Tip jar

If you like CaB and wish to support it, you can use PayPal or KoFi. Thank you, and I hope you continue to enjoy the site - Neil.

Buy Me a Coffee at ko-fi.com

Support CaB

Recent

Welcome to Cook'd and Bomb'd. Please login or sign up.

March 28, 2024, 10:30:55 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Brexit Thread Seven: More of this shit

Started by Mister Six, April 05, 2019, 04:29:39 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Paul Calf

#2160
Quote from: biggytitbo on July 19, 2019, 08:00:09 AM
Yes considering democracy is now defined as John Bercow and a handful of ultra-remainers playing fast and loose with centuries of convention to insert entirely unrelated amendments into entirely unrelated bills in a desperate proxy attempt to stop the thing they voted for.

In a political environment where the next PM has declared that there'll be no General Election because people are sick of voting, your desperate shilling for the anti-democratic far-right establishment is beyond stupid, and is now becoming reckless.

You will have to live with the consequences of what you say and do, so probably best to have a think before you say anything.

Paul Calf

I mean, after your craven abandonment of a life-long commitment to socialism when you realised that Corbyn wasn't going to help a disorderly Brexit was so blatant that I'm amazed that you're able to show your face in here.

biggytitbo

Quote from: Paul Calf on July 19, 2019, 08:33:12 AM
In a political environment where the next PM has declared that there'll be no General Election because people are sick of voting, your desperate shilling for the anti-democratic far-right establishment is beyond stupid, and is now becoming reckless.

It's not up to the Prime Minister, parliament voted to have a fixed term act a few years back. He could request a general election but parliament has to vote for it by a 2/3d majority. Likewise parliament could force an election by calling a no confidence vote.

The constant implication we're on the verge of a fascist takeover makes you look like a fool.

Captain Z

Quote from: jobotic on July 17, 2019, 05:32:44 PM


Is that Ron in the window, having just opened another Virgin Media bill?

Paul Calf

Quote from: biggytitbo on July 19, 2019, 02:37:02 PM
It's not up to the Prime Minister, parliament voted to have a fixed term act a few years back. He could request a general election but parliament has to vote for it by a 2/3d majority. Likewise parliament could force an election by calling a no confidence vote.

The constant implication we're on the verge of a fascist takeover makes you look like a fool.

Being called a fool be someone of your perspicacity and political nous isn't especially concerning.

A no-confidence vote is unlikely to succeed, as it depends on Tories voting themselves out of government. He won't request a GE because he knows they're likely to lose. He is very close to Bannon, who is currently building a far-right, anti-EU network across Europe. What seems most likely is that they've found a way to ignore or sideline parliament to enforce their will.

But please do tell us about how everything's fine.

Quote from: biggytitbo on July 19, 2019, 07:13:50 AM
The one crucial detail missing in all this talk of stopping prorogation and no deal is that come October, the EU will be dealing directly with Boris Johnson, not parliament. Parliament ultimately isnt involved when it comes to the final decision. They could of course find a way with Bercow bending the rules to jam an amendment into some totally unrelated bill to force him to go ask for an extension, but they can't make him not sadly 'fail' to secure it...

I don't think this is correct. There's an interesting letter in the LRB referencing the 'Three Knights' opinion given by senior EU Law experts in the UK.  Their opinion is that, in order for a withdrawal from the EU to be constitutional, it needs to be authorised by Parliament in legislation once the outcome of the negotiations, and the impact on citizens' rights, is known.

So, there seems a strong legal/constitutional argument that 'no deal' Brexit would not happen automatically after all. 

QuoteWilliam Davies writes that a no deal Brexit is 'the default outcome if nothing else can be agreed on' (LRB, 20 June). Although it seems to be assumed by all sides that this is the case, there is an alternative legal interpretation of the way Article 50 operates. On 10 February 2017 the QCs David Edward, Francis Jacobs, Jeremy Lever, Helen Mountfield and Gerry Facenna published what is now known as the Three Knights Opinion. It was submitted to the House of Lords in advance of its second reading of the European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Bill 2017. It points out that Article 50 requires a decision to withdraw from the EU to be taken by a member state 'in accordance with its own constitutional requirements'. In the UK's case those constitutional requirements, in the view of the authors (and following the Supreme Court's decision in Miller), include the enactment by Parliament of legislation expressly authorising withdrawal on the terms agreed or withdrawal in the absence of agreement: the principle of parliamentary sovereignty means that only Parliament is capable of authorising in this way the changes in domestic law and existing rights that would necessarily follow from withdrawal. Absent such legislation, the Article 50 notification would simply lapse on expiry (the necessary domestic constitutional requirements not having been met) and the UK would consequently remain a member of the EU. As the authors put it, 'Article 50 cannot have the effect of ejecting a member state from the European Union contrary to its own constitutional requirements.'

Parliament's subsequent decision to trigger Article 50 has not diminished the force of this analysis. As the opinion points out, the necessary parliamentary authorisation can no more be achieved by Parliament endorsing notification of the UK's intention to leave the EU two (now more) years in advance of the event, on terms then unknown, than it can by a single 'take it or leave it' vote at the end of the process. Unless Parliament enacts legislation expressly authorising a no deal exit, the UK cannot legally crash out of the EU when the Article 50 period expires on 31 October (or indeed, if a further extension is granted, on some later date), given the impact this would have on the rights of British citizens and businesses and on the rights of those of other member states resident or established here.

Davies adverts to the irony of 'the legalistic nature of the EU itself' being responsible for the apparent momentum behind no deal. But what would an international treaty look like without legally binding terms? The ironies, in any case, are clear. The mechanism that the autonomy-sapping EU has provided for departure from the bloc expressly defers to member states' own constitutional requirements, while the parliamentary sovereignty vaunted by many in the Leave camp turns out to be precisely what, on this analysis, means no deal is not in fact the legal default.

The Three Knights Opinion is just that: an opinion. Given its authors' considerable professional standing and expertise, however, and the persuasiveness of its reasoning, the limited media coverage (beyond a handful of academic articles and blog posts) and near total absence of political attention it has received to date are striking.

Henry Day
London SW2


Mr_Simnock

Quote from: Paul Calf on July 19, 2019, 02:52:02 PM
A no-confidence vote is unlikely to succeed, as it depends on Tories voting themselves out of government. He won't request a GE because he knows they're likely to lose. He is very close to Bannon, who is currently building a far-right, anti-EU network across Europe. What seems most likely is that they've found a way to ignore or sideline parliament to enforce their will.

suppositiontastic that, I do enjoy your misery hyperbole you like to spout out on here, some of it could almost be considered to be 'crafted' (and I do use that term lightly).

Quote from: Clatty McCutcheon on July 19, 2019, 03:49:12 PM

I don't think this is correct. There's an interesting letter in the LRB referencing the 'Three Knights' opinion given by senior EU Law experts in the UK.  Their opinion is that, in order for a withdrawal from the EU to be constitutional, it needs to be authorised by Parliament in legislation once the outcome of the negotiations, and the impact on citizens' rights, is known.

So, there seems a strong legal/constitutional argument that 'no deal' Brexit would not happen automatically after all.

As far as the EU is concerned once we pass the deadline and no agreement has been reached it's no deal time despite what the ' EU Law experts' think.

Quote from: Mr_Simnock on July 19, 2019, 04:45:28 PM
As far as the EU is concerned once we pass the deadline and no agreement has been reached it's no deal time despite what the ' EU Law experts' think.

It's not a question of whether it's 'no deal time' as such, it's whether such a scenario automatically causes the UK to leave the EU in terms of its Article 50 notification.  The opinion states the belief that this is not the case, as it requires the member state to leave in accordance with their 'constitutional requirements'. Of course, it doesn't help that the UK medieval-style state infrastructure includes no written constitution.  However, their legal opinion is that the principle of Parliamentary Sovereignty would require UK legislation to be passed in order for Brexit to be effective.

If they are correct, the UK won't leave the EU if there's no deal, unless parliament passes legislation to that effect. If the UK government purports to have left, presumably this is open to legal challenge in the good old ECJ or otherwise.

I would put good money on this saga rumbling on into 2020 and possibly for years beyond.

Replies From View

Quote from: Paul Calf on July 19, 2019, 08:33:12 AM
You will have to live with the consequences of what you say and do, so probably best to have a think before you say anything.

Fairly easy to live with things like that when you are as oblivious as titbo.  A political version of Guy Pearce's character in Memento.

olliebean

Quote from: Clatty McCutcheon on July 19, 2019, 03:49:12 PM
I don't think this is correct. There's an interesting letter in the LRB referencing the 'Three Knights' opinion given by senior EU Law experts in the UK.  Their opinion is that, in order for a withdrawal from the EU to be constitutional, it needs to be authorised by Parliament in legislation once the outcome of the negotiations, and the impact on citizens' rights, is known.

So, there seems a strong legal/constitutional argument that 'no deal' Brexit would not happen automatically after all.

A no deal Brexit would be illegal anyway, as it would require breaking the Good Friday Agreement, but I don't suppose that'll stop them at this stage.

Zetetic

Border in the Irish Sea would be good enough (for most other WTO members, for example).

Worst you can be accused of then is breaking the multi-party agreement (by the DUP), but if you're still dependent on that shower by then you're fucked anyway.

Natnar

I'd love to ask any UKIP supporters how they feel about British people going to live and work abroad. Surely if you don't like immigrants coming in and "stealing our jobs" then you'd also have a problem with "unpatriotic" people moving abroad.

Paul Calf

It depends, I think. Hardcore blood-and-soil nationalists would insist that it's wrong and that people should stay where they belong. Others might fall back on British exceptionalism but mostly, I think, they don't care what British people do and just want people to stop speaking Polish in THEIR a high streets.

sponk

Quote from: Natnar on July 20, 2019, 10:18:03 AM
I'd love to ask any UKIP supporters how they feel about British people going to live and work abroad. Surely if you don't like immigrants coming in and "stealing our jobs" then you'd also have a problem with "unpatriotic" people moving abroad.

It might shock you to learn that bigots and xenophobes can be hypocritical and irrational.

Fambo Number Mive

There's an anti-Brexit march in London today.

QuoteProtesters will take to London's streets on Saturday for a "No to Boris. Yes to Europe" march days ahead of Boris Johnson's widely anticipated move into No 10.

A Boris toddler blimp was launched in Parliament Square at 10am, featuring salmon-pink skin, the politician's trademark "faux-dishevelled hairstyle", mismatched running gear and a Brexit-bus T-shirt, according to March for Change.

The singer Billy Bragg and presenter Sandi Toksvig are expected to join the march, which begins at noon in Park Lane and will make its way to Parliament Square...

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jul/19/boris-blimp-to-join-9ft-nigel-farage-on-anti-brexit-march-in-london

BlodwynPig


Quote from: Fambo Number Mive on July 20, 2019, 12:23:17 PM
There's an anti-Brexit march in London today.

QuoteLook at these fucking gammons!

QuoteI've never seen so many white people in one place!

Quotedey r stealing r futures!





biggytitbo

Quote from: olliebean on July 19, 2019, 11:10:43 PM
A no deal Brexit would be illegal anyway, as it would require breaking the Good Friday Agreement, but I don't suppose that'll stop them at this stage.


Nobody can answer this simple question - who exactly is going to install border infrastructure in Ireland and who exactly is going to break the good Friday agreement?


Supplemental question - what kind of psyopaths would put the sacred rules of a neoliberal trading bloc before a highly prized, internationally cherished peace treaty?

Replies From View

biggy if you had to choose between staying in Dr Evil's Evil Evilpean Union and entering a trade deal with the United Sublimely Socialist States of America, which would you pick?

Quote from: Replies From View on July 20, 2019, 01:40:29 PM
biggy if you had to choose between staying in Dr Evil's Evil Evilpean Union and entering a trade deal with the United Sublimely Socialist States of America, which would you pick?

in what world do we have to choose between those two options?

Johnny Yesno


biggytitbo

Looks like a white supremacist rally https://twitter.com/DarrenPlymouth/status/1152536121219440640?s=19


The only place you'd see less brown faces is in Brussels!

jobotic

Wonder if any of them voted fascist.

Why don't you fuck off?

biggytitbo

Quote from: Replies From View on July 20, 2019, 01:40:29 PM
biggy if you had to choose between staying in Dr Evil's Evil Evilpean Union and entering a trade deal with the United Sublimely Socialist States of America, which would you pick?


It's weird that remainers are suddenly so obsessed with trade. But obviously now you love trade you'd notice there's something wrong with being locked in a trading arrangement with the EU, who we have a massive deficit with.


Whereas we have no trade deal with the US and have a massive surplus with them! How's that work 🤔

Johnny Yesno

Quote from: biggytitbo on July 20, 2019, 01:54:09 PM

It's weird that remainers are suddenly so obsessed with trade. But obviously now you love trade you'd notice there's something wrong with being locked in a trading arrangement with the EU, who we have a massive deficit with.


Whereas we have no trade deal with the US and have a massive surplus with them! How's that work 🤔

It's almost like we're worried about other things than trade surpluses or deficits, isn't it? Like whether we'll have to lower our consumer, environmental, ethical and employment standards. And open up our public services to vulture capitalists.

But you know all this already because we've been over it so many times. Stop being dishonest.

Replies From View

Quote from: biggytitbo on July 20, 2019, 01:54:09 PM

It's weird that remainers are suddenly so obsessed with trade. But obviously now you love trade you'd notice there's something wrong with being locked in a trading arrangement with the EU, who we have a massive deficit with.


Whereas we have no trade deal with the US and have a massive surplus with them! How's that work 🤔

Obsessed with trade?

I am concerned (have always been concerned) about handing our public sector over to profit-making US corporations, as well you know.

And you dodged the question again because you are in favour of it happening, despite all your mock-horror hands over your mouth posturing over the neoliberalism of the EU.

Unlike you I think that handing our NHS over to private US medical companies would be A Bad Thing, for example, and I will even put my money where my mouth is in this regard by consistently never voting for a fascist party to make it happen.  Somewhat of a maverick position to hold, I know, but what can I say:  I'm not a thick cunt I guess.

sponk

Quote from: biggytitbo on July 20, 2019, 01:54:09 PM

It's weird that remainers are suddenly so obsessed with trade. But obviously now you love trade you'd notice there's something wrong with being locked in a trading arrangement with the EU, who we have a massive deficit with.


Whereas we have no trade deal with the US and have a massive surplus with them! How's that work 🤔

Biggs, have you ever changed your mind on anything EU related because of an argument here? Have you ever changed anyone else's mind on anything?

biggytitbo

Making things up then pretending to worry about them is a fun pastime im sure but not very convincing. Quote one mainstream UK politician who has ever argued for any of this  scaremongering nonsense please? It's a phantom argument.


You don't even have to believe the current lot who have all explicitly ruled out opening public services to the us or lowering food standards, just have some basic comprehension of political reality, why would anyone sell out the people who vote for them for no actual benefit? It's a fatuous argument and like everything else at the moment 100% a proxy for your burning desire to stop us leaving the EU. You will literally try and seize on any stupid bullshit if it helps you get what you want.

sponk

Quote a single Tory politician before 2010 saying they wanted to double homelessness during their first 8 years in office

Johnny Yesno

Quote from: biggytitbo on July 20, 2019, 02:18:34 PM
Making things up then pretending to worry about them is a fun pastime im sure but not very convincing. Quote one mainstream UK politician who has ever argued for any of this  scaremongering nonsense please? It's a phantom argument.


You don't even have to believe the current lot who have all explicitly ruled out opening public services to the us or lowering food standards, just have some basic comprehension of political reality, why would anyone sell out the people who vote for them for no actual benefit? It's a fatuous argument and like everything else at the moment 100% a proxy for your burning desire to stop us leaving the EU. You will literally try and seize on any stupid bullshit if it helps you get what you want.

'Trust the tories!'

You're such a socialist, buggy. Thank you for deigning to educate us.