Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Brexit

Westministenders. Whilst Boris makes more daft promises, a50 hits the courts. Poo and Fan Time.

997 replies

RedToothBrush · 01/10/2016 15:39

There is no plan. Or is there?

We’ve talked on the last thread about how it’s being set up as ‘Hard Brexit’ or ‘Unilateral Continuity’ (dubbed here as the ‘Off The Top Of The Cliff Plan’) by the hard line Brexiteers either as the plan or the means by which to force a softer deal with the EU (which perhaps seems to be preferred choice of Mrs May herself).

The last few weeks have been plagued by comments by various members of the Cabinet over what Brexit means – comments which are frankly bollocks and show an outstanding world class level of ignorance – and have led to us being laughed at (Verhofstadt head of EU negotiations), facing outright anger and demands for compensation (Japan) and pure bewilderment (USA unless your name is Donald).

And they have been repeated contradicted and undermined by May in response with, the response that this is not government policy and she will not be giving a running commentary.

Thus making the UK look like the world’s leading political basket case whilst at the same time being ‘an excellent place to make new investment in’. Obviously. As long as you prattle the words ‘Free Trade’ a lot a bright new world of opportunity will open up. Just look at the Japanese position on that.

-------------------

But really the reason why ‘Brexit means Brexit’ is still so vague, could be a legal one.

The next step in the Battle for Brexit, is in the courts and over whether the Royal Prerogative can be used to trigger a50 or whether May will have to first pass it through Parliament before she can notify the EU that we are leaving. This may prove to be a big hurdle for the government and one they have a real chance of losing particular the NI case.

The two big a50 challenges (though there are others) come from a cross party NI challenge supported by the NI Attorney General in Belfast and a crowdfunded ‘People’s challenge’ in the English courts. The NI challenge is characterised by a loss of rights and the international agreement that is the Good Friday Agreement, whilst the English challenge includes this as well as other acquired rights and concerns over the devolved assemblies and the Act of Union.

The government’s defence to this, which they sought a bizarre court order to protect and keep secret which was later overturned, is that ministers have better expertise to implement the start of Brexit than the courts (see Johnson, Fox and Davies), that it does not fall under parliament’s jurisdiction and that whilst the Royal Prerogative can’t be used to remove rights, because ‘Brexit means Brexit’ is so vague it’s impossible to challenge use of the Royal Prerogative because we don’t know precisely which rights will be affected!

The case for the government is also being presented by a relatively inexperienced lawyer.

However, some very respected constitutional law academics think the core of the government’s argument is sound, though this might be lost in the ridiculous other defences, the government have put along it. Their lead of the defence is a lawyer, who has little public law experience too.
The government need to win both these big cases, to ensure that they can use the Royal Prerogative. Don’t forget the likelihood of appeals regardless of the first ruling too.

-------------------

Into the political void the Irish PM has stepped in to led discussions into the future of the island, the Japanese have issued a Brexit ‘wish list, the Spanish have staked a claim to co-sovereignty of Gibraltar (something rejected overwhelming in a referendum in 2002) and threatened to block negotiations otherwise, a French Presidential hopeless has kindly offered us another referendum, the USA have reiterated that they won’t do a deal with us until our WTO status is in good order and the Italians have said ‘No chance!’. This is the UK taking back control folks.

At home Ken Clarke has said that May needs to get her act together, George Osborne has said Brexit did not mean hard Brexit and Dominic Grieve has urged her not to sleepwalk into a hard Brexit. The Tory conference looks set for all out Tory War.

-------------------

In a side issue the pro-Brexit newspaper, The Sun has come out in an editorial telling the Government to have the courage to pull the plug on the child sex abuse inquiry which was set up by Theresa May when she was Home Secretary, calling it a ‘farce’ and saying its scope was too wide and unmanageable… It might seem unrelated, but it calls May’s judgment and handling of large issues into question. If she allows it to plow on, it could turn into an even bigger farce and embarrassment, yet if she U-Turns it could make her look weak and have the potential to do the same over Brexit. She’ll struggle to throw Amber Rudd under the bus over the matter, because most of this happened on her watch. This will come back to haunt May. It also starts to question Murdoch’s position and opinion of May. Is this a withdrawal of support for her?

-------------------

In summary, the next six to eight weeks are crucial to what Brexit looks like. It’s time for the shit to start hitting the fan. Brace yourselves for next couple of weeks. Get stocked up on the gin

We are not being led by UK politics anymore nor even internal squabbles really but the courts and outside forces which are shaping what is possible and achievable rather than what we want.

All talk is of a hard Brexit. It might well prove to be the case yet. We aren’t there yet though. There could be some more twists and turns yet.

An article 50 defeat in the courts for the government throws it back to Parliamentary scrutiny, taking up time and potentially watering down demands. It could even produce the result that a50 is deemed not fit for purpose and we have to go back to the EU begging for a new treaty for a way out (which technically they would have to do as they legally have to recognise democratic votes). This might be our only way to prevent a chaotic exit from the EU. This might led not to an exit though, but a two tier EU – a proposal suggested by, errrr Guy Verhofstadt, Head of EU Negotiations – and is very unlikely to prove to be the quick exit by 2020 that Kippers so desperately want. And a second referendum on the deal reached, in order to prove it was the will of the people. It could also prove a threat to the current government and raise the realistic spectre of a rebellion and a vote of no confidence and in turn a General Election.

Of course the EU themselves have a couple of their own headaches at the polls to survive too, whilst the German banks start to get the jitters. And there is the small matter of America having their own Brain Fart in the coming months, which could have a big impact on what happens next.

Yep, this is taking back control folks. What do you mean it feels more like a game of roulette? So might even say Russian roulette.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
29
dudleymcdudley · 11/10/2016 14:19

Marking place
(And also want to say:

Thus, politically, a hard Brexit is actually the soft option for the government.

I think this is what May et al are aiming for - they get what they want ideologically, they don't have to look bad whilst carrying out an impossible negotiating act with the EU and they hope they can also avoid responsibility for the negative economic consequences (if they are actually willing to believe there will be any).

GreenandWhite · 11/10/2016 14:22

Cailleach1 at this moment in time some countries allow their citizens to hold two passports, I believe the UK permit this too. I am wondering if they will get rid of EU citizens who would be willing to take on a second citizenship (British) but possibly less willing to give up their native citizenship. I am asking myself if the government will say that from 2017/18 etc. if you become British via naturalisation, you are not permitted to keep your other nationality, forcing people to choose.

RedToothBrush · 11/10/2016 14:23

Snuggle this is what the referendum said in terms of end deals:

48% - despite reservations about social or economic provision, 48% were united that staying in the EU was the best out come.

The other 52% said that they wanted out of the EU. This was split into three camps. One that was happy with the social provisions of the EU but unhappy with its economic ones. One that happy with the economic provisions but unhappy with the social ones. And a third that rejected both. This means in terms of outcome in negotiations they do not have a united goal.

If we want to look at it like this, then actually the EU could be eventually be perceived as the best outcome for the country - by both Leavers and Remainers - as opposed to Hard Brexit with a focus on immigration alone, but destroys us economically.

Polls have suggested that a lot of people do want Hard Brexit. Reframe the question about how much you are willing to pay for Hard Brexit and the result shifts enormously to a softer option.

OP posts:
TheElementsSong · 11/10/2016 14:25

you are not permitted to keep your other nationality, forcing people to choose.

That would fit with their "citizenship" rhetoric wouldn't it.

GreenandWhite · 11/10/2016 14:34

I am very worried they would go down this route. BY forcing people to choose you rally unroot them. They will never truly belong here due to ether accent yet have lost their original belonging as well. The new disenfranchised.

PattyPenguin · 11/10/2016 14:38

Would it be legal to make those applying for naturalisation give up any other citizenship, whilst simultaneously allowing citizens of Northern Ireland to also hold Irish citizenship, as they currently can, or allowing expats to be dual citizens of the UK and another state, either inside or outside the EU, where that is allowed?

GreenandWhite · 11/10/2016 14:43

My apologies for appalling spelling. I wondered if they would put this restriction only on EU citizens applying for naturalisation e.g. not those born into two citizenships.

RedToothBrush · 11/10/2016 14:45

Greenandwhite, But if you believe you’re a citizen of the world, you’re a citizen of nowhere. You don’t understand what the very word ‘citizenship’ means. is not compatible with the idea of dual citizenship.

Davis's comment's yesterday also seemed to fit in with that as the position. I think its about trying to push integration rather than multicultural as a concept.

Also whilst you might have the legal right to remain in the UK, acquired rights does remain a bargaining chip in terms of negotiation. You might have the right to remain but find you don't have the right to healthcare for example as an EU national because EU nations are not prepared to reciprocate for UK nationals living abroad.

Your rights might therefore end up being as second class to British Citizen rights.

There is another issue here though. Even if you wanted to apply for indefinite right to Remain, unless there is massive investment in the authority or they fast track people somehow, it will take so long to process that you could be left in limbo a long time.

And of course there is also the money. Will everyone who qualifies be able to afford citizenship? This discriminates. Of course the theory might be that those on lower incomes will be most disadvantaged. It doesn’t quite work out like that though does it? If you settle here and start a family even on a higher income, it doesn’t mean you’ll have the money to afford the fee. Thus again leaving you in limbo. I’m bet it will impact most on families rather than single people for this reason too.

Will it be legal for Irish citizens etc?
They could change the law with executive power to allow for this under the 'Great' Repeal Act.

I'm afraid you guys are still bargaining tools, despite Davis reassurance... Wish I could say different.

There is a legal case just begging to be brought here. I am in no doubt that at some point it will happen.

OP posts:
RedToothBrush · 11/10/2016 14:53

www.buzzfeed.com/marieleconte/british-medical-association-hits-out-at-plan-to-make-pregnan?bftwnews&utm_term=.jk0mZ5Bnd#.pxqyqb20n
British Medical Association Hits Out At Plan To Make Pregnant Women Show Their Passports

The plans were first mentioned in 2015 as part of a clampdown on so-called health tourists when the Department of Health issued guidelines telling hospitals they had a “legal obligation” to make sure the people they treated were eligible for free care on the NHS.

Cathy Warwick, chief executive of the Royal College of Midwives, said: “This move by the trust is a concern. I am sure no trust would deny care to women in labour or who are pregnant and arrive at a hospital needing urgent care related to their pregnancy. To be clear, the law says, and government policy states, that trusts must offer care to women in labour, irrespective of their immigration status in the country.”

Antenatal care says lives. If women are afraid of being deported or be charged they will avoid giving birth in hospital. This will endanger even more lives.

How does this fit with the governments slavery/trafficking policies? It just puts vulnerable women more at risk in pursuit of immigration targets. Its inhumane.

We are better than this. Aren't we?

OP posts:
GreenandWhite · 11/10/2016 14:58

AIBU to just hate those leavers a little bit, especially friends who know I have a German dh and who confidently say "but it won't affect people like you and your family" or, "it'll be difficult for a while but we will be just fine soon after", nothing to see here.

OlennasWimple · 11/10/2016 15:03

The current position on citizenship in the UK is that you can hold both the one you are born with and British citzenship. I don't see any appetite for changing this - it would have far reaching ramifications that would need far too long to unpick whilst also designing a new system for EU folk. In short, a bit of a red herring.

I wonder if they will create a new immigration category for EU citizens who were here before the referendum? It could give access to healthcare, unrestricted work rights etc. A modest processing fee (covering costs, but not above cost), simple to administer for applicants and caseworkers. But draw a line in the sand sufficient to satisfy Brexiters that "we are taking back control of our borders".

OlennasWimple · 11/10/2016 15:08

RedToothBrush - the St George's hospital pilot is interesting. I share your concerns about vulnerable women not accessing antenatal care due to concerns that they will be deported. But I don't know what the alternative is: there are some hospitals who are spending a lot of money on women who have no entitlement to that treatment, meaning that there are cuts elsewhere and services stretched to breaking point - often endangering other patients. I think that asking for proof at booking in is a better option than waiting until someone is in labour, for example, or the current unworkable system of presenting someone with a bill afterwards that is practically unenforceable.

RedToothBrush · 11/10/2016 15:28

Olenna where is the problem here? The failing lies with the border agencies not the hospitals.

Why should the already over stretched NHS be lumbered with the duties of the border agency.

This is trying to fix the problem without being willing to invest in the right area and the inevitable result that there will be unintended consequences – namely to the most vulnerable – the sick or pregnant.

The border agency should be responsible for tackling the problem – and focusing on the traffickers as part of that. Not targeting people who need assistance and help.

its just WRONG.

OP posts:
OlennasWimple · 11/10/2016 15:38

It's been a legal duty for hospitals and other healthcare providers to check entitlement to access for free for some time now, they just haven't done it systematically (anywhere, so far as I'm aware)

How are the border agencies supposed to keep tabs on women who enter on a visitor visa but don't go home? Some travel pregnant, some become pregnant whilst in the UK. (I'm not talking about women who are trafficked here, because that's a different issue and one that needs multi-agency international cooperation which I suspect will reduce post-Brexit Sad) They could issue virtually no visas to women of child-bearing age, I suppose, in case they turn out to be health tourists, but that seems disproportionate and raises unwelcome issues of its own.

Should the border agencies sit in hospitals and check papers instead of asking health care workers? It's a model that works well in prisons and some police stations, but not one that I would like to see more widely.

RedToothBrush · 11/10/2016 15:44

Louise Mensch ‏@LouiseMensch
This piece makes me warm more to @Theresa_May than anything I've read yet

Be prepared to be depressed then.

heatst.com/world/theresa-may-is-competent-humourless-and-illiberal-says-ex-home-office-colleague/
Liberal Democrat Norman Baker on May.

OP posts:
RedToothBrush · 11/10/2016 15:46

Well the border agency don't just work at the border...

OP posts:
RedToothBrush · 11/10/2016 15:54

www.bindmans.com/insight/brexit/the-article-50-peoples-challenge-a-pre-hearing-brief
All you need to know about the People's challenge (13th, 17th and 18th October), when there will be a ruling (likely to reserve judgement and announce in a couple of weeks) and what happens next (likely to go to Supreme court regardless of ruling)

Being live tweeted by the People's Challenge Group People
@ChallengeArt50

OP posts:
Motheroffourdragons · 11/10/2016 15:54

This reply has been withdrawn

This has been withdrawn by MNHQ on behalf of the poster.

RedToothBrush · 11/10/2016 16:08

www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/oct/11/norway-rejects-uk-request-for-joint-trade-taskforce-report-eea-eu?CMP=twt_gu
Norway rejects Liam Fox request for free trade deal taskforce

Country understood to believe bilateral talks could jeopardise EEA agreement and are ‘inappropriate’ before Britain exits EU

Faisal Islam ‏@faisalislam

pro-Brexit Labour MP Frank Field tells me "not about hard or soft, but long Brexit - should take as long as possible to get good deal" Field says he hasn't seen tomorrow's Opposition Day motion, but he didn't sound like someone likely to vote with Government - he's not a great fan of the PM's announcement to trigger Article 50 by end March. Interesting. Many varied nuanced views in the House.

news.sky.com/story/sky-views-brexit-means-leaving-eu-everything-else-is-politics-10613139
Islam has also written article for Sky on what Brexit Means:
^That election victory was forged not in its appeal to Labour-UKIPswitchers, but to Liberal Democrat voters in the South West.
The promise was compassionate Conservatism, avoiding economic chaos, losing AAA credit ratings, and economic and constitutional stability.^

These two separate mandates are not fully coherent. The tension between them will define the PM's tenure at No10.

And the final line:
The only direct mandate given by the referendumis to leave the EU - anything else is merely high politicking.

OP posts:
merrymouse · 11/10/2016 16:19

There was a binary choice and everyone who voted for the wrong option didn't all vote to LEAVE THE EU, but the lesser in number homogenous mass who voted for the other option were the majority because they all conferred and wanted ecactly the same thing for ever and ever amen so we should all just go back as we were? Unbelievable

A very complicated issue was presented as a binary choice, so now we are in a mess. What do you expect people to do - keep quiet?

smallfox2002 · 11/10/2016 16:27

Espeically as we had a referendum on this 41 years ago and the leave side got to complain about it weekly ever since!

There was a basic binary choice at the poll booth, but you will find that many who voted leave will be bitterly disappointed by the actual outcome as they all thought they were voting for something different/

The happiest right now have got to be those who voted to get rid of Cameron!

CeciledeVolanges · 11/10/2016 16:51

"Not about hard or soft, but long"?
Take your laughs where you can get them.

merrymouse · 11/10/2016 17:27
Grin
merrymouse · 11/10/2016 17:32

And in other political news, Trump has declared himself free from the Republican Party!

The only question now is whether Kanye or Kim is more likely to stand for election in 2020.

You think there is some kind of end in sight, and then you realise this is only the beginning...

RedToothBrush · 11/10/2016 17:34

In other news woohoo Royal Yacht might be on the cards. Naturally fits with the Brexit vote against the elite.
Harry Cole @MrHarryCole
BREAKING: Government announce they are "very keen" to see costed business plan for new yacht. Door held open for Brexit Britannia.

It has to be named Brexit McBrexitface

I look forward to the costed business plan for Brexit being made public.

Christopher Hope ‏@christopherhope

Gerald Howarth: a new Royal yacht "is not a luxury but a must have." Scrapping Britannia in 1997 was "one of the darkest moments of my life"
Sir Gerald Howarth MP for Aldershot

Tom Pugh ‏@Tom_PughPA
PA: Fujitsu planning a "transformation programme" which will result in a cut of up to 1,800 jobs in the UK, its workers have been told.

Nothing to do with Brexit. Honest.

Guy Verhofstadt ‏@GuyVerhofstadt
Constructive meeting with deputy first minister @MMcGuinnessSF on #brexit and the need to prevent a hard Irish border

raises eyebrows

Natalie Bennett ‏@natalieben

Heard in #Witney hustings last night Tory candidate booed for using dis-proven Jeremy Hunt 7-day #NHS line. In Witney! Politics changing!

raises them higher

Alexander Clarkson ‏@APHClarkson
Anyone who has watched what has happened to the Swiss government since 2014 knows this is a bad sign for Theresa May

Deputy head of DG Trade’s Swiss Unit, Nina Obermaier, will join the Commission’s chief Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier to lead negotiations with the U.K.

paints on eyebrows to replace the ones that have just fallen off head
Green AIBU? I think the response is, well you’re not one of those ‘them’, meaning ‘bad immigrants’. Its naïve and ignorant.

OP posts:
Swipe left for the next trending thread