Page 142 of 142 FirstFirst ... 4292117132133134135136137138139140141142
Results 2,821 to 2,832 of 2832

Thread: Brexit - Time to scrap it and start again?

  1. #2821
    Katsumoto's Avatar Quae est infernum es
    Moderator Emeritus

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    11,747

    Default Re: Brexit - Time to scrap it and start again?

    Speaking of people who don't know what they're talking about...

    The FT on Wednesday morning reports on a chastening encounter over lunch between Mr Johnson, Michel Barnier and Jean-Claude Juncker, which one official described as a “penny dropping” moment for the prime minister over what it really means to replace the Irish backstop.

    According to an account of the meeting, the prime minister was told by his EU counterparts in no uncertain terms that the UK’s plan to replace the backstop by allowing Northern Ireland to stick to common EU rules on food and livestock (known as SPS) was not enough to prevent customs checks on the vast majority of goods that cross the Irish border.

    At that point, a befuddled Mr Johnson turned to David Frost, his chief negotiator, and Stephen Barclay, Brexit secretary, and said: “So you’re telling me the SPS plan doesn’t solve the customs problem?”

    The exchange, according to one EU official, was part of an abrupt “learning curve” for Mr Johnson in his first face-to-face meeting with Mr Barnier and Mr Juncker since he took office.

    Another official describes the prime minister gradually “slumping” in his chair as the reality of the UK’s negotiating position and the limited time left to strike an agreement dawned on him. “He wasn’t used to hearing it”, added the official.
    https://www.ft.com/content/7453c686-...b-77216ebe1f17
    "I pray Heaven to bestow the best of blessings on this house and all that shall hereafter inhabit it. May none but honest and wise men ever rule under this roof."
    - John Adams, on the White House, in a letter to Abigail Adams (2 November 1800)

  2. #2822

    Default Re: Brexit - Time to scrap it and start again?

    No, it's to point out your ignorance of the UK's constitutional arrangements.
    Please explain to me how the UK's constitutional arrangements include reversing a perfectly legitimate referendum. I am all too eager to learn.

  3. #2823

    Default Re: Brexit - Time to scrap it and start again?

    Quote Originally Posted by ioannis76 View Post
    Please explain to me how the UK's constitutional arrangements include reversing an advisory referendum. I am all too eager to learn.
    Sure thing. The UK is a representative democracy, not a direct democracy.

  4. #2824

    Default Re: Brexit - Time to scrap it and start again?

    Quote Originally Posted by ioannis76 View Post
    Please explain to me how the UK's constitutional arrangements include reversing a perfectly legitimate referendum. I am all too eager to learn.
    This, or any, referendum has no special status in UK law. It was held according to an Act of Parliament which even said (as The Left says above) that it was "advisory". David Cameron or any of his successors could have said they didn't like the result and ignored it. Of coure politically that would have been madness, but constitutionally it would have been fine: the UK is not a republic and has no doctrine of popular sovereignty.
    Resident Language Geek
    Baseless Assertions on the Celts Since 1996

  5. #2825

    Default Re: Brexit - Time to scrap it and start again?

    Quote Originally Posted by Katsumoto View Post
    Speaking of people who don't know what they're talking about...


    https://www.ft.com/content/7453c686-...b-77216ebe1f17
    This excerpt was doing the rounds in the Guardian comments section where, naturally, it was being treated as the gospel according to Mark. I was wondering how long it was going to be until it turned up here.
    .

  6. #2826

    Default Re: Brexit - Time to scrap it and start again?

    Quote Originally Posted by Elmetiacos View Post
    I've finally seen the document, having been wondering why it was "worst case" planning. I have been curious as to what variables are in play which cause the scenario to be described as "worst case" rather than "likeliest case" or "reasonable assumption" and there are basically none. To me "worst case" would be everything in Yellowhammer and then for example, there happens to be an air traffic controllers' strike, or a major terrorist incident or something like that, happening at the same time. That's what "wost case" means to me, something horrible which is unlikely but possible being factored in. Everything which is in the document is simply the most probable scenario. All talk of "worst case" is the government lying again, as it was caught doing when the document was leaked initially.
    And you would be perfectly correct. The original is already in public domain thanks to the leak, it was named as a base document and the only major difference is the redaction of point 15 , rather pointless as the original was already reported upon. Moreover we know that the port scenario is not a worst case one as further leaked papers make the presumption that at Holyhead, Liverpool, Portsmouth and Heysham, 2/3rd of lorries will be turned away for lack of proper papers ( worst case would obviously be none).At Dover they would probably waive lorries through, so if you are a drugs smuggler or trader in illegal migrants 1 November will be your birthday.

    https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/go...-brexit-628520


    https://www.ft.com/content/7453c686-...b-77216ebe1f17

    If Boris truly understood the situation he would have asked 'Time to scrap it and start again? '.

    The Oct 31st deadline makes no policy sense, unless the real issue for him is the anti-tax avoidance directive about to land in January.
    Last edited by mongrel; Today at 01:18 PM.
    Absolutley Barking, Mudpit Mutt Former Patron: Garbarsardar

    "Out of the crooked tree of humanity,no straight thing can be made." Immanuel Kant
    "Oh Yeah? What about a cricket bat? That's pretty straight. Just off the top of my head..." Al Murray, Pub Landlord.

  7. #2827
    caratacus's Avatar Primicerius
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    U.K.
    Posts
    3,748

    Default Re: Brexit - Time to scrap it and start again?

    This whole Supreme Court hearing is a complete fiasco. The Queen’s court adjudicating whether the Queen’s government was or was not right in the prorogation of parliament for a matter of days!

    I really cannot believe what i was hearing today. The debate at one point centred around whether the Government had acted in good faith and with just intention.

    Now I admittedly only have a basic understanding of English law, but this seemed utterly ridiculous to anyone who has. In law you either break a law or you don't, motive doesn't come into it. For a senior Scottish QC like Aidan O’Neil, to actually be suggesting that the court consider this as evidence against prorogation is bizarre. Truth is this is a political matter not a legal one, there are no laws that the government broke, and this whole legal challenge is a complete waste of taxpayers money.

    Supreme Court: Prorogation carried out 'in bad faith', judges told
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49735947
    he PM's decision to suspend Parliament for five weeks was carried out "in bad faith", the Supreme Court has heard. Scottish judges ruled the move unlawful, but the government is appealing, arguing it is a political judgement, not a matter for the courts.

    Defending the ruling, Aidan O'Neill QC said people expected the government to engage "solely in high politics rather than low, dishonest, dirty tricks".
    Apparently all Scottish polliticians must be paragons of virtue according to the learned QC.
    Last edited by caratacus; Today at 02:19 PM.

  8. #2828
    Daruwind's Avatar Citizen
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Prague
    Posts
    2,067

    Default Re: Brexit - Time to scrap it and start again?

    Quote Originally Posted by caratacus View Post
    whether the Queen’s government was or was not right in the prorogation of parliament for a matter of days!

    I really cannot believe what i was hearing today. The debate at one point centred around whether the Government had acted in good faith and with just intention.

    Now I admittedly only have a basic understanding of English law, but this seemed utterly ridiculous to anyone who has. In law you either break a law or you don't, motive doesn't come into it.
    Motive is often important. Google for example difference between manslaughter and murder..motive and circumstances are always important And same can be said about reason for prorogation of parliament especially before such important days as brxit date definitely is..

  9. #2829
    caratacus's Avatar Primicerius
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    U.K.
    Posts
    3,748

    Default Re: Brexit - Time to scrap it and start again?

    Quote Originally Posted by Daruwind View Post
    Motive is often important. Google for example difference between manslaughter and murder..motive and circumstances are always important And same can be said about reason for prorogation of parliament especially before such important days as brxit date definitely is..
    Murder is against the law, motive assists in finding who is guilty or what charge is made, not in deciding whether a crime has been committed. If you get a speeding ticket, it doesn't matter whether you were looking at the speedometer with your foot down or were distracted , you still committed an offence and are liable for punishment. An argument can be made an justified that prorogation of parliament was inproper, but the fact remains it wasn't against constitutional law solely on the basis of that alone.
    Last edited by caratacus; Today at 03:06 PM.

  10. #2830
    Dante Von Hespburg's Avatar Sloth's Inferno
    Civitate Magistrate

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    4,968

    Default Re: Brexit - Time to scrap it and start again?

    Quote Originally Posted by caratacus View Post

    Now I admittedly only have a basic understanding of English law, but this seemed utterly ridiculous to anyone who has. In law you either break a law or you don't, motive doesn't come into it. For a senior Scottish QC like Aidan OíNeil, to actually be suggesting that the court consider this as evidence against prorogation is bizarre. Truth is this is a political matter not a legal one, there are no laws that the government broke, and this whole legal challenge is a complete waste of taxpayers money.
    It's Scottish law that is being used and analysed when the Scottish case is being considered (as there are essentially two concurrent cases being dealt with- One the Government appeal against Scottish High Court ruling and the other Gina Miller's appeal against the English High Court ruling). It's important to note that Scottish law is significantly different from English law (essentially it's broader, far more detailed and takes into account a lot more in laymens terms- hence in criminal court Scots have innocent, guilty and unproven as the three valid verdicts- unproven essentially leaves the person out of prison, but with a ruined life as its a 'we know you did it, but can't conclusively say'- its arguably considered far more 'unbias' than English law currently stands due to the firmer separation of the political and legal up t'North, though this is a historical argument that is essentially on-going, with much legal willy waving from both sides). With that in mind though the prorouging issue gets both far more complex and interesting.

    What does seem to be happening is that the Government have shifted their expectation of the ruling according to Cabinet leaks- they now expect that while the Supreme Court (using the Scottish legal framework) will allow proroguing currently, it will also more than likely decide that yes this is a legal matter as well as political that they can rule on, and also fire a warning shot for future governments attempting to prorogue- either by a time limit, and certainly they will not allow it to happen again (As Boris seems to want to keep the option open from his interview earlier with Kunesburg). This essentially allows both sides to claim a 'victory' of sorts- as this prorouging is allowed, but doing it again will not be taken kindly by the justice system.

    At least that is the view of current cabinet leaks (Source Kunessburg- arch remainer, arch brexiteer, Labour and Conservative Shrill)

    1. This is all very unpredictable, but if you are following Supreme Court case the expectation in govt might be shifting a bit

    2. Senior govt source says - 'No 10 thinks Supreme Court will say prorogation is justiciable in principle' - in other words, it is a matter of law, not just politics, 'and they will fire warning shots about how a govt shouldn't use this to close Parliament illegitimately' but...

    3. Number 10 does not, at the moment, think court will unravel their plan for Queen's Speech on Oct 14th - caveat, clearly we are all in very untested and spinnable territory here, and it will be down to the 11 judges, no one else



    4. Obviously has implications for what Johnson may be able to do next - remember in our interview this week he didnít rule out trying prorogation again
    https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status...80844124590080







    Last edited by Dante Von Hespburg; Today at 03:30 PM.
    House of Caesars: Under the Patronage of Char Aznable

    Proud Patron of the roguishly suave Gatsby


  11. #2831

    Default Re: Brexit - Time to scrap it and start again?

    Quote Originally Posted by TheLeft View Post
    Sure thing. The UK is a representative democracy, not a direct democracy.
    So are most countries, but referenda are the highest form of the expression of the people. They are, in fact, the only link between the original concept of democracy and the current state of, well, oligarchy.

    But the way you guys are depicting it, Cameron pretty much resigned for nothing.
    Amd since the referendum was merely on an advisory note, why scream for a second one?
    The funny thing is, as Corbyn suggests it, the UK voters will practically have a choice between Remain and Remain. Looks like the cunning Labour Party is trying to load the dice beforehand, fearing that the outcome is going to be even more of a slap in the face than the previous one. Bah, I always knew that those sneaky socialists are truly pro-EU in all countries.

  12. #2832
    Daruwind's Avatar Citizen
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Prague
    Posts
    2,067

    Default Re: Brexit - Time to scrap it and start again?

    by the was MEPs voted today overwhelmingly to support article 50 extension incase Uk ask for it.
    https://www.euronews.com/2019/09/18/...-on-article-50
    Of course final saying has EU Commision but this might be good indication of mood.

    plus look like UK negotiators are holding back any serious offer,draft just to keep it safe till last possible moment. Thatīs confidence into own work...
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics...-sources-admit

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •