Brexit discussion thread II

blanch152 · 12-09-2017 04:05PM

demfad wrote: »

Edit: To understand the dangers of this Bill ask yourself: What would someone like Donald Trump do with it? Or (more pertinently with Brexit) what would the people behind Donald Trump like to see done with this Bill?

Not only that, with the five year fixed-term parliaments, plenty of time for such a government to eliminate all opposition.

Zubeneschamali · 12-09-2017 05:52PM

Fratton Fred wrote: »

I would hazard s guess and say that if a minister deleted those clauses, they would be doing so to amend those issues and this would be overturned by a court

If people are reduced to hazarding guesses about how the legislation might prevent the PM from running roughshod over Parliament, perhaps an amendment might be in order.

oscarBravo · 12-09-2017 06:19PM

Fratton Fred wrote: »

I get where you are coming from, it is poor drafting, but I would hazard s guess and say that if a minister deleted those clauses, they
Would be doing so to amend those issues and this would be overturned by a court

Overturned on what basis? Such an action wouldn't be illegal or unconstitutional, would it?

Fratton Fred · 12-09-2017 08:07PM

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

If people are reduced to hazarding guesses about how the legislation might prevent the PM from running roughshod over Parliament, perhaps an amendment might be in order.

Which is probably why 157 amendments have been tabled, I guess.

Fratton Fred · 12-09-2017 08:11PM

oscarBravo wrote: »

Overturned on what basis? Such an action wouldn't be illegal or unconstitutional, would it?

So, what's the solution then? A shed load of legislation has to go uniquely in to the various different legal systems in the uk. There's lots of people throwing their hands in the air and predicting that th UK is about to experience its own night of the long knives, but there aren't many alternatives being thrown around.

It's the first reading, it has a long way to go before becoming law.

oppenheimer1 · 12-09-2017 08:38PM

Fratton Fred wrote: »

no they can't, because section 9(3) specifically states:

I get where you are coming from, it is poor drafting, but I would hazard s guess and say that if a minister deleted those clauses, they
Would be doing so to amend those issues and this would be overturned by a court

It's a key section of the legislation. It's not poor drafting, open ends like this are intentional. This bill, least we forget has been in the world for over a year.

The UK courts uphold the laws passed by the Parliament so the courts will be powerless if certain provisions are amended in order to change other legislation.

Things are starting to get interesting now as the data out today so the UK population is now getting poorer since the vote. Lots of pressures seem to be building

Fratton Fred · 12-09-2017 09:29PM

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

It's a key section of the legislation. It's not poor drafting, open ends like this are intentional. This bill, least we forget has been in the world for over a year.

the white paper has, the actual wording is fairly recent.

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

The UK courts uphold the laws passed by the Parliament so the courts will be powerless if certain provisions are amended in order to change other legislation.

The courts will interpret the laws passed, not blindly uphold them. They also work on the basis that no one is above the law, so if a minister changes the bill by deleting the restrictions contained within, the Supreme Court could conceivably consider that to be illegal as they are doing so purely to amend etc tax, human rights etc etc. It is also very clear in the original legislation what the purpose is and changing or deleting those clauses is clearly against the purpose. In fact, one of the governments problems could be that the bill is so vague, a lot of what it does could be open to challenge through the courts.

steddyeddy · 12-09-2017 10:06PM

A letter to the Irish Times today. Criticising Brexit is now anti-British. I guess all remainers must be anti-British so.

Sir. – Your newspaper’s strongly anti-British stance serves only to muddy the waters.

Try to accept that the British people have voted democratically to leave the EU and that, Sir, is exactly what we will do. Respect the will of the British people and offer a lead to all people of goodwill to help minimise the fallout. – Yours, etc,

DAVID E ELLIS,

Swindon,

England.

View · 12-09-2017 11:21PM

Fratton Fred wrote: »

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

It's a key section of the legislation. It's not poor drafting, open ends like this are intentional. This bill, least we forget has been in the world for over a year.

the white paper has, the actual wording is fairly recent.

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

The UK courts uphold the laws passed by the Parliament so the courts will be powerless if certain provisions are amended in order to change other legislation.

The courts will interpret the laws passed, not blindly uphold them. They also work on the basis that no one is above the law, so if a minister changes the bill by deleting the restrictions contained within, the Supreme Court could conceivably consider that to be illegal as they are doing so purely to amend etc tax, human rights etc etc. It is also very clear in the original legislation what the purpose is and changing or deleting those clauses is clearly against the purpose. In fact, one of the governments problems could be that the bill is so vague, a lot of what it does could be open to challenge through the courts.

If Parliament grants a Minister to make such amendments at will, then it would clearly be the sovereign wish of Parliament that the Minister has such power. The courts would have to accept that under the "Parliament is sovereign" principle.

It would require a constitutional revolution for them to suddenly decide to throw that principle out in favour of a "Parliament is sovereign but not in this case because the Minister is using the powers that Parliament granted him/her in an area we don't like" principle.

murphaph · 12-09-2017 11:43PM

Slowly but surely Brexit is becoming all consuming. Parliament will have little time to do anything else for the next number of years. That's terrible for the UK people really.

Panrich · 12-09-2017 11:59PM

I don't see much succour here for proponents of Brexit. There is still a false belief among many Brexiteers that the German car industry will come to their rescue.

http://news.sky.com/story/germany-plans-for-worst-case-scenario-brexit-11032175

murphaph · 13-09-2017 12:13AM

That message has been sent loud and clear for months now but yes, it's still failing to get through to far too many in the UK who are in for a big shock when they fall over the cliff's edge. Ireland will need to hold on tight too of course.

FrancieBrady · 13-09-2017 06:26AM

murphaph wrote: »

That message has been sent loud and clear for months now but yes, Irish still failing to get through to far too many in the UK who are in for a big shock when they fall over the cliff's edge. Ireland will need to hold on tight too of course.

The difference being that we have something to hold on to.

demfad · 13-09-2017 10:18AM

murphaph wrote: »

That message has been sent loud and clear for months now but yes, it's still failing to get through to far too many in the UK who are in for a big shock when they fall over the cliff's edge. Ireland will need to hold on tight too of course.

Ireland is perceived as the weak link by the UK. So a hard Brexit holds a gun to Ireland's head as well as the UK's. If maximising damage to Ireland helps the UKs position it is clear that it will happen. If and when it does they will offer us (and others) a generous bilateral deal to pull us from the EU herd.
(Worringly on many fronts, The RW/Russian axis are spreading the Ire-exit theme on SM, US funded climate denial groups are up etc. they are preparing for this).

Enda Kennys shocking facilitation of Theresa May's absolute BS on the border should be pointed out. He knew there was no solution to this with a hard Brexit. She played him. If the Taoiseach had been a strong critic of the indefensible we might, might be in a better place now.

murphaph · 13-09-2017 10:35AM

demfad wrote: »

Ireland is perceived as the weak link by the UK. So a hard Brexit holds a gun to Ireland's head as well as the UK's. If maximising damage to Ireland helps the UKs position it is clear that it will happen. If and when it does they will offer us (and others) a generous bilateral deal to pull us from the EU herd.
(Worringly on many fronts, The RW/Russian axis are spreading the Ire-exit theme on SM, US funded climate denial groups are up etc. they are preparing for this).

Enda Kennys shocking facilitation of Theresa May's absolute BS on the border should be pointed out. He knew there was no solution to this with a hard Brexit. She played him. If the Taoiseach had been a strong critic of the indefensible we might, might be in a better place now.

Sounds quite plausible. Mr. Putin played the US and UK electorates like a fiddle. I hope we are all now aware of the sinister ways in which the ex KGB man can try to steer the agenda. People might not think he'd care about Ireland but that is wrong. His goal is to weaken the EU and that can only happen one country at a time.

Spread the word to those less media savvy!

blanch152 · 13-09-2017 10:42AM

demfad wrote: »

Ireland is perceived as the weak link by the UK. So a hard Brexit holds a gun to Ireland's head as well as the UK's. If maximising damage to Ireland helps the UKs position it is clear that it will happen. If and when it does they will offer us (and others) a generous bilateral deal to pull us from the EU herd.
(Worringly on many fronts, The RW/Russian axis are spreading the Ire-exit theme on SM, US funded climate denial groups are up etc. they are preparing for this).

Enda Kennys shocking facilitation of Theresa May's absolute BS on the border should be pointed out. He knew there was no solution to this with a hard Brexit. She played him. If the Taoiseach had been a strong critic of the indefensible we might, might be in a better place now.

In a hard Brexit, Ireland will be damaged, but as many others have said, not as much as the UK.

The EU will want to ensure that they don't lose Ireland as well, so considerable assistance both financial (costs of border, new infrastructure for direct trading with the Continent etc.) and non-financial (Medicines Agency, allow our low-cost corporate tax regime to continue).

The key to Ireland surviving a hard Brexit is to be flexible. Some domestic industries and services will be damaged - food exports, UK multiples etc. - but there will be oppportunities in financial services and other areas which we will have to move fast to take advantage of. Hopefully, it will just be a short-term shock but a long-term benefit.

Water John · 13-09-2017 10:42AM

I think the strategic plan of Ire Inc to maximise the influence with the EU and to which they devoted considerable time and resources, is the one that will pay maximum dividend for us.
Let the EU front up for us. They have a much bigger stick.

Professor Moriarty · 13-09-2017 10:53AM

murphaph wrote: »

Sounds quite plausible. Mr. Putin played the US and UK electorates like a fiddle. I hope we are all now aware of the sinister ways in which the ex KGB man can try to steer the agenda. People might not think he'd care about Ireland but that is wrong. His goal is to weaken the EU and that can only happen one country at a time.

Spread the word to those less media savvy!

I dunno. I don't think there is enough existing eurosceptism to be built on. This poll from Feb 2017 shows that Irish people are very pro-European. From the article:

90% of those interviewed agreed with the freedom of movement of persons and ability to work anywhere within the EU member states, while 81% had a positive view on immigration for other EU member states.
55% of Irish have a positive image of the EU, which is the highest in any member state, and 20 points above the average.
67% of Irish interviewed would be against an "Irexit" from the EU, while 25% would be pro.

Interestingly, the survey showed a correlation between levels of education and distrust in the EU, with data showing that the more education someone had, the more likely they were to be pro-European Union. In this context, it must be noted that we are very educated compared to the OECD average.

85% of Irish people are in favour of economic and monetary union, including the euro (surprisingly, the EU average is 70%). Also, the clusterfúck that Brexit is creating for Britain since February can only have increased support for Ireland remaining in the EU since the poll was taken.

murphaph · 13-09-2017 11:18AM

Agreed that it would take a herculean effort by Putin but we still need to remain vigilant.

Some interesting speeches in the European Parliament today. The state of the union address by Juncker focused on reform of the institutions.

They have already forgotten Brexit. It's a side show now for the EU. The priority now is to strengthen the 27. The UK will be really out in the cold in a couple of years.

solodeogloria · 13-09-2017 11:22AM

murphaph wrote: »

Agreed that it would take a herculean effort by Putin but we still need to remain vigilant.

Some interesting speeches in the European Parliament today. The state of the union address by Juncker focused on reform of the institutions.

They have already forgotten Brexit. It's a side show now for the EU. The priority now is to strengthen the 27. The UK will be really out in the cold in a couple of years.

Good morning!

I don't get why this is a problem. The UK voted to leave. That's the outcome they want. I don't think the British people mind too much if the UK isn't a preoccupation in Brussels. This is the way it should be. The British people voted out.

I'm much much more interested in the technical details of Brexit than poster after poster prophesying armageddon with no basis for it.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

Professor Moriarty · 13-09-2017 11:24AM

murphaph wrote: »

Agreed that it would take a herculean effort by Putin but we still need to remain vigilant.

Some interesting speeches in the European Parliament today. The state of the union address by Juncker focused on reform of the institutions.

They have already forgotten Brexit. It's a side show now for the EU. The priority now is to strengthen the 27. The UK will be really out in the cold in a couple of years.

Yeah. He was very circumspect (despite being heckled by Farage) and the tone seems to be about moving on without Britain. Of course, this will be ignored by the British press who still portray the EU as being terrified by Brexit. The reality is that it has already been factored into future plans.

blanch152 · 13-09-2017 11:34AM

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good morning!

I don't get why this is a problem. The UK voted to leave. That's the outcome they want. I don't think the British people mind too much if the UK isn't a preoccupation in Brussels. This is the way it should be. The British people voted out.

I'm much much more interested in the technical details of Brexit than poster after poster prophesying armageddon with no basis for it.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

Interesting to hear how well-advanced the trade deals with Mexico and Mercosur are and that Australia and New Zealand are next. How are the UK getting on with theirs?

murphaph · 13-09-2017 11:38AM

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good morning!

I don't get why this is a problem. The UK voted to leave. That's the outcome they want. I don't think the British people mind too much if the UK isn't a preoccupation in Brussels. This is the way it should be. The British people voted out.

I'm much much more interested in the technical details of Brexit than poster after poster prophesying armageddon with no basis for it.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

The UK needs a deal. The EU can survive on WTO rules without one.

Let's not pretend it's a negotiation of equals. The fact London is now pushing for weekly negotiations shows that desperation is setting in.

The UK fatally miscalculated the relative positions of all parties. There will be no Knight in shining BMW armour coming to the rescue of the UK. The obvious reality that the UK needs the single market much more than the EU27 needs the UK market is undeniable.

Professor Moriarty · 13-09-2017 11:47AM

blanch152 wrote: »

Interesting to hear how well-advanced the trade deals with Mexico and Mercosur are and that Australia and New Zealand are next. How are the UK getting on with theirs?

The recent trip to Japan didn't go very well for May. From the BBC's report (note that the University Prof has an unfortunate name as the Boards filter highlights):

"Japanese companies are getting frustrated with the lack of answers from Mrs May on a concrete position vis a vis EU access," Seijiro Take****a, from the University of Shizuoka, tells me.
"Mrs May can't answer that yet. And because she's not giving any concrete measures, that is exacerbating the worries of Japanese companies."
Privately, some in Tokyo's business circles are saying that Japanese companies based in the UK are already looking for alternative sites in Europe for their headquarters and manufacturing sites.

And:

Compound that with the fact that the focus for the Japanese is completing the "cars for cheese" trade deal they hammered out with the EU in July, and you can see why this trip may not go all that well for Mrs May.
"The EU is a much larger economy, and the reason why so many Japanese companies were in the UK in the first place was to get access to the EU market," says Mr Take****a.

And:

The EU-Japan deal is a priority for Tokyo.
It took four years and 18 rounds of negotiations, and it still needs to be ironed out, so "Japan will be distracted for now with that, and with the conclusion of the TPP-11 [Trans-Pacific Partnership] deal in Sydney", says Deborah Elms, from the Asian Trade Centre.

All of this ever before Britain has begun its own trade negotiations. Rinse and repeat globally.

LeinsterDub · 13-09-2017 11:48AM

demfad wrote: »

Ireland is perceived as the weak link by the UK. So a hard Brexit holds a gun to Ireland's head as well as the UK's. If maximising damage to Ireland helps the UKs position it is clear that it will happen. If and when it does they will offer us (and others) a generous bilateral deal to pull us from the EU herd

I don't think the EU members can accept bilateral deals. Can they?

oppenheimer1 · 13-09-2017 11:49AM

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good morning!

I don't get why this is a problem. The UK voted to leave. That's the outcome they want. I don't think the British people mind too much if the UK isn't a preoccupation in Brussels. This is the way it should be. The British people voted out.

I'm much much more interested in the technical details of Brexit than poster after poster prophesying armageddon with no basis for it.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

You must not read the Brexit press. The Telegraph and in particular it's comments section obsess over Brexit and it's potential "catastrophic" effects on the European economy.

Junkers speech, although didn't make much reference to Brexit, completely riled them for some reason.

ambro25 · 13-09-2017 11:50AM

solodeogloria wrote: »

I'm much much more interested in the technical details of Brexit than poster after poster prophesying armageddon with no basis for it.

Those be the "technical details" which Davis and his team have so far proven incapable of coming up with, and the responsibility for which (at least insofar as Northern Ireland is concerned) the EU placed solely at their feet a week ago?

By the evidence of media reports for the past 15 months [and politicians' (so much Brits as EU ones) well-known penchant for leaving anything and everything to the last second, never less typified for the British side than by their steadfast reliance on the "nothing is agreed until everything is agreed" mantra), you're likely to be waiting another 18 months I'm afraid.

LeinsterDub wrote: »

I don't think the EU members can accept bilateral deals. Can they?

They can, if the subject-matter of such deals lie outside the scope of the TEU/TFEU and associated EU competences, or if such bilateral deals are "made compatible with" the TEU/TFEU and associated EU competences. For instance, FR and the UK concluded the bilateral Le Touquet Agreement long after both were EU Member States.

Equally however, anything bilateral between the UK and an EU/EFTA/EEA/CU Member State involving a core EU competency, such as trade or movement of persons, is deffo not going to fly with Brussels.

Zubeneschamali · 13-09-2017 11:51AM

solodeogloria wrote: »

I'm much much more interested in the technical details of Brexit than poster after poster prophesying armageddon with no basis for it.

The problem with discussing the technical details of Brexit is that there aren't any yet.

It is impossible to tell from the UKs contradictory goals which ones they are really going to aim for when the posturing stops and the real negotiations actually start.

blanch152 · 13-09-2017 12:01PM

LeinsterDub wrote: »

I don't think the EU members can accept bilateral deals. Can they?

No, there is no possibility of Ireland doing a bilateral deal with the UK. That is why there is a difficulty with the Good Friday Agreement. It was only possible within a common EU framework. By leaving the EU, the UK are reversing aspects of the GFA which are now unimplementable.

Thankfully, times have changed and the republican nuts who might want to start some aggro won't be tolerated.

murphaph wrote: »

The UK needs a deal. The EU can survive on WTO rules without one.

Let's not pretend it's a negotiation of equals. The fact London is now pushing for weekly negotiations shows that desperation is setting in.

The UK fatally miscalculated the relative positions of all parties. There will be no Knight in shining BMW armour coming to the rescue of the UK. The obvious reality that the UK needs the single market much more than the EU27 needs the UK market is undeniable.

This is pretty much it. Juncker was sending a message to the UK with his statement. By showing that there was a push to finalise Mexico and Mercosur trade deals and commence new ones with Australia and New Zealand, he was showing the UK that the EU is moving to insulate itself from any Brexit economic shock.

The silence on UK trade deals means that they are heading for a cliff. The third quarter economic results from the UK will be interesting.

listermint · 13-09-2017 12:10PM

blanch152 wrote: »

No, there is no possibility of Ireland doing a bilateral deal with the UK. That is why there is a difficulty with the Good Friday Agreement. It was only possible within a common EU framework. By leaving the EU, the UK are reversing aspects of the GFA which are now unimplementable.

Thankfully, times have changed and the republican nuts who might want to start some aggro won't be tolerated.

This is pretty much it. Juncker was sending a message to the UK with his statement. By showing that there was a push to finalise Mexico and Mercosur trade deals and commence new ones with Australia and New Zealand, he was showing the UK that the EU is moving to insulate itself from any Brexit economic shock.

The silence on UK trade deals means that they are heading for a cliff. The third quarter economic results from the UK will be interesting.

Was listening to Newstalk the other day and with reference to AppleGreen who have substantial british interests (Fuel forecourts) They were very much indicating in Q1 Q2 as to how there was no negative impact at all, But they are now stating that this has been a significant reduction in performance across all of their entities and this is just menial items like coffee and chocolate bars at the petrol station. - usually the first things to go are small luxuries when people are tightening the belts.

Expect more, I think retail is going to have a tough Christmas in the UK this year.

Brexit discussion thread II

Comments