote.

B'stard Child

17,114 posts

185 months

Friday 15th March
quotequote all
Isaac Hunt said:
Shall we have a sweepstake to see who can guess the volume number of this topic at the time we actually get Brexit?
Infinity..........................

Basically because Brexit will never happen biggrin

don'tbesilly

7,171 posts

102 months

Friday 15th March
quotequote all
Vanden Saab said:
psi310398 said:
As we have our crystal balls out, might one possible unforeseen consequence of entering into the WA or remaining locked to the EU be to provoke the rise of an English independence movement?

The only legal unilateral way out of the backstop that I can see is for England to leave the UK.

One of the arguments from the time of the Scottish Referendum was that if it was OK for Scotland to have a referendum to leave the UK, then surely it was equally possible for England to do the same.

Following the logic of this (and the EU's pronouncements at the time) rUK would be Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales (if they didn't go with England) and it (rUK) would continue to hold the legal obligations to observe the backstop etc.

At the same time, NI could be offered a referendum (per the GFA) on whether to unite with Ireland or, failing that, join with England or stay with rUK.

But, assuming a positive vote, England (as a "new" nation) would be free and clear of any obligations to the EU.
What a great idea.
I like it, Scotland seems desperate to get away, so a vote to help them on their way would be gratefully received, can you imagine never having to listen to Sturgeon ever again, it would be like a divorcee never having to listen to the ex ever again, sheer bliss I'd guess

Vanden Saab

1,877 posts

13 months

Friday 15th March
quotequote all
don'tbesilly said:
Vanden Saab said:
psi310398 said:
As we have our crystal balls out, might one possible unforeseen consequence of entering into the WA or remaining locked to the EU be to provoke the rise of an English independence movement?

The only legal unilateral way out of the backstop that I can see is for England to leave the UK.

One of the arguments from the time of the Scottish Referendum was that if it was OK for Scotland to have a referendum to leave the UK, then surely it was equally possible for England to do the same.

Following the logic of this (and the EU's pronouncements at the time) rUK would be Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales (if they didn't go with England) and it (rUK) would continue to hold the legal obligations to observe the backstop etc.

At the same time, NI could be offered a referendum (per the GFA) on whether to unite with Ireland or, failing that, join with England or stay with rUK.

But, assuming a positive vote, England (as a "new" nation) would be free and clear of any obligations to the EU.
What a great idea.
I like it, Scotland seems desperate to get away, so a vote to help them on their way would be gratefully received, can you imagine never having to listen to Sturgeon ever again, it would be like a divorcee never having to listen to the ex ever again, sheer bliss I'd guess
Not only that but they could blame their new found poverty on us....rofl

psi310398

2,589 posts

142 months

Friday 15th March
quotequote all
don'tbesilly said:
Yet the ERG will get the blame for voting down May's deal for the third time, because Cox is desperate to get the DUP onside, and then the ERG will follow suit.

I'll wager that if the deal gets voted down by the ERG/DUP, the media will then blame same for it all falling to pieces.
Or credit.

The WA is pretty universally seen as a turd. And full membership is clearly preferable to colony status.

I were ERG, I'd rather remain (revoke A50) and cause trouble from within than sign up indefinitely to the provisions of the WA and associated bits of paper. There's nothing stopping the running of a 'treason of the clerks' campaign and going for Brexit again after a GE, possibly in coalition with TBP. It took the best part of 50 years to get the last referendum - taking another ten and causing Brussels any amount of problems in the meantime does not seem terribly unattractive, compared to the WA.

And whatever happens, including a clean departure on the 29th, there will be unfinished business. Better to have open options than closed ones IMV.

mattmurdock

1,675 posts

172 months

Friday 15th March
quotequote all
don'tbesilly said:
Vanden Saab said:
psi310398 said:
As we have our crystal balls out, might one possible unforeseen consequence of entering into the WA or remaining locked to the EU be to provoke the rise of an English independence movement?

The only legal unilateral way out of the backstop that I can see is for England to leave the UK.

One of the arguments from the time of the Scottish Referendum was that if it was OK for Scotland to have a referendum to leave the UK, then surely it was equally possible for England to do the same.

Following the logic of this (and the EU's pronouncements at the time) rUK would be Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales (if they didn't go with England) and it (rUK) would continue to hold the legal obligations to observe the backstop etc.

At the same time, NI could be offered a referendum (per the GFA) on whether to unite with Ireland or, failing that, join with England or stay with rUK.

But, assuming a positive vote, England (as a "new" nation) would be free and clear of any obligations to the EU.
What a great idea.
I like it, Scotland seems desperate to get away, so a vote to help them on their way would be gratefully received, can you imagine never having to listen to Sturgeon ever again, it would be like a divorcee never having to listen to the ex ever again, sheer bliss I'd guess
Brilliant, we'll solve the problem of the backstop breaking up the UK and forcing Irish re-unification by breaking up the UK and forcing Irish re-unification.

What an absolute winner, why on earth has no-one thought of it before? wink

Alfa numeric

2,939 posts

118 months

Friday 15th March
quotequote all
I know this has been quoted multiple times but...

biggles330d said:
I'd love for this to be pushed to a General Election and the Lib Dems come riding in on a single issue policy of withdrawing A50 and abandoning Brexit altogether.

With near 50% of the population having voted to remain, which is a pretty clear and easy to understand concept, and 50% voting to exit but on a total rainbow of flavours that were never defined at the outset, have never been defined since and appear to be at the root of the current chaos as nobody can agree, from Hard Exit no deal to a deal based Exit as close to remaining as makes little difference apart from loosing the ability to influence anything but having some control of immigration.. the Lib Dems could walk a general election with a massive majority as the 'leave' vote was split between a disgruntled electorate who have lost all trust and faith in the Conservatives for creating this whole mess and the horror filled prospect of Corbyn riding in on his bicycle and loony left ideology putting the death nail into the country.

I'd vote Lib Dem every day of the week for that. They couldn't do much damage in 5 years and we'd rid ourselves of this curse of Brexit on a properly democratic decision... a General Election.
People seem to think that everyone who voted to remain holds the same view. Whilst there aren't as many differing views as the leave side, there were some. I met someone who was going to vote remain and wanted closer integration- removal of the op-outs, adopt the Euro, Schengen, the whole nine yards. I voted remain but hoped that Cameron would continue his efforts to reform the institution. Conversely on the leave side I knew people who voted leave as a protest vote and didn't expect it to win, others who wanted a return to the EEC and others who wanted something similar to the WA. Presumably there are others who voted leave and wanted no deal, and others who were so anti EU they didn't care if the UK leaving cost Gibraltar, NI and Scotland. I think the only reason the divisions in the leave vote are so stark is because of the result of the referendum.

It's true that the second referendum campaign seems to be a Remain campaign. This is probably due to people who voted leave assuming that everyone holds the same view they do and don't think it's necessary. Personally I'm inclined to support it because of the political mess the country is in- the result was so close that a clear direction wasn't immediately obvious, and this was only increased by the outcome of the General Election. Any second referendum would have to address this by being much clearer- whatever wins out of remain/WA/no deal, that's an end to it. The problem is there doesn't seem to be a question that can produce this certainty. In all honesty I think a second referendum would probably produce another vote for leave, only hopefully with a preferred direction out of the mess we're currently in. I still won't like it but at least there would be agreement rather than the infighting we're currently stuck in.



Nickgnome

1,560 posts

28 months

Friday 15th March
quotequote all
alfie2244 said:
Nickgnome said:
I think if a far right party sprung up at least we would be able to see the real mindset of what I hope would be a few of the population but probably in reality many more.

Visibility of these people is a good thing.
Don't you think UKIP may be moving that way and leaving a hole for a new"not so far" right party to fill.....perhaps with Brexit as it's main, if not only issue?
I really do not care. I would never vote for a single issue party. Seems like a pretty dumb thing to do.