Current Affairs EU In or Out

[summerisle]

I have the utmost confidence that this ship of fools will navigate us through the choppy waters of the trade deals yet to come.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

I have the utmost confidence that this ship of fools will navigate us through the choppy waters of the trade deals yet to come.

It does give an excuse to share this delightful exchange between the head of the WTO and IDS



The world (bar Trump and Putin) are face palming about Britain, and Pete is lapping it up for some reason.

 

[Eggs]

....Johnson meeting the Irish PM today at ‘an undisclosed location near Liverpool’. I wonder if that location will be leaked.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

....Johnson meeting the Irish PM today at ‘an undisclosed location near Liverpool’. I wonder if that location will be leaked.

This is the Irish PM who Johnson has previously pondered why he wasn't called Murphy 'like the rest of them'.

 

[Disgruntledgoat]

The sad thing is that Joe and those like him seem not to have even grasped what they were voting for in the first referendum, as 'ever closer union' was a founding principle of the Treaty of Rome, as were the four fundamental freedoms. That he continues to be mistaken after 60 years is not a good advert for his grasp of the subject. That they seem to confuse the ever closer union of 'the people of Europe' whereby decisions are made as local to those people as possible, with the ever closer union of the governments of Europe merely exacerbates his evident confusion.

The UK has the most centralised system of government of any EU nation seems to pass him by also.

 

[Disgruntledgoat]

....Johnson meeting the Irish PM today at ‘an undisclosed location near Liverpool’. I wonder if that location will be leaked.

Morrisons car park, mate.

 

[Deleted member 48881]

From The Economist

For weeks the European Union has complained that, even as the October 31st deadline for Britain to leave drew nearer, Boris Johnson’s new government was failing to offer clear proposals to amend Theresa May’s failed Brexit deal. All Mr Johnson would say was that the hated backstop, an arrangement to avert a hard border in Ireland by keeping the United Kingdom in a customs union, had to go. This week, after a tub-thumping party conference speech in Manchester under the slogan “Get Brexit done”, Mr Johnson at last put forward his plan. Yet despite his labelling it a “fair and reasonable compromise”, it got a cool reception from the EU, which sees it as a breach of promises, not the basis for a new deal.


As expected, Mr Johnson’s proposal would keep Northern Ireland under the EU’s agri-food regulatory regime. He now wants to expand this to cover manufactured goods as well. But Great Britain would opt out of the rules, implying checks on goods moving between Northern Ireland and the mainland. And the plan would apply for only four years after the transition period ends in 2021, at which point the Northern Irish Assembly would decide whether to remain aligned with the EU or adopt British rules. Meanwhile, the whole UK would leave the customs union. This implies customs checks between Northern Ireland and the south—though Mr Johnson insists these could be automated and, when necessary, conducted away from the border. He also wants Northern Ireland out of the EU’s value-added-tax regime.


The plan was welcomed by Tory Brexiteers and, more importantly, by the Northern Irish Democratic Unionist Party, which supports the Tories in Parliament. Yet it has little appeal in Brussels or, critically, Dublin. EU governments see it as a big step back from undertakings given by Mrs May in December 2017 to maintain an open, frictionless border in Ireland, preserve the all-island economy and avoid new customs or border controls anywhere on the island. They are unhappy about the proposed unilateral four-year time limit. And they do not believe that promises to use new technology, exemptions for small businesses and a system of trusted traders would be enough to avoid physical controls at or near the border.


British ministers were out in force this week selling the new plan as what one called a “landing zone” that could satisfy all sides. Mr Johnson suggested that, just as he had compromised, so it was now the EU’s turn. Some in Brussels were relieved that he had not said it was his final, “take it or leave it” offer, as initial reports had suggested. A few even hoped it might be tweaked to include alignment on customs as well as on regulations, or to revert to a Northern Ireland-only backstop. Yet the signals from Downing Street suggest that the prime minister sees little scope for more compromise on his side.


His sales pitch to the EU ahead of the crucial European Council summit on October 17th-18th rests on two arguments. The first is that only a deal close to his can ever pass in Parliament. For evidence, he cites the Brady amendment, a version of Mrs May’s Brexit deal minus the backstop, which MPs voted for in January. The second is that, if the EU is unwilling to accept his plan, he will have no alternative but to leave with no deal on October 31st. And although that may be bad for Britain, it will also hurt the EU, especially Ireland.


Yet in Brussels neither argument seems convincing. The EU knows that Mr Johnson has no parliamentary majority. He cannot rely even on his own Tory MPs, since some hardliners prefer no-deal to anything else. This means he needs at least some Labour backing to pass any deal. And although there are Labour MPs who share the Tories’ desire to “get Brexit done”, and many are nervous about no-deal, few will want to rescue a prime minister whom they mistrust as a populist popinjay.


As for no-deal, everyone is aware of Mr Johnson’s repeated promises to take Britain out of the EU on October 31st, “do or die”. His ministers loyally repeated this pledge in Manchester. Mr Johnson himself argued forcefully against any further dither or delay. Yet Brussels also understands the terms of the Benn act that was passed by Parliament last month. This requires the prime minister to seek the agreement of the EU to a three-month extension of the deadline if, by October 19th, he has neither secured a deal nor won parliamentary approval for a no-deal Brexit.

January is the new October

Mr Johnson says he will obey the law, but he also insists that Britain will leave the EU on October 31st, whatever happens. These two positions are clearly in conflict. Hence a favourite parlour game at the Tory conference: to hunt for loopholes in what Mr Johnson likes to call the “Surrender Act”. Some suggest he might formally ask for an extension but secretly tell Brussels he does not want one. Or he could invite other EU governments to refuse an extension, so as to exert more pressure on MPs to accept a deal. He might invoke an emergency under the Civil Contingencies Act, to suspend the law. Some ministers claimed there was a secret wheeze to get round the Benn act, but that it was confidential.


Yet one of the act’s authors, Dominic Grieve, a former Tory attorney-general, insists its drafting is legally watertight. He characterises the suggested tricks to try to get round it as “far-fetched and reputationally catastrophic”. He and his supporters, who have a majority in Parliament, are ready to legislate again if need be. They would go to court at the slightest hint that Mr Johnson might flout their law. Some even talk of passing a “humble address” to invite the queen to sack her prime minister in such circumstances.


Any extension of the October 31st deadline would be a humiliation for Mr Johnson, which is why some suggest he should resign instead. Yet there could be ways to turn matters to his advantage. One idea is to attach a confirmatory referendum to some version of a Brexit deal, which might win over a majority of MPs. But the prime minister is averse to the notion of a second vote. He would prefer a general election which, after being forced against his will to request an extension, he could fight under the banner of backing the people who voted to leave the EU against an establishment determined to stand in their way.


The obstacle to this is the 2011 Fixed-term Parliaments Act. This requires a two-thirds majority of MPs to vote in favour of any early dissolution of Parliament. The effect has been to give the Labour opposition a veto over the prime minister’s repeated calls for an early general election. The irony that it was a Conservative-led government, under David Cameron, that passed this particular piece of legislation is surely not lost on Mr Johnson.

 

[Jebus_lives]

This is the Irish PM who Johnson has previously pondered why he wasn't called Murphy 'like the rest of them'.

Did he actually say that?

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Did he actually say that?

Allegedly, along with pondering whether Merkel was previously a Stasi informant. It was during his time as Foreign Secretary.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Updated: 60,000 staff fall under potential post-Brexit migration salary cap

More than 60,000 NHS workers from overseas would fall under an increased immigration salary threshold which has been proposed to government, an analysis by HSJ has revealed.

www.hsj.co.uk

 

[Khalekan]

Brexit....the soundtrack album

 

[spectateur]

Updated: 60,000 staff fall under potential post-Brexit migration salary cap

More than 60,000 NHS workers from overseas would fall under an increased immigration salary threshold which has been proposed to government, an analysis by HSJ has revealed.

www.hsj.co.uk

So 60000 foreign NHS workers could lose their right to UK residency, could be forced to leave. How many of these are EU nationals is not clear.
However, as things stand, around 5 million EU citizens will have their futures made uncertain on 01/11/19.
3.5M continental EU citizens live/work in the UK whilst 1.5M UK citizens live/work in continental Europe. A crash out brexit means that free movement will cease and many of these 5M people will instantly become "illegal immigrants" pending application for work/residence permits.
UK pensioners who decided to spend their retirement years in other EU states are also in fear of their pensions being capped and the extension of their UK health and welfare rights to other countries cancelled.
These things were agreed to remain in place under the T.May deal, but her deal was rejected by many factions in parliament for a variety of reasons.
Just another facet of the idiocity of Brexit unconsidered by the "get it done" brigade, but then 17.4 voted for it didn't they.

 

[dwightschrute]

I have the utmost confidence that this ship of fools will navigate us through the choppy waters of the trade deals yet to come.

Liz Truss is 100x more stupid than Diane Abbott, you wouldn't think so by the amount of abuse she gets from low intelligence gammon though, I wonder why...

 

[dwightschrute]

Jeff King: The Prime Minister’s Constitutional Options after the Benn Act: Part I

This is the first of a two-part discussion of this theme. This first part addresses the obligations under the Benn Act and the legal response to attempts to frustrate it; the second part will addre…

ukconstitutionallaw.org

Article from the experts breaking down how Johnson has no way of not asking for an extension, other than resigning and making a court official do it

Jeff King: The Prime Minister’s Constitutional Options after the Benn Act: Part II

This is the second of a two-part discussion of this theme. The first part addressed the obligations under the Benn Act and the legal response to attempts to frustrate it; this second part addresses…

ukconstitutionallaw.org

And a second part on how if he resigns Corbyn is best place to become PM not a Lib Dem/NU fantasy

 

[peteblue]

Jeff King: The Prime Minister’s Constitutional Options after the Benn Act: Part I

This is the first of a two-part discussion of this theme. This first part addresses the obligations under the Benn Act and the legal response to attempts to frustrate it; the second part will addre…

ukconstitutionallaw.org

Article from the experts breaking down how Johnson has no way of not asking for an extension, other than resigning and making a court official do it

Jeff King: The Prime Minister’s Constitutional Options after the Benn Act: Part II

This is the second of a two-part discussion of this theme. The first part addressed the obligations under the Benn Act and the legal response to attempts to frustrate it; this second part addresses…

ukconstitutionallaw.org

And a second part on how if he resigns Corbyn is best place to become PM not a Lib Dem/NU fantasy

Good articles......

’It is important to conclude by reflecting that this legal position should suit the PM as much as the opposition at the present time. If the PM were ‘forced out’ and the opposition could take whatever electoral heat for extending the negotiating period, followed shortly by an election, the PM could capitalize on the result and the inevitable headlines without having breached any of his red lines. Mr. Johnson could play the martyr and the phoenix.’