Jump to content

Beyond Brexit - A new dawn? A leap of faith?


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Nofinikea said:

Yet a couple of days ago you argued that America was a bigger fish for us to hook up with than the EU, but you go about cementing that relationship by not giving a rats ass what potentially there next president thinks....

Good one!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

There's a difference between not accepting the result and not agreeing with the result.  I accepted it would happen but that doesn't make me think it's the right thing to do.  The Brexiteers have been

Grammar.

I hope Brexit is everything that has been promised.  I am long enough in the tooth to realise that the people making those promises have made a career from telling lies without shame. The result

Posted Images

1 hour ago, Nofinikea said:

Just seems to me that you use USA to make your argument when it suits.  If you think we are potentially better off hooking into a deal with the USA then I would suggest we take an interest in what they say.

Just on that note, what makes you think the 66M UK can strike a better deal with the US than the 660M EU?

just a thought, but we are one of the 9 countries who pay at least 2% GDP minimum to NATO, the other bigger eu countries don't. germany pissed trump off by having gas from russia,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, geosname said:

We should take what they say with a pinch of salt, isn't that the advice when trump (the president) speaks,  we should pay far more attention to what people do than what they say..... especially politicians.

And what makes you think that the UK can broker better deals than the EU as a whole?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Jacko51 said:

So do you agree with breaching the treaty, Dave?  Yes or no?

yes if the need arises, it will depend on the eu... but have they already

The EU’s Withdrawal Treaty breaks the terms of the Good Friday Agreement

BREXIT FACTS4EU.ORG SUMMARY

US House of Representatives Speaker Pelosi : “No chance” of UK-US trade deal
Brexit Facts4EU.Org presents some facts which Ms Pelosi does not seem to be aware of

  • The Government’s UK Internal Market Bill is needed to maintain the free flow of trade across the United Kingdom
  • To prevent this would be contrary to the 1800 Act of Union between Great Britain and Ireland and 1707 Articles of Union between England and Scotland
  • The Withdrawal Agreement would clearly alter the constitutional status of Northern Ireland within the UK
  • It would amount to a major breach of the core principle of the Belfast (Good Friday) Agreement
  • According to the GFA, NI’s constitutional status cannot be changed without the consent of the people of Northern Ireland

The EU’s Withdrawal Treaty requires the imposition of tariffs between the UK and Northern Ireland. As the distinguished barrister and EU law specialist Martin Howe wrote yesterday in [paywall] the Daily Telegraph:

“International law does not justify a later treaty to which these community representatives are not parties being used to over-ride the rights they enjoy under the earlier treaty, especially where it involves over-riding such a fundamental right as the right to self determination of the people of NI.

“If there were any doubt that Parliament has this right, section 38 of the Withdrawal Agreement Act preserves Parliamentary sovereignty and makes it quite clear that Parliament has the right to pass the clauses which the government is proposing and thereby override these errant clauses in the Protocol.”

“The EU has a long history of disregarding adverse rulings by WTO disputes bodies, for example on subsidies to Airbus. The ECJ itself in a case called Portugal v Council decided that it should not give any direct effect to the WTO Agreements under EU law, because that would force compliance with the WTO obligations and so have the consequence of depriving the EU’s legislative or executive organs of the possibility entering into negotiated arrangements.”

The Protocol sets out the clear principle that NI is part of the customs territory of the UK, so goods should be allowed to flow from Great Britain to NI without tariffs. There are provisions for the UK authorities to levy EU tariffs on goods which are “at risk” of crossing the open border into the EU. The problem is that the circumstances in which goods are to be treated as “at risk” are not defined in the Protocol, and joint agreement is needed with the EU on the rules which would define this.”

keep your eye on em boris...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Complete rubbish, written for the Brexit Party and by a Daily Telegraph employee. 

Your sources are unreliable and fallacious. 

It isn't the EUs Withdrawal Agreement but the EU-UK agreed WA. We helped to write it, for goodness sake. Have you forgotten that? No one forced us to sign it.

If it was so bad why was that not mentioned last year when Johnson signed the WA and when he told the voters to vote for it in his manifesto? 

There has to be a border somewhere. Take the third bullet point for example. We knew that when we signed the WA!! It was Johnson's choice. NI had to remain in part within EU customs territory because there has to be a border between the UK and Eire unless you want a hard border in Ireland. Pray tell me where you want one, Dave.

"Override errant clauses." What the hell is that supposed to mean? The whole list is nonsense and would get laughed out of court. 

Don't let these charlatans twist the facts and claim black is white. It's not worth the paper its written on. 

Why is it that the government has lost two of its senior justice ministers and its top legal civil servant - all 3 resigning because they know this bill is illegal?

I remind you that Lewis stood up in the Commons and admitted to breaking the law. A government minister has admitted it, on record.

They are also breaking the ministerial code to uphold the law. It's shameful.

If you want another reference I give you the words of the Professor of International Law at Cambridge. Elliott is his name and he's arguably Britain's top legal expert. He says, "Getting MPs to vote in favour of Ministers breaching international law before they are allowed to do so still ultimately reduces to the same thing — breaching international law."

I quoted you what the Bar Council said the other day. The Bar Council.

I've quoted what Michael Howard and William Hague have said about the Government's proposal. 

We've had the Irish government expressing alarm and Joe Biden too. 

All these people aren't wrong. The UK is breaking the law. End of.

Nonsense and misinformation from the Brexit Party is completely unreliable and untrue. The Agreement was written and signed by both parties. Never lose sight of that. And the only person proposing to break it is Johnson.

With everything that's gone on in the past few months re- testing, examinations, care homes, Cummings testing his eyesight, and the rest, I really can't comprehend how anyone can believe a single word that Johnson tells us. I'm sorry but he's a proven liar and is now getting found out.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, TheSage said:

Complete rubbish, written for the Brexit Party and by a Daily Telegraph employee. 

Your sources are unreliable and fallacious. 

It isn't the EUs Withdrawal Agreement but the EU-UK agreed WA. We helped to write it, for goodness sake. Have you forgotten that? No one forced us to sign it.

If it was so bad why was that not mentioned last year when Johnson signed the WA and when he told the voters to vote for it in his manifesto? 

There has to be a border somewhere. Take the third bullet point for example. We knew that when we signed the WA!! It was Johnson's choice. NI had to remain in part within EU customs territory because there has to be a border between the UK and Eire unless you want a hard border in Ireland. Pray tell me where you want one, Dave.

"Override errant clauses." What the hell is that supposed to mean? The whole list is nonsense and would get laughed out of court. 

Don't let these charlatans twist the facts and claim black is white. It's not worth the paper its written on. 

Why is it that the government has lost two of its senior justice ministers and its top legal civil servant - all 3 resigning because they know this bill is illegal?

I remind you that Lewis stood up in the Commons and admitted to breaking the law. A government minister has admitted it, on record.

They are also breaking the ministerial code to uphold the law. It's shameful.

If you want another reference I give you the words of the Professor of International Law at Cambridge. Elliott is his name and he's arguably Britain's top legal expert. He says, "Getting MPs to vote in favour of Ministers breaching international law before they are allowed to do so still ultimately reduces to the same thing — breaching international law."

I quoted you what the Bar Council said the other day. The Bar Council.

I've quoted what Michael Howard and William Hague have said about the Government's proposal. 

We've had the Irish government expressing alarm and Joe Biden too. 

All these people aren't wrong. The UK is breaking the law. End of.

Nonsense and misinformation from the Brexit Party is completely unreliable and untrue. The Agreement was written and signed by both parties. Never lose sight of that. And the only person proposing to break it is Johnson.

With everything that's gone on in the past few months re- testing, examinations, care homes, Cummings testing his eyesight, and the rest, I really can't comprehend how anyone can believe a single word that Johnson tells us. I'm sorry but he's a proven liar and is now getting found out.

 

 

Section 38 doesn't lie Sage?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, TheSage said:

Complete rubbish, written for the Brexit Party and by a Daily Telegraph employee. 

Your sources are unreliable and fallacious. 

It isn't the EUs Withdrawal Agreement but the EU-UK agreed WA. We helped to write it, for goodness sake. Have you forgotten that? No one forced us to sign it.

If it was so bad why was that not mentioned last year when Johnson signed the WA and when he told the voters to vote for it in his manifesto? 

There has to be a border somewhere. Take the third bullet point for example. We knew that when we signed the WA!! It was Johnson's choice. NI had to remain in part within EU customs territory because there has to be a border between the UK and Eire unless you want a hard border in Ireland. Pray tell me where you want one, Dave.

"Override errant clauses." What the hell is that supposed to mean? The whole list is nonsense and would get laughed out of court. 

Don't let these charlatans twist the facts and claim black is white. It's not worth the paper its written on. 

Why is it that the government has lost two of its senior justice ministers and its top legal civil servant - all 3 resigning because they know this bill is illegal?

I remind you that Lewis stood up in the Commons and admitted to breaking the law. A government minister has admitted it, on record.

They are also breaking the ministerial code to uphold the law. It's shameful.

If you want another reference I give you the words of the Professor of International Law at Cambridge. Elliott is his name and he's arguably Britain's top legal expert. He says, "Getting MPs to vote in favour of Ministers breaching international law before they are allowed to do so still ultimately reduces to the same thing — breaching international law."

I quoted you what the Bar Council said the other day. The Bar Council.

I've quoted what Michael Howard and William Hague have said about the Government's proposal. 

We've had the Irish government expressing alarm and Joe Biden too. 

All these people aren't wrong. The UK is breaking the law. End of.

Nonsense and misinformation from the Brexit Party is completely unreliable and untrue. The Agreement was written and signed by both parties. Never lose sight of that. And the only person proposing to break it is Johnson.

With everything that's gone on in the past few months re- testing, examinations, care homes, Cummings testing his eyesight, and the rest, I really can't comprehend how anyone can believe a single word that Johnson tells us. I'm sorry but he's a proven liar and is now getting found out.

why is it everytime a remainer comments on this thread cummings eye sight comes up?

hindsight is a great thing, covid we all could have done things different, but it was a completley new scene, nobody had come up against anything like it, 7 months into it and we still dont know much about it, boris followed the experts who were still learning . When/if it ends then we will have the inquiery and finger pointing...

article 50  was passed by 498 to 114... SNP,PLAID CYMRU, Lib Dems, 47 Lab, and 1 Tory  never lose sight of that, so why are we still arguing and not home free?

nonsence and misinformation in your eyes, in ours its the BBC bias, the FT, and Observer...

 

 

34 minutes ago, TheSage said:

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Nofinikea said:

And what makes you think that the UK can broker better deals than the EU as a whole?

Why not?

Dont spin the old yarn of 60m compared to 600m. At the end of the day the EU bureaucrats line their own pockets with any deal made plus id rather have the full share of 60m than 1/27th deal of 600m. The US already export more to the U.K. than any other EU country plus they are desperate to build trade with any country at the moment as they compete with China.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's about time we started to accept the facts of what is going on rather than the nonsense put out by this embarrassing, incompetent government of liars.

Only yesterday we had Rabb telling us from NY that it's the nasty EU putting a border in the Irish Sea. Give me strength. We agreed to that border when we signed the treaty. What on earth is he talking about apart from this continuing propaganda he spouts blaming the EU, remainers or civil servants. We helped write the treaty and we signed it. 

We've had others on here claiming that the EU is going to starve the people of NI. Really? In 2020? You really think that's what will happen? They can't do that anyway because legally they'd be breaking the WA.

 We used our sovereignty to sign the WA. It's now binding in international law. It's not the EUs treaty foisted upon us against our will. We helped to frame it and Johnson signed it and then sold it to you lot as an oven ready deal, no more negotiation necessary, job done, move on. It was a pack of lies. 

A country can't go round trashing agreements before the ink is dry. You can't go back on your word of honour or we'd have total chaos and anarchy in international relations. What on earth would happen if all countries world-wide said we've changed our mind and we're not keeping our word? Parliament used its sovereignty to sign the Agreement. You can't unilaterally override it.

I'm still waiting for someone to tell me where you want a border. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 14/09/2020 at 11:32, Regal Beagle said:

Some more information I've come to learn about the recent updates which may come as a surprise to those in a remainer echo chamber.

 

-The UK has not broken an international law

-Even if the proposed bill passes, we still won't have broken international law, but it does give the UK Gov the domestic powers to do so.

-The law is apparently (according to the Government) an insurance policy to be used IF the EU were to carry through with their threats, which themselves would almost certainly be a breach of the agreement anyway. If that's true, then this is a way for the UK to remove this weapon from the EU's arsenal without ever having to break a law.

-Loophole was probably an incorrect word, it implies that what the EU were allegedly planning to do was lawful. The UK actually has terms in the agreement to ensure good faith and best endeavours when it comes to the EU negotiating.

 

 

 

The BBC today has retracted a story of David Cameron apparently supporting the rejection of the bill when he did not. Geoffrey Cox is also being misrepresented in the media as being overly sceptical when he in fact wasn't.

 

The remainer lies continue.

 

Yes,typical of the BBC,they never learn do they,editing a video clip of Cameron to "make it look like he was unsupportive of the goverment"

You couldn't make it up?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, geosname said:

What makes you think I think that? I never said or suggested that.

You argued that we are free to deal with other countries with bigger potential than the EU.  You listed America as one of those.  To do that we would have to negotiate a deal with them.  For us to be better off than now, that deal would have to be better than any deal they do with the USA.  Otherwise your assertation that whilst the EU is our current single biggest market, but not necessarily the biggest, which you went on to explain was potential other markwts by listing population figures was just meaningless waffle.

So, what makes you think that the UK can negotiate a better deal than the EU?  Or were you just saying stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, philpvfc said:

Why not?

Dont spin the old yarn of 60m compared to 600m. At the end of the day the EU bureaucrats line their own pockets with any deal made plus id rather have the full share of 60m than 1/27th deal of 600m. The US already export more to the U.K. than any other EU country plus they are desperate to build trade with any country at the moment as they compete with China.

so the population figures are a yarn?

Geo was arguing that there are potentially bigger markets than the EU and backed it up with population figures...  is that <ovf censored> then?  Is a market place of 1 Billion potentially not more attractive than 1Million?

You sound like Trump... fake news.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Reporting Posts and Ignoring Users

    Moderators don't read everything. Please don't assume we'll spot rule breaking (e.g. personal abuse) - use the orange report button above a post to alert them.

    If you can't get on with another forum user you can select the "ignore" option. Simply click on the link below, type in their username and save - Click here




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy