How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 15)

[paulrockliffe]

Now we're being sued because our plant health import rules are more strict that the EU's.....

[B'stard Child]

techguyone said:

I agree, I think Gina Miller needs an OBE

I agree I supported her legal challenge - I wanted the government to do it right - nothing would be worse than a legal challenge after the event reversing the process - I don't care about her motives for bring the challenge (or her backers motives either) it was the right thing to do for a whole range of reasons

[TriumphStag3.0V8]

B'stard Child said:

I agree I supported her legal challenge - I wanted the government to do it right - nothing would be worse than a legal challenge after the event reversing the process - I don't care about her motives for bring the challenge (or her backers motives either) it was the right thing to do for a whole range of reasons

Its ironic that her actions pretty much lead to a harder Brexit than might have been the case.

[hutchst]

The (first) Gina Miller decision wasn't about Brexit, it was about the separation of powers in our Constitution.

[TriumphStag3.0V8]

hutchst said:

The (first) Gina Miller decision wasn't about Brexit, it was about the separation of powers in our Constitution.

Of course it was.

However that thinly veiled excuse didnt last long did it?

[turbobloke]

TriumphStag3.0V8 said:

hutchst said:

The (first) Gina Miller decision wasn't about Brexit, it was about the separation of powers in our Constitution.

Of course it was.

However that thinly veiled excuse didnt last long did it?

Transparent excuses are transparent but appealing to grieving remainers as there's nothing else available.

[gooner1]

Stay in Bed Instead said:

Scolmore said:

Perhaps an account rename on the 1st Jan to CAVOK?

Changing name upsets some here though.

Sounds like another one of your fibs, whoever you are this week.

[turbobloke]

gooner1 said:

Stay in Bed Instead said:

Scolmore said:

Perhaps an account rename on the 1st Jan to CAVOK?

Changing name upsets some here though.

Sounds like another one of your fibs, whoever you are this week.

It's not just Him with a capital H working in mysterious ways

[anonymous-user]

paulrockliffe said:

Now we're being sued because our plant health import rules are more strict that the EU's.....

The SM is all bout having the same rules applied everywhere with that EU control constantly expanding to remove member states ability to self regulate. One of the benefits of Brexit will be that the UK can have higher standards without the EU being able to force them lower. This is one of the important aspects of the level playing field agreements, UK is not intent in lowering standards, it often has higher thresholds than the EU minimum.

[Borghetto]

Jimboka said:

Great news
0.001% of what we lose, when on WTO terms with our closest neighbours ?
The sunny uplands

You come across as a complete moron, but maybe you can explain how we are going to lose 99.999% of our trade with the EU. Have you thought about upping sticks and pissing off to your beloved eu like MrrT who seems to also hate the country of his birth. Where you see only doom and gloom, many people see opportunity. I imagine you work in the stores dept of an outfit that thinks it can't compete in a global market and your low grade job might be at risk. Don't worry the welfare state will still be there when your employer tosses you into the waste paper bin of unemployable people. You are the 2020's equivalent of a conscientious objector.

[Biggy Stardust]

TriumphStag3.0V8 said:

Deleted. It is just not worth arguing with an inbecile.

Preserved for posterity & petty amusement.

[TriumphStag3.0V8]

Biggy Stardust said:

Preserved for posterity & petty amusement.

Whatever floats your boat son.

Will taking the piss out of an imbecile be permitted?

[B'stard Child]

Borghetto said:

Jimboka said:

Great news
0.001% of what we lose, when on WTO terms with our closest neighbours ?
The sunny uplands

You come across as a complete moron, but maybe you can explain how we are going to lose 99.999% of our trade with the EU. Have you thought about upping sticks and pissing off to your beloved eu like MrrT who seems to also hate the country of his birth. Where you see only doom and gloom, many people see opportunity. I imagine you work in the stores dept of an outfit that thinks it can't compete in a global market and your low grade job might be at risk. Don't worry the welfare state will still be there when your employer tosses you into the waste paper bin of unemployable people. You are the 2020's equivalent of a conscientious objector.

Don’t feed the troll/hit and run merchant - it’s pointless (with newly sourced Irish passport by grandparents rights)

[anonymous-user]

Mrr T said:

jsf said:

Mrr T said:

jsf said:

Mrr T said:

As for the WA it contains almost no mention of the future relationship. So no the only country which has breached the WA is the UK. There will be some fun days in the courts.

How has the UK breached the WA?

I believe the IMB breaches the good faith provision of the WA. Should be fun to see the UK defence. Not sure BJ not reading or understanding the WA will be a good defence. The idiot defence does not normally work.

ECJ caselaw disagees. In starting the dispute process prior to the IMB becoming law and being used, the EU has broken its own law.

Please provide a link to the relevant case law.

Here you go.

https://verfassungsblog.de/a-draft-is-no-infringem...

[i4got]

jsf said:

Mrr T said:

jsf said:

Mrr T said:

jsf said:

Mrr T said:

As for the WA it contains almost no mention of the future relationship. So no the only country which has breached the WA is the UK. There will be some fun days in the courts.

How has the UK breached the WA?

I believe the IMB breaches the good faith provision of the WA. Should be fun to see the UK defence. Not sure BJ not reading or understanding the WA will be a good defence. The idiot defence does not normally work.

ECJ caselaw disagees. In starting the dispute process prior to the IMB becoming law and being used, the EU has broken its own law.

Please provide a link to the relevant case law.

Here you go.

https://verfassungsblog.de/a-draft-is-no-infringem...

Is that a mike drop I hear?

[anonymous-user]

jsf said:

ECJ caselaw disagees. In starting the dispute process prior to the IMB becoming law and being used, the EU has broken its own law.
Here you go.

https://verfassungsblog.de/a-draft-is-no-infringem...

Not correct.

That case is about "draft" provisions. The current situation involves agreed provisions, albeit they are conditional upon certain events. The concept of anticipatory breach is clear in law.

[Sway]

rockin said:

jsf said:

ECJ caselaw disagees. In starting the dispute process prior to the IMB becoming law and being used, the EU has broken its own law.
Here you go.

https://verfassungsblog.de/a-draft-is-no-infringem...

Not correct.

That case is about "draft" provisions. The current situation involves agreed provisions, albeit they are conditional upon certain events. The concept of anticipatory breach is clear in law.

When the dispute process was commenced, they were draft provisions, as the Bill was not Law.

[Mrr T]

jsf said:

Mrr T said:

jsf said:

Mrr T said:

jsf said:

Mrr T said:

As for the WA it contains almost no mention of the future relationship. So no the only country which has breached the WA is the UK. There will be some fun days in the courts.

How has the UK breached the WA?

I believe the IMB breaches the good faith provision of the WA. Should be fun to see the UK defence. Not sure BJ not reading or understanding the WA will be a good defence. The idiot defence does not normally work.

ECJ caselaw disagees. In starting the dispute process prior to the IMB becoming law and being used, the EU has broken its own law.

Please provide a link to the relevant case law.

Here you go.

https://verfassungsblog.de/a-draft-is-no-infringem...

That took you a few days. The problem with the opinion piece is its concentration on a case where a draft law cannot break EU law until it becomes law. That's fine because EU law does not normally contain a good faith provision.

The EU arguement is that just by publishing the IMB the UK may not have broken the WA provisions it seeks to change but it has broken the good faith provisions of the WA.

The UK can argue the case in court and see if the court agrees.

[anonymous-user]

Mrr T said:

That took you a few days. The problem with the opinion piece is its concentration on a case where a draft law cannot break EU law until it becomes law. That's fine because EU law does not normally contain a good faith provision.

The EU arguement is that just by publishing the IMB the UK may not have broken the WA provisions it seeks to change but it has broken the good faith provisions of the WA.

The UK can argue the case in court and see if the court agrees.

I couldn't remember where i read it, then remembered.

Maybe i should have just ignored your post, as you often do when queried.

[Mrr T]

jsf said:

Mrr T said:

That took you a few days. The problem with the opinion piece is its concentration on a case where a draft law cannot break EU law until it becomes law. That's fine because EU law does not normally contain a good faith provision.

The EU arguement is that just by publishing the IMB the UK may not have broken the WA provisions it seeks to change but it has broken the good faith provisions of the WA.

The UK can argue the case in court and see if the court agrees.

I couldn't remember where i read it, then remembered.

Maybe i should have just ignored your post, as you often do when queried.

My comment on the time was meant to be funny. Should have put a smiley.

I am sure I sometimes miss question. When there is a thread melt down I do skip pages.

Thanks for the link not sure it's right but we will see. Lots of socially distanced fun to come