Brexit discussion thread X (Please read OP before posting)

Joe_ Public · 08-09-2019 11:38AM

Dunno was anybody listening to Sajid Javid on the Marr show earlier. Was quite something, think he basically accused Amber Rudd of being a barefaced liar when she suggested no serious negotiations were taking place, but will let that go for now. He also said the PM will not break the law in relation to the Benn bill but that he will categorically not be asking for an extension on the 19th October and that they'll be leaving the EU on the 31st. One way of interpreting that paradox is that they are supremely confident they will find some sort of loophole that will get them out of the extension request bill. Probably something ancient and arcane that will keep the courts busy. A case of watching this space i imagine.

declanflynn · 08-09-2019 11:46AM

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Dunno was anybody listening to Sajid Javid on the Marr show earlier. Was quite something, think he basically accused Amber Rudd of being a barefaced liar when she suggested no serious negotiations were taking place, but will let that go for now. He also said the PM will not break the law in relation to the Benn bill but that he will categorically not be asking for an extension on the 19th October and that they'll be leaving the EU on the 31st. One way of interpreting that paradox is that they are supremely confident they will find some sort of loophole that will get them out of the extension request bill. Probably something ancient and arcane that will keep the courts busy. A case of watching this space i imagine.

Javid always comes accross as an idiot, the will keep singing the same song, deep down the know the game is up, dup under the bus is the most lightly way out of the cul de sac

murphaph · 08-09-2019 11:47AM

cryptocurrency wrote: »

Problem solved for Ireland but the EU don't want britain free and it will kill the EU with trade

Give it a rest. It was the Brits that asked to extend the NI only backstop to GB to keep the DUP on side. If it hadn't been for that GB would be well on its way to the sunlit uplands by now.

Joe_ Public · 08-09-2019 11:49AM

declanflynn wrote: »

Javid always comes accross as an idiot, the will keep singing the same song, deep down the know the game is up, dup under the bus is the most lightly way out of the cul de sac

Javid also claimed the UK have a proposal for renegotiations, but of course he couldnt divulge what it was, god forbid, because that is not how you do negotiating. It is such a zinger, a gamechanger, that it would be "madness" to discuss it in public lest......well, who the heck knows really....

Shelga · 08-09-2019 11:50AM

Sajid Javid strikes me as someone who does actually want to do good for the country outside of Brexit- unlike, say, Dominic Raab- but he has sold his soul to be Chancellor in this government, and there is no going back.

Cannot trust a word he says on Brexit- therefore cannot trust anything he says on future spending, as no one knows just how bad the impact of a hard Brexit would be.

Professor Moriarty · 08-09-2019 11:53AM

cryptocurrency wrote: »

You do have a lot of faith in this frenchman.

He was born in England.

declanflynn · 08-09-2019 11:54AM

cryptocurrency wrote: »

Shelga wrote: »

Sajid Javid strikes me as someone who does actually want to do good for the country outside of Brexit- unlike, say, Dominic Raab- but he has sold his soul to be Chancellor in this government, and there is no going back.

Cannot trust a word he says on Brexit- therefore cannot trust anything he says on future spending, as no one knows just how bad the impact of a hard Brexit would be.

No he understands the City and its importance and don't want the EU and their grubby overregulation getting their hands on it

Too late mate €700 billion already moved from london to other financial centres

cryptocurrency · 08-09-2019 11:56AM

declanflynn wrote: »

Too late mate €700 billion already moved from london to other financial centres

jeysus much more then that left HK back to mainland china in the last few weeks so I suppose they are doomed too.

Rolls eyes.

08-09-2019 12:01PM

What would happen if the game plan is Johnson resigning on the 31st?

He can't ask for extension, and parliament can't elect a new caretaker PM.

Zubeneschamali · 08-09-2019 12:03PM

Deleted User wrote: »

What would happen if the game plan is Johnson resigning on the 31st?

Parliament will take further action well in advance of the 31st if Boris defies them and the law.

Sam Russell · 08-09-2019 12:03PM

Mortelaro wrote: »

GM228 wrote: »

Not appointing is not compulsory retirement. Compulsory retirement is something which can only be done by the European Court of Justice and only where the member concerned no longer fulfills the conditions required for the performance of their duties or if they have been guilty of serious misconduct.

The ECJ is bound to operate within the confines of the TFEU and the TEU which dictates these matters, there is no provision for the ECJ to alter them, that is beyond it's competence.

The matters surrounding the membership and operation of the Commission is set by the TFEU and the TEU, there are no creative ways around those treaties and for good reason.

Whoever thought this idea up is actually very smart and obviously well versed in EU law as it really could hold the EU to ransom.

That's your opinion
Until you prove that you are a constitutional lawyer or privy to the inner workings of the commission that's all it is as is mine
Regardless, I'm not concerned for the reasons I posted earlier
The UK parliament is well able to legislate to undo mr Cummings plans and the EU commission are well able to accommodate that

It was a surprise when the ECJ decided that the UK could unilaterally revoke Art 50 - as it was the perceived wisdom that it would require a unanimous vote by all EU 28 to agree to a revoke.

If the UK decide not to appoint a commissioner, then at what point is it necessary for such a commissioner to be present and voting?

Unanimous decisions in the EU are rare, and could be decided by 'nem con', that is no one voting against. Would the (voluntary) absence of a UK Commissioner be much of a problem?

Is it a requirement that the Commissioner is nominated by the UK Gov? Could the Crown nominate a Commissioner (on instruction from the HoC?

It all sounds a bit of a Cumming cunning plan from Baldrick.

johnnyskeleton · 08-09-2019 12:04PM

cryptocurrency wrote: »

You do have a lot of faith in this frenchman

declanflynn wrote: »

You have a lot of faith in depaffel the Turkish man

Mod note:

Stop the one liners please

Capt'n Midnight · 08-09-2019 12:08PM

GM228 wrote: »

What is outlined for in your post is provided for under the TEU and TFEU where there is unanimous agreement of the European Council, it requires unanimous agreement of each head of state including the UK so long as they remain a member of the EU.

The two salient points remain in all circumstances.

* The commission has operated for months while waiting for replacements.

* The commissioners act in the interests of the EU not their own country.

Boris not nominating a replacement won't stop the EU from functioning.

Joe_ Public · 08-09-2019 12:08PM

Deleted User wrote: »

What would happen if the game plan is Johnson resigning on the 31st?

He can't ask for extension, and parliament can't elect a new caretaker PM.

The bill compels him to seek the extension not later than the 19th, so that presumably gives them time to manoeuvre in the event of PM not playing ball. But to be honest, i dont think anybody really knows what happens if all this comes to pass.

prawnsambo · 08-09-2019 12:21PM

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

The two salient points remain in all circumstances.

* The commission has operated for months while waiting for replacements.

* The commissioners act in the interests of the EU not their own country.

Boris not nominating a replacement won't stop the EU from functioning.

Just to put this one to bed. Here's an actual expert in EU law on the subject.

briany · 08-09-2019 12:22PM

I doubt this can happen, but what ought to happen is that if Boris openly defied parliament, then the executive power should transfer to the next highest in government to perform the task. If that person refuses, hand off to the next, and the next, and the next until someone willing is found, even if it's the leader of the opposition.

GM228 · 08-09-2019 12:27PM

Sam Russell wrote: »

It was a surprise when the ECJ decided that the UK could unilaterally revoke Art 50 - as it was the perceived wisdom that it would require a unanimous vote by all EU 28 to agree to a revoke.

Not really, it was held that it would have turned a unilateral sovereign right into a conditional right and that was not compatible with EU law.

Sam Russell wrote: »

If the UK decide not to appoint a commissioner, then at what point is it necessary for such a commissioner to be present and voting?

The commissioner must be present for the commission to function and for anything resulting from the commission having legal force, not just for voting rights.

Sam Russell wrote: »

Unanimous decisions in the EU are rare, and could be decided by 'nem con', that is no one voting against. Would the (voluntary) absence of a UK Commissioner be much of a problem?

That's because the TFEU allows in the majority of matters for majority decisions, however in the case of a reduction in the number of commissioners it requires a unanimous decision of the EC.

Sam Russell wrote: »

Is it a requirement that the Commissioner is nominated by the UK Gov? Could the Crown nominate a Commissioner (on instruction from the HoC?

It all sounds a bit of a Cumming cunning plan from Baldrick.

The commissioner is recommended by the PM in conjunction with advice of the Foreign Secretary.

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

The two salient points remain in all circumstances.

* The commission has operated for months while waiting for replacements.

* The commissioners act in the interests of the EU not their own country.

Boris not nominating a replacement won't stop the EU from functioning.

Indeed, and in relation to the first point unanimous agreement was required from the EC to do so. Without such agreement the numbers can not be reduced and the Commission can not function as required under the TEU in which case the second point bears no relevance.

prawnsambo wrote: »

Just to put this one to bed. Here's an actual expert in EU law on the subject.

It's interesting to note he mentions Martin Bangemann, the matter was referred to the ECJ by the EC in 1999.

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:31999D0494

However, several ECJ judgments dealing with the matter all confirmed that a unanimous decision of the EC was required to reduce the numbers.

For example see the Germany vs Commission of EC Case C334-99 case:-

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1567942342589&uri=CELEX:61999CJ0334

Findings of the Court

According to the second paragraph of Article 213(1) EC, and the second paragraph of Article 9(1) CS, the number of Members of the Commission may be altered by the Council, acting unanimously.

Or the Kvaerner Warnow Werft GmbH vs Commission of EC Joined Cases T-227/99 and T-134/00 case:-

The second paragraph of Article 215 EC lays down the rules for replacing a member of the Commission: [t]he vacancy thus caused shall be filled for the remainder of the Member's term of office by a new Member appointed by common accord of the governments of the Member States. The Council may, acting unanimously, decide that such a vacancy need not be filled

The Commission's decision of 1 July 1999 cannot therefore be interpreted as a decision to reduce the number of Members of the Commission, a decision which only the Council, acting unanimously, may take under the second subparagraph of Article 213(1) EC.

The ECJ has indeed confirmed the Commission can continue to work with less than the required number of commissioners but only upon unanimous agreement of the EC in accordance with the TFU and TFEU meaning the PM must also agree with this.

Now it is put to bed.

Hermy · 08-09-2019 12:58PM

briany wrote: »

As for removing him before that, I don't think the parliamentary will is there for that.

Perhaps but the Tories think otherwise it seems.

briany · 08-09-2019 01:12PM

Hermy wrote: »

Perhaps but the Tories think otherwise it seems.

With the purge that's gone on in the Cons, it's really not surprising that they'll try to oust him by not giving them their support at the next GE. Then again, he's one of the most recognisable faces in parliament and therefore least needing of party support. Same thing as Ken Clarke, who could probably get reelected, if he wanted to, but he's retiring.

Bercow has said he'd planned on stepping down over the Summer, but he was astute not to, because you know that the current 'government' would have tried their level best to get someone into the chair who was little more than their puppet.

cryptocurrency · 08-09-2019 01:13PM

Hermy wrote: »

Perhaps but the Tories think otherwise it seems.

They will hold on as long as they can but they all know the game is up. Boris holds his nerve and gets in november election and he is king in the UK for 5 years.

Mortelaro · 08-09-2019 01:13PM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

What would happen if the game plan is Johnson resigning on the 31st?

He can't ask for extension, and parliament can't elect a new caretaker PM.

That cannot happen because the law has specific dates earlier in october that the PM must send the request to Brussels
It also can be just a representative of the British government court appointed that delivers the request should Boris not do it

Mortelaro · 08-09-2019 01:16PM

cryptocurrency wrote: »

They will hold on as long as they can but they all know the game is up. Boris holds his nerve and gets in november election and he is king in the UK for 5 years.

To be honest if Boris is the clear winner of the election, then the Brits will have made their bed and will have to deal with the consequences, not too many will have much sympathy

Infini · 08-09-2019 01:18PM

cryptocurrency wrote: »

They will hold on as long as they can but they all know the game is up. Boris holds his nerve and gets in november election and he is king in the UK for 5 years.

Boris and his friends antics are alienating everyone including his own party and supporters. Honestly remember May's gambit and how she thought she could win a majority but ended up losing. A GE is not a guaranteed victory for them.

J Mysterio · 08-09-2019 01:27PM

devnull wrote: »

The Tories are looking for reinforcements it seems:
https://twitter.com/DKShrewsbury/status/1170439183208472578

From one right wing party to another.

What was it that Farage said about British people collaborating with people outside the UK?

Wasnt this fella castigated when he did this before already? At it again. Is it treason?

briany · 08-09-2019 01:29PM

Infini wrote: »

Boris and his friends antics are alienating everyone including his own party and supporters. Honestly remember May's gambit and how she thought she could win a majority but ended up losing. A GE is not a guaranteed victory for them.

Not after B-day where Farage makes good on his ultimatum to run candidates. At that point, BXP siphon off a good amount of Conservative votes, causing them to lose seats. Not a tactic I'd pursue if I were Farage as it would surely make Brexit less likely by increasing Lib and Lab seat numbers, but I'm not against him making the mistake all the same.

rogue-entity · 08-09-2019 01:34PM

cryptocurrency wrote: »

The EU is an economic threat to the UK

cryptocurrency wrote: »

EU wants tax harmonisation, federalisation, EU army...the US support of Brexit is not a coincidence. I expect the US and UK to work closer with their regime change plans for Brussels over the coming years.

Let me fix that for you:

The EU is an economic threat to the US

EU wants to reduce or eliminate tax avoidance by the wealthy and corporations, closer alignment on issues relevant to the single market, less dependence on an unreliable and unpredictable ally for security and defence....the US support of Brexit is not a coincidence. I expect the US and UK to work closer with their regime change plans for Brussels over the coming years.

I don't believe it's a coincidence that this joyride began after the 'Panama Papers' and the EU's collective decision to introduce an Anti Tax-Avoidance Directive. Quite a few extremely wealthy individuals will benefit from the UK's exit but not the individuals that voted believing that exiting the EU will bring about an economic windfall.

It aligns with Trump's interests, he appears to see any other nation or trading bloc that can rival the US as an implicit enemy, he'd rather the EU was out of the picture so he could strike US-advantageous deals with individual European Countries.

Popeleo · 08-09-2019 01:51PM

cryptocurrency wrote: »

jeysus much more then that left HK back to mainland china in the last few weeks so I suppose they are doomed too.

Rolls eyes.

Depends on your definition of 'doomed' - HK are 22 years into their 50 year transition agreement. Expect continuing pressure for the next three decades as all notions of sovereignty are squeezed out of the HK people and they are subsumed into the mainland, the HK dollar is swapped for the yuan and 'one country two systems' ends. The Chinese don't put up with dissent.

Of course, this is just the undoing of the British colonial era gunboat diplomacy and the First Opium War that led to the UK controlling HK (all caused by the Chinese somehow getting upset by the British East India company smuggling huge quantities of opium into China).

The British Empire was built on such tactics. Try repeating that today and we in Ireland will all get to use our expired iodine tablets as the fallout drifts over the Irish Sea.

briany · 08-09-2019 01:56PM

rogue-entity wrote: »

Let me fix that for you:

I don't believe it's a coincidence that this joyride began after the 'Panama Papers' and the EU's collective decision to introduce an Anti Tax-Avoidance Directive. Quite a few extremely wealthy individuals will benefit from the UK's exit but not the individuals that voted believing that exiting the EU will bring about an economic windfall.

It aligns with Trump's interests, he appears to see any other nation or trading bloc that can rival the US as an implicit enemy, he'd rather the EU was out of the picture so he could strike US-advantageous deals with individual European Countries.

This is exactly the thing. China and U.S.A don't want another player in the game. It's this ground on which they oppose the E.U., and nothing to do with sovereignty in principle, but sovereignty because it removes collective bargaining power.

J Mysterio · 08-09-2019 02:03PM

Skirmishes with police and such. Violence can only get worse you would think, no mattet the outcome.

https://twitter.com/JoshuaPotash/status/1170421368002895877

A Shropshire Lad · 08-09-2019 02:09PM

A french veto would be a dream for Johnson in the current situation surely ?

Brexit discussion thread X (Please read OP before posting)

Comments