| The UK "breaking International Law" 12:35 - Sep 12 with 3101 views | Kerouac |
Read what Boris has to say and answer me this...
If you are opposed to the UK doing what it needs to do to circumnavigate Barnier's threat to use the withdrawal agreement against the citizens of this country WHY do you support Barnier and the EU in this endeavour to break up our country and threaten our citizens?
Boris Johnson: EU a threat to integrity of the UK
'Boris Johnson has accused the European Union of threatening to impose a food "blockade" in the Irish Sea that would destroy the "economic and territorial integrity of the UK".
Writing in The Telegraph (you can read the article in full below), the Prime Minister made a passionate defence of his decision to alter the Brexit divorce deal, saying he has to protect Britain from the "disaster" of handing Brussels the "power to carve up our country".
He also issued a direct plea to Tory MPs threatening to rebel over his plans, telling them that, if they stand in his way, they will reduce the chance of getting a trade deal with the EU.
Mr Johnson insisted a Canada-style trade deal with the bloc is still possible and remains his goal, but that Brussels must "take their threats off the table" and rebel MPs must get into line. He also believes the UK will still "prosper mightily" under a narrower, Australia-style trade deal.
The Prime Minister claimed the EU could effectively impose a food blockade across the Irish Sea by refusing to grant the UK approved "third party" status for food exports, which officials say Michel Barnier, the EU's chief negotiator, has "explicitly" threatened.
The Withdrawal Agreement gives the EU oversight over goods of animal origin being transported from the mainland to Northern Ireland for four years, meaning Brussels could use an "extreme interpretation" to impose tariffs or declare such trade illegal.
On Friday, Mr Johnson addressed Tory MPs in a video conference, telling them he wanted to "clear up a serious anomaly" in the agreement.
The Government is trying to rush through legislation that would amend the Withdrawal Agreement and in particular its Northern Ireland protocol.
Mr Johnson argues that he has been forced to act because of a "serious misunderstanding" in Brussels about the terms of the agreement, and must unilaterally make changes to it because it has become a "danger to the very fabric of the United Kingdom".
The EU has told Mr Johnson that, unless he backtracks by the end of the month, the trade talks are over.
Some senior Conservatives have expressed outrage after ministers admitted the move would break international law (see video below), and MEPs said on Friday they would refuse to ratify any trade deal if Mr Johnson's Internal Market Bill passed.
But the Prime Minister has come out fighting, using his article to warn off the EU and the rebels within his party.
He wrote: "Unless we agree to the EU's terms, the EU will use an extreme interpretation of the Northern Ireland protocol to impose a full-scale trade border down the Irish Sea. We are being told that the EU will not only impose tariffs on goods moving from Great Britain to Northern Ireland, but that they might actually stop the transport of food products from GB to NI.
"I have to say that we never seriously believed that the EU would be willing to use a treaty, negotiated in good faith, to blockade one part of the UK, to cut it off, or that they would actually threaten to destroy the economic and territorial integrity of the UK."
The Prime Minister said any such barrier would be "completely contrary to the letter and the spirit of the Good Friday Agreement" because undermining the Union "would seriously endanger peace and stability in Northern Ireland".
He added: "This interpretation cannot have been the real intention of those who framed the protocol (it certainly wasn't ours) — and it is therefore vital that we close that option down."
Mr Johnson said he hoped the UK-EU Joint Committee — led on the UK side by Michael Gove (watch Mr Gove updating MPs on Brexit in the video below) and set up to thrash out technical details of the Withdrawal Agreement, which is separate from any trade deal — will be able to agree on a solution.
But he said "we cannot leave the theoretical power to carve up our country — to divide it — in the hands of an international organisation. We have to protect the UK from that disaster, and that is why we have devised a legal safety net — in the UK Internal Market Bill — to clarify the position and to sort out the inconsistencies."
Downing Street argues that the EU's interpretation of the Withdrawal Agreement would give it the power to interfere in the UK state aid regime and to decide which goods crossing the Irish Sea should be subject to checks.
Mr Johnson told MPs his Bill would ensure that goods crossing the Irish Sea are not subject to unnecessary checks or tariffs.
On Friday a group of more than a dozen MPs, among them former ministers, signalled that they would press ahead with attempts to bar the Government from overriding the Withdrawal Agreement without the support of Parliament.
They intend to defy the whip and back an amendment tabled by Sir Bob Neill, the chairman of the Commons justice committee, who has already secured the backing of Damian Green, Theresa May's former deputy, and ex-solicitor general Sir Oliver Heald.
Mel Stride, a former Treasury minister, said he would be surprised if the legislation survived without "very significant amendment", adding: "When we have a minister standing up at the despatch box saying we will be prepared to break an international treaty, that is a moment when you hold your breath a bit."
The scale of the backbench criticism is believed to have alarmed Number 10 and forced the Government's Whips' Office to begin reaching out to MPs deemed "at risk" of rebelling.
One MP contacted by their whip told The Telegraph Downing Street was "clearly worried" by the number of MPs speaking out. Another said: "I made it very clear [to my whip] that there hasn't been a sensible explanation of why we're pulling this stunt, given the damage it will do."
Mr Johnson will hope his article, and the explanation he gave to MPs in a Zoom meeting on Friday, will have answered their questions.
He wrote: "We must get this Bill through. So I say to my fellow parliamentarians that we cannot go back to the dark days of last year — the squabbling that so undermined our negotiators. If we fail to pass this Bill, or if we weaken its protections, then we will in fact reduce the chances of getting that Canada-style deal."
Senior Government sources on Friday accused Mr Barnier, Brussels' chief negotiator, of issuing an "explicit threat" to deny the UK approved third-party status for food exports in the event of no trade deal.
Failure to issue the status, which is granted to non-EU countries and acknowledges that their agricultural systems meet basic standards, could also cause major complications for sending live animals or meat products to Northern Ireland after the transition period ends.
Meanwhile, European Parliament leaders representing the majority of MEPs on Friday threatened to veto any future UK-EU trade deal unless Mr Johnson withdrew legislation seeking to alter parts of the Withdrawal Agreement (see Q&A below).
In a statement, the pro-EU groups said that if the UK pressed ahead with the Internal Market Bill "in its current form" they would "under no circumstances ratify any agreement between the EU and the UK".
However, British officials on Friday dismissed threats by Brussels to walk away from trade talks, with a senior figure close to the negotiations saying there had been "more productive" discussions this week than in previous sessions.
They also suggested that the legislation — which ministers admitted breaks international law in a "specific and limited way" — may have salvaged a trade deal rather than increasing the chances of no deal.
UK officials are now confident that they have got EU leaders' attention at an earlier stage of the talks than they would otherwise have done.
With the two sides due to meet again in Brussels this week, they added that the basis for a deal by mid-October remained.'
Let's make the EU take their threats off the table and pass this Bill
By Boris Johnson
It is now more than seven months since this country left the EU on January 31, and since then we have been working hard to build what I am sure will be a great new future relationship.
We want a thoroughgoing free trade deal. We want a deal like the one between the EU and Canada; and since we currently conform with every jot and tittle of EU regulation, and since we have been loyal and paid-up members for more than four decades, it strikes me that if the EU is willing to offer these terms to Canada then it makes sense to offer the same to us.
Our partners know that, whatever happens, the UK is their friend, their biggest single export market and committed forever to the peace and security of the European continent. They know that there are ways in which we want to continue and even deepen our relations, not just in trade.
As I have never tired of saying, we have left the EU, but we have not left Europe. But they also know — or at least they know now — that leaving the EU means the UK is serious about its new-found sovereignty.
In forging our new relationships, we can't have our lives or our economy regulated by the European Court; we must have the right to devise our own laws and regulations. And we must have sole control of our spectacular marine wealth — our fisheries.
Those are some of our conditions, and in the last few months I believe we have made considerable progress. If both sides want it, there is a great free trade deal there to be done.
So I have become anxious in the last few weeks to discover that there is an obstacle. Our negotiators believe that there may be a serious misunderstanding about the terms of the Withdrawal Agreement that we reached last October.
You may remember those days. They were torrid. We were negotiating with one hand tied behind our back, since Parliament had voted to deprive the UK side of the right to walk away. We had a deadline of October 31 — which Parliament decided to flout. MPs were in a state of constant turmoil and recrimination. And yet, provided it was applied in good faith, the Withdrawal Agreement we reached was extremely good.
We excised the baleful presence of the Northern Ireland "backstop", which effectively kept this country locked in the EU's legal orbit, forced to accept EU laws, unable to do free trade deals. We made sure that Northern Ireland was explicitly recognised as part of the customs territory of the United Kingdom, and able to take part fully in new free trade agreements (such as the one Liz Truss has just done with Japan). And we also took steps to protect free movement at the all-important border between Northern Ireland and Ireland.
We agreed that, in some limited ways, Northern Ireland would continue to conform with EU law for four years. We agreed that this limited alignment would end, unless the Northern Irish assembly voted to continue it. We agreed to do some light-touch checks on goods arriving in Northern Ireland, in case they should go on to Ireland, in order to avoid checks at the North-South border.
And on the basis of that excellent deal we left the EU — and so it is deeply regrettable that what seemed so simple and clear to us is seen very differently by our EU friends.
We decided in the Withdrawal Agreement to create a Joint Committee, in which we would thrash out the details of these new arrangements. It is here that things risk coming unstuck. We are now hearing that, unless we agree to the EU's terms, the EU will use an extreme interpretation of the Northern Ireland protocol to impose a full-scale trade border down the Irish Sea.
We are being told that the EU will not only impose tariffs on goods moving from Great Britain to Northern Ireland, but that they might actually stop the transport of food products from GB to NI.
I have to say that we never seriously believed that the EU would be willing to use a treaty, negotiated in good faith, to blockade one part of the UK, to cut it off, or that they would actually threaten to destroy the economic and territorial integrity of the UK. This was for the very good reason that any such barrier, any such tariffs or division, would be completely contrary to the letter and the spirit of the Good Friday Agreement.
By actively undermining the Union of our country, such an interpretation would seriously endanger peace and stability in Northern Ireland. This interpretation cannot have been the real intention of those who framed the protocol (it certainly wasn't ours) — and it is therefore vital that we close that option down.
We want an agreement in the Joint Committee on how we can implement the protocol. We have consistently shown that we are willing to help our friends — to the extent that is possible and reasonable — to protect the integrity of their Single Market and to keep a fluid North-South border.
But we cannot leave the theoretical power to carve up our country — to divide it — in the hands of an international organisation. We have to protect the UK from that disaster, and that is why we have devised a legal safety net — in the UK Internal Market Bill — to clarify the position and to sort out the inconsistencies.
This Bill protects jobs and growth across the UK by preventing barriers to trade between the nations and regions. It means that anything approved for sale in Scotland or Wales must be good for sale in England or Northern Ireland, and vice-versa.
The Bill gives freedoms and certainties for businesses and citizens that were previously set out in EU law. That is why, as we now come out of the EU, it is absolutely vital. It is now also clear that we need this Bill to protect the free flow of goods and services between NI and the rest of the UK, and to make sense of that commitment in the EU withdrawal agreement — that NI is part of the UK customs territory. It is therefore crucial for peace, and for the Union itself. We must get this Bill through.
So I say to my fellow parliamentarians that we cannot go back to the dark days of last year — the squabbling that so undermined our negotiators. If we fail to pass this Bill, or if we weaken its protections, then we will in fact reduce the chances of getting that Canada-style deal.
As it happens, I believe that this country will prosper mightily in either event. We could do very well indeed if we left on Australian terms. But there is no doubt that, in the short term at least, the Canada deal would be better and smoother — and that is what we are pitching for.
So let's end any potential for misunderstanding. Let's remove this danger to the very fabric of the United Kingdom. Let's make the EU take their threats off the table. And let's get this Bill through, back up our negotiators and protect our country. |  |
| |  |
| The UK "breaking International Law" on 12:47 - Sep 12 with 2287 views | Gwyn737 |
I don’t. I just don’t understand what anyone would be surprised by the EU’s stance.
The passion Brexit folk feel for leaving is reciprocated by the EU’s desire to keep everything together. If they were breaking international law can you imagine the ire this end?
As I’ve said before I wanted to remain, didn’t work out and now I’d like it to work out well. I don’t want to reverse the decision but I still feel incredibly frustrated by those who said this would be easy.
The sooner people how challenging this is and will be the better. Phrases like ‘oven ready’ ‘we hold all the cards’ and ‘they need us more than we need them’ are unhelpful. |  | | |
| The UK on 13:18 - Sep 12 with 2269 views | Kerouac |
| The UK "breaking International Law" on 12:47 - Sep 12 by Gwyn737 |
I don’t. I just don’t understand what anyone would be surprised by the EU’s stance.
The passion Brexit folk feel for leaving is reciprocated by the EU’s desire to keep everything together. If they were breaking international law can you imagine the ire this end?
As I’ve said before I wanted to remain, didn’t work out and now I’d like it to work out well. I don’t want to reverse the decision but I still feel incredibly frustrated by those who said this would be easy.
The sooner people how challenging this is and will be the better. Phrases like ‘oven ready’ ‘we hold all the cards’ and ‘they need us more than we need them’ are unhelpful. |
...yet as Boris states in that article, our regulations are in total alignment with theirs, and the trade deal we are asking for would replicate their pre-existing agreements (Canada style).
So the actual trade deal is only difficult because the EU is making it difficult.
Supporters of the EU have consistently claimed that us leaving would be a disaster for this country, we would become poorer, that we would beg to be allowed back into the EU.
If this really was the case, why then would the EU not just sign a trade deal (to minimise damage to their own economies) and watch us flounder as the all powerful EU juggernaut glided forward into the future dominated by the EU?
Why then, are they so desperate to keep us locked in, that they would stoop to the despicable threats on our country, our businesses, our people?
Somebody is telling porkies here, but it has nothing to do with a big red f*cking bus  [Post edited 12 Sep 2020 13:19]
| |
| |
| The UK on 13:33 - Sep 12 with 2253 views | Gwyn737 |
| The UK on 13:18 - Sep 12 by Kerouac |
...yet as Boris states in that article, our regulations are in total alignment with theirs, and the trade deal we are asking for would replicate their pre-existing agreements (Canada style).
So the actual trade deal is only difficult because the EU is making it difficult.
Supporters of the EU have consistently claimed that us leaving would be a disaster for this country, we would become poorer, that we would beg to be allowed back into the EU.
If this really was the case, why then would the EU not just sign a trade deal (to minimise damage to their own economies) and watch us flounder as the all powerful EU juggernaut glided forward into the future dominated by the EU?
Why then, are they so desperate to keep us locked in, that they would stoop to the despicable threats on our country, our businesses, our people?
Somebody is telling porkies here, but it has nothing to do with a big red f*cking bus [Post edited 12 Sep 2020 13:19]
|
Of course they’re making it difficult. That’s their aim. I don’t understand why people are surprised and getting their knickers in a twist.
It was always going to be this way.
I’m not comfortable with the whole breaking the law in a limited and specific way stuff. However, it looks like any amendments will go back to the commons. The outcome will likely be the same but at least due process would be followed. | | | |
| The UK "breaking International Law" on 13:52 - Sep 12 with 2248 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
The UK is hoping for a free trade deal like Canada. This was not on offer and never was. UK is not Canada and is not joining but leaving. UK has to pay the price for leaving which will be decided by the EU based on what UK has to offer them (for example fishing rights). Ireland is heading for reunification following Brexit. The North voted to stay and will have been shocked that the English and Welsh have thrown them under the bus once in the 2016 and a second time in the Withdrawal arrangement. Demographics in Northern Ireland will soon see a Catholic majority in any case. The Brexit team did not expalain this to their voters although it would probably not made much difference anyway. Brexit makes illlegal immigration to UK more likely not less likely as the French see no reason to co-operate with a UK government threatening them with a no deal chaos. |  |
| Wise sage since Toshack era |
| |
| The UK "breaking International Law" on 13:56 - Sep 12 with 2242 views | Nortbankboy |
Now do Boris seem the type man who would back on his word and lie? | | | |
| The UK on 14:05 - Sep 12 with 2239 views | ItchySphincter |
....and none of this would be a discussion if it wasn't for Bojo the Clown's mad power grab.
Didn't Gove et al say that Europe and the rest of the world would be falling over themselves to do a deal with us?
Why aren't you starting a discussion about your heroes pulling your pants down, bending you over, and slipping you a length? I know you like it but can't you at least see now that the shafting you love so much is not for all of us?
Food blockades, hold-ups at customs, breaking up the union..... who'd have thunk it, eh?
Bloody EU, not giving us what we want, after all this is what we wanted wasn't it? You won, get over it. [Post edited 12 Sep 2020 14:07]
|  |
| |
| The UK "breaking International Law" on 14:05 - Sep 12 with 2239 views | felixstowe_jack |
| The UK "breaking International Law" on 13:52 - Sep 12 by ReslovenSwan1 |
The UK is hoping for a free trade deal like Canada. This was not on offer and never was. UK is not Canada and is not joining but leaving. UK has to pay the price for leaving which will be decided by the EU based on what UK has to offer them (for example fishing rights). Ireland is heading for reunification following Brexit. The North voted to stay and will have been shocked that the English and Welsh have thrown them under the bus once in the 2016 and a second time in the Withdrawal arrangement. Demographics in Northern Ireland will soon see a Catholic majority in any case. The Brexit team did not expalain this to their voters although it would probably not made much difference anyway. Brexit makes illlegal immigration to UK more likely not less likely as the French see no reason to co-operate with a UK government threatening them with a no deal chaos. |
The only reason the EU will do a trade deal with the UK is if it is in their interests. The EU exports over £80 billion a year to the UK. The UK exports £40 billion a year. I guess the loss of an export market worth £80 billiona year will not cause more than a couple of million lost jobs in the EU which they will consider a small price to get their revenge on the UK. They in their infinite wisdom cannot see why a Country should want to leave their undemocratic cartel.
It is not as if the EU has never broken an agreement in THE past.
Tony Blair exchanged half our annual rebate in return for the EU totally reforming the CAP. Guess what the EU took the money and CAP remain to this day. It cost of 33% of the EUs annual budget costing £34 billion every year. That amounts too £133 for every man woman and child in the EU. It also keeps food prices much higher than world prices which effects all the poor in the EU. | |
| |
| The UK "breaking International Law" on 15:55 - Sep 12 with 2193 views | Gwyn737 |
| The UK "breaking International Law" on 14:05 - Sep 12 by felixstowe_jack |
The only reason the EU will do a trade deal with the UK is if it is in their interests. The EU exports over £80 billion a year to the UK. The UK exports £40 billion a year. I guess the loss of an export market worth £80 billiona year will not cause more than a couple of million lost jobs in the EU which they will consider a small price to get their revenge on the UK. They in their infinite wisdom cannot see why a Country should want to leave their undemocratic cartel.
It is not as if the EU has never broken an agreement in THE past.
Tony Blair exchanged half our annual rebate in return for the EU totally reforming the CAP. Guess what the EU took the money and CAP remain to this day. It cost of 33% of the EUs annual budget costing £34 billion every year. That amounts too £133 for every man woman and child in the EU. It also keeps food prices much higher than world prices which effects all the poor in the EU. |
What are the equivalent percentage of total exports for those figures? | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| The UK "breaking International Law" on 17:49 - Sep 12 with 2160 views | Catullus |
| The UK "breaking International Law" on 14:05 - Sep 12 by felixstowe_jack |
The only reason the EU will do a trade deal with the UK is if it is in their interests. The EU exports over £80 billion a year to the UK. The UK exports £40 billion a year. I guess the loss of an export market worth £80 billiona year will not cause more than a couple of million lost jobs in the EU which they will consider a small price to get their revenge on the UK. They in their infinite wisdom cannot see why a Country should want to leave their undemocratic cartel.
It is not as if the EU has never broken an agreement in THE past.
Tony Blair exchanged half our annual rebate in return for the EU totally reforming the CAP. Guess what the EU took the money and CAP remain to this day. It cost of 33% of the EUs annual budget costing £34 billion every year. That amounts too £133 for every man woman and child in the EU. It also keeps food prices much higher than world prices which effects all the poor in the EU. |
Those figures are wrong I think. It's more like 300 billion against 240 billion with a 60 billion trade deficit but that's only in goods. When we take services into account we have a trade surplus.
This Bojo bill, it shows how good they are that this clause didn't have a "get out" clause of it's own that we could trigger. Or did they trust the EU not use it in what they consider it's proper context?
Or put another way, our negotiators were outfoxed by Barnier and let a damaging clause stay in the WA and now it's biting us on the bum.
BTW, leaving was easy, it's the sorting out the future that was always going to be hard! Some people are still looking at this in purely economics sense, to some leavers it was about more than money. | |
| |
| The UK "breaking International Law" on 18:01 - Sep 12 with 2144 views | Kerouac |
| The UK "breaking International Law" on 13:52 - Sep 12 by ReslovenSwan1 |
The UK is hoping for a free trade deal like Canada. This was not on offer and never was. UK is not Canada and is not joining but leaving. UK has to pay the price for leaving which will be decided by the EU based on what UK has to offer them (for example fishing rights). Ireland is heading for reunification following Brexit. The North voted to stay and will have been shocked that the English and Welsh have thrown them under the bus once in the 2016 and a second time in the Withdrawal arrangement. Demographics in Northern Ireland will soon see a Catholic majority in any case. The Brexit team did not expalain this to their voters although it would probably not made much difference anyway. Brexit makes illlegal immigration to UK more likely not less likely as the French see no reason to co-operate with a UK government threatening them with a no deal chaos. |
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.cityam.com/donald-tusk-offers-uk-canada-style
😂
To be fair, it must be hard to keep up with all the lies. | |
| |
| The UK "breaking International Law" on 18:15 - Sep 12 with 2133 views | Gwyn737 |
There’s a lot of water gone under the bridge since that article was published.... | | | |
| The UK "breaking International Law" on 18:30 - Sep 12 with 2125 views | Kerouac |
| The UK "breaking International Law" on 18:15 - Sep 12 by Gwyn737 |
There’s a lot of water gone under the bridge since that article was published.... |
Why do you think the EU were offering a Canada +++ deal when Theresa May was in government 2 years ago but couldn’t possibly countenance it now?
What’s changed?
😠| |
| |
| The UK "breaking International Law" on 18:35 - Sep 12 with 2121 views | Gwyn737 |
| The UK "breaking International Law" on 18:30 - Sep 12 by Kerouac |
Why do you think the EU were offering a Canada +++ deal when Theresa May was in government 2 years ago but couldn’t possibly countenance it now?
What’s changed?
😠|
Our requests seem to be stronger. That deal wasn’t enough for the Eurosceptics in the Tory party at the time, and it certainly isn’t enough for them now with an 80 seat majority and the more euro moderate MPs jettisoned. | | | |
| The UK "breaking International Law" on 18:43 - Sep 12 with 2116 views | Kerouac |
| The UK "breaking International Law" on 18:35 - Sep 12 by Gwyn737 |
Our requests seem to be stronger. That deal wasn’t enough for the Eurosceptics in the Tory party at the time, and it certainly isn’t enough for them now with an 80 seat majority and the more euro moderate MPs jettisoned. |
Pardon.
Our negotiators are requesting a deal that the EU said was possible over and over again.
The Brexiteers won at the ballot box and now the government has an 80 seat majority.
The only reason the Canada deal is not on the table right now is because the EU have decided they won’t agree to it.
Why?
What’s changed? | |
| |
| The UK "breaking International Law" on 18:46 - Sep 12 with 2114 views | Gwyn737 |
| The UK "breaking International Law" on 18:43 - Sep 12 by Kerouac |
Pardon.
Our negotiators are requesting a deal that the EU said was possible over and over again.
The Brexiteers won at the ballot box and now the government has an 80 seat majority.
The only reason the Canada deal is not on the table right now is because the EU have decided they won’t agree to it.
Why?
What’s changed? |
For whatever reason they see themselves in a position of power. | | | |
| The UK "breaking International Law" on 18:55 - Sep 12 with 2103 views | Kerouac |
| The UK "breaking International Law" on 18:46 - Sep 12 by Gwyn737 |
For whatever reason they see themselves in a position of power. |
Quite the opposite my friend.
They are trying every dirty trick in the book to keep us under their control, because they are TERRIFIED of what we will achieve out of their clutches.
They are so weak that cutting their own nose off to spite their face is preferable to cutting us loose with the kind of trade deal they have with other countries.
The fact that they are acting in such bad faith invalidates the withdrawal agreement.
The fact that they are trying to harm the citizens of this country as well as their own citizens should tell you everything about them.
How any UK citizen could support a foreign power trying to do this to us is beyond me. | |
| |
| The UK "breaking International Law" on 18:59 - Sep 12 with 2099 views | Kilkennyjack |
Johnson is a second rate hack journo who lied to the queen.
He is also an English nationalist.
He may even be a Russian asset.
Barnier is a professional.
Johnson lied about Brexit, he won the Referendum. Take Back Control.
Johnson lied about his oven ready deal, he won the election. Get Brexit Done.
Now he is lying about the WA.
The document says the border is in the Irish Sea. It was the only way to get it agreed, of course.
Now he says the document that he presented to Parliament for approval was not very good and done in a rush. Rubbish of course.
It was probably always his plan to row back on the WA he himself had signed but you cant do that with International Law. Its signed and done.
Any changes must be agreed by BOTH sides and Johnson knows it.
The EU will not change - why should they.
But if Johnson carries on then not only will the EU deal be dead, but also any US deal. Any hard border on the island of Ireland will not be an option.
Johnson is going to resign in January citing ill health due to Covid.
He seems healthy enough to me though.
🤷â€â™‚ï¸ |  |
| Beware of the Risen People
|
| |
| The UK "breaking International Law" on 19:00 - Sep 12 with 2096 views | Gwyn737 |
| The UK "breaking International Law" on 18:55 - Sep 12 by Kerouac |
Quite the opposite my friend.
They are trying every dirty trick in the book to keep us under their control, because they are TERRIFIED of what we will achieve out of their clutches.
They are so weak that cutting their own nose off to spite their face is preferable to cutting us loose with the kind of trade deal they have with other countries.
The fact that they are acting in such bad faith invalidates the withdrawal agreement.
The fact that they are trying to harm the citizens of this country as well as their own citizens should tell you everything about them.
How any UK citizen could support a foreign power trying to do this to us is beyond me. |
I’d argue it’s becoming a race to the bottom from both sides. | | | |
| The UK "breaking International Law" on 19:06 - Sep 12 with 2092 views | NotLoyal |
Russia do what they want, they never have a problem breaking any territorial laws because they couldn’t care or give a toss. Take a leaf UK. |  |
| |
| The UK on 20:30 - Sep 12 with 2061 views | majorraglan |
The Canada plus offer was conditional on Northern Ireland staying in both the Customs Union and Single market something that has been unacceptable to the UK. The Customs issue has been kicked around for a while and is unresolved, therefore the Canada plus deal isn't an option.
Lies lies and more lies - indeed. [Post edited 12 Sep 2020 21:57]
| | | |
| The UK on 20:39 - Sep 12 with 2052 views | majorraglan |
| The UK on 13:18 - Sep 12 by Kerouac |
...yet as Boris states in that article, our regulations are in total alignment with theirs, and the trade deal we are asking for would replicate their pre-existing agreements (Canada style).
So the actual trade deal is only difficult because the EU is making it difficult.
Supporters of the EU have consistently claimed that us leaving would be a disaster for this country, we would become poorer, that we would beg to be allowed back into the EU.
If this really was the case, why then would the EU not just sign a trade deal (to minimise damage to their own economies) and watch us flounder as the all powerful EU juggernaut glided forward into the future dominated by the EU?
Why then, are they so desperate to keep us locked in, that they would stoop to the despicable threats on our country, our businesses, our people?
Somebody is telling porkies here, but it has nothing to do with a big red f*cking bus [Post edited 12 Sep 2020 13:19]
|
I thought a significant sticking point was the fact the Boris and Dominic Cummins wanted to change the rules on state aid to support British industry which were perceived as unacceptable by the EU as it undermined their rules and “level playing field”.
There’s lots of smoke and mirrors and some lying going on. We need more scrutiny around this as opposed to PR pieces. | | | |
| The UK on 20:55 - Sep 12 with 2041 views | Catullus |
| The UK on 20:39 - Sep 12 by majorraglan |
I thought a significant sticking point was the fact the Boris and Dominic Cummins wanted to change the rules on state aid to support British industry which were perceived as unacceptable by the EU as it undermined their rules and “level playing field”.
There’s lots of smoke and mirrors and some lying going on. We need more scrutiny around this as opposed to PR pieces. |
Just like the brexit referendum, lies are coming in from all angles. | |
| |
| The UK "breaking International Law" on 21:20 - Sep 12 with 2028 views | felixstowe_jack |
| The UK "breaking International Law" on 17:49 - Sep 12 by Catullus |
Those figures are wrong I think. It's more like 300 billion against 240 billion with a 60 billion trade deficit but that's only in goods. When we take services into account we have a trade surplus.
This Bojo bill, it shows how good they are that this clause didn't have a "get out" clause of it's own that we could trigger. Or did they trust the EU not use it in what they consider it's proper context?
Or put another way, our negotiators were outfoxed by Barnier and let a damaging clause stay in the WA and now it's biting us on the bum.
BTW, leaving was easy, it's the sorting out the future that was always going to be hard! Some people are still looking at this in purely economics sense, to some leavers it was about more than money. |
Trade deficit in goods £97 billion
Trade surplus in services £28 billion
Total deficit £67 billion. | |
| |
| The UK "breaking International Law" on 21:26 - Sep 12 with 2025 views | builthjack |
How come it's been well over 4 years and these absolute clowns have still not got trade deals?
Absolutely useless, cretins. |  |
| Swansea Indepenent Poster Of The Year 2021. Dr P / Mart66 / Roathie / Parlay / E20/ Duffle was 2nd, but he is deluded and thinks in his little twisted brain that he won. Poor sod. We let him win this year, as he has cried for a whole year. His 14 usernames, bless his cotton socks.
|
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
