- 17,333
- United Kingdom
Brexit - The UK leaves the EU
- Thread starter Touring Mars
- 6,870 comments
- 301,636 views
- 20,681
- TenEightyOne
- TenEightyOne
It will be done. Big Liz has spoken.
- 29,964
- Bratvegas
- GTP_Liquid
Tax-dodging parasite.
- 29,376
- Glasgow
- GTP_Mars
Ruth Davidson must be feeling like a Japanese schoolboy right now...
- 20,681
- TenEightyOne
- TenEightyOne
Do we know the reasons for her resignation yet? I've just had an afternoon nap and the field is changing so quickly.
- 6,838
- Europe
- GTP_Slim
- PzR Slim
She said it was for personal and political reasons that have been developing over the past few months and nothing to do with today.
- 29,376
- Glasgow
- GTP_Mars
She opposes No Deal and doesn't support Boris Johnson, therefore her position as leader of the Scottish Conservatives is now totally untenable... as if it hasn't been for several weeks already.
Yeh... right.
- 11,297
- Sweden
- eran0004
It’s not worthless because it doesn’t satisfy the EU, it’s worthless because there is no guarantee that what the agreement says will align with the reality of a post-Brexit border.
The backstop was such a guarantee, because it said that if all else fail, certain mechanics would come in place to make sure that the border can stay open until another solution have been found.
As much as you like the agreement you must be able to realise that a practical solution to the border issue is needed and there won’t be one just because the Good Friday Agreement says so.
- 29,376
- Glasgow
- GTP_Mars
And those 'certain mechanics' are: a) The UK stays in the EU permanently b) Ireland is ejected from the Single Market or c) something else.
The UK government have repeatedly told the EU that the answer must be c, but the EU have consistently refused to entertain this idea... it's about time they woke up to the reality that this is the only option*.
The UK and Ireland have both committed (to each other and to their own electorates) that there will never be a return to a hard border in Ireland. So who is it that is insisting on there having to be one?! I wonder...
The backstop doesn't guarantee anything that hasn't already been guaranteed after decades of war and years of intense diplomacy. It is, ironically, a guarantee that the UK won't sign the Withdrawal Agreement - therefore, either it goes or the EU will have to find 'something else' to replace that hard border they seem to require but cannot have.
* Note that even if the UK decided to remain in the EU (the option I would prefer) just now, that still doesn't answer the question of what would happen in the future should the UK people exercise their right to leave the EU. In other words, if/when the UK decides to leave the EU, 'staying in' is not (and never was) a credible answer to that problem.
-
There's also something a tad ironic about people protesting against Parliament being laid off for a few weeks at such a crucial time when Parliament has been on holiday for over a month and doesn't come back until next week.
Last edited:
A petition against BoJo’s prorogue
already has over 900,000 signatures;
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/269157
Edit: over a million now
already has over 900,000 signatures;
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/269157
Edit: over a million now
Last edited:
- 1,377
- zzxxz
Don't forget that they were going to have most of that time off for party conferences anyway.
Allowing MP’s a holiday seems reasonable... I’m not sure where the irony is?
- 30,021
- Cuddington, Cheshire
- JDA1982
I'd like to see everyone go into work tomorrow and ask for a month off all at the same time as each other and see what their bosses say. I know what I'd say to my staff if they all asked for next month off. Everyones entitled to a holiday, including MP's, but I think you're missing the point.
- 11,297
- Sweden
- eran0004
It’s d) the UK or Northern Ireland remains in the customs union until a c) can be found.
The backstop is a last resort to prevent a hard border, that’s the whole point of it. If you remove the backstop, it will be replaced by a hard border and the Good Friday Agreement can’t do anything about it because if you leave the border open you will essentially say that “we reserve the right to make our own laws and regulations regarding trade and traded goods, but we will leave this gigantic loophole open for anyone who wishes to ignore them.”
And I totally understand that the backstop sounds awful if you want to get out of the EU, but to claim that there won’t be a hard border because of the Good Friday Agreement is simply wrong. The Good Friday Agreement is a “what” and the backstop is a “how”. If there is no “how”, then goodbye “what”.
- 30,021
- Cuddington, Cheshire
- JDA1982
You really don't see the irony in that they have been off since the 25th July yet are complaining about Parliament being suspended for 5 days? Ok.
I don't want a no deal exit, nor am I pro leave, but these guys have had 3 years to sort this farce out, complaiing about 5 days is laughable IMO. They have had plenty of chance to work together for the good of the country but they have refused to do that, instead opting to play at party politics when it's really been a time to knuckle down together and sort the mess out.
I don't, you are correct.
Parliament has been in session for a while now and I have no issue with holidays. But yes, further blocking MP's in Parliament from acting to try and prevent no-deal so Bojo can maybe play chicken with the EU and the country's future (not his own of course) is total ********.
So, just let Bojo do what he wants? No where did the Tory's campaign to the public that they would push, aggressively for no-deal, yet here we have a new leader elected by his own party, pushing a drastic change that will have lasting effects... and the public and Parliament gets no say?
As per the FT article I linked and took an excerpt from;
Yet here we are, with a PM no one outside of the Tories wanted, pushing it through anyway and trying to block any attempt to stop him.
A half truth, but even if it was totally accurate, removing opportunities to resolve this so that it avoids no-deal is not something to be laughed at or belittled.
- 17,333
- United Kingdom
MP's are useless, the fact we don't "need" them during a time of massive turmoil is evidence of this.
- 29,376
- Glasgow
- GTP_Mars
I don't disagree with much of your analysis, but the crucial problem with d) is that there is no legal exit mechanism that the UK can ever apply should the backstop ever come into force.
The Political Declaration merely states a desire to achieve a future trade deal (between the UK and the EU) that would render the backstop obsolete, but it is not legally binding. That leaves open the very real (and quite likely) scenario that the EU will not strike a trade deal with the UK that allows the backstop to be removed unless that deal involves keeping the UK inside the Single Market permanently, but with no say over the rules of the Single Market.
Importantly, the ultimate decision as to whether the criteria for c) have been fulfilled lies entirely with the EU and entirely not with the UK, which is why the backstop is neither economically, legally or morally acceptable.
With the backstop ruled out by Parliament repeatedly (three votes against it and one vote in favour of dropping it), the EU had a responsibility (should it wish to prevent No Deal) to respond to that by agreeing to work towards a more acceptable solution - a more formal commitment than is currently given by the Political Declaration toward a fair trade deal that does not keep the UK permanently locked inside the EU's legal orbit without a means of exit... but not only have they not done that, they have refused to even negotiate at all.
Not that I entirely agree with Johnson's approach, but this at least explains why he is doing what he is doing. If the EU agreed to drop the backstop and accept the reality that neither Ireland or the UK will ever install a hard border, then there is still a chance that the EU and the UK can agree a different form of temporary arrangement while a new system of mutual customs checks is implemented in Ireland, but crucially that does not permanently lock the UK into the Single Market with no EU voting rights.
-
The EU say that they will not accept UK "promises" on finding alternatives to the backstop, but at the same time they expect the UK to accept their promises (i.e. non legally binding commitments as stated in the Political Declaration) that they will ever let the UK leave the backstop.
The trouble is, if the EU do not accept that the UK can (ever) implement alternatives to the backstop, then (by their own admission) they won't (ever) be willing or able to let us leave! That's the problem.
Last edited:
How can we take control of our borders if we have an open border? And surely any form of customs checks (mutual or otherwise) will have to involve some form of border.
- 29,376
- Glasgow
- GTP_Mars
As has been stated previously, there's a difference between allowing people to come and go into an area and affording those people the right to live and work in that area. Freedom of Movement - one of the cornerstones of the EU project - enables both, whereas Brexit will end the latter, but not necessarily the former. Indeed, it has always been the stated aim of both the Irish and UK government that, irrespective of whatever form Brexit takes, Ireland will remain a common travel area as it is today. The difference after Brexit, however, is that EU nationals will no longer have the automatic right to live or work north of the border.
Customs checks can (and already do) exist at all external Irish ports so there's no particular need to introduce new physical infrastructure at the border, though there will of course need to be new systems put in place to monitor cross-border trade. But, once again, both the UK and Irish governments have repeatedly committed to no infrastructure at the border, which compels both to finding new ways to satisfy the requirements of both UK and EU customs.
- 20,681
- TenEightyOne
- TenEightyOne
