BJ has not broken the WA yet.
At least not for a few more years, until the EU has tangible evidence to complain about.
It's so stupid that trying as I may, I can't see the benefit of this negotiating strategy.
Brexit, for once some facts.
- Thread starter flecc
- Start date
At least not for a few more years, until the EU has tangible evidence to complain about.
It's so stupid that trying as I may, I can't see the benefit of this negotiating strategy.
There is an argument that even putting forward the bill breaks the terms of the WA.
And the Ministerial Code requires adherence to the highest standards of propriety. Which (I'd argue) this debacle certainly doesn't.
Clearly the MC needs to be removed from PM's control and made independent. And given huge gnashers.
Last edited:
The government is going to allow large groups of people to gather so that they can kill animals for fun. Chinless and sexually inadequate men with enormous foreheads must be rejoicing the length and breadth of the country. At last, they will have something to give them an erection again.
And there was I thinking this was why Viagra was available.
While the home secretary insists that two families of four accidentally meeting and having a chat will be liable to a fine.
There might be some sort of trade deal with Japan. But it obviously isn't guaranteeing much...
For some reason HMP Sutton comes to mind as being the prison of choice for establishment figures. I hope his cell mate is a 22 stone meat head called Susan who likes playing Mummys & Daddys after lights out.
Which remind me of a joke. It goes something like, the 22 stone meat head asking the terrified new cell mate if he wants to be mummy or daddy. The terrified cell mate chooses daddy thinking it will be the lesser of the two atrocities. The 22 stone meat head says great, get over here and suck mummy’s cock.
"Theres no doubt Charlie behaves badly, but today he has been denied a fair trial". That's an ex wife with morals thats nearly as elastic as boris'For some reason HMP Sutton comes to mind as being the prison of choice for establishment figures. I hope his cell mate is a 22 stone meat head called Susan who likes playing Mummys & Daddys after lights out.
Which remind me of a joke. It goes something like, the 22 stone meat head asking the terrified new cell mate if he wants to be mummy or daddy. The terrified cell mate chooses daddy thinking it will be the lesser of the two atrocities. The 22 stone meat head says great, get over here and suck mummy’s cock.
For him the benefit is that he still thinks he'll get his own way, as he always has through life.
He can't accept different, hence the perversity of his attitudes.
.
the EU should not have made any threat (clear or veiled) about "UK listing as a 3rd country is not guaranteed" though.
That is just as stupid as BJ's single market bill.
They can simply require British foods sold in the EU to have appropriate declaration and labelling in case of no deal.
That is just as stupid as BJ's single market bill.
They can simply require British foods sold in the EU to have appropriate declaration and labelling in case of no deal.
It is a valid threat. The eu isnt under any obligation, legally or otherwise, to guarantee the UK's status ito access to the single market
We buy stuff from any countries not subject to international sanction.
Access to the Single Market is practically automatic, the issue of tariff is a separate issue.
The EU make two specific threats regarding NI:
1. to impose EU tariffs (and collect them subject to refunds later) on any goods coming into NI, including goods shipped from the UK. This is not going to be acceptable for goods coming from UK mainland. You can see why the DUP support the bill.
The role of the NI joint committee is to sort this out.
2. to impose EU standards on all goods entering NI. The UK wants NI to be a freeport. On this, the EU may have a strong point but I can't see UK government is going to concede without a fight.
Well certain EU lawyers would make the claim that even tabling an Act without using the built in dispute resolution processes,breached the Treaty.
they still can't sue until there is a material breach.
I can't see how, even in case of no deal.
If for example, the EU can't collect import duty on goods entering NI, what can it do?
Sue? Woosh, it seems that almost everyone on one side of this discussion is blind to the reality.
By even tabling the Act, the UK side have breached the Treaty. That voids the entire treaty, ..not a small bit in a limited sense ,but the full WA Treaty. And it is the EUs choice whether to let this stand. The UK Government is breaking an Act of its own Parliament. Things like that occasionally happen, but are Consitutional crises
nobody is talking about voiding the WA. Dispute resolutions are there for disputes like those arising from a no deal, where both sides can negotiate on variations to the treaty.
My point is, the UK needed the one year of transition. The EU is interested in long term relationship where its size can give it some advantage. The UK side only wants to start small then see later how the future shapes up.
My point is, the UK needed the one year of transition. The EU is interested in long term relationship where its size can give it some advantage. The UK side only wants to start small then see later how the future shapes up.
I think some people really are talking about undermining the WA with the possibility that it will be void.
Whether they are the people we need to listen to, the ones who can act, that is another matter.
that may be BJ but I don't think he is interested in that. He only needs to win enough concession for his Canada deal and I think he will get it.
This time, the UK does have more cards than before the WA.
As we have been saying all along
The EU will tell him what he can have
He will declare it is a victory
All the morons will cheer