Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

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
CeciledeVolanges · 04/10/2016 09:39

Me2017, are you aware that "common law" refers to law made by the courts? How do you propose that a 200-page, highly technical EU regulation be replaced by a series of court decision? The courts' function is to interpret the law, not to make it, especially where they have no expertise.

CeciledeVolanges · 04/10/2016 09:39

Me2017, are you aware that "common law" refers to law made by the courts? How do you propose that a 200-page, highly technical EU regulation be replaced by a series of court decision? The courts' function is to interpret the law, not to make it, especially where they have no expertise.

CeciledeVolanges · 04/10/2016 09:40

Me2017, are you aware that "common law" refers to law made by the courts? How do you propose that a 200-page, highly technical EU regulation be replaced by a series of court decision? The courts' function is to interpret the law, not to make it, especially where they have no expertise.

CeciledeVolanges · 04/10/2016 09:42

Me2017, are you aware that "common law" refers to law made by the courts? How do you propose that a 200-page, highly technical EU regulation be replaced by a series of court decision? The courts' function is to interpret the law, not to make it, especially where they have no expertise.

CeciledeVolanges · 04/10/2016 09:42

Me2017, are you aware that "common law" refers to law made by the courts? How do you propose that a 200-page, highly technical EU regulation be replaced by a series of court decision? The courts' function is to interpret the law, not to make it, especially where they have no expertise.

CeciledeVolanges · 04/10/2016 09:42

Me2017, are you aware that "common law" refers to law made by the courts? How do you propose that a 200-page, highly technical EU regulation be replaced by a series of court decision? The courts' function is to interpret the law, not to make it, especially where they have no expertise.

CeciledeVolanges · 04/10/2016 09:42

Me2017, are you aware that "common law" refers to law made by the courts? How do you propose that a 200-page, highly technical EU regulation be replaced by a series of court decision? The courts' function is to interpret the law, not to make it, especially where they have no expertise.

Corcory · 04/10/2016 09:59

Can someone explain to me exactly what parliament will debate if they are to debate A50? They can't debate what terms we want as that would show our hand. Just saying we will trigger A50 by the end of March 17 has apparently shown our hand too much!

RedToothBrush · 04/10/2016 10:12

Corcory, timing is all we have in terms of negotiation. May is under pressure from the EU to announce a date. Not announcing a date actually weakens their hand and allows them to say we will not talk about talks. Debating a50 in the HoC changes the Constitutional side of things. The government can legitimately say they there was a democratic vote for leaving to the EU (which the EU must legally respect), but at the same time say they have a Constitutional issue which will not allow them to trigger a50 because the HoC seek certain assurances / preliminary talks prior to a50 being triggered.

All May has done has actually allow the EU to take a hard line by playing the political game. Its a sign of weakness on her part to have caved into that pressure from the right and from the EU rather than a sign of strength though it will be interpreted by many as the opposite.

This is not in the national interest and only facilitates a chaotic exit rather than a managed one.

OP posts:
RedToothBrush · 04/10/2016 10:25

This morning has started well.

Paul Waugh @paulwaugh
Theresa May tells BBC foreign doctors will be allowed to stay "until further numbers [of home-grown doctors] are trained". Doc-exit in 2025?

Nicola Sturgeon ‏@NicolaSturgeon
Nicola Sturgeon Retweeted Paul Waugh
The arrogance of this from UKG is breathtaking...like they're somehow doing these doctors a favour by 'allowing' them to save lives here.

So we are apparently intending to send them all back from that suggestion it would seem. Including the skilled and educated ones.

Welcome to fascist Britain.

OP posts:
RufusTheSpartacusReindeer · 04/10/2016 10:28

Fucking hell we're in trouble

RedToothBrush · 04/10/2016 10:37

www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/chris-grayling-train-platform-brexit-debate_uk_57f35934e4b01e384a3db545?
And Chris Grayling thinks that we will raise the height of station platforms.

In terms of whether we should Brexit or not, we should do what is in the national interest from the position we are now at. Brexiting just because of the referendum is not necessarily in the national interest. It may be that Brexit IS the right thing to do because of the referendum, but HOW we Brexit is the key to that and is crucial.

Why exactly are we in such a rush to Brexit in an disorderly fashion? A calmer but longer time frame with some more certainty and more diplomatic attitude to the EU would go a long way to keep investment coming in. Instead we have this clusterfuck and a rush to the exit.

David Allen Green is tweeting this, this morning:
David Allen Green ‏@DavidAllenGreen
"Brexit was right in principle but not how it was attempted in practice."

Common political saying, 2019.

The rush to the exit is purely political and about this idea that Remainer will somehow do everything they can to destroy Brexit.

I actually don't think that's true. Remainers are angry about the way the referendum was handled and the lack of plan. They overwhelming voted on the basis of evidence and fact - with their heads rather than heart and any great love of the EU. They often disliked the EU but still decided on balance that the EU was a lesser evil.

We still have not seen anything that presents a logical, reasoned and unemotional response to Brexit. Anything that reassures all those fears that have gone away.

I do believe that if this was done then many Remainers would actually say ok then. The fact that we are rushing to the exit only serves to fuel those fears tbh, and harden resistance to Brexit as it becomes increasingly obvious that this is a power grab and an ideological thing which is lead by people who are incompetent, ignorant, arrogant and just plain xenophobic.

Put simply, if Brexit was so good, we wouldn't need to rush for the exit. Rushing for the exit is precisely about doing it before anyone realises what's really going on and how bad it is going to be.

OP posts:
RedToothBrush · 04/10/2016 10:39

Just how hard is it to say to the EU a50 is not fit for purpose and to present a good legal case on those grounds to facilitate a managed exit?

OP posts:
CeciledeVolanges · 04/10/2016 10:51

Corcory whether and when to trigger it.

RedToothBrush · 04/10/2016 10:53

ciaranmcgonagle.com/2016/10/03/a-seed-of-doubt-on-the-practical-difficulties-of-the-eca-repeal-act/

The practical difficulties of the 'Great' Repeal Act.

Fab piece on how a lot of EU law refers to EU bodies, so whilst the law might be there, if the supporting bodies are not yet in place this might be a bit of a problem and effectively a gap in the law.

Remember, we have two years to set up and recruit people to manage these issues.

This spider diagram

Westministenders. Whilst Boris makes more daft promises, a50 hits the courts. Poo and Fan Time.
OP posts:
jaws5 · 04/10/2016 10:55

Shock at TM's comment about EU doctors! I can't believe this is happening. I am European and I feel threatened. So heartbreaking...

CeciledeVolanges · 04/10/2016 10:58

Corcory whether and when to trigger it.

Me2017 · 04/10/2016 11:02

Yes. Common law is made by the courts. What is the question I am being asked? I have said we haev to have a statute that gives validity to current regulations which would otherwise be potentially voided on brexit day. After that then it will be down to the state to repeal some laws it wants to. It would be very dangerous if we instead just left things (so all EU based regulations would simply go on brexit day and we had to have time before then or shortly after to bring similar laws in. I think people on both sides agree with my stance.

Peregrina · 04/10/2016 11:13

I think Grayling thinks that we will lower the height of platforms - the idiot, he hasn't read the legislation and seen that we are specifically exempt and that we and Ireland can specifically keep our 915cms.

Good luck to Leasdom unpicking the fisheries legislation. She will probably just go to the sea and start lecturing the fish. They won't listen and will swim where they want to swim.

As far as training more doctors are concerned - yes, we should have been doing it years ago, and no, we shouldn't have been relying on overseas Drs, predominantly from the Indian sub continent. So what stopped us then?

Peregrina · 04/10/2016 11:16

Oops. 915 mm - otherwise we would have to be giants to catch a train!

Me2017 · 04/10/2016 11:31

Here is another new bit of EU law - a directive on trade secrets - comes into force in about 2018. It's pretty sensible. Instead of having 28 different laws in that area we will have one. So In 2018 the UK will have to bring it into force with regulations. When we leave the EU in 2019 we will hopefully have some general Act which says existing regulations continue. In the future when teh EU changes that law will then decide on a case by case basis whether to make future changes but will have no say in the EU law changes.

We could instead abolish the 2018 regulations in 2019 if we preferred but I doubt we will have time to do that as there are thousands of similar regulations and not enough time.

twofingerstoGideon · 04/10/2016 11:31

She will probably just go to the sea and start lecturing the fish.

As a mother...

CeciledeVolanges · 04/10/2016 11:38

Wow, sorry, I have no idea what happened there! I just got an error message from Mumsnet when I tried to post which it appears to have made up for spectacularly now! Many many apologies.

CeciledeVolanges · 04/10/2016 11:38

Wow, sorry, I have no idea what happened there! I just got an error message from Mumsnet when I tried to post which it appears to have made up for spectacularly now! Many many apologies.

RedToothBrush · 04/10/2016 11:42

As far as training more doctors are concerned - yes, we should have been doing it years ago, and no, we shouldn't have been relying on overseas Drs, predominantly from the Indian sub continent. So what stopped us then?

Kids don't want to be doctors. This year was the first year that medicine was available through clearing.

Let me think about why kids in this country don't want to be doctors, when so many children around the world aspire to that.

The NHS is such an attractive employer at the moment isn't it?

OP posts:
Swipe left for the next trending thread