Brexit matters

[21C101]

I fear it is the remainers that have been had, if anyone has been had. This from todays (so-called) Independent:

"The so-called “level playing field” safeguards the EU believes it secured – one of the key clashes that threatened the agreement – will be “difficult to enforce”, the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) said...

.... a breach will only be committed if the panel rules a lowering of standards has actually affected trade and investment, rather than simply taken place.
The IPPR said the compromise meant the commitments “are considerably weaker than expected” and that a breach “would be difficult to prove”.

Furthermore, the requirement for the UK to keep pace with improvements in protections across the Channel – the so-called “rebalancing mechanism” – was even weaker.....

Any assessment....... must be based on “reliable evidence” and not mere “conjecture or remote possibility”...

And proposed “rebalancing measures” (tariffs).....would be referred to the “complex arbitration system” first.

As a result, the IPPR paper said, “rebalancing measures are only likely to be used in a rare number of scenarios”. [and will be utterly self defeating if the UK has negotiated free trade agreements with other countries, which will provide alternative tariff free sources"

Workers’ rights and environmental protections ‘easily eroded’ by Brexit trade deal, think tank warns

So-called ‘level playing field’ safeguards ‘considerably weaker than expected’ and ‘difficult to enforce’, says IPPR

www.independent.co.uk

 

[VauxhallandI]

Has it occurred to you that WTO is “unelected bunch of bureaucrats” making rules that UK has no control over??

Moreover - WTO has its own tribunal that UK can’t control ?
These are judges / arbiters not elected / appointed by any of us...

At least ECJ had UK judges ( not anymore), and was guarding rules that were approved by UK Parliament and / or Government, as none or very little of the EU’s rules could be introduced without each member’s approval .

Exactly and that’s why there is little respect for Brexiteers therefore any form of reconciliation is far off.

I’ve given them 4.5 years to describe the point of it and even now the logic is insulting ones intelligence. The BS doesn’t work on all you know.

 

[dosxuk]

The remainers did a lot of good work in going round shrieking that Boris was a madman set on no deal, it helped convince the EU side he was serious about it.

If he was serious about it then he would have walked away at one of the many breaking points that he announced. What was the first one, July? Every single one of them came and went and nobody believed for a moment he was actually going to abandon the talks. He didn't even do the whole "break off talks and then go back to them a short while later after being 'convinced' to carry on" type thing that even small children can pull off.

We got a small taste of what no-deal meant last week and suddenly we caved on a load of the sticking points. Strange that, if you think we were willing to just walk away.

 

[21C101]

Has it occurred to you that WTO is “unelected bunch of bureaucrats” making rules that UK has no control over??

Moreover - WTO has its own tribunal that UK can’t control ?
These are judges / arbiters not elected / appointed by any of us...

At least ECJ had UK judges ( not anymore), and was guarding rules that were approved by UK Parliament and / or Government, as none or very little of the EU’s rules could be introduced without each member’s approval .

All the WTO bureaucrats can do is set tariffs and rule on disagreements. Since Maastrict, and certainly since the Lisbon Treaty gave the ECJ sweeping new powers not just over commercial disputes but over defence, foreign affairs, immigration, justice and home affairs, the ECJ has been able to routinely interfere in the most fundamental duties of an elected government.

For example a convicted murderer in the Republic of Ireland is currently trying to overturn his conviction by having the ECJ rule that use of his phone data is illegal, which if, as expected, he wins the case, will see his conviction quashed as key evidence will be disallowed.

That ceases in the UK on Friday. All such cases can only be appealed to the British Courts and, if the government loses, it can go away and pass an Act of Parliament reversing the decision.

I'm sure that this is not something you welcome, but it is a huge and fundamental, almost revolutionary, change.

Irish murderer appeals conviction on grounds of EU data law breach

Phone data helped clinch murder conviction for Graham Dwyer in 2015

www.theguardian.com

 

[Dave1987]

I fear it is the remainers that have been had, if anyone has been had. This from todays (so-called) Independent:

"The so-called “level playing field” safeguards the EU believes it secured – one of the key clashes that threatened the agreement – will be “difficult to enforce”, the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) said...

.... a breach will only be committed if the panel rules a lowering of standards has actually affected trade and investment, rather than simply taken place.
The IPPR said the compromise meant the commitments “are considerably weaker than expected” and that a breach “would be difficult to prove”.

Furthermore, the requirement for the UK to keep pace with improvements in protections across the Channel – the so-called “rebalancing mechanism” – was even weaker.....

Any assessment....... must be based on “reliable evidence” and not mere “conjecture or remote possibility”...

And proposed “rebalancing measures” (tariffs).....would be referred to the “complex arbitration system” first.

As a result, the IPPR paper said, “rebalancing measures are only likely to be used in a rare number of scenarios”. [and will be utterly self defeating if the UK has negotiated free trade agreements with other countries, which will provide alternative tariff free sources"

Workers’ rights and environmental protections ‘easily eroded’ by Brexit trade deal, think tank warns

So-called ‘level playing field’ safeguards ‘considerably weaker than expected’ and ‘difficult to enforce’, says IPPR

www.independent.co.uk

So what you are essentially saying is hopefully the UK can do trade deals with other countries so when there is a bonfire of workers rights, animal welfare rules, environmental protections etc that the UK sticks two fingers up at the EU. Wow this is the future of the UK eh? Never been so ashamed to be British if this is the new "Global Britain". Wonder how long it is until sick pay, maternity pay and such like are abolished in the UK in the name of being more competitive......

 

[37424]

So what you are essentially saying is hopefully the UK can do trade deals with other countries so when there is a bonfire of workers rights, animal welfare rules, environmental protections etc that the UK sticks two fingers up at the EU. Wow this is the future of the UK eh? Never been so ashamed to be British if this is the new "Global Britain". Wonder how long it is until sick pay, maternity pay and such like are abolished in the UK in the name of being more competitive......

Pretty likely under the Tories yes, which is why Starmer needs get the Labour party fit to be elected.

 

[najaB]

For example a convicted murderer in the Republic of Ireland is currently trying to overturn his conviction by having the ECJ rule that use of his phone data is illegal, which if, as expected, he wins the case, will see his conviction quashed as key evidence will be disallowed.

If they used illegally gathered evidence then his conviction should be quashed. While this particular case sucks, the "rule of law" also applies to protecting people against state overreach.

 

[class ep-09]

All the WTO bureaucrats can do is set tariffs and rule on disagreements. Since Maastrict, and certainly since the Lisbon Treaty gave the ECJ sweeping new powers not just over commercial disputes but over defence, foreign affairs, immigration, justice and home affairs, the ECJ has been able to routinely interfere in the most fundamental duties of an elected government.

For example a convicted murderer in the Republic of Ireland is currently trying to overturn his conviction by having the ECJ rule that use of his phone data is illegal, which if, as expected, he wins the case, will see his conviction quashed as key evidence will be disallowed.

That ceases in the UK on Friday. All such cases can only be appealed to the British Courts and, if the government loses, it can go away and pass an Act of Parliament reversing the decision.

I'm sure that this is not something you welcome, but it is a huge and fundamental, almost revolutionary, change.

Irish murderer appeals conviction on grounds of EU data law breach

Phone data helped clinch murder conviction for Graham Dwyer in 2015

www.theguardian.com

As if British courts were allowing illegally obtained evidence ( or potentially illegaly in your case) to be used in a trail to convict any one.

Next example please ...

 

[DarloRich]

For example a convicted murderer in the Republic of Ireland is currently trying to overturn his conviction by having the ECJ rule that use of his phone data is illegal, which if, as expected, he wins the case, will see his conviction quashed as key evidence will be disallowed.

that is a gross simplification of the situation but not an unexpected response when the ECJ is discussed in this country. Nor will a decision of the ECJ lead, automatically, to his conviction in Ireland being overturned.

The bigger issue that you should have highlighted to support your position is not the appeal but the fact that Ireland failed to change it's laws in response to a 2014 ECJ ruling on data preservation. Your argument should be that the ECJ can order national governments to change laws to suit their decisions. That isn't, actually, correct but is an argument trotted out by Brexit fans on a regular basis.

As a UK citizen the question should be: Do I trust this Tory government to protect my rights? Furthermore as a UK citizen do I trust this Tory government to comply with a judgement of the Supreme Court on the application of my rights if those rights should become inconvenient to that Tory government?

I now have no independent mechanism to force the UK Government to comply with those decisions.

 

[21C101]

As if British courts were allowing illegally obtained evidence ( or potentially illegaly in your case) to be used in a trail to convict any one.

Next example please ...

The whole point is that it will be for the British Courts to decide for better or worse.
And for the British people to elect those who appoint said judges, and that those judges will swear an oath of allegience to The Queen, not to an embryonic European Republic and it's furtherance

 

[DarloRich]

The whole point is that it will be for the British Courts to decide for better or worse.
And for the British people to elect those who appoint said judges, and that those judges will swear an oath of allegience to The Queen, not to an embryonic European Republic and it's furtherance

this is preposterous nonsense. Every time I have been in court the royal crest has been very prominent behind the bench. Must have missed the oaths to European republics.

EDIT for anyone interested these are the two oaths that UK judges make:

Courts and Tribunal service: https://www.judiciary.uk/about-the-...aw.”-,Judicial oath,, affection or ill will.”

Oath of allegiance​

“I, _________ , do swear by Almighty God that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second, her heirs and successors, according to law.”

Judicial oath​

“I, _________ , do swear by Almighty God that I will well and truly serve our Sovereign Lady Queen Elizabeth the Second in the office of ________ , and I will do right to all manner of people after the laws and usages of this realm, without fear or favour, affection or ill will.”

 

[21C101]

So what you are essentially saying is hopefully the UK can do trade deals with other countries so when there is a bonfire of workers rights, animal welfare rules, environmental protections etc that the UK sticks two fingers up at the EU. Wow this is the future of the UK eh? Never been so ashamed to be British if this is the new "Global Britain". Wonder how long it is until sick pay, maternity pay and such like are abolished in the UK in the name of being more competitive......

Thats an insult to the other 166 states to be honest and implies the only thing that can save their poor benighted workers is a neosocialist superstate that tightly regulates everything.

If people in the UK want such a socialist state they are free to vote for it (and may well do so).

The argument that because they cannot be trusted to vote for this, they should have the power to make this choice taken away, with an unelected supranational socialist state imposing that on them, is uncomfortably close to the truth of why some of the most fanatical remainers have taken this stance since the days of Delors.

this is preposterous nonsense. Every time I have been in court the royal crest has been very prominent behind the bench. Must have missed the oaths to European republics.

If you have any evidence of the Royal Crest being prominent in the European Court of Justice I would be delighted to see it.

 

[class ep-09]

All the WTO bureaucrats can do is set tariffs and rule on disagreements. Since Maastrict, and certainly since the Lisbon Treaty gave the ECJ sweeping new powers not just over commercial disputes but over defence, foreign affairs, immigration, justice and home affairs, the ECJ has been able to routinely interfere in the most fundamental duties of an elected government.


And who gave WTO powers to decide , what tariffs and where to apply them ?

WTO members..

And who gave the powers to ECJ to make rulings?

EU members , including UK

Why?

To create - “ level playing field “ .

None of these organisations would exist if countries / members did not agree for them to be established in first place , for.....


their benefit .

 

[DarloRich]

of the most fanatical remainers have taken this stance since the days of Delors.


If you have any evidence of the Royal Crest being prominent in the European Court of Justice I would be delighted to see it.

dear me. This is silly.

The further argument you might make is the clash of legal style, foundation and tradition between European and English & Welsh legal systems

 

[21C101]

dear me. This is silly.

Not as silly as you accusing me of saying that UK judges were swearing allegiance to the EU not the Queen.

 

[Pinza-C55]

Not really. They just need enough people to answer yes to a question like this one...

"Should Scotland be an independent country?"

They will frame the debate in simple terms, as England/Westminster against Scotland and say that Scotland can go it 'alone' as a 'progressive' nation in the EU. Last time I don't think practical details got in the way of this, not even considerations like which currency would be used.

My understanding of currency is that if Scotland was to be independent from the UK and still wished to use the Pound as its currency then Scottish exchange and interest rates would be controlled by the Bank Of England but that the EU requires any joining nation to have its own Central Bank and thus control of its own finances. And, although the SNP like to think the EU will for some reason make "exceptions" for Scotland, they will have to adopt the Euro as their currency.

 

[DarloRich]

Not as silly as you accusing me of saying that UK judges were swearing allegiance to the EU not the Queen.

You clearly cant look at this sensibly so I shall leave it there. You are welcome to express your view but it is not accurate. That matters to some more than others.

 

[bspahh]

The whole point is that it will be for the British Courts to decide for better or worse.
And for the British people to elect those who appoint said judges, and that those judges will swear an oath of allegience to The Queen, not to an embryonic European Republic and it's furtherance

British judges can make decisions. However, they can be overruled by partnership councils. They aren't the ECJ, but are based in Brussels half the time. David Allen Green commented yesterday:

https://twitter.com/davidallengreen/status/1343224452553834496

In essence: The European Council and Council of Ministers and committees have been replaced with a ministerial-level Partnership Council and committees, operating 50% from Brussels The European Commission with a Secretariat, again 50% in Brussels

Binding EU law has been replaced with Partnership Council decisions, which will bind UK and in respect of which UK parliament only has the right to be 'informed' All this, since 2016, to end up with institutions recognisably similar to what already exists

One can see why Boris Johnson does not want Brexiter MPs to spend too much time on this deal If I were a hard Brexiter MP I would not be impressed at the institutional arrangements

 

[DarloRich]

David Allen Green commented yesterday

He is a very good legal commentator.

 

[Chester1]

British judges can make decisions. However, they can be overruled by partnership councils. They aren't the ECJ, but are based in Brussels half the time. David Allen Green commented yesterday:

https://twitter.com/davidallengreen/status/1343224452553834496

Arbitration sounds like a reasonable compromise. Both sides legal systems need to have an input because many of the issues will involve points of both British and EU law. Having neutral people break the tie is a logical choice.

 

[matacaster]

If the Southern Irish decide to offer transhipment to EU via ship rather than road bridge across UK, would that reduce the amount of unnecessary traffic and maintenance on uk roads which should be welcomed!

 

[Dave1987]

Thats an insult to the other 166 states to be honest and implies the only thing that can save their poor benighted workers is a neosocialist superstate that tightly regulates everything.

If people in the UK want such a socialist state they are free to vote for it (and may well do so).

The argument that because they cannot be trusted to vote for this, they should have the power to make this choice taken away, with an unelected supranational socialist state imposing that on them, is uncomfortably close to the truth of why some of the most fanatical remainers have taken this stance since the days of Delors.

I don’t want anything of a socialist state at all. I don’t think many Brexit voters realise how many of their rights were enshrined in EU law. I have read that many ERG MP's ideas moving forward includes axing many of the rights that British workers have had for years. The EU is a massive trading bloc so even South American countries agreed to enhance their animal welfare standards in order to sell their products into the EU. The only way for the UK as I see it is down. We are already up to the stage where both parents in the average family have to work full time because one salary simply is not enough to live on. I simply do not believe that the ERG will not pounce on this opportunity to lay waste to workers rights, animal welfare, environment protections, data protections etc etc. A storm is definitely on the horizon. I don’t believe many people in the UK truly knew what they were voting for with Brexit, but the cat is out of the bag and until 2024 there is nothing to stop it.

 

[alex397]

If the Southern Irish decide to offer transhipment to EU via ship rather than road bridge across UK, would that reduce the amount of unnecessary traffic and maintenance on uk roads which should be welcomed!

You do have a point, but I’d say that might be scraping the barrel a bit for benefits of Brexit.

The Times of Ireland says that between 200 to 250 Irish lorries were stuck in recent chaos at UK ports, and that about 150,000 lorries use the landbridge each year (that is roughly an estimated 410 lorries a day). It would be interesting (and probably impossible) to work out how much they contribute to the economy in terms of service station visits and other costs, and if that more or less covers the maintainence costs they cause to the roads.

Irish Times article here

Stranded Irish hauliers face dumping product over French travel ban​

Up to 250 lorries stuck in England because of measures to halt new coronavirus strain​

Cliff Taylor, Simon Carswellabout 9 hours ago

Trucks at Dover. The port – through which many Irish exporters and importers move goods – has said it is closed to trucking and passengers “until further notice”. Photograph: Gareth Fuller
Up to 250 Irish lorries stuck in England face returning home and dumping product after France banned road freight from Britain due to a new Covid-19 strain, a haulage industry group has said.

France suspended all air, rail, road and seat traffic from the UK on midnight on Sunday for at least 48 hours in an effort to stop a new strain of the coronavirus spreading from Britain.
Irish Road Haulage Association president Eugene Drennan said that turning around and returning home was the “worst scenario” facing Irish hauliers stranded in Britain as a result of the ban.
He estimated that between 200 and 250 drivers may not be able to continue on their journeys over the UK “landbridge” route to mainland Europe to deliver products, in some cases fresh food.
Mr Drennan said he spoke to Minister for Transport Eamon Ryan and his department’s officials and the French authorities on Sunday night about trying to permit Irish trucks travel on to France.
He has asked the French embassy about exempting lorries with Irish registration plates from the ban, pointing to how safely Irish drivers have been operating during the Covid-19 pandemic.

Restrictions​

The Port of Dover in Kent closed to all accompanied traffic leaving the UK until further notice due to the border restrictions in France complicating the situation for Irish drivers stuck in Britain.
“If we have to turn trucks back on the road, it will result in a lot of product being dumped, a lot off missed deadlines and another dent in the reputation of Ireland, ” said Mr Drennan.
He said he hoped the Government would be able to help the stranded hauliers to be able to make a decision on whether they can either travel on to France or return to Ireland.
He said he had contacted DFDS, the operator of the new direct Rosslare-Dunkirk service that starts on January 2nd, to see if the shipping line could begin sailing earlier to help the situation.

“I am very concerned and annoyed. I have flagged this since June, that we do not have enough capacity on direct ferries to France. We are badly caught, by the whim of France,” he said.
The landbridge, traditionally the cheapest and fastest transit route for Irish hauliers to and from mainland Europe, has been delayed in recent weeks by heavy congestion from pre-Brexit stockpiling. The French travel ban has brought this route to a standstill with 10 days to Brexit.
Mr Drennan said that he called on Irish hauliers not to load any cargo for transport to mainland Europe through the UK landbridge until they have a booking on a direct ferry.
“We don’t have enough capacity tonight or tomorrow. We are really caught,” he said.
Aidan Flynn, general manager of the Freight Transport Association, an Irish group, said this was a “perfect storm” with Covid-19, pre-Brexit stockpiling and Christmas supplies falling at the same time.

Dover closed​

Last night the port of Dover – through which many Irish exporters and importers move goods – announced that it was closed to trucking and passengers leaving the UK “until further notice”. Containers can continue to be sent unaccompanied.
The UK government’s Cobra emergency committee is to meet on Monday to discuss the situation, with the movement of freight traffic high on the agenda. With EU ministers also due to discuss the situation, both sides may try to find a way to allow freight to flow. The Eurotunnel is also closing.
The issue will be a major problem for Irish exporters and importers. While the Government has said that freight movements between Ireland and the UK will continue, the movement of goods through UK ports looks set to effectively stop. This will cause a particular headache for companies trading in time-sensitive food products. About 150,000 truck movements a year are recorded through the landbridge to and from Ireland.

Direct routes​

A number of new direct routes from Irish to continental ports have been opened in recent months in advance of Brexit and some deliveries are likely to be redirected on to these services.
According to Mr Flynn, the latest developments would test whether there is enough direct capacity, as the Government has claimed. Direct routes typically take longer and thus cost more than normal use of the landbridge. Already there have been major delays through Kent on the way to Dover in recent days due to stockpiling ahead of the UK’s exit from the EU trading block at the end of the year.
The UK’s exit from the EU single market is expected to lead to delays in freight traffic due to new customs procedures – and if there is no trade deal, the delays could be worse.

 

[Mag_seven]

I don’t believe many people in the UK truly knew what they were voting for with Brexit

I think that has been clear for a while now! Still there will be some that will claim it was all about "Blue Passports" and "Fish".

 

[alex397]

I don’t want anything of a socialist state at all. I don’t think many Brexit voters realise how many of their rights were enshrined in EU law. I have read that many ERG MP's ideas moving forward includes axing many of the rights that British workers have had for years. The EU is a massive trading bloc so even South American countries agreed to enhance their animal welfare standards in order to sell their products into the EU. The only way for the UK as I see it is down. We are already up to the stage where both parents in the average family have to work full time because one salary simply is not enough to live on. I simply do not believe that the ERG will not pounce on this opportunity to lay waste to workers rights, animal welfare, environment protections, data protections etc etc. A storm is definitely on the horizon. I don’t believe many people in the UK truly knew what they were voting for with Brexit, but the cat is out of the bag and until 2024 there is nothing to stop it.

If many of these rights are put on the bonfire by the Tories after 1st Jan, hopefully there will be enough backlash to stop it. However, no matter how much scrutiny they get from the media, such as with Covid, Cummings, Patel and so on, it seems they just carry on regardless (and worse than that, they still get support from their increasingly cultish fans).

 

[najaB]

If many of these rights are put on the bonfire by the Tories after 1st Jan, hopefully there will be enough backlash to stop it.

The problem is, as always, that there won't be a big bonfire, just a series of small little ones. They will dress them up as "improvements" and brush aside anybody who criticises the changes as "alarmists" or "fear mongers".

Source: History.

 

[DarloRich]

The problem is, as always, that there won't be a big bonfire, just a series of small little ones. They will dress them up as "improvements" and brush aside anybody who criticises the changes as "alarmists" or "fear mongers".

Source: History.

and each change will be cheered to the rafters by Tory MP's, their media clients and the people whose thoughts are directed by that media.

 

[Dave1987]

and each change will be cheered to the rafters by Tory MP's, their media clients and the people whose thoughts are directed by that media.

Many BoJo supporters want the media restricted (because all they ever do is scaremonger and spread fake news apparently), kinda like what happened in Germany in the 1930's.....

 

[DarloRich]

Many BoJo supporters want the media restricted (because all they ever do is scaremonger and spread fake news apparently), kinda like what happened in Germany in the 1930's.....

No: They want media they don't agree with restricted.

 

[birchesgreen]

The problem is, as always, that there won't be a big bonfire, just a series of small little ones. They will dress them up as "improvements" and brush aside anybody who criticises the changes as "alarmists" or "fear mongers".

Source: History.

There will also be distractions, Patel has started talking about the death penalty. Its very unlikely to happen but very useful to gain attention.