Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 12848
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Wed Sep 09, 2020 12:35 pm

A101 wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
So you say: screw Northern Ireland,


Nope didn’t say that

Dutchy wrote:
ditch the Good Friday Agreement


I didn’t say that either

Dutchy wrote:
screw the UK economy (maximum damage because of trading on the worst possible terms).


You keep saying the UK economy is screwed, cant be much worse than we are now under a covid- induced economic coma


All of that is a consequence of your desire:
A101 wrote:
Ditch the WA in its entirety under the Vienna Convention I say and trade without a deal.


You cannot say that and than say you didn't take into account the consequences. At least I think you took that into account when making that statement, didn't you? I only pointed them out.
 
LJ
Posts: 5470
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 1999 8:28 pm

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Wed Sep 09, 2020 12:43 pm

For those who have some time to read the Internal Market Bill.

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/58-01/0177/20177.pdf

Judging by the initial comments, the UK indeed wants to reserve the right to do what it wants in NI. I'll read it later (have some work to do...)

Meanwhile, the GBPEUR rate is below 1.10.
 
LJ
Posts: 5470
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 1999 8:28 pm

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Wed Sep 09, 2020 12:48 pm

bennett123 wrote:
'The festival will open applications on Wednesday for individuals and organisations to create teams which will then be commissioned to come up with ideas for the event. Thirty teams, each receiving £100,000, will be chosen'.

So they are going to have a festival in 2022, but are looking for people to come up with ideas of what the festival should consist of.

Surely this is completely back to front.


Ideal opportunity to hand over money to friends (to bad the maximum is GBP 100k).

BTW Can only UK residents submit proposals?
 
frmrCapCadet
Posts: 5232
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Wed Sep 09, 2020 1:27 pm

Were NI wanting certain products from the UK, and merely wanting some special privileges regarding tariffs and facilitating entry I suspect that the UK and EU would come up with a speedy process to make it happen. A small commission of EU/UK members would need assurance that such goods were only for NI, and leakage into ROI/EU would be minimal and inconsequential. That does not seem to be the intent of Boris in making these changes.
 
marcelh
Posts: 1630
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2013 12:43 pm

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Wed Sep 09, 2020 1:59 pm

frmrCapCadet wrote:
Were NI wanting certain products from the UK, and merely wanting some special privileges regarding tariffs and facilitating entry I suspect that the UK and EU would come up with a speedy process to make it happen. A small commission of EU/UK members would need assurance that such goods were only for NI, and leakage into ROI/EU would be minimal and inconsequential. That does not seem to be the intent of Boris in making these changes.

Boris wants to eat the cake and have it too.....
 
ltbewr
Posts: 15937
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Wed Sep 09, 2020 2:42 pm

Boris and his 'friends' keep mucking up Brexit for tor their selfish political reasons. The UK wants to modify the already set exit agreements with the EU over internal UK trade and with Northern Ireland, Ireland, EU trade. The EU, in particular the German's leader is very unhappy. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-5400348

What can they do ? Give up NI to become part of the ROI ? That wold be the best answer but is never going to happen.
 
User avatar
Francoflier
Posts: 6023
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2001 12:27 pm

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Wed Sep 09, 2020 3:22 pm

LJ wrote:
It seems the UK has some money left as it's going to spend GBP 120mn on a "Festival of Brexit". I've to say, the timing is perfect.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/sep/09/festival-of-brexit-organisers-launch-application-process


They should have organized a 'Brexit Festival' a few years back with people submitting their ideas on how to implement Brexit properly, because that government has absolutely no bloody clue what it's doing with it...
:laughing:
 
Reinhardt
Posts: 480
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2018 5:05 pm

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Wed Sep 09, 2020 3:37 pm

LJ wrote:

Ideal opportunity to hand over money to friends (to bad the maximum is GBP 100k).


This govenment has been busy giving free money to almost any friends they can find. In normal life this is abuse of public funds, but in the UK, it's just the new normal and nobody does anything.
 
Ertro
Posts: 201
Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2019 9:28 pm

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Wed Sep 09, 2020 3:44 pm

Just popped into my mind that UK financial sector thinks it can continue serving EU customers even after no-deal brexit relying on the goodwill from EU to declare equivalence of rules even in the case if rules are not the same and commit to keep that equivalence forever despite whatever UK government decides in the future. UK financial sector has voiced frustration that EU has not for several months for some reason not committed to declare equivalency forever.

Anybody want to guess is the UK financial sector going to get the equivalency-forever-commitment as a goodwill gesture from EU as they hope to get?
 
Klaus
Posts: 21638
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Wed Sep 09, 2020 3:46 pm

ltbewr wrote:
Boris and his 'friends' keep mucking up Brexit for tor their selfish political reasons. The UK wants to modify the already set exit agreements with the EU over internal UK trade and with Northern Ireland, Ireland, EU trade. The EU, in particular the German's leader is very unhappy. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-5400348

What can they do ? Give up NI to become part of the ROI ? That wold be the best answer but is never going to happen.

Your link doesn't work, but this seems to be the article you're referring to, right?
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-54 ... ting-story

I just see no reference to a german reaction there and I'm not aware of such a reaction yet, but it will come soon with the proposed text now public as the german government has the EU presidency now. But of course it is proper that Michel Barnier and Ursula von der Leyen are going first with their statements.
 
Klaus
Posts: 21638
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Wed Sep 09, 2020 3:57 pm

Ertro wrote:
Just popped into my mind that UK financial sector thinks it can continue serving EU customers even after no-deal brexit relying on the goodwill from EU to declare equivalence of rules even in the case if rules are not the same and commit to keep that equivalence forever despite whatever UK government decides in the future. UK financial sector has voiced frustration that EU has not for several months for some reason not committed to declare equivalency forever.

Anybody want to guess is the UK financial sector going to get the equivalency-forever-commitment as a goodwill gesture from EU as they hope to get?

In a word: No.

If BoJo keeps going the way he's doing now (no doubt puppeteered by Dominic Cummings as his nihilistic, anarchistic external brain), it is actually possible that the EU may withhold the equivalence declaration completely, but even in the best of cases it will be limited, temporary and at the unilateral discretion of the EU with the UK having no say in the matter, with the likelihood that the UK financial industry will see increasing demands for EU regulation compliance if they want to keep that valuable but fragile privilege.
 
User avatar
Grizzly410
Posts: 554
Joined: Sun May 10, 2015 8:38 pm

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Wed Sep 09, 2020 4:01 pm

Klaus wrote:
ltbewr wrote:
Boris and his 'friends' keep mucking up Brexit for tor their selfish political reasons. The UK wants to modify the already set exit agreements with the EU over internal UK trade and with Northern Ireland, Ireland, EU trade. The EU, in particular the German's leader is very unhappy. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-5400348

What can they do ? Give up NI to become part of the ROI ? That wold be the best answer but is never going to happen.

Your link doesn't work, but this seems to be the article you're referring to, right?
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-54 ... ting-story

I just see no reference to a german reaction there and I'm not aware of such a reaction yet, but it will come soon with the proposed text now public as the german government has the EU presidency now. But of course it is proper that Michel Barnier and Ursula von der Leyen are going first with their statements.


Ursula von der Leyen and Charles Michel already commented via Twitter.

@vonderleyen
Very concerned about announcements from the British government on its intentions to breach the Withdrawal Agreement. This would break international law and undermines trust.
Pacta sunt servanda = the foundation of prosperous future relations.

@eucopresident :
The Withdrawal Agreement was concuded and ratified by both sides, it has to be applied in full.
Breaking international law is not aceptable and does not create the confidence we need to build our future relationship. #Brexit
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 12848
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Wed Sep 09, 2020 4:06 pm

When you thought things could not get worse. With the adoption of this bill, we are back before the Withdraw agreement. So I guess von der Leyen will suspent negotiations until this bill is adopted or defeated in the House. It is utterly pointless to continue negotiations with this bill in the twilight.

A101 wrote:
No he hasn’t said that at all.

All he is doing from what I can see is putting a timeline on negotiations and if that is not forthcoming he intends to legislate where he has legal advice on certain sections of the WA. It then will go into dispute mechanism procedures to sort out initiate by the EU


You were wrong.
 
Klaus
Posts: 21638
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Wed Sep 09, 2020 4:18 pm

Grizzly410 wrote:
Ursula von der Leyen and Charles Michel already commented via Twitter.

Yes, but she speaks for the European Commission, not for Germany. That would be Angela Merkel.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 12848
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Wed Sep 09, 2020 4:24 pm

Klaus wrote:
Grizzly410 wrote:
Ursula von der Leyen and Charles Michel already commented via Twitter.

Yes, but she speaks for the European Commission, not for Germany. That would be Angela Merkel.


Correct. Merkel will react to this bombshell as well. Germany has the current presidency of the EU.
 
art
Posts: 4410
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 11:46 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Wed Sep 09, 2020 5:00 pm

ltbewr wrote:
Boris and his 'friends' keep mucking up Brexit...

:checkmark:

ltbewr wrote:
What can they do ? Give up NI to become part of the ROI ? That wold be the best answer but is never going to happen.


Guessing here but I don't think that most people in England, Wales and Scotland would regret 'giving up' Northern Ireland. The problem is that Northern Ireland does not seem to have an independence movement. If it became independent it could join the EU, couldn't it?
 
AeroVega
Posts: 384
Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2007 4:32 pm

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Wed Sep 09, 2020 5:28 pm

A101 wrote:
Ditch the WA in its entirety under the Vienna Convention I say and trade without a deal.


What trade are you talking about? You think the EU will let the UK trade under WTO rules if the UK breaches the WA? Start thinking about punitive tariffs on UK products instead.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 12848
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Wed Sep 09, 2020 5:47 pm

AeroVega wrote:
A101 wrote:
Ditch the WA in its entirety under the Vienna Convention I say and trade without a deal.


What trade are you talking about? You think the EU will let the UK trade under WTO rules if the UK breaches the WA? Start thinking about punitive tariffs on UK products instead.


WTO terms have high enough tariffs in them to make UK products unattractive for EU buyers. No need to make them more expensive with extra punitive tariffs.
 
frmrCapCadet
Posts: 5232
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Wed Sep 09, 2020 5:57 pm

Anybody have a link to studies showing just what WTO rules would actually be if/when there is a hard Brexit? Would they be the same for all countries the UK trades with?
 
sabenapilot
Posts: 3719
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2000 6:18 pm

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Wed Sep 09, 2020 6:09 pm

Meanwhile the Scottish government claims the bill violates their authority as it legislates devolved matters.

Looks to me like the Scottish government is given ever more ammunition to successfully launch and win a new indiref.

As expected, Brexit is pulling th UK apart....
 
A101
Posts: 2712
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:27 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Wed Sep 09, 2020 6:11 pm

Dutchy wrote:
When you thought things could not get worse. With the adoption of this bill, we are back before the Withdraw agreement. So I guess von der Leyen will suspent negotiations until this bill is adopted or defeated in the House. It is utterly pointless to continue negotiations with this bill in the twilight.

A101 wrote:
No he hasn’t said that at all.

All he is doing from what I can see is putting a timeline on negotiations and if that is not forthcoming he intends to legislate where he has legal advice on certain sections of the WA. It then will go into dispute mechanism procedures to sort out initiate by the EU


You were wrong.



Nope not wrong, happening as I said it would go to the dispute mechanism, only thing I don’t know is who long it will take to set up an independent panel after the requirement of 3months talks at the joint committee


"I will call for an extraordinary Joint Committee on the
Withdrawal Agreement to be held as soon as possible so that our
UK partners elaborate and respond to our strong concerns on the
bill," Sefcovic told a news briefing of London's planned new
domestic laws that risk undercutting the EU-UK divorce treaty.



https://www.lse.co.uk/news/eu-calls-for ... 9pzhi.html


The thing is the UK hasn’t broken the treaty yet even if the legislation passed Parliament, it can only breach the treaty when it actual uses the legislation
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 12848
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Wed Sep 09, 2020 6:25 pm

A101 wrote:
Nope not wrong, happening as I said it would go to the dispute mechanism, only thing I don’t know is who long it will take to set up an independent panel after the requirement of 3months talks at the joint committee


You live in your own little bubble, just like all Brexiteers.
 
A101
Posts: 2712
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:27 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Wed Sep 09, 2020 6:38 pm

Dutchy wrote:
A101 wrote:
Nope not wrong, happening as I said it would go to the dispute mechanism, only thing I don’t know is who long it will take to set up an independent panel after the requirement of 3months talks at the joint committee


You live in your own little bubble, just like all Brexiteers.


Were was I wrong?

Did he not put a timeline of the 15th October?

Did he not get legal advice?

Did the EU not start the dispute mechanism?

All he is doing from what I can see is putting a timeline on negotiations and if that is not forthcoming he intends to legislate where he has legal advice on certain sections of the WA. It then will go into dispute mechanism procedures to sort out initiate by the EU
 
sabenapilot
Posts: 3719
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2000 6:18 pm

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Wed Sep 09, 2020 6:54 pm

A101 wrote:
The thing is the UK hasn’t broken the treaty yet even if the legislation passed Parliament, it can only breach the treaty when it actual uses the legislation


Wel, that's just wrong.
The very fact the UK will pass legislation to contradict the WA is a clear violation of the obligations and commitments taken up by the UK in an international treaty: it doesn't matter if this piece of legislation is actually ever used or not and so the EU will launch full legal procedings the very moment this law is adopted and not wait till it is actually used.
(just announced by the EC)

What a pathetic show Brexit turns out to be: painted into a corner, BoJo now needs to start making holes in the walls around him to get out of the corner he painted himself in!
 
LJ
Posts: 5470
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 1999 8:28 pm

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Wed Sep 09, 2020 7:12 pm

Ertro wrote:
Just popped into my mind that UK financial sector thinks it can continue serving EU customers even after no-deal brexit relying on the goodwill from EU to declare equivalence of rules even in the case if rules are not the same and commit to keep that equivalence forever despite whatever UK government decides in the future. UK financial sector has voiced frustration that EU has not for several months for some reason not committed to declare equivalency forever.

Anybody want to guess is the UK financial sector going to get the equivalency-forever-commitment as a goodwill gesture from EU as they hope to get?


The impact on the UK financial sector is not dependent on "equivalence" alone. For example, the clearing of Euro cannot be performed in a non-EU country, "equivalence" will not change that. Therefore all clearing in Euro will have to be in the EU as of July 2021. The same for requirements regarding where certain funds can place their holdings (some pension funds need to hold the money in an EU country). At present there is a debate if the EU should introduce regulation which require asset managers to be resident in an EU country if it want to serve EU counterparties. Not a good prospect for UK based asset managers.
 
art
Posts: 4410
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 11:46 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Wed Sep 09, 2020 7:20 pm

A101 wrote:
The thing is the UK hasn’t broken the treaty yet even if the legislation passed Parliament, it can only breach the treaty when it actual uses the legislation


That's UK then. A bit like planning and making preparations to burgle a house where there is no offence committed until you actually burgle it.

Ever heard of going equipped? Try pulling the other!
 
Dogman
Posts: 192
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2018 4:47 pm

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Wed Sep 09, 2020 7:36 pm

A101 wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
When you thought things could not get worse. With the adoption of this bill, we are back before the Withdraw agreement. So I guess von der Leyen will suspent negotiations until this bill is adopted or defeated in the House. It is utterly pointless to continue negotiations with this bill in the twilight.

A101 wrote:
No he hasn’t said that at all.

All he is doing from what I can see is putting a timeline on negotiations and if that is not forthcoming he intends to legislate where he has legal advice on certain sections of the WA. It then will go into dispute mechanism procedures to sort out initiate by the EU


You were wrong.



Nope not wrong, happening as I said it would go to the dispute mechanism, only thing I don’t know is who long it will take to set up an independent panel after the requirement of 3months talks at the joint committee


"I will call for an extraordinary Joint Committee on the
Withdrawal Agreement to be held as soon as possible so that our
UK partners elaborate and respond to our strong concerns on the
bill," Sefcovic told a news briefing of London's planned new
domestic laws that risk undercutting the EU-UK divorce treaty.



https://www.lse.co.uk/news/eu-calls-for ... 9pzhi.html


The thing is the UK hasn’t broken the treaty yet even if the legislation passed Parliament, it can only breach the treaty when it actual uses the legislation


If this legislation becomes a law, will be there custom checks between NI and the rest of the GB? As far as I know they should be present according to the current WA.
 
ElPistolero
Posts: 2469
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 12:44 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Wed Sep 09, 2020 9:59 pm

A101 wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
When you thought things could not get worse. With the adoption of this bill, we are back before the Withdraw agreement. So I guess von der Leyen will suspent negotiations until this bill is adopted or defeated in the House. It is utterly pointless to continue negotiations with this bill in the twilight.

A101 wrote:
No he hasn’t said that at all.

All he is doing from what I can see is putting a timeline on negotiations and if that is not forthcoming he intends to legislate where he has legal advice on certain sections of the WA. It then will go into dispute mechanism procedures to sort out initiate by the EU


You were wrong.



Nope not wrong, happening as I said it would go to the dispute mechanism, only thing I don’t know is who long it will take to set up an independent panel after the requirement of 3months talks at the joint committee


"I will call for an extraordinary Joint Committee on the
Withdrawal Agreement to be held as soon as possible so that our
UK partners elaborate and respond to our strong concerns on the
bill," Sefcovic told a news briefing of London's planned new
domestic laws that risk undercutting the EU-UK divorce treaty.



https://www.lse.co.uk/news/eu-calls-for ... 9pzhi.html


The thing is the UK hasn’t broken the treaty yet even if the legislation passed Parliament, it can only breach the treaty when it actual uses the legislation


Lol

Nice spin, but the government appears to have admitted that it wants to breach international law. There’s not a whole lot to interpret there.

That it might be stopped from doing so by others - such as Parliament or the House of Lords or an international mediator - has little bearing on the antagonistic - possible malicious - nature of its intent. This is banana republic levels of bizarre.

On the wider front, seems this hasn’t gone unnoticed in the US. Trump may yet prevail, but if the Dems control the house (which is responsible for trade deals) this won’t just be a UK-EU issue.

No matter what happens, the damage is done. As the pro-Brexit Spectator’s James Forsyth succinctly put its:

“That statement from Brandon Lewis is going to be quoted back at the UK for years to come by countries we criticise”
 
A101
Posts: 2712
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:27 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Thu Sep 10, 2020 12:31 am

art wrote:
A101 wrote:
The thing is the UK hasn’t broken the treaty yet even if the legislation passed Parliament, it can only breach the treaty when it actual uses the legislation


That's UK then. A bit like planning and making preparations to burgle a house where there is no offence committed until you actually burgle it.

Ever heard of going equipped? Try pulling the other!


Yep have heard of that,

The Withdrawal Agreement gives us some of the tool to actually unilaterally take measures to protect UK-NI trade. Remember this came about because of the veiled threat reported in the Sun broadsheeet regarding food trade
 
A101
Posts: 2712
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:27 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Thu Sep 10, 2020 4:10 am

sabenapilot wrote:
A101 wrote:
The thing is the UK hasn’t broken the treaty yet even if the legislation passed Parliament, it can only breach the treaty when it actual uses the legislation


Wel, that's just wrong.
The very fact the UK will pass legislation to contradict the WA is a clear violation of the obligations and commitments taken up by the UK in an international treaty: it doesn't matter if this piece of legislation is actually ever used or not and so the EU will launch full legal procedings the very moment this law is adopted and not wait till it is actually used.
(just announced by the EC)

What a pathetic show Brexit turns out to be: painted into a corner, BoJo now needs to start making holes in the walls around him to get out of the corner he painted himself in!



Well they actually haven’t....remember this is the response by the UK in an attempt by the EU to use EU law and restrict trade between NI and the mainland UK if we didn’t sign the FTA they wanted.

Extortion is another word to use by EU actions

Article 16
1. If the application of this Protocol leads to serious economic, societal or environmental difficulties that are liable to persist, or to diversion of trade, the Union or the United Kingdom may unilaterally take appropriate safeguard measures. Such safeguard measures shall be restricted with regard to their scope and duration to what is strictly necessary in order to remedy the situation. Priority shall be given to such measures as will least disturb the functioning of this Protocol.
 
JJJ
Posts: 4127
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 5:12 pm

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Thu Sep 10, 2020 7:11 am

A101 wrote:
sabenapilot wrote:
A101 wrote:
The thing is the UK hasn’t broken the treaty yet even if the legislation passed Parliament, it can only breach the treaty when it actual uses the legislation


Wel, that's just wrong.
The very fact the UK will pass legislation to contradict the WA is a clear violation of the obligations and commitments taken up by the UK in an international treaty: it doesn't matter if this piece of legislation is actually ever used or not and so the EU will launch full legal procedings the very moment this law is adopted and not wait till it is actually used.
(just announced by the EC)

What a pathetic show Brexit turns out to be: painted into a corner, BoJo now needs to start making holes in the walls around him to get out of the corner he painted himself in!



Well they actually haven’t....remember this is the response by the UK in an attempt by the EU to use EU law and restrict trade between NI and the mainland UK if we didn’t sign the FTA they wanted.

Extortion is another word to use by EU actions

Article 16
1. If the application of this Protocol leads to serious economic, societal or environmental difficulties that are liable to persist, or to diversion of trade, the Union or the United Kingdom may unilaterally take appropriate safeguard measures. Such safeguard measures shall be restricted with regard to their scope and duration to what is strictly necessary in order to remedy the situation. Priority shall be given to such measures as will least disturb the functioning of this Protocol.


Well, the economist calls it for what it is. Reckless and dangerous.

Britain threatens to flout international law

Boris Johnson’s readiness to break a treaty as a negotiating tactic is both foolish and dangerous

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.econom ... tional-law
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 12848
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Thu Sep 10, 2020 7:37 am

A101 wrote:
Well they actually haven’t....remember this is the response by the UK in an attempt by the EU to use EU law and restrict trade between NI and the mainland UK if we didn’t sign the FTA they wanted.


Question: what exactly are you defending here? Both sides seem to agree this bill is a breach of the Withdraw Agreement. The UK government has admitted to it. And yet here you are defending a position saying it isn't. UK's top legal civil servant quits over Brexit deal changes: Jonathan Jones resigns after plans emerge to alter legally binding Northern Ireland protocol, Jones, the now-former head of the UK government’s legal department, has stepped down because of this. That hasn't happened since an alteration over the 2003 Iraq war involvement of the UK - weapons of mass destruction which weren't there.

So, again, in what kind of bubble do you live when the rest of the world accepts that this is clear and deliberate to undermine the withdrawal agreement. Or to put it in the language you have often used: are you for real?

So given that the UK government is doing that - a fact, so we do not need to talk about it anymore -, do you have any opinion on that fact?

A101 wrote:
Extortion is another word to use by EU actions


No, your perception again. Brexit has consequences and a hard Brexit has a lot of consequences. The withdrawal agreement is a safeguard against a hard Brexit and all whims of the UK government and rightfully so it seems. As has been explained to you many many times, a hard Brexit will result in a hard border, nobody is denying that fact.


A101 can you please not dispute facts, it is a bit tiresom and it doesn't get us anywere.
 
A101
Posts: 2712
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:27 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Thu Sep 10, 2020 8:06 am

Dutchy wrote:
A101 wrote:
Well they actually haven’t....remember this is the response by the UK in an attempt by the EU to use EU law and restrict trade between NI and the mainland UK if we didn’t sign the FTA they wanted.


Question: what exactly are you defending here? Both sides seem to agree this bill is a breach of the Withdraw Agreement. The UK government has admitted to it. And yet here you are defending a position saying it isn't. UK's top legal civil servant quits over Brexit deal changes: Jonathan Jones resigns after plans emerge to alter legally binding Northern Ireland protocol, Jones, the now-former head of the UK government’s legal department, has stepped down because of this. That hasn't happened since an alteration over the 2003 Iraq war involvement of the UK - weapons of mass destruction which weren't there.

So, again, in what kind of bubble do you live when the rest of the world accepts that this is clear and deliberate to undermine the withdrawal agreement. Or to put it in the language you have often used: are you for real?

So given that the UK government is doing that - a fact, so we do not need to talk about it anymore -, do you have any opinion on that fact?

A101 wrote:
Extortion is another word to use by EU actions


No, your perception again. Brexit has consequences and a hard Brexit has a lot of consequences. The withdrawal agreement is a safeguard against a hard Brexit and all whims of the UK government and rightfully so it seems. As has been explained to you many many times, a hard Brexit will result in a hard border, nobody is denying that fact.


A101 can you please not dispute facts, it is a bit tiresom and it doesn't get us anywere.



The facts are yes the UK is altering the WA in a way that breaks the agreement as signed, but it’s also a fact that there is a provision within the WA in which I posted that both sides can use to unilaterally change certain aspects of the agreement in which they have done.

And as I pointed to before the EU does not agree with it hence the dispute mechanism being used,

From the agreement

1. If the application of this Protocol leads to serious economic, societal or environmental difficulties that are liable to persist, or to diversion of trade, the Union or the United Kingdom may unilaterally take appropriate safeguard measures. Such safeguard measures shall be restricted with regard to their scope and duration to what is strictly necessary in order to remedy the situation. Priority shall be given to such measures as will least disturb the functioning of this Protocol.
 
Ertro
Posts: 201
Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2019 9:28 pm

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Thu Sep 10, 2020 8:21 am

A101 wrote:
remember this is the response by the UK in an attempt by the EU to use EU law and restrict trade between NI and the mainland UK if we didn’t sign the FTA they wanted.


If that is the case then surely somebody would have actually said that. Could you please find some source where it can be seen that somebody who wants to retain some credibility has actually voiced that opinion. And I don't mean some irrelevant fringe person writing in garbage tabloids but somebody from the top that has actual first hand knowledge of both the negotiations between EU and UK and also first hand knowledge of UK government inner circle decision making coming into the conclusion of what has happened in last days.

A101 wrote:
1. If the application of this Protocol leads to serious economic, societal or environmental difficulties that are liable to persist, or to diversion of trade, the Union or the United Kingdom may unilaterally take appropriate safeguard measures. Such safeguard measures shall be restricted with regard to their scope and duration to what is strictly necessary in order to remedy the situation. Priority shall be given to such measures as will least disturb the functioning of this Protocol.


There has been no application of if this protocol. The problem is not even trying to apply the protocol. This sentence comes only into play AFTER there has been an application of the protocol and AFTER it has lead to serious difficulties.

You cannot even state what could possibly be the serious difficulties from applying the protocol. As far as I can see the only difficulties are that some logistics company needs to fill customs forms for goods passing the irish sea and those are not serious difficulties. Something that is directly written into the agreement and signed as agreed cannot be used as difficulties to trash the agreement. The only serious difficulties are now coming from UK government planning to NOT apply this protocol.
 
A101
Posts: 2712
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:27 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Thu Sep 10, 2020 8:49 am

Ertro wrote:
A101 wrote:
remember this is the response by the UK in an attempt by the EU to use EU law and restrict trade between NI and the mainland UK if we didn’t sign the FTA they wanted.


If that is the case then surely somebody would have actually said that. Could you please find some source where it can be seen that somebody who wants to retain some credibility has actually voiced that opinion. And I don't mean some irrelevant fringe person writing in garbage tabloids but somebody from the top that has actual first hand knowledge of both the negotiations between EU and UK and also first hand knowledge of UK government inner circle decision making coming into the conclusion of what has happened in last days.

A101 wrote:
1. If the application of this Protocol leads to serious economic, societal or environmental difficulties that are liable to persist, or to diversion of trade, the Union or the United Kingdom may unilaterally take appropriate safeguard measures. Such safeguard measures shall be restricted with regard to their scope and duration to what is strictly necessary in order to remedy the situation. Priority shall be given to such measures as will least disturb the functioning of this Protocol.


There has been no application of if this protocol. The problem is not even trying to apply the protocol. This sentence comes only into play AFTER there has been an application of the protocol and AFTER it has lead to serious difficulties.

You cannot even state what could possibly be the serious difficulties from applying the protocol. As far as I can see the only difficulties are that some logistics company needs to fill customs forms for goods passing the irish sea and those are not serious difficulties. Something that is directly written into the agreement and signed as agreed cannot be used as difficulties to trash the agreement. The only serious difficulties are now coming from UK government planning to NOT apply this protocol.



Can you show no one has brought it up behind the scenes were we are not privy to such negotiations.

There nothing in the article that say they either party cannot pre-emptively use such a provision when the other party to the negotiations try to use it as a threat as means of coercion and not expect the other party to shut the gate before the horse bolts
 
Ertro
Posts: 201
Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2019 9:28 pm

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Thu Sep 10, 2020 8:56 am

A101 wrote:
Can you show no one has brought it up behind the scenes were we are not privy to such negotiations.
There nothing in the article that say they either party cannot pre-emptively use such a provision when the other party to the negotiations try to use it as a threat as means of coercion and not expect the other party to shut the gate before the horse bolts


"There is nothing" That is the part you got correct.
 
A101
Posts: 2712
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:27 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Thu Sep 10, 2020 9:13 am

Ertro wrote:
A101 wrote:
Can you show no one has brought it up behind the scenes were we are not privy to such negotiations.
There nothing in the article that say they either party cannot pre-emptively use such a provision when the other party to the negotiations try to use it as a threat as means of coercion and not expect the other party to shut the gate before the horse bolts


In reality the whole thing is UK government trying to threaten everybody that if UK government does not get the unicorn to eat and keep it too UK government is going shoot itself in the foot illegally. Let's see how far that flies.


Where’s the threat?
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 12848
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Thu Sep 10, 2020 9:15 am

A101 wrote:
The facts are yes the UK is altering the WA in a way that breaks the agreement as signed, but it’s also a fact that there is a provision within the WA in which I posted that both sides can use to unilaterally change certain aspects of the agreement in which they have done.


You can quote anything you like. Jonathan Jones resigned over this. So you basically are arguing that you know it better than the head of the UK government’s legal department. So, who are you that you think you are such a legal mind that you know this stuff better than the top legal mind in her majesties government with a hole department to advise him. Why should we take any word of you above everyone else? I think it is a fair question to ask.

A101 wrote:
The facts are yes the UK is altering the WA in a way that breaks the agreement as signed


No but's, no if's, just a full stop. The UK withdraws unilaterally from a signed international treaty under international law. That is a fact - or at least the current intention of the UK government -.
Now we have established facts, we can argue over the appropriate consequences. Perhaps you could answer the following questions:
- do you think it is appropriate to do so and if so why?
- what do you think the border between Ulster and Ireland will look like if this bill is adopted? How do you think the citizens of Ulster will react to it?
- do you think this action will make it easier to come to a trade agreement with the EU - remember BoJo has set a deadline for 15october - 5 weeks from now?
- how do you think other nations will react to this when Great Britain can withdraw, unilaterally, from an international agreement with such ease? What will / has happen(ed) to the perception of the UK as a dependable partner?
 
A101
Posts: 2712
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:27 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Thu Sep 10, 2020 11:18 am

Dutchy wrote:
A101 wrote:
The facts are yes the UK is altering the WA in a way that breaks the agreement as signed, but it’s also a fact that there is a provision within the WA in which I posted that both sides can use to unilaterally change certain aspects of the agreement in which they have done.


You can quote anything you like. Jonathan Jones resigned over this. So you basically are arguing that you know it better than the head of the UK government’s legal department. So, who are you that you think you are such a legal mind that you know this stuff better than the top legal mind in her majesties government with a hole department to advise him. Why should we take any word of you above everyone else? I think it is a fair question to ask.



It’s your prerogative to agree or not with anything posted on the forum.

You know Sir Jonathan Jones personally?
You have inside information on what the actual advice to Government was?

His job is to give unbiased advice and it’s implications, he obviously didn’t agree with the way Government has taken the advice, it also dosnt mean that Government has to accept his advise.
It also dosnt mean that his personal opinion on Brexit is the same as the Government’s. Without knowing the full background there also may have been disagreements in the past and this could be an accumulation on his personal views on the matter coming to the fore.

His has not disclosed the reason to resign has not been made public, but there are reports in FT of conflicting advice to government. But I far from being a legal eagle but try to make myself as knowledgeable as possible and read various legal text and gather information from nurmerous source to make informed judgement. I’m not saying I’m right but when you look at the entire picture and judgements with legal text it become clear to understand.

Dutchy wrote:
A101 wrote:
The facts are yes the UK is altering the WA in a way that breaks the agreement as signed


No but's, no if's, just a full stop. The UK withdraws unilaterally from a signed international treaty under international law. That is a fact - or at least the current intention of the UK government -.


Well from your own post it’s not a fact, where has it said in the new IM bill it unilaterally compel’s the UK from withdrawing from the WA?

Dutchy wrote:

Now we have established facts, we can argue over the appropriate consequences. Perhaps you could answer the following questions:
- do you think it is appropriate to do so and if so why?


appropriate To do what?


Dutchy wrote:

- what do you think the border between Ulster and Ireland will look like if this bill is adopted? How do you think the citizens of Ulster will react to it?


Exactly what the withdrawal agreement shows a border in the Irish Sea, I cant say how all will react but I imagine most would agree with it

Dutchy wrote:

- do you think this action will make it easier to come to a trade agreement with the EU - remember BoJo has set a deadline for 15october - 5 weeks from now?


Not for me to decide that up to those from Barnier to decide

Dutchy wrote:

- how do you think other nations will react to this when Great Britain can withdraw, unilaterally, from an international agreement with such ease? What will / has happen(ed) to the perception of the UK as a dependable partner?


I believe there are 116 state parties have ratified the Vienna convention, it will show that the UK will not be bullied into signing an unacceptable agreement
 
ElPistolero
Posts: 2469
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 12:44 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Thu Sep 10, 2020 11:43 am

A101 wrote:
The facts are yes the UK is altering the WA in a way that breaks the agreement as signed, but it’s also a fact that there is a provision within the WA in which I posted that both sides can use to unilaterally change certain aspects of the agreement in which they have done.

And as I pointed to before the EU does not agree with it hence the dispute mechanism being used,

From the agreement

1. If the application of this Protocol leads to serious economic, societal or environmental difficulties that are liable to persist, or to diversion of trade, the Union or the United Kingdom may unilaterally take appropriate safeguard measures. Such safeguard measures shall be restricted with regard to their scope and duration to what is strictly necessary in order to remedy the situation. Priority shall be given to such measures as will least disturb the functioning of this Protocol.


The only fact here is that the Government has admitted that it knowingly intends to break international law.

The EU doesn’t disagree:

“The EU paper said that the Internal Market Bill breaks international law because no party can “unilaterally change, clarify, amend, interpret or disapply” the Brexit treaty.”

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/20 ... it-treaty/

Brexiteer ideology normally doesn’t faze me too much, but the openly antagonistic nature of this move is, well, amazing to see. Either Brexiteers genuinely did not understand what they were signing up to (insert stereotype), or the whole negotiation was done in bad faith - get a transition period to buy time to prepare for a cliff edge, then blow it up. Any credibility, to the extent it exists, seems to be in critically short supply.

The big questions now are whether the WA collapses fully in the next month or so - premature end of the transition period, plus sanctions (i.e. no WTO or Australia agreement); and, whether the EU actively starts putting pressure on third countries to not roll over their EU FTAs to the UK until the dispute is settled (i.e. pick sides).

Quite the escalation. Excuse me while I grab some snacks - this should be entertaining.
 
ElPistolero
Posts: 2469
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 12:44 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Thu Sep 10, 2020 11:57 am

A101 wrote:
I believe there are 116 state parties have ratified the Vienna convention, it will show that the UK will not be bullied into signing an unacceptable agreement


You’re assuming that the 116 state parties aren’t literate.

Thing is, they are. They’re as capable as you and I of reading the Tory Party manifesto from last year - the one that got them the mandate to govern:

“Many said it would be impossible. But he swiftly negotiated a great new deal – despite Parliament’s best efforts to block his progress.”

...

“Boris Johnson’s new deal takes the whole country out of the EU as one United Kingdom. It takes us out of the customs union, allowing us to set our own tariffs and do our own trade deals. It allows us to pass our own laws and ensures that it is our courts that enforce them.

Our deal is the only one on the table. It
is signed, sealed and ready. It puts the whole country on a path to a new free trade agreement with the EU. This will be a new relationship based on free trade and friendly cooperation, not on the EU’s treaties or EU law. There will be no political alignment with the EU. We will keep the UK out of the single market, out of any form of customs union, and end the role of the European Court of Justice.“

The deal itself hasn’t changed. This is the same “great new deal”, “signed sealed and ready”, that he got a mandate to implement.

Outside the Brexit faithful, you’re going to have a hard time convincing anyone that the UK was bullied into signing this. Bit hard after a democratically elected government embraces it as “great” etc.

The rest of the world is smarter than you seem to think.
 
A101
Posts: 2712
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:27 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Thu Sep 10, 2020 12:04 pm

ElPistolero wrote:
The EU doesn’t disagree:

“The EU paper said that the Internal Market Bill breaks international law because no party can “unilaterally change, clarify, amend, interpret or disapply” the Brexit treaty.”


Got a link to the EU paper or was the link behind the paywall?

Are you saying it’s a misprint under article 16 where it say “unilaterally” in the agreement


1. If the application of this Protocol leads to serious economic, societal or environmental difficulties that are liable to persist, or to diversion of trade, the Union or the United Kingdom may unilaterally take appropriate safeguard measures. Such safeguard measures shall be restricted with regard to their scope and duration to what is strictly necessary in order to remedy the situation. Priority shall be given to such measures as will least disturb the functioning of this Protocol.
 
A101
Posts: 2712
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:27 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Thu Sep 10, 2020 12:09 pm

ElPistolero wrote:
A101 wrote:
I believe there are 116 state parties have ratified the Vienna convention, it will show that the UK will not be bullied into signing an unacceptable agreement


You’re assuming that the 116 state parties aren’t literate.

Thing is, they are. They’re as capable as you and I of reading the Tory Party manifesto from last year - the one that got them the mandate to govern:

“Many said it would be impossible. But he swiftly negotiated a great new deal – despite Parliament’s best efforts to block his progress.”

...

“Boris Johnson’s new deal takes the whole country out of the EU as one United Kingdom. It takes us out of the customs union, allowing us to set our own tariffs and do our own trade deals. It allows us to pass our own laws and ensures that it is our courts that enforce them.

Our deal is the only one on the table. It
is signed, sealed and ready. It puts the whole country on a path to a new free trade agreement with the EU. This will be a new relationship based on free trade and friendly cooperation, not on the EU’s treaties or EU law. There will be no political alignment with the EU. We will keep the UK out of the single market, out of any form of customs union, and end the role of the European Court of Justice.“

The deal itself hasn’t changed. This is the same “great new deal”, “signed sealed and ready”, that he got a mandate to implement.

Outside the Brexit faithful, you’re going to have a hard time convincing anyone that the UK was bullied into signing this. Bit hard after a democratically elected government embraces it as “great” etc.

The rest of the world is smarter than you seem to think.



Ah sorry my misunderstanding I was referring about the talking about the FTA

Technically no trade deal makes the WA incompatible with UK law
 
sierrakilo44
Posts: 681
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2011 1:38 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Thu Sep 10, 2020 12:28 pm

Dutchy wrote:
- what do you think the border between Ulster and Ireland will look like if this bill is adopted? How do you think the citizens of Ulster will react to it?


Just a clarification. “Ulster” refers to one of the traditonal provinces of Ireland, it comprises 9 counties, 6 in NI and 3 in the ROI so it shouldn’t be used to refer to the political entity of Northern Ireland specifically.

If there was a hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland then it would be a disaster whether it’s economic, electronic or physical. For a generation people in the two places have become accustomed to free access between neighbours. For the Irish in Northern Ireland it has allowed them to associate with their kinfolk in the Republic without having to pass through border checks. In reality it has allowed them to greater live their identities as “Irish” with little interaction with the British. This has allowed a relative peace to emerge.

A hard border would be catastrophic for the economies, for the psyche and for the peace process. It would violate the GFA and probably lead to the troubles round 2.

There’s pretty much only 3 clear choices with the Irish/UK border.

1. Hard border, resulting in probable violence and economic ruin for NI and ROI.

2. Border in Irish Sea, most sensible, will probably lead to sooner Irish reunification.

3. Border remains open, UK in practice remains aligned to EU regulations so in essence Brexit doesn’t happen.

Technically there’s a 4th option, Ireland leaves the EU to form an economic union with the UK, there’s a better chance of Boris Johnson winning next year’s London Marathon than that happening....
 
ElPistolero
Posts: 2469
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 12:44 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Thu Sep 10, 2020 12:42 pm

A101 wrote:

Got a link to the EU paper or was the link behind the paywall?

Are you saying it’s a misprint under article 16 where it say “unilaterally” in the agreement


1. If the application of this Protocol leads to serious economic, societal or environmental difficulties that are liable to persist, or to diversion of trade, the Union or the United Kingdom may unilaterally take appropriate safeguard measures. Such safeguard measures shall be restricted with regard to their scope and duration to what is strictly necessary in order to remedy the situation. Priority shall be given to such measures as will least disturb the functioning of this Protocol.


Here’s a non-paywall version:

“Already by tabling the draft bill and pursuing the policy expressed therein, the UK government is in violation of the good faith obligation under the withdrawal agreement (article 5) because this bill jeopardises the attainment of the objectives of the agreement”, the commission lawyers write.“

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... exit-talks

As for article 16, no it’s not a misprint. It simply doesn’t apply here. As has been already pointed out by the UK government, by virtue of its refusal to invoke it.

If you want to keep engaging in Brexiteer spin, feel free to. That said, Russell’s teapot applies, so, well good luck.
 
ElPistolero
Posts: 2469
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 12:44 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Thu Sep 10, 2020 12:50 pm

A101 wrote:

Ah sorry my misunderstanding I was referring about the talking about the FTA

Technically no trade deal makes the WA incompatible with UK law


Incorrect.

The WA applies regardless of deal or no deal.

By virtue of being ratified by Parliament, the WA is already enshrined in UK law. It can only become incompatible with UK law if the UK passes laws that deliberately contradict it after it’s been ratified.

That is to say, it is compatible until it is deliberately made incompatible - an act that amounts to breaching international law.

Not that this should come as any surprise - it’s pretty much exactly as its played out.
 
94717
Posts: 2789
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 3:38 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Thu Sep 10, 2020 1:44 pm

ElPistolero wrote:
A101 wrote:

Ah sorry my misunderstanding I was referring about the talking about the FTA

Technically no trade deal makes the WA incompatible with UK law


Incorrect.

The WA applies regardless of deal or no deal.

By virtue of being ratified by Parliament, the WA is already enshrined in UK law. It can only become incompatible with UK law if the UK passes laws that deliberately contradict it after it’s been ratified.

That is to say, it is compatible until it is deliberately made incompatible - an act that amounts to breaching international law.

Not that this should come as any surprise - it’s pretty much exactly as its played out.


While WA is already UK and International law, is the UK ministers actually breaking UK law as well?
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 14950
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Thu Sep 10, 2020 2:13 pm

Klaus wrote:
Guardian: Brexit: Johnson to override EU withdrawal agreement

Johnson will put an ultimatum to negotiators this week, saying the UK and Europe must agree a post-Brexit trade deal by 15 October or Britain will walk away for good.



I love the threat. The talks are supposed to end in early October anyway, for the result to have any chance of being ratified by the various EU bodies, so BoJo takes his serious voice and says "we walk out if nothing is agreed by the 15th October !".
Last edited by Aesma on Thu Sep 10, 2020 2:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
SomebodyInTLS
Posts: 1945
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 12:31 pm

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Thu Sep 10, 2020 2:21 pm

olle wrote:
While WA is already UK and International law, is the UK ministers actually breaking UK law as well?


That's what I've been reading... The first page of the UK government ministerial code states that members must uphold all laws, so strictly speaking everyone involved with this bill has contravened that and should be thrown out of government with immediate effect.
 
Klaus
Posts: 21638
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

Re: Brexit Part IX: Final rush to No Deal

Thu Sep 10, 2020 2:23 pm

Aesma wrote:
Klaus wrote:
Johnson will put an ultimatum to negotiators this week, saying the UK and Europe must agree a post-Brexit trade deal by 15 October or Britain will walk away for good.

That's not from me!

I love the threat. The talks are supposed to end in early October anyway, for the result to have any chance of being ratified by the various EU bodies, so BoJo takes his serious voice and says "we walk out if nothing is agreed by the 15th October !".

He's overplayed his hand just now already.

A treaty violation suit is already being considered on the EU side which could result in fines and sanctions against the UK, and once EU sanctions are activated the UK will become toxic to other countries who have any interest in their relationship with the EU.

None of this is the EU's doing: It is only another automatic consequence of the completely misconceived Brexit idea and of all the lies which have paved the way to this corner the UK government and the Tories have now painted themselves into.

Also both the Biden campaign and Nancy Pelosi have stated that such a violation of the Good Friday Agreement will not be accepted by either the House or by a Biden government, so the UK could kiss any US trade deal goodbye just as well.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Aaron747, L0VE2FLY and 14 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos