Jump to content
simmo

The (all new) Brexit Thread

Recommended Posts

29 minutes ago, Paul1Perth said:

Mate, the tradies I know have been more affected by Covid than they will by brexit. Things don't stop breaking and there's always someone wanting an extension, new kitchen, new light fittings. God knows where the money comes from, maybe they've all paid their mortgages off up North mate, but there will be work for tradies after brexit and after covid.

The remoaners are in the midst of project fear IV. Last month they were saying there won't be enough tradesmen, now they're saying there won't be any work.  They have not got a clue. All they know is that they want it to fail.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, simmo said:

The remoaners are in the midst of project fear IV. Last month they were saying there won't be enough tradesmen, now they're saying there won't be any work.  They have not got a clue. All they know is that they want it to fail.

Yep, I've seen the posts about the car industry. Didn't the UK make an absolute balls up of it's own car industry that had been centered around Birmingham for generations. Way before the UK were in the EU. 

Wasn't that long ago that I think it was Nissan shut down a plant in Spain? It was a few months ago but I remember it came out of the blue and the workers were having a bit of a riot, burning stuff.

Let's face it, since covid car sales have fallen off a cliff, they can't get rid of new ones fast enough. There are too many automated factories turning out too many cars that people either don't want or can't afford. People will be tightening their belts after this covid thing flows through, they'll be more worried about paying mortgages, hanging on to their job. Not buying new cars.

Stands to reason the car industry all over the world is in crisis. 

I saw a post further back about cheap labour in the UK factories? Compared to where? I wouldn't have thought UK wages were cheap, the thing that attracted Nissan et al to the UK was government grants. Nissans costs to set up there would have been minimal. Now the factory is there, producing, it has as good a chance of staying open as anywhere.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Paul1Perth said:

Mate, the tradies I know have been more affected by Covid than they will by brexit. Things don't stop breaking and there's always someone wanting an extension, new kitchen, new light fittings. God knows where the money comes from, maybe they've all paid their mortgages off up North mate, but there will be work for tradies after brexit and after covid.

I've seen Billy Elliot mate. I know what it's going to be like.

They're all going to be having ballet lessons.


Nearly there! Don't drop the ball now guys! Vaccines are weeks away. Stay safe!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Paul1Perth said:

Mate, the tradies I know have been more affected by Covid than they will by brexit. Things don't stop breaking and there's always someone wanting an extension, new kitchen, new light fittings. God knows where the money comes from, maybe they've all paid their mortgages off up North mate, but there will be work for tradies after brexit and after covid.

I think that's absolutely correct.   Same is true for me and the role I do - people will always want my experience and I personally will be absolutely fine.

 

But that doesn't mean that everyone will and that's what I worried about.  Those that are going to be negatively affected.   I think it's also worth noting that there is a clear distinction between the UK "surviving" after Brexit and "thriving".  They aren't the same.

  • Like 1

British  | Lived in Australia 2001-02 on 457   | Married Aussie wife & moved back to UK | Plan to return to Sydney 2026 when all kids have finished school

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, simmo said:

The remoaners are in the midst of project fear IV. Last month they were saying there won't be enough tradesmen, now they're saying there won't be any work.  They have not got a clue. All they know is that they want it to fail.

This is the kind of thing that prevents us, as a nation and as individuals, from having constructive discourse and keeps us divided (just as the architects of those divisions intended).

It's just not true that there are tens of millions of remain voters sat around moaning, feeling bitter at having lost a vote and hoping it all fails so that they can say "I told you so" to the people who voted to leave.  The reality isn't some bitter us vs them cohort.  The reality is that there are millions of people who care about the country and care about all of the people in it who are genuinely concerned that life here is going to take a big backwards step for several decades and so they are trying to do something about it.  Even if they are totally wrong about it, the motives aren't to jealously destroy brexit because they lost the vote.  The motives are to try and stop or limit the damage.   

  • Thanks 2
  • Haha 1

British  | Lived in Australia 2001-02 on 457   | Married Aussie wife & moved back to UK | Plan to return to Sydney 2026 when all kids have finished school

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, FirstWorldProblems said:

This is the kind of thing that prevents us, as a nation and as individuals, from having constructive discourse and keeps us divided (just as the architects of those divisions intended).

It's just not true that there are tens of millions of remain voters sat around moaning, feeling bitter at having lost a vote and hoping it all fails so that they can say "I told you so" to the people who voted to leave.  The reality isn't some bitter us vs them cohort.  The reality is that there are millions of people who care about the country and care about all of the people in it who are genuinely concerned that life here is going to take a big backwards step for several decades and so they are trying to do something about it.  Even if they are totally wrong about it, the motives aren't to jealously destroy brexit because they lost the vote.  The motives are to try and stop or limit the damage.   

TBH, I am now out of patience with the brexit mob, we can all see, or should be able to, that Boris and his merry men simply don't care about the country, they see brexit as a opportunity to gain and hold powe,   so the only way to break the iron grip of tthis nationalist cult is for the wheels to come off big time, that is what had to happen in Japan and Germany to break that iron grip of nationalism after the war, we never experienced it and we will have to go thro that now for real change to happen.   

Edited by BacktoDemocracy
  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, BacktoDemocracy said:

TBH, I am now out of patience with the brexit mob, we can all see, or should be able to, that Boris and his merry men simply don't care about the country, they see brexit as a opportunity to gain and hold powe,   so the only way to break the iron grip of tthis nationalist cult is for the wheels to come off big time, that is what had to happen in Japan and Germany to break that iron grip of nationalism after the war, we never experienced it and we will have to go thro that now for real change to happen.   

When you get savaged by ed milliband, you know you are doing something wrong.

http://www.eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=87731


Nearly there! Don't drop the ball now guys! Vaccines are weeks away. Stay safe!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bad Faith in Friendly Relations Between States

As usual, the British are slow to anger

It has been more than four years since the then President of the EU Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker, promised menacingly that "it will not be an amicable divorce".

During those four years Brexiteers have become increasingly concerned that the EU has no intention of negotiating in good faith. For their part, Remainers pointed out "what did you expect - the EU is only defending its interests." It was perhaps a fair criticism. Initially perhaps, but no longer - not now that the EU's methods have finally been laid bare by the Prime Minister.

It's worth pausing to quote him:

”We are being told that the EU will not only impose tariffs on goods moving from Great Britain to Northern Ireland, but that they might actually stop the transport of food products from GB to NI. I have to say that we never seriously believed that the EU would be willing to use a treaty, negotiated in good faith, to blockade one part of the UK, to cut it off, or that they would threaten to destroy the economic and territorial integrity of the UK."

It needs repeating: a foreign power is threatening to annex part of the United Kingdom

Of course one could say Boris is a politician prone to exaggeration, but Lord Frost is a cautious civil servant and describes the relevant negotiations as follows:

frost_5.jpg

“the EU knows perfectly well all the details of our food standards rules because we are operating EU rules... Any changes in future would be notified to the... EU in the usual way with plenty of lead time. The EU lists dozens of countries globally on precisely this basis, without any sort of commitment about the future.

“Yet it has been made clear to us in the current talks that there is no guarantee of listing us. I am afraid it has also been said to us explicitly in these talks that if we are not listed we will not be able to move food to Northern Ireland.”

Lord Frost's full comments are here.

EU consternation despite meek UK response

The UK's response so far has been incredibly meek. The Draft Internal Market Bill, which has caused so much consternation, is still only a draft and, even in its most extreme version, leading QCs point out it is consistent with both the rule of law and the UK constitution.

In fact it could be said that failing to pass a statute to "clarify" the domestic scope of the Withdrawal Agreement would risk breaching one of the fundamental founding statutes of the British Parliament - Articles VI and VII of the Act of Union of 1800 - which in effect guarantee free trade between Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Some even argue that Parliament has no authority to override the Acts of Union as those provisions are expressed to be "for ever".

Meanwhile, the UK is entitled to expect third countries to act within certain international norms. Of course the EU isn't a country but it likes to behave like one and is acting on the instructions of its 27 Member States, all of whom are obliged by international law to abide by certain UN Resolutions. Let's take a look at just one: UN Resolution 2625 on "Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation Among States" which requires, amongst other things, that:

”No State may use or encourage the use of economic, political or any other type of measures to coerce another State in order to obtain from it the subordination of the exercise of its sovereign rights and to secure from it advantages of any kind." and

”Every State shall refrain from any action aimed at the partial or total disruption of the national unity or territorial integrity of any other State or country."

EU cutting off food supplies to Northern Ireland?

The EU's threat to blockade delivery of food is such a clear breach of International Law that it must also be viewed as a breach of the EU's duty in Article 184 of the Withdrawal Agreement to use its "best endeavours, in good faith and in full respect of [the UK's legal order], to take the necessary steps to negotiate expeditiously the agreements governing their future relationship..."

Let's not forget that this is just one of the EU's dubious negotiating tactics, it is both Machiavellian and Mercantilist. Someone needs to stand up to this kind of behaviour in Europe and those who are slow to anger have a history of doing so.

Sometimes a little history puts things into perspective

In 1802, about a year after the Act of Union came into force, the UK government signed the Treaty of Amiens with a number of continental powers, including France, to establish peace in Europe.

It lasted just 14 months - at which point Napoleon threatened to annex territories unless the British stopped saying mean things about him in the newspapers.

Will the EU Withdrawal Treaty last as long?

Not if our MPs today grasp what polite society knew in 1802: threats are more than just bad manners.

barrister.jpg

Article written exclusively for Facts4EU.Org readers by a Barrister with more than 20 years’ call and experience of working in Brussels.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


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

Bad Faith in Friendly Relations Between States

As usual, the British are slow to anger

It has been more than four years since the then President of the EU Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker, promised menacingly that "it will not be an amicable divorce".

During those four years Brexiteers have become increasingly concerned that the EU has no intention of negotiating in good faith. For their part, Remainers pointed out "what did you expect - the EU is only defending its interests." It was perhaps a fair criticism. Initially perhaps, but no longer - not now that the EU's methods have finally been laid bare by the Prime Minister.

It's worth pausing to quote him:

”We are being told that the EU will not only impose tariffs on goods moving from Great Britain to Northern Ireland, but that they might actually stop the transport of food products from GB to NI. I have to say that we never seriously believed that the EU would be willing to use a treaty, negotiated in good faith, to blockade one part of the UK, to cut it off, or that they would threaten to destroy the economic and territorial integrity of the UK."

It needs repeating: a foreign power is threatening to annex part of the United Kingdom

Of course one could say Boris is a politician prone to exaggeration, but Lord Frost is a cautious civil servant and describes the relevant negotiations as follows:

frost_5.jpg

“the EU knows perfectly well all the details of our food standards rules because we are operating EU rules... Any changes in future would be notified to the... EU in the usual way with plenty of lead time. The EU lists dozens of countries globally on precisely this basis, without any sort of commitment about the future.

“Yet it has been made clear to us in the current talks that there is no guarantee of listing us. I am afraid it has also been said to us explicitly in these talks that if we are not listed we will not be able to move food to Northern Ireland.”

Lord Frost's full comments are here.

EU consternation despite meek UK response

The UK's response so far has been incredibly meek. The Draft Internal Market Bill, which has caused so much consternation, is still only a draft and, even in its most extreme version, leading QCs point out it is consistent with both the rule of law and the UK constitution.

In fact it could be said that failing to pass a statute to "clarify" the domestic scope of the Withdrawal Agreement would risk breaching one of the fundamental founding statutes of the British Parliament - Articles VI and VII of the Act of Union of 1800 - which in effect guarantee free trade between Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Some even argue that Parliament has no authority to override the Acts of Union as those provisions are expressed to be "for ever".

Meanwhile, the UK is entitled to expect third countries to act within certain international norms. Of course the EU isn't a country but it likes to behave like one and is acting on the instructions of its 27 Member States, all of whom are obliged by international law to abide by certain UN Resolutions. Let's take a look at just one: UN Resolution 2625 on "Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation Among States" which requires, amongst other things, that:

”No State may use or encourage the use of economic, political or any other type of measures to coerce another State in order to obtain from it the subordination of the exercise of its sovereign rights and to secure from it advantages of any kind." and

”Every State shall refrain from any action aimed at the partial or total disruption of the national unity or territorial integrity of any other State or country."

EU cutting off food supplies to Northern Ireland?

The EU's threat to blockade delivery of food is such a clear breach of International Law that it must also be viewed as a breach of the EU's duty in Article 184 of the Withdrawal Agreement to use its "best endeavours, in good faith and in full respect of [the UK's legal order], to take the necessary steps to negotiate expeditiously the agreements governing their future relationship..."

Let's not forget that this is just one of the EU's dubious negotiating tactics, it is both Machiavellian and Mercantilist. Someone needs to stand up to this kind of behaviour in Europe and those who are slow to anger have a history of doing so.

Sometimes a little history puts things into perspective

In 1802, about a year after the Act of Union came into force, the UK government signed the Treaty of Amiens with a number of continental powers, including France, to establish peace in Europe.

It lasted just 14 months - at which point Napoleon threatened to annex territories unless the British stopped saying mean things about him in the newspapers.

Will the EU Withdrawal Treaty last as long?

Not if our MPs today grasp what polite society knew in 1802: threats are more than just bad manners.

barrister.jpg

Article written exclusively for Facts4EU.Org readers by a Barrister with more than 20 years’ call and experience of working in Brussels.

It really doesn't matter how much you try and blame it all on the EU simmo.

But it always comes back to the fact that Johnson signed an agreement that he didn't bother to read.

That's where we are.

  • Like 1

Nearly there! Don't drop the ball now guys! Vaccines are weeks away. Stay safe!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 14/09/2020 at 13:50, newjez said:

I've seen Billy Elliot mate. I know what it's going to be like.

They're all going to be having ballet lessons.

That was the end of the mining era and Billy Elliot was no tradie.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, FirstWorldProblems said:

I think that's absolutely correct.   Same is true for me and the role I do - people will always want my experience and I personally will be absolutely fine.

 

But that doesn't mean that everyone will and that's what I worried about.  Those that are going to be negatively affected.   I think it's also worth noting that there is a clear distinction between the UK "surviving" after Brexit and "thriving".  They aren't the same.

Everyone will be adjusting for a couple of years after covid. You can blame it on brexit if you want but compare with other European countries and covid will have worse affects.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Paul1Perth said:

That was the end of the mining era and Billy Elliot was no tradie.

Same thing, different times, same Tories.


Nearly there! Don't drop the ball now guys! Vaccines are weeks away. Stay safe!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Paul1Perth said:

Everyone will be adjusting for a couple of years after covid. You can blame it on brexit if you want but compare with other European countries and covid will have worse affects.

We will see Paul.

The UK recovered from the GFC fairly quickly 

So in theory, the same should happen here?

So we will see.


Nearly there! Don't drop the ball now guys! Vaccines are weeks away. Stay safe!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, FirstWorldProblems said:

I think that's absolutely correct.   Same is true for me and the role I do - people will always want my experience and I personally will be absolutely fine.

 

But that doesn't mean that everyone will and that's what I worried about.  Those that are going to be negatively affected.   I think it's also worth noting that there is a clear distinction between the UK "surviving" after Brexit and "thriving".  They aren't the same.

If you are talking tradies in the u.k - I can give you the facts .

Most of my mates are painters- plumbers - electricians and they are stacked out with work .

 My mate has just gone on his own , as a painter - taking bookings now for Feb 21 .

  • Like 1

BUT I DONT FEEL AFRAID

AS LONG AS I GAZE AT

WATERLOO SUNSET

IAM IN PARADISE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, BacktoDemocracy said:

TBH, I am now out of patience with the brexit mob, we can all see, or should be able to, that Boris and his merry men simply don't care about the country, they see brexit as a opportunity to gain and hold powe,   so the only way to break the iron grip of tthis nationalist cult is for the wheels to come off big time, that is what had to happen in Japan and Germany to break that iron grip of nationalism after the war, we never experienced it and we will have to go thro that now for real change to happen.   

Unfortunately, and I think this is true for both sides of the political aisle, for most people politics is boring and they don't engage on a day to day level and to the extent people do it's via the echo chamber of the news outlets they prefer.  

  • Like 1

British  | Lived in Australia 2001-02 on 457   | Married Aussie wife & moved back to UK | Plan to return to Sydney 2026 when all kids have finished school

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Paul1Perth said:

Everyone will be adjusting for a couple of years after covid. You can blame it on brexit if you want but compare with other European countries and covid will have worse affects.

Do I understand correctly that your position is that Brexit won't have a significant negative effect on the economy and lives of the regular working folk of the UK?

I'm genuinely interested in the positives you believe it will bring.  I truly am unable to see even one, but I concede that I may well be blinkered by the overwhelming concerns that I have.

  • Thanks 1

British  | Lived in Australia 2001-02 on 457   | Married Aussie wife & moved back to UK | Plan to return to Sydney 2026 when all kids have finished school

Share this post


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

Bad Faith in Friendly Relations Between States

As usual, the British are slow to anger

It has been more than four years since the then President of the EU Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker, promised menacingly that "it will not be an amicable divorce".

During those four years Brexiteers have become increasingly concerned that the EU has no intention of negotiating in good faith. For their part, Remainers pointed out "what did you expect - the EU is only defending its interests." It was perhaps a fair criticism. Initially perhaps, but no longer - not now that the EU's methods have finally been laid bare by the Prime Minister.

It's worth pausing to quote him:

”We are being told that the EU will not only impose tariffs on goods moving from Great Britain to Northern Ireland, but that they might actually stop the transport of food products from GB to NI. I have to say that we never seriously believed that the EU would be willing to use a treaty, negotiated in good faith, to blockade one part of the UK, to cut it off, or that they would threaten to destroy the economic and territorial integrity of the UK."

It needs repeating: a foreign power is threatening to annex part of the United Kingdom

Of course one could say Boris is a politician prone to exaggeration, but Lord Frost is a cautious civil servant and describes the relevant negotiations as follows:

frost_5.jpg

“the EU knows perfectly well all the details of our food standards rules because we are operating EU rules... Any changes in future would be notified to the... EU in the usual way with plenty of lead time. The EU lists dozens of countries globally on precisely this basis, without any sort of commitment about the future.

“Yet it has been made clear to us in the current talks that there is no guarantee of listing us. I am afraid it has also been said to us explicitly in these talks that if we are not listed we will not be able to move food to Northern Ireland.”

Lord Frost's full comments are here.

EU consternation despite meek UK response

The UK's response so far has been incredibly meek. The Draft Internal Market Bill, which has caused so much consternation, is still only a draft and, even in its most extreme version, leading QCs point out it is consistent with both the rule of law and the UK constitution.

In fact it could be said that failing to pass a statute to "clarify" the domestic scope of the Withdrawal Agreement would risk breaching one of the fundamental founding statutes of the British Parliament - Articles VI and VII of the Act of Union of 1800 - which in effect guarantee free trade between Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Some even argue that Parliament has no authority to override the Acts of Union as those provisions are expressed to be "for ever".

Meanwhile, the UK is entitled to expect third countries to act within certain international norms. Of course the EU isn't a country but it likes to behave like one and is acting on the instructions of its 27 Member States, all of whom are obliged by international law to abide by certain UN Resolutions. Let's take a look at just one: UN Resolution 2625 on "Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation Among States" which requires, amongst other things, that:

”No State may use or encourage the use of economic, political or any other type of measures to coerce another State in order to obtain from it the subordination of the exercise of its sovereign rights and to secure from it advantages of any kind." and

”Every State shall refrain from any action aimed at the partial or total disruption of the national unity or territorial integrity of any other State or country."

EU cutting off food supplies to Northern Ireland?

The EU's threat to blockade delivery of food is such a clear breach of International Law that it must also be viewed as a breach of the EU's duty in Article 184 of the Withdrawal Agreement to use its "best endeavours, in good faith and in full respect of [the UK's legal order], to take the necessary steps to negotiate expeditiously the agreements governing their future relationship..."

Let's not forget that this is just one of the EU's dubious negotiating tactics, it is both Machiavellian and Mercantilist. Someone needs to stand up to this kind of behaviour in Europe and those who are slow to anger have a history of doing so.

Sometimes a little history puts things into perspective

In 1802, about a year after the Act of Union came into force, the UK government signed the Treaty of Amiens with a number of continental powers, including France, to establish peace in Europe.

It lasted just 14 months - at which point Napoleon threatened to annex territories unless the British stopped saying mean things about him in the newspapers.

Will the EU Withdrawal Treaty last as long?

Not if our MPs today grasp what polite society knew in 1802: threats are more than just bad manners.

barrister.jpg

Article written exclusively for Facts4EU.Org readers by a Barrister with more than 20 years’ call and experience of working in Brussels.

But the thing that should really scare you mate, is that the guys who agreed a withdrawal agreement that gave away Northern Ireland, are the same people who are agreeing your free trade agreements.

So, the next time an agreement gets signed in record time, what gremlins are in the small print? Did they bother to read it, let alone understand it? What else have they given away by mistake and incompetence?

Our fate is in the hands of a buffoon.

Scary.

  • Like 2

Nearly there! Don't drop the ball now guys! Vaccines are weeks away. Stay safe!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, simmo said:

Bad Faith in Friendly Relations Between States

As usual, the British are slow to anger

It has been more than four years since the then President of the EU Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker, promised menacingly that "it will not be an amicable divorce".

During those four years Brexiteers have become increasingly concerned that the EU has no intention of negotiating in good faith. For their part, Remainers pointed out "what did you expect - the EU is only defending its interests." It was perhaps a fair criticism. Initially perhaps, but no longer - not now that the EU's methods have finally been laid bare by the Prime Minister.

It's worth pausing to quote him:

”We are being told that the EU will not only impose tariffs on goods moving from Great Britain to Northern Ireland, but that they might actually stop the transport of food products from GB to NI. I have to say that we never seriously believed that the EU would be willing to use a treaty, negotiated in good faith, to blockade one part of the UK, to cut it off, or that they would threaten to destroy the economic and territorial integrity of the UK."

It needs repeating: a foreign power is threatening to annex part of the United Kingdom

Of course one could say Boris is a politician prone to exaggeration, but Lord Frost is a cautious civil servant and describes the relevant negotiations as follows:

frost_5.jpg

“the EU knows perfectly well all the details of our food standards rules because we are operating EU rules... Any changes in future would be notified to the... EU in the usual way with plenty of lead time. The EU lists dozens of countries globally on precisely this basis, without any sort of commitment about the future.

“Yet it has been made clear to us in the current talks that there is no guarantee of listing us. I am afraid it has also been said to us explicitly in these talks that if we are not listed we will not be able to move food to Northern Ireland.”

Lord Frost's full comments are here.

EU consternation despite meek UK response

The UK's response so far has been incredibly meek. The Draft Internal Market Bill, which has caused so much consternation, is still only a draft and, even in its most extreme version, leading QCs point out it is consistent with both the rule of law and the UK constitution.

In fact it could be said that failing to pass a statute to "clarify" the domestic scope of the Withdrawal Agreement would risk breaching one of the fundamental founding statutes of the British Parliament - Articles VI and VII of the Act of Union of 1800 - which in effect guarantee free trade between Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Some even argue that Parliament has no authority to override the Acts of Union as those provisions are expressed to be "for ever".

Meanwhile, the UK is entitled to expect third countries to act within certain international norms. Of course the EU isn't a country but it likes to behave like one and is acting on the instructions of its 27 Member States, all of whom are obliged by international law to abide by certain UN Resolutions. Let's take a look at just one: UN Resolution 2625 on "Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation Among States" which requires, amongst other things, that:

”No State may use or encourage the use of economic, political or any other type of measures to coerce another State in order to obtain from it the subordination of the exercise of its sovereign rights and to secure from it advantages of any kind." and

”Every State shall refrain from any action aimed at the partial or total disruption of the national unity or territorial integrity of any other State or country."

EU cutting off food supplies to Northern Ireland?

The EU's threat to blockade delivery of food is such a clear breach of International Law that it must also be viewed as a breach of the EU's duty in Article 184 of the Withdrawal Agreement to use its "best endeavours, in good faith and in full respect of [the UK's legal order], to take the necessary steps to negotiate expeditiously the agreements governing their future relationship..."

Let's not forget that this is just one of the EU's dubious negotiating tactics, it is both Machiavellian and Mercantilist. Someone needs to stand up to this kind of behaviour in Europe and those who are slow to anger have a history of doing so.

Sometimes a little history puts things into perspective

In 1802, about a year after the Act of Union came into force, the UK government signed the Treaty of Amiens with a number of continental powers, including France, to establish peace in Europe.

It lasted just 14 months - at which point Napoleon threatened to annex territories unless the British stopped saying mean things about him in the newspapers.

Will the EU Withdrawal Treaty last as long?

Not if our MPs today grasp what polite society knew in 1802: threats are more than just bad manners.

barrister.jpg

Article written exclusively for Facts4EU.Org readers by a Barrister with more than 20 years’ call and experience of working in Brussels.

The only problem is that the threat of cutting off food supples is a hypothetical construct in Boris's head, no one has uttered such a threat and Boris signed up to the deal despite being told it was defective and he said it was a marvellous deal at the time of signing it, so what is different now?

What is different now is that it suits Boris to lie now in order to cast the EU as the bogeyman to cover up Boris's lazy  incompetence and the stupidity of a no deal Brexit.

And I doubt whether a British barrister would have been working under European law so he must have been a govt adviser, not really an advert for impartiality

Lord Frost became a Baronet in October 2020 after having served Boris and May as special POLITICAL advser for a number of years, not really a very independent Civil Servant at all

Edited by BacktoDemocracy
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, bunbury61 said:

If you are talking tradies in the u.k - I can give you the facts .

Most of my mates are painters- plumbers - electricians and they are stacked out with work .

 My mate has just gone on his own , as a painter - taking bookings now for Feb 21 .

No, I don't see an issue there.  The work they do is domestically focused. It's big industry where the problems lie (and the smaller supply chain that supports them).  Brexit isn't going to stop people wanting their kitchens refitted and boilers replaced.  It's organisation heavily reliant upon freedom of supply chain movement and the tarrifs.

  • Congratulations 1

British  | Lived in Australia 2001-02 on 457   | Married Aussie wife & moved back to UK | Plan to return to Sydney 2026 when all kids have finished school

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, FirstWorldProblems said:

Do I understand correctly that your position is that Brexit won't have a significant negative effect on the economy and lives of the regular working folk of the UK?

I'm genuinely interested in the positives you believe it will bring.  I truly am unable to see even one, but I concede that I may well be blinkered by the overwhelming concerns that I have.

Well , stop worrying then , its already done , there's nothing you can do about it .

Iam 100% behind brexit , and once the dust settles , I think it will be a great future for the u.k .

I have said many many times , the e.u could have been a beacon for the world , but sadly that's not to be .

It will eventually break up .

  • Like 1

BUT I DONT FEEL AFRAID

AS LONG AS I GAZE AT

WATERLOO SUNSET

IAM IN PARADISE

Share this post


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

No, I don't see an issue there.  The work they do is domestically focused. It's big industry where the problems lie (and the smaller supply chain that supports them).  Brexit isn't going to stop people wanting their kitchens refitted and boilers replaced.  It's organisation heavily reliant upon freedom of supply chain movement and the tarrifs.

Yes, but such a massive hit to the economy will feed down into most households. Sure, people will get emergency repairs. Unless they can live without. But nobody is going to choose to spend money in this environment.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/09/15/brexit-costs-would-be-higher-than-coronavirus-for-the-uk-goldman-says.html

Sadly, we will reach a point where these types of articles can't be ignored, as it will become real. Personally I am drip feeding money into the UK economy, as I don't believe we will leave without a deal.

But I'm holding some back, because after all, we are led by a moron who is being manipulated by a psychopath.

  • Like 1

Nearly there! Don't drop the ball now guys! Vaccines are weeks away. Stay safe!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, simmo said:

Bad Faith in Friendly Relations Between States

As usual, the British are slow to anger

It has been more than four years since the then President of the EU Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker, promised menacingly that "it will not be an amicable divorce".

During those four years Brexiteers have become increasingly concerned that the EU has no intention of negotiating in good faith. For their part, Remainers pointed out "what did you expect - the EU is only defending its interests." It was perhaps a fair criticism. Initially perhaps, but no longer - not now that the EU's methods have finally been laid bare by the Prime Minister.

It's worth pausing to quote him:

”We are being told that the EU will not only impose tariffs on goods moving from Great Britain to Northern Ireland, but that they might actually stop the transport of food products from GB to NI. I have to say that we never seriously believed that the EU would be willing to use a treaty, negotiated in good faith, to blockade one part of the UK, to cut it off, or that they would threaten to destroy the economic and territorial integrity of the UK."

It needs repeating: a foreign power is threatening to annex part of the United Kingdom

Of course one could say Boris is a politician prone to exaggeration, but Lord Frost is a cautious civil servant and describes the relevant negotiations as follows:

frost_5.jpg

“the EU knows perfectly well all the details of our food standards rules because we are operating EU rules... Any changes in future would be notified to the... EU in the usual way with plenty of lead time. The EU lists dozens of countries globally on precisely this basis, without any sort of commitment about the future.

“Yet it has been made clear to us in the current talks that there is no guarantee of listing us. I am afraid it has also been said to us explicitly in these talks that if we are not listed we will not be able to move food to Northern Ireland.”

Lord Frost's full comments are here.

EU consternation despite meek UK response

The UK's response so far has been incredibly meek. The Draft Internal Market Bill, which has caused so much consternation, is still only a draft and, even in its most extreme version, leading QCs point out it is consistent with both the rule of law and the UK constitution.

In fact it could be said that failing to pass a statute to "clarify" the domestic scope of the Withdrawal Agreement would risk breaching one of the fundamental founding statutes of the British Parliament - Articles VI and VII of the Act of Union of 1800 - which in effect guarantee free trade between Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Some even argue that Parliament has no authority to override the Acts of Union as those provisions are expressed to be "for ever".

Meanwhile, the UK is entitled to expect third countries to act within certain international norms. Of course the EU isn't a country but it likes to behave like one and is acting on the instructions of its 27 Member States, all of whom are obliged by international law to abide by certain UN Resolutions. Let's take a look at just one: UN Resolution 2625 on "Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation Among States" which requires, amongst other things, that:

”No State may use or encourage the use of economic, political or any other type of measures to coerce another State in order to obtain from it the subordination of the exercise of its sovereign rights and to secure from it advantages of any kind." and

”Every State shall refrain from any action aimed at the partial or total disruption of the national unity or territorial integrity of any other State or country."

EU cutting off food supplies to Northern Ireland?

The EU's threat to blockade delivery of food is such a clear breach of International Law that it must also be viewed as a breach of the EU's duty in Article 184 of the Withdrawal Agreement to use its "best endeavours, in good faith and in full respect of [the UK's legal order], to take the necessary steps to negotiate expeditiously the agreements governing their future relationship..."

Let's not forget that this is just one of the EU's dubious negotiating tactics, it is both Machiavellian and Mercantilist. Someone needs to stand up to this kind of behaviour in Europe and those who are slow to anger have a history of doing so.

Sometimes a little history puts things into perspective

In 1802, about a year after the Act of Union came into force, the UK government signed the Treaty of Amiens with a number of continental powers, including France, to establish peace in Europe.

It lasted just 14 months - at which point Napoleon threatened to annex territories unless the British stopped saying mean things about him in the newspapers.

Will the EU Withdrawal Treaty last as long?

Not if our MPs today grasp what polite society knew in 1802: threats are more than just bad manners.

barrister.jpg

Article written exclusively for Facts4EU.Org readers by a Barrister with more than 20 years’ call and experience of working in Brussels.

Meanwhile the grown ups have pointed out that the govts legal team consists of barristers barely out of pupilage and 2 dyed in the wool brexiteers who put forwards this argument of ignoring international treaties they don't like in a paper they published, Suella is staying out of the limelight at the moment in case somebody asks her to substantiate her CV which is a bit dodgy like Leadsome's was.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/sep/15/brexit-barristers-question-selection-legal-team-uk-override-deal-eu#img-1

Edited by BacktoDemocracy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, newjez said:

It really doesn't matter how much you try and blame it all on the EU simmo.

But it always comes back to the fact that Johnson signed an agreement that he didn't bother to read.

That's where we are.

So you agree that the agreement puts the uk/ni/gfa at risk?  we all make mistakes, should he just let it go and risk all of that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, newjez said:

But the thing that should really scare you mate, is that the guys who agreed a withdrawal agreement that gave away Northern Ireland, are the same people who are agreeing your free trade agreements.

So, the next time an agreement gets signed in record time, what gremlins are in the small print? Did they bother to read it, let alone understand it? What else have they given away by mistake and incompetence?

Our fate is in the hands of a buffoon.

Scary.

see above.  Back against the wall, we all make mistakes.  I like how how accepted this and is putting this right aren't you?  or would you prefer we hand over sovereignty to the EU? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×