Westministenders: Rebel Rebel Your Brexit is a Mess.

[RedToothBrush]

Hot Tramp, I love you so!

The European Parliament have agreed to progress talks to the next stage. Despite Brexiteers saying its not legally binding, it is apparent that the EU certainly disagree.

Not only that, but the wording of the deal goes further. It binds us to not being able to agree and new trade deals for 2 years.

The All Important Amendment 7 to the Great Repel Bill has been successful. May’s power grab has a set back.

By just FOUR votes the government was defeated. How May will be regretting that pointless election tonight.

Parliament will have a meaningful vote on the exit terms.

But don’t be too excited. Brussels might not like this as May can not guarantee the UK will agree to a deal. It means the the EU are negotiating with parliament NOT May now.

There is also the suggestion that the mood of parliament is changing and is beginning to lean more towards a EFTA / EEA type deal.

But equally this could also send us to the brink with a deal from the EU that could be rejected by parliament.

The stakes just got higher.

Sloppy job.
Suggests again that those reports didn't exist when DD was boasting about their "excruciating detail" , so were cobbled together frantically.for the HoC committee.

Nia Griffith MP@NiaGriffithMP
Reading through the Brexit sectoral 'analysis' on defence. As a former teacher, I know a copy-and-paste job when I see one...!

UK trade unions and some others seems to think the ECJ ruling will make a difference
Uber claim not.

www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/uber-eu-court-decision-taxi-company-regulation-what-mean-customers-drivers-uk-europe-a8120471.html

The IWGB union, which has brought cases against Uber and Deliveroo in the UK over drivers’ rights said
the ruling was “one more nail in the coffin for Uber’s argument that it is simply an agent acting on behalf of drivers and therefore not liable to pay them minimum wage and holidays”.

How have people reacted to the ruling?
TUC general secretary Frances O’Grady said the verdict meant Uber must “play by the same rules as everybody else”.
She added: “Their drivers are not commodities. They deserve at the very least the minimum wage and holiday pay.
“Advances in technology should be used to make work better, not to return to the type of working practices we thought we’d seen the back of decades ago.”

I must admit I would never take an Uber
I disapprove of the business model and also there are too many confirmed reports of their drivers either sexually assaulting passengers, or stranding the elderly / disabled out of sheer nastiness

It's good news, BCF and where the legislature is being bought off, the judiciary cannot be.

Uber are regulated as a taxi service - private hire company in the UK so nothing will change here as they are already deemed to be a transport company here.
I think the unions are just saying that this is another thing that is being tightened as far as Uber is concerned so can't be a bad thing, but it has absolutely nothing to do with employment law.

I would never take an Uber either by the way.

https://inews.co.uk/news/exclusive-uk-demands-secrecy-brexit-trade-talks-us/

I'm getting more worried by Fox's secret talks with the US
He is far too much in bed with them already
Why such secrecy ?

"Nothing can be released for four years after talks are concluded"

What do they plan to hide for 4 years after the deal has been agreed ?
Why do these talks need such secrecy when UK-EU trade talks don't ?

Ah, because the EU publishes reports to keep the EU public informed
Remember that the UK originally wanted total secrecy here too

Maybe the only aim is to hide the ignorance & bungling incompetence of the UK side as it gets taken to the cleaners
how the UK beats its chest to say "never" and then backs down without a whimper

it has absolutely nothing to do with employment law
How has it nothing to do with employment law?

Because it's about how Uber trades if it's an app. or a taxi provider. Thus it is called a transport company because it has been deemed to be a taxi provider. In the UK they need a private hire licence in any tow they operate in. Transport for London refused to renew their trading licence and they are appealing.

mother The Uk unions say the cheap prices are at the expense of excessive hours & unhealthy working conditions.
Also that the conditions are a risk to public safety
The unions claim the ECJ decision is an important step on the way to stopping exploitation
Uber says nothing to see, move on

re voting for the impossible - as discussed with LH - there is a current AIBU demanding the impossible:

https://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/amiibeingunreasonable/3118896-To-think-that-food-banks-who-limit-to-three-weeks-are-as-mean-spirited-as-Universal-Credit?msgid=74231069

The OP seems to believe food banks who do not give out food for as many months / years as a user needs are just being nasty
Apparently has no idea that a food bank might not have the resources to do this

I hope it is just a rather odd troll, not someone who genuinely doesn't realise that food or money can't be magicked up at need
If not, then maybe the OP is one of those who would vote both for abolishing income tax and for raising benefits & public services.

But BigChoc, May managed to magic up some money for the DUP.

But Peregrina that was for a vitally important reason: saving the Tory party's arse

sectoral studies

A rare few hints at trouble ahead weren't deleted from the non-impact parts of the

Otherwise, general agreement that the non-censored bits were shoddy work, with padding & plagiarism

www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/dec/21/civil-service-reports-brexit-criticised-padding-plagiarism

A section on agriculture, for example, points out that
“95% of official veterinarians in the meat hygiene sector are from the EU” < yes, RNorth posted that statistic - maybe cribbed from his blog ? >
as well as the “vast majority” of seasonal agricultural employees.

(paywall) Barnier: on transition

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/brexit-transition-must-end-in-december-2020-says-michel-barnier-srtwnxfv6

Britain must complete negotiations by itself with 168 countries
to replicate or roll over more than 750 international, trade or aviation agreements
before a Brexit transition period begins
…
In pointed comments aimed at Liam Fox, the pro-Brexit international trade secretary,
Michel Barnier expressed doubts as to whether his Whitehall department was capable of carrying out the negotiations in time for Brexit in March 2019
< or in time for 2099, with Fox in charge >

“The UK needs to prepare as of now to be able to replicate these agreements,
They need to ensure that already now they have the administrative capacity to carry out these negotiations to conclude these agreements.”

There are about 759 bilateral international agreement between the EU and other countries
that Mr Barnier said “logically” would no longer cover Britain after Brexit
despite plans for a transition period lasting about two years.

European governments, Mr Barnier said, would “
appraise the feasibility, the value, the need for the UK to be able to continue to benefit during this period from some of these agreements”
but the onus would be on Britain and the trade secretary to ensure coverage
< natch, not the EU's responsibility any more >

In a jibe at Eurosceptics such as Dr Fox who have criticised EU officials for “red tape”,
the former French foreign minister reminded Britain that it could no longer depend on the commission’s trade department to help with the talks.

“It’s always useful to remember that when we talk about red tape here in Brussels, this red tape and bureaucracy works in many areas on behalf of 28 member states,

Therefore when a country is no longer a member of the EU naturally they need to have that administrative capacity.”

Other senior Brussels officials have acknowledged that
Britain will need the EU’s help to roll over the agreements
in order to prevent disruption to trade or aviation,
assistance that will be regarded by critics of Brexit as a failure of an independent trade policy
< and it would indeed be an embarrassment, to ask for such help >

“UK can not do it alone,” said one senior EU officials.

Blue passports, yay.

www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/dec/22/british-passports-will-be-navy-blue-after-brexit-says-home-office

How about we get all that French shit off the front of it while we’re about it?

My passport is pink and will continue to be after brexit. Because there are really easy ways to change the colour of things. Thank god we don't have anything more important to worry about

95% of official veterinarians in the meat hygiene sector are from the EU , pah ! won't need their services though will we , once agriculture has been destroyed and we are importing beef from the US ?

On a slightly more serious note where is RTB , are they OK ?

Personally I believe we should have had a referendum on any colour change to the passport

Differentiating by color is very important to some people.

The sun’s headline on this proclaims it “a stunning Brexit victory”

I think whoever said Brexit was hardest on satirists had it right. They should be an impact assessment for that.

Lots on twitter about how Croatia has blue passports despite being in the eu

LOL at a stunning brexit victory

"Luscious Blue Passport (6-4-0.5) is wearing the true colours of Brexit! The lovely stunna is proud to be from the UK (while it exists). 'I really enjoy political analysis' said the smooth-backed official document. 'It's mystifying that dark blue rather than red is considered to be more British when red has signified the British Empire for centuries - red army uniforms, red on the map, the red of the Chelsea Pensioners - I love it when my lovers turn red". Well, she's certainly making us blush!"

{Incidentally I know that 'stunna' was strictly speaking only in use in the Sunday Sport, I never saw it in the Sun}

Well, we had been wondering what the hell the govt had been doing in the 500 days since the EU referendum.....

Let me be clear ... not doing its day job