FT: Bojo to override WA

[GerryT]

can't believe nobodies thought of that before 

You can twist it to suit your position but it won't make that position correct.
First you need to show in the WA, where it say's in so many words "if there's on trade deal then this WA explodes"
Second there were 2 documents. First the WA which is a binding treaty. The clue is in the name "withdrawal", as in pertaining to leaving the EU and tidying up any loose ends. And the "political declaration" being a aspiration, non binding doc, which scoped out what both sides hoped a trade deal would look like. Neither side are under any obligation to give the other a trade deal.
The UK courts have nothing to do with it, the new bill is not illegal. The issue is it seeks to ride roughshot over the WA. The EU will seek redress through the WA process.
You would think the EU knew or anticipated Johnson doing this, because there is a provision in the WA that if the UK falters, like it seems to be trying, then the EU can get hefty financial payments from the UK, if the UK continues to falter the EU is allowed to hit the UK with sanctions and my favourite part, if a future trade deal (past the date of this UK transgression) is struck the EU is not bound by the terms of past present or future agreements with the UK. So the EU could easily refuse Uk planes to land in the EU, refuse UK haulers, refuse eurathom and close UK nuclear power plants. The list goes on. Very cleaver of the EU to have that put into a WA, where the EU can take action legally as recognised globally but the UK can't with what it's doing.

[Baff]

The WA explicitly allows the UK unilateral action.
The reason for this is because the UK was worried that if no trade deal was signed, it would not be able to leave the EU under the previous terms of the unratified WA. That it must first gain EU approval.

That this would be used as leverage to either keep the UK in the EU indefinitely by offering a terribly bad trade deal, or to force the UK to accept a terrible trade deal just to get out of the EU.


The UK is still worried by this.
Talk of the EU banning UK food sales in NI being used as leverage in the current trade negotiations have prompted them to use the WA as intended.

[Streetwalker]

R

The WA wouldn't be needed if there was a comprehensive FTA, the closer you get to no deal the more of a WA you need. The need for a WA heading toward no deal is now stronger than ever. You have the WA backward, to protect the GFA the WA reaffirms there is no border on the island of IRL, if that now causes you a problem, well that's your problem
[/quote]

This is where the difference of opinion lies . The WA was signed with the expectation of a trade deal being achieved . The WA states that the Political declaration will run parallel with the WA . The PD states a comprehensive free trade deal will be  at the core of  the talks  . Therefore its safe to  believe that the EU would  act in good faith to achieve those goals . It is the UK contention that they haven't and the EU's that they have = stalemate

So with the WA being loaded in the EU's favour a no deal becomes a problem for the integrity of the UK  ,stage right enter the apparent illegal bill . The remoaners will be all over it, a probable court case lasting months and who knows what the vote in Parliament will result in .

I dont have anything backward . Preserving the integrity of the UK is part of the GFA. The Irish government acknowledged that N Ireland was part of the sovereign territory of the UK  in a binding international agreement . The WA agreement overrides this with N Ireland coming under the customs union ,removing sovereignty from part of the UK.  The WA therefore  is in effect , illegal .

So we come to the Irish internal border which nobody in Ireland wants , nobody in the UK wants and only the EU want . Well they want one between the UK and the EU . They are quite happy to steal N Ireland for that purpose ,how about we steal Ireland ?   Not actually steal it but for customs purposes . It would make far more sense for Eire to be aligned with the UK  (no EU land border  GFA is upheld ) than part of the UK to be aligned with the EU ( blurry land border ,customs problems ,smuggling GFA brought into disrepute )

Cant believe nobodies thought of that before 

[GerryT]

The Eu don't do threats.

That has to be the daftest thing I have read in a while.

hang on, I just asked call me Dave, he says the EU most definitely do threats.

I was going to offer proof but I thought of so many that my brain blew up!   

Indulge me, and please not one's where its actually the UK threatening the EU. Bonus points where its Brexit related.

[T00ts]

The Eu don't do threats.

That has to be the daftest thing I have read in a while.

hang on, I just asked call me Dave, he says the EU most definitely do threats.

I was going to offer proof but I thought of so many that my brain blew up!   

[Sheepy]

The Eu don't do threats.

That has to be the daftest thing I have read in a while.

hang on, I just asked call me Dave, he says the EU most definitely do threats.

[T00ts]

The Eu don't do threats.

That has to be the daftest thing I have read in a while.

[GerryT]

We are miles apart on what we think is going on and how things have developed . A couple of points though .

The WA and the political declaration we designed to run in parallel . The EU from the outset stuck to the legal text of the WA rather than incorporating the goodwill of the political declaration .  Its no wonder that no deal approaches .

That's not how the process started. The EU tabled that the first item would be the divorce bill, then the rights of EU citizens living in the UK, then the border between NI and ROI. This evolved into the WA. The EU also said they would only progress to the future trade deal if there were sufficient progress on the first 3 items. Davis agreed to this, wright or wrong is irrelevant, he could have argued a parallel approach but he would have had to back that up with an "or else", then the EU would have had to counter, but none of that happened, so we went with what transpired. You need to dust your memory as there were constant comments from Barnier saying no progress, no progress, I remember the UK back peddling, not that they were saying the EU were delaying, but if that's what you think happened I'm sure you can provide some info to show that's what happened.
Of course the EU suck to the legal text, it's rules based and doesn't do things in a casual way.
No deal approaches because the UK put up so many red lines it wasn't possible for the UK to then table a FTA proposal they wanted, again if you can remember it was always a case of the UK saying what they didn't want and never what the did want, remember the "we won't show our hand" nonsense.

I didnt say Johnson would tweak the GFA , I was referring to the WA which needs adjusting in the event of a no deal to protect the sovereignty of the United Kingdom and indeed the GFA .

Johnson so far will do fine by me and though breaking treaties doesn't sit well we really had little alternative the way things have panned out . 

R

The WA wouldn't be needed if there was a comprehensive FTA, the closer you get to no deal the more of a WA you need. The need for a WA heading toward no deal is now stronger than ever. You have the WA backward, to protect the GFA the WA reaffirms there is no border on the island of IRL, if that now causes you a problem, well that's your problem.

The EU called an emergency meeting today of the joint committee, this is the vehicle that deals with the WA and would be used to make changes to it. Obviously the EU will seek clarification regarding yesterdays events and confirming that any new legislation under the guise of yesterdays bill will be met with a measured response. The UK are escalating the issue, where it goes they won't know until it happens. The Eu don't do threats.

[Sheepy]

Well look on the Brightside, at least we are showing the EU is escapable, for others who see that the only way to deal with them, is give them the two fingers.

Poor old UK didn't realise leaving the EU only required a letter to be submitted.

What others now see is the effect doing this has on a country, I doubt any other country would want to repeat the experience. Wait for 2021 when the UK sails out of the harbour, thats when the real problems will start, it's been mild up to now.

LOL feck em. I have spent a lifetime listening to their problems and how they will get it right next time. They were full of shit when they started down this path and they still are.

[Streetwalker]

Ireland aside the EU have not been negotiating in good faith since talks began . They have insisted on negotiations following ECHR and EU protocols . They seem to have forgotten that we have left and have our own set of rules to follow . It is not the way that trade agreements are made .

So David Davis showing up 4 times in a yr is good faith ?  agreeing a treaty and breaking it soon after is good faith. You don't know the meaning of good faith. The EU have not insisted on anything regarding the talks, the first meeting back in 2016 was to agree the format and process for brexit, the 2 parties at that meeting EU/UK agreed the way forward. Stop bleating on that you now don't like what you agreed. Give one example of where the EU has not negotiated in good faith.

Article 184 of the WA says the talks should proceed in good faith , I have seen little of that . What I have seen is stubborn people who if we locked them in a room for 4 years would not be able to agree the price of fish let alone who can catch it .

So you say but haven't shown how the EU has not proceeded in good faith. Being in the room trying to agree is the point. Agreeing and later unilaterally breaking that agreement is the best example of proceeding in bad faith

For me the WA became null and void almost as soon as the ink was dry with the attitude of Barnier  who refused to discuss anything until we agreed with him .

Totally wrong, the EU and UK agreed the process. on day 1. No-one told anyone what to do.

Johnsons tweaking with the N Ireland protocol is as we have said a sign that we will walk and are prepared in the event of a no deal . The  legality  of what he is up to is still to be proven one way or the other but for sure his case is not helped with all the usual suspects coming out in support of what are in effect our opponents in trade talks .

Johnson is a liar and has broken international law, He can't "tweak" the GFA, its not in his power. It's this attitude of UK superiority has the UK where it is. The GFA is agreed, if the UK wants to change it there is a mechanism to do so. He has zero power to make any changes on his own

Still thats enough of supporting the conservatives for one day from me . It could all be political game and probably is where the picture of doom and gloom is painted by the remoaners and Johnson comes to the rescue at the last minute with such a crap deal that the remoaners rejoice and those that voted leave accept it as the best deal we will get .

Its how we got into this mess in the first place .

Johnson is prob the worst PM the UK has ever had and will ever have. He has not the capacity or wit to secure a deal. Don't you realise his action today has stopped any chance of a deal. The EU will now start to play hardball, you might think they have up to now but they have been trying to help the UK. But that day has past.

We are miles apart on what we think is going on and how things have developed . A couple of points though .

The WA and the political declaration we designed to run in parallel . The EU from the outset stuck to the legal text of the WA rather than incorporating the goodwill of the political declaration .  Its no wonder that no deal approaches .

I didnt say Johnson would tweak the GFA , I was referring to the WA which needs adjusting in the event of a no deal to protect the sovereignty of the United Kingdom and indeed the GFA .

Johnson so far will do fine by me and though breaking treaties doesn't sit well we really had little alternative the way things have panned out . 

[GerryT]

Well look on the Brightside, at least we are showing the EU is escapable, for others who see that the only way to deal with them, is give them the two fingers.

Poor old UK didn't realise leaving the EU only required a letter to be submitted.

What others now see is the effect doing this has on a country, I doubt any other country would want to repeat the experience. Wait for 2021 when the UK sails out of the harbour, thats when the real problems will start, it's been mild up to now.

[Sheepy]

Well to be fair on Boris, Parliament played by the EU rules for decades and even tried them after the referendum, but alas they didn't work then or now, so lets leave with a big bang, sort of like creating a new universe.

The UK was integral in making EU laws, had more say than the majority of EU countries, in essence EU laws are UK made.

As for a big bang, the UK isn't that important, more like an imploding grenade, doing most of the damage to itself, with some fallout.

IRL exports to the UK now down to 6%, it was at 20% 3 yrs ago, 10% at the start of this yr, wonder where it will be by January.

Well look on the Brightside, at least we are showing the EU is escapable, for others who see that the only way to deal with them, is give them the two fingers.

[GerryT]

Well to be fair on Boris, Parliament played by the EU rules for decades and even tried them after the referendum, but alas they didn't work then or now, so lets leave with a big bang, sort of like creating a new universe.

The UK was integral in making EU laws, had more say than the majority of EU countries, in essence EU laws are UK made.

As for a big bang, the UK isn't that important, more like an imploding grenade, doing most of the damage to itself, with some fallout.

IRL exports to the UK now down to 6%, it was at 20% 3 yrs ago, 10% at the start of this yr, wonder where it will be by January.

[Sheepy]

Well to be fair on Boris, Parliament played by the EU rules for decades and even tried them after the referendum, but alas they didn't work then or now, so lets leave with a big bang, sort of like creating a new universe.

[papasmurf]

The decision for you and the rest of the UK is, who's the best man/woman to make that happen

Basically Britain is stuffed, I can't think of any politician of any party out of the current useless crop capable of organising a "party" in  brewery.