|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Shake it all about: Brexit thread II
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
quote:
Originally posted by Rocinante:
Yes, it looks very much like LINO (Leaving In Name Only), if it really happens I'll be happy with that as the least worst outcome (other than actually staying in).
Yes.
It may even be the best outcome?
No more Ukipper and brexiteer bleating!
We're leaving the jurisdiction of the ECJ (eventually). That alone is more than 'name only', isn't it?
If we want the benefits of being able to trade within the single market (which is what the EU is all about) we won't be able to ignore the ECJ.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by balaam:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
No more Ukipper and brexiteer bleating!
Why should we not bleat? What have you got against people who really care for their country airing their views?
People who really care for their country don't advocate sabotaging its economy just to prove that we have the power to do so. [This is why "taking back control" is a nonsense: as we have the ability to withdraw from the EU whenever we choose we have all the control we could want. That doesn't make it a good idea to exercise that control because actions have consequences]
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by balaam:
Why should we not bleat? What have you got against people who really care for their country airing their views?
Nothing - provided nobody takes it to be anything more than hot-air. So long as Nigel Cabbage never appears on a BBC programme again.
Surely you can see that there is a level of acute farce when the deal which is agreed (and, let's be honest is the most likely option given that the Tories can't themselves agree what they want out of a trade deal) amounts to remaining within the things that the most ardent leavers wanted out of.
The DUP, who appear to be the most Brexity of Brexiteers seem intent on saying that the UK as a whole is going to leave the CM and CU when this agreement appears to suggest that the default position - because of the DUP's big boots on Monday - is going to be that NI, and because of the DUP's fixation also the rest of the country are staying with something that looks a lot like the current CM.
If that's not madness, I don't know what is. They've forced an agreement that does the exact opposite of what they say they want.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
Also, here's another thing I'd love to have out with the DUP. They keep saying that they don't want any separation between NI and the rUK, whilst at the same time supporting a system that is separate in various ways from the rUK.
They legal system in NI is different to that in Scotland and EnglandandWales. The Police service is different than anything in the rUK. The school system is different.
You don't go from Holyhead to NI and think that it is a completely different country, but it clearly isn't as similar as crossing the bridge from Bristol to Newport.
So all this bleating about NI having a "special status" as if this would somehow reduce its Britishness seems to me to be absolute baloney. NI already has a different, arguably a special, status. And one which the DUP actively support.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
betjemaniac
Shipmate
# 17618
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
Also, here's another thing I'd love to have out with the DUP. They keep saying that they don't want any separation between NI and the rUK, whilst at the same time supporting a system that is separate in various ways from the rUK.
They legal system in NI is different to that in Scotland and EnglandandWales. The Police service is different than anything in the rUK. The school system is different.
You don't go from Holyhead to NI and think that it is a completely different country, but it clearly isn't as similar as crossing the bridge from Bristol to Newport.
So all this bleating about NI having a "special status" as if this would somehow reduce its Britishness seems to me to be absolute baloney. NI already has a different, arguably a special, status. And one which the DUP actively support.
You're older than me Mr Cheesy (I think) - surely by now you've learned not to expect *anything* about Northern Ireland (and especially it's politics) to make sense?
--------------------
And is it true? For if it is....
Posts: 1481 | From: behind the dreaming spires | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
Also, here's another thing I'd love to have out with the DUP. They keep saying that they don't want any separation between NI and the rUK, whilst at the same time supporting a system that is separate in various ways from the rUK.
They legal system in NI is different to that in Scotland and EnglandandWales. The Police service is different than anything in the rUK. The school system is different.
You don't go from Holyhead to NI and think that it is a completely different country, but it clearly isn't as similar as crossing the bridge from Bristol to Newport.
So all this bleating about NI having a "special status" as if this would somehow reduce its Britishness seems to me to be absolute baloney. NI already has a different, arguably a special, status. And one which the DUP actively support.
Well, might it be a case of their old-fashioned Britishness itself being what makes them so different from the rest of the UK?
I believe the suit-and-bowler outfits that they wear in the parades are meant as some sort of ethnic costume, to show everyone how British they are(like Hawaiians wearing leis, for example). But of course, very few people elsewhere in the UK dress that way anymore. So by being very British as per 1930, they end up being completely un-British as per 2017.
Mind you, I don't know if their legal system, police etc are British in that sense, ie. reminiscent of Britain a long time ago. I'm kind of guessing most of them might assume that to be the case, since(again, extrapolating largely from the clothes), their whole identity seems wrapped up in "We are what the British were like in the past".
--------------------
I have the power...Lucifer is lord!
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
We're leaving the jurisdiction of the ECJ (eventually). That alone is more than 'name only', isn't it?
I don't think that means what you think it means.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican't
Shipmate
# 15292
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by chris stiles:
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
We're leaving the jurisdiction of the ECJ (eventually). That alone is more than 'name only', isn't it?
I don't think that means what you think it means.
What do you think I think it means and what do you think it actually means (if different)?
[ 08. December 2017, 17:31: Message edited by: Anglican't ]
Posts: 3613 | From: London, England | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican't
Shipmate
# 15292
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Rocinante:
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
quote:
Originally posted by Rocinante:
Yes, it looks very much like LINO (Leaving In Name Only), if it really happens I'll be happy with that as the least worst outcome (other than actually staying in).
Yes.
It may even be the best outcome?
No more Ukipper and brexiteer bleating!
We're leaving the jurisdiction of the ECJ (eventually). That alone is more than 'name only', isn't it?
True. I hope it keeps the nutbars happy, but I strongly suspect it won't be enough.
I suppose one's view of who is and who isn't a 'nutbar' might vary, but mainstream pro-Brexit opinion seems very much on board with current developments. Nigel Farage isn't happy, but then again he's all about boarding the outrage bus so I'm not particularly surprised.
Posts: 3613 | From: London, England | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by balaam:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
No more Ukipper and brexiteer bleating!
Why should we not bleat? What have you got against people who really care for their country airing their views?
Apart from the fact that you, and your kind, have undermined the economy, the western alliance, race relations and the Northern Irish Peace Process, nothing at all. To paraphrase the Blessed Clement Attlee (PBUH):
quote:
I can assure you there is widespread resentment at your activities and a period of silence on your part would be welcome.
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rocinante
Shipmate
# 18541
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
quote:
Originally posted by Rocinante:
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
quote:
Originally posted by Rocinante:
Yes, it looks very much like LINO (Leaving In Name Only), if it really happens I'll be happy with that as the least worst outcome (other than actually staying in).
Yes.
It may even be the best outcome?
No more Ukipper and brexiteer bleating!
We're leaving the jurisdiction of the ECJ (eventually). That alone is more than 'name only', isn't it?
True. I hope it keeps the nutbars happy, but I strongly suspect it won't be enough.
I suppose one's view of who is and who isn't a 'nutbar' might vary, but mainstream pro-Brexit opinion seems very much on board with current developments. Nigel Farage isn't happy, but then again he's all about boarding the outrage bus so I'm not particularly surprised.
Yes, just heard Farago on Radio 4 being predictably outraged, apparently still being subject to the ECJ for nearly a decade!!! is NOT WHAT PEOPLE VOTED FOR (as if he has any idea what anyone voted for.) People I know, pro- and anti-Brexit, are heartily sick of the whole sorry farce and just want it all put to bed. "Brexit is just so 2016", as one colleague put it. If this deal (or proto-deal, whatever it is, the hard bits are still to do,) allows us to pay lipservice to Brexit and then get on with our lives, it looks like that will be acceptable to most normal people.
Posts: 384 | From: UK | Registered: Jan 2016
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican't
Shipmate
# 15292
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Rocinante:
Yes, just heard Farago on Radio 4 being predictably outraged, apparently still being subject to the ECJ for nearly a decade!!! is NOT WHAT PEOPLE VOTED FOR (as if he has any idea what anyone voted for.) People I know, pro- and anti-Brexit, are heartily sick of the whole sorry farce and just want it all put to bed. "Brexit is just so 2016", as one colleague put it. If this deal (or proto-deal, whatever it is, the hard bits are still to do,) allows us to pay lipservice to Brexit and then get on with our lives, it looks like that will be acceptable to most normal people.
As much I'd like to be shot of the ECJ yesterday, and certainly by the withdrawal date, this is a negotiation and you're never going to get quite what you want. I think most people, on either side of the argument, get this and just want a resolution, as you say.
There's also something of a contradiction in Farage's argument that no-one's challenged him on (well, not so far as I've seen). If you believe (as I do, and Farage obviously does) that the European Union's powers are far-reaching and its tentacles extend deep into British economic, legal, political, life and so forth, then it's obviously going to be difficult to reverse that in a very short period of time. I don't quite understand how one can argue that the EU is all-powerful and also that you can flick a switch overnight and everything will be ok. But I suppose that, since Farage will never be in power, he doesn't have to square that particular circle.
Posts: 3613 | From: London, England | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican't
Shipmate
# 15292
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Rocinante:
If this deal (or proto-deal, whatever it is, the hard bits are still to do)
This is the bit that I found curious. When I admit to not having read all the EU's and UK government's negotiation position papers, I'm sure I'm not the only one on this board who hasn't, but my understanding was that the EU's position was that the Stage 1 issues (EU citizens' rights, the financial settlement, Irish issues, etc.) had to be agreed before proceeding to Stage 2 and by 'agreed' I thought this meant agreed in some binding way.
Now, though, the agreed position appears to be that nothing is agreed until everything is agreed. If that is a change, it seems to be something of a climbdown by the EU, but it also seems to be mean the whole thing is in flux. Britain could, presumably, still crash out of the EU with no deal (and no financial settlement, etc.) if Stage 2 comes to nothing.
I'm still perplexed as to why HMG agreed to the two-stage process in the first place, but I suppose that's a different issue altogether.
Posts: 3613 | From: London, England | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
What do you think I think it means and what do you think it actually means (if different)?
See Sioni's answer up thread. The CJEU would be involved as soon as the UK has a trade deal with the EU.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican't
Shipmate
# 15292
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by chris stiles:
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
What do you think I think it means and what do you think it actually means (if different)?
See Sioni's answer up thread. The CJEU would be involved as soon as the UK has a trade deal with the EU.
Right, but quite possibly only to the extent that any other country in the world does? (Unless we negotiate differently, of course.) Canada and Japan have trade deals with the EU. I don't think anyone claims that those countries are subject to the ECJ, do they?
Posts: 3613 | From: London, England | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
quote:
Originally posted by chris stiles:
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
What do you think I think it means and what do you think it actually means (if different)?
See Sioni's answer up thread. The CJEU would be involved as soon as the UK has a trade deal with the EU.
Right, but quite possibly only to the extent that any other country in the world does? (Unless we negotiate differently, of course.) Canada and Japan have trade deals with the EU. I don't think anyone claims that those countries are subject to the ECJ, do they?
Canada and Japan don't have land borders with the EU, which members of the EEA have (as well as some "candidate countries" like Turkey and some Eastern European countries. That land border with the Republic of Ireland makes one hell of a lot of difference, to those on both sides of it.
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
Right, but quite possibly only to the extent that any other country in the world does? (Unless we negotiate differently, of course.) Canada and Japan have trade deals with the EU. I don't think anyone claims that those countries are subject to the ECJ, do they?
To the extent that the ECJ ultimately rules on EU standards and they wish to trade with the EU, yes they are, and given that even Brexiters like Johnson/Gove claim the UK can do 'better than a canadian deal' yes it will.
I doubt if most of the people who object to the ECJ actually know what it does (apart from some cargo cult belief that it 'stops us deporting terrorists').
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican't
Shipmate
# 15292
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by chris stiles:
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
Right, but quite possibly only to the extent that any other country in the world does? (Unless we negotiate differently, of course.) Canada and Japan have trade deals with the EU. I don't think anyone claims that those countries are subject to the ECJ, do they?
To the extent that the ECJ ultimately rules on EU standards and they wish to trade with the EU, yes they are
But I don't see how that differs from the supreme court of any other country in the world with which another country wishes to do business, say.
Which I would say is somewhat different to the principle of the primacy of EU law (and being subject to it). The ECJ would be in no different position to, say, the High Court of Australia if that court had given a judgment on standards that affected British exporters to Australia.
But I accept that the ECJ could conceivably get some role in any final settlement.
[ 08. December 2017, 19:37: Message edited by: Anglican't ]
Posts: 3613 | From: London, England | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
I'm struggling to see how this is good for the EU.
As long as it's good for Britain I couldn't care less how it is for the EU.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican't
Shipmate
# 15292
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
I'm struggling to see how this is good for the EU.
As long as it's good for Britain I couldn't care less how it is for the EU.
Martin Schulz has proposed that there be a United States of Europe by 2025 and that any EU member state that doesn't want to sign up to it should leave the EU. If his idea came to pass, I wonder how much of the EU would be left?
Posts: 3613 | From: London, England | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
Martin Schulz has proposed that there be a United States of Europe by 2025 and that any EU member state that doesn't want to sign up to it should leave the EU. If his idea came to pass, I wonder how much of the EU would be left?
Not much, probably.
Reading various articles about the deal, it really does sound like the UK is getting access to the single market without having to accept freedom of movement (other than any EU nationals already here having the right to stay).
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rocinante
Shipmate
# 18541
|
Posted
Freedom of movement will in theory no longer be allowed, but will be impossible to stop in practice. Anyone from the EU who wants to take advantage of the opportunities afforded by our wonderful gig economy just needs to get on a plane to Dublin and take a bus to Belfast.
Posts: 384 | From: UK | Registered: Jan 2016
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
The DUP, who appear to be the most Brexity of Brexiteers
The Grauniad the other day was suggesting that the DUP are actually almost as split as the Tories on the issue, with Arlene Foster being relatively soft and Sammy Wilson being someone who makes Mr Farage look sane. Don't know enough about them to know if that's true. It's probably true, though, that unionism is more fundamental to their identity than Euroscepticism.
--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Rocinante:
Freedom of movement will in theory no longer be allowed, but will be impossible to stop in practice. Anyone from the EU who wants to take advantage of the opportunities afforded by our wonderful gig economy just needs to get on a plane to Dublin and take a bus to Belfast.
True but I suspect that even Uber carries out basic right-to-work checks before setting people on their glorious path to freedom from employment legislation.
--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
alienfromzog
Ship's Alien
# 5327
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
I'm still perplexed as to why HMG agreed to the two-stage process in the first place, but I suppose that's a different issue altogether.
Because - contrary to what HM Government seems to think - the UK is in a very weak negotiating position. The EU wanted the two-stage process: the UK had to agree or the EU would have waited with the clock ticking until the UK agreed. The inescapable fact is this: No Deal™ is bad for the EU (but not that bad) and VERY bad for the UK.
As economist Wren-Lewis noted more than a year ago, the UK had essentially one card - the timing of when to invoke Article 50. That was the only time the UK held any real power in the negotiation. Once A50 invoked, all the power pretty much sits with the EU.
A wise government would have done as much work as possible before invoking A50. You know, things like impact assessments, negotiating strategy, a clear idea of what we wanted as an end-point (not just wishful thinking), bilateral talks with Ireland about NI... that sort of thing...
But then May was (and still is) running scared from the right-wing of her party who demanded activation of A50 RIGHT NOW. And hence (as is the case so much at the moment) good governance took second place to political expediency.
It seems to me that the best hope of a good outcome for the UK is that the EU team seem to want a fair deal for the UK... It seems that the EU has forced the UK into accepting a default of single market rules and custom union until things can be sorted. This is a much better deal for the UK than anything HMG has put forward (at least publicly).
I do love irony.
AFZ
[ 09. December 2017, 08:00: Message edited by: alienfromzog ]
--------------------
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.
[Sen. D.P.Moynihan]
An Alien's View of Earth - my blog (or vanity exercise...)
Posts: 2150 | From: Zog, obviously! Straight past Alpha Centauri, 2nd planet on the left... | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
Reading various articles about the deal, it really does sound like the UK is getting access to the single market without having to accept freedom of movement (other than any EU nationals already here having the right to stay).
Been thinking about this. I think the reason why nothing is said about freedom of movement is that freedom of movement wasn't identified as a Phase I issue (except with regard to EU citizens who have already exercised that freedom).
So far as I see it, there are now three possible outcomes:
1. A comprehensive free trade deal that entails UK-EU regulatory alignment. Freedom of movement as part of this deal will presumably be discussed at Phase II.
2. No deal. The UK maintains EU regulations anyway in order to ensure an open border in Ireland, and thus can't strike trade deals outside Europe unless the other country is happy to accept EU regulatory standards. Goods exported from the UK to Ireland incur no tariffs but there is no guarantee that exports from the UK to Continental Europe won't incur tariffs*.
3. No deal. The UK reneges on the Phase I deal and makes up its own regulations in order to strike trade deals outside Europe. Ireland retaliates by imposing border controls.
I think the EU has now comprehensively ensured that any notional advantages of the no-deal scenario have thoroughly evaporated ...
* In this scenario it would of course be possible to avoid tariffs by sending a container (say) Liverpool to Belfast, Belfast to Dublin, Dublin to Rotterdam but unless tariffs are set at 100%+ I am pretty sure it would be cheaper just to send the container direct to Rotterdam and pay the tariff.
[ 09. December 2017, 08:26: Message edited by: Ricardus ]
--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by alienfromzog:
A wise government would have done as much work as possible before invoking A50. You know, things like impact assessments, negotiating strategy, a clear idea of what we wanted as an end-point (not just wishful thinking), bilateral talks with Ireland about NI... that sort of thing...
A wise government would have done that before calling a referendum on whether or not to leave the EU. Wisdom is something that has been in remarkably short supply in UK governments of late.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
alienfromzog
Ship's Alien
# 5327
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
quote:
Originally posted by alienfromzog:
A wise government would have done as much work as possible before invoking A50. You know, things like impact assessments, negotiating strategy, a clear idea of what we wanted as an end-point (not just wishful thinking), bilateral talks with Ireland about NI... that sort of thing...
A wise government would have done that before calling a referendum on whether or not to leave the EU. Wisdom is something that has been in remarkably short supply in UK governments of late.
Indeed.
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
AFZ
--------------------
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.
[Sen. D.P.Moynihan]
An Alien's View of Earth - my blog (or vanity exercise...)
Posts: 2150 | From: Zog, obviously! Straight past Alpha Centauri, 2nd planet on the left... | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
The ECJ would be in no different position to, say, the High Court of Australia if that court had given a judgment on standards that affected British exporters to Australia.
In which case it is arguable that it is not the ECJ itself that you object. If the UK wishes to go 'beyond' a Canadian deal - specifically to craft a deal on services - then there are plenty of bits of legislation involved that will pull in the involvement of the ECJ (GDPR for instance has all sorts of knock on impacts).
Remember that the UK has also made noises about 'regulatory alignment' ( https://archive.fo/pRgYn ) which means that ECJ judgements will apply to more than just exporters.
[ 09. December 2017, 10:18: Message edited by: chris stiles ]
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Rocinante:
Freedom of movement will in theory no longer be allowed, but will be impossible to stop in practice. Anyone from the EU who wants to take advantage of the opportunities afforded by our wonderful gig economy just needs to get on a plane to Dublin and take a bus to Belfast.
Except they will no longer automatically have right of residence or the right to work. So there wouldn't be any point in them doing so.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by Rocinante:
Freedom of movement will in theory no longer be allowed, but will be impossible to stop in practice. Anyone from the EU who wants to take advantage of the opportunities afforded by our wonderful gig economy just needs to get on a plane to Dublin and take a bus to Belfast.
Except they will no longer automatically have right of residence or the right to work. So there wouldn't be any point in them doing so.
Not *automatically* but the devil will be in the detail and it will be subject to the exact terms of "the deal" and what the ECJ will do when it has to deal with a case which I am sure will happen, although we don't know when.
In short, we don't know now any more than we knew before 23rd June 2016 and we are only now, nearly 18 months on making any progress.
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dafyd
Shipmate
# 5549
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ricardus:
True but I suspect that even Uber carries out basic right-to-work checks before setting people on their glorious path to freedom from employment legislation.
There was a case recently where a certain up-market burger chain arranged for the immigration officials to swoop in and round up all the workers who weren't in the country legally.
This implies that the company was conducting right-to-work checks with insufficient rigour.
Workers who aren't supposed to be in the country are unable to claim workplace pensions, minimum wages, etc. Therefore there is an incentive to companies to not conduct right-to-work checks, should it be the case that immigration targets perversely prioritise deporting immigrants over punishing the companies that employ them. (Surely not.)
That may not apply to Uber as Uber has its own way to avoid paying workplace pensions, minimum wages, sanction people who wnat to have employment rights, etc.
--------------------
we remain, thanks to original sin, much in love with talking about, rather than with, one another. Rowan Williams
Posts: 10567 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
Also, here's another thing I'd love to have out with the DUP. They keep saying that they don't want any separation between NI and the rUK, whilst at the same time supporting a system that is separate in various ways from the rUK.
They legal system in NI is different to that in Scotland and EnglandandWales. The Police service is different than anything in the rUK. The school system is different.
You don't go from Holyhead to NI and think that it is a completely different country, but it clearly isn't as similar as crossing the bridge from Bristol to Newport.
So all this bleating about NI having a "special status" as if this would somehow reduce its Britishness seems to me to be absolute baloney. NI already has a different, arguably a special, status. And one which the DUP actively support.
Having spent much time in my student years in Northern Ireland and with many of my friends from there, I would never make the mistake of associating it with British identity. It is part of the UK, but I would not go much further than that. YKMV
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rocinante
Shipmate
# 18541
|
Posted
This caught my eye recently:
Illegal migrants are very unlikely to be caught
As long as there is demand for their labour, people will move to meet that demand. Always have, always will. If we allow them to do it legally then we'll know who they are, what they're doing and how much tax they've paid, but instead we've decided to Take Back Control.
Posts: 384 | From: UK | Registered: Jan 2016
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
It's quite noticeable that hardly had the congratulations died down, over the phase one deal, than it starts getting torn to shreds. It seems to resolve nothing, since the next lot of negotiations can change it all, or can lead nowhere, producing a sudden exit. I wonder if the Ultras are still plotting for a hard Brexit?
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bishops Finger
Shipmate
# 5430
|
Posted
Not sure if anyone else has picked up on this, but it looks as though the Government has been defeated in a key vote.
IJ
--------------------
Our words are giants when they do us an injury, and dwarfs when they do us a service. (Wilkie Collins)
Posts: 10151 | From: Behind The Wheel Again! | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
TurquoiseTastic
Fish of a different color
# 8978
|
Posted
My first reaction is that this is a "shoot-selves-in-feet" moment as far as Remainers are concerned. Chance to vote down final deal at least as likely to be used to oppose "soft" Brexit as to oppose "hard" Brexit. Overall raises chance of no deal.
Posts: 1092 | From: Hants., UK | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
You reassure me inasmuch as that was my confused take.
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
Since it's democracy at action for the end of the process rather than the more logical option of asking the people or their representatives what they want from Brexit before starting the process, the options are limited.
The best option would be for the government to find out what the majority views of Parliament and the people are, and enter negotiations seeking to obtain a deal that will pass with a large majority of MPs voting for it - ideally a free vote on the merits of the deal, not something forced through by the whips.
The other option is for the government to press on with a deal to satisfy a vocal minority in their party. And, then have it rejected by Parliament - probably leading to a no deal as there'll be no time to renegotiate to get something else agreed.
I'm not holding my breath that this government has the nous to do something half way sensible.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jay-Emm
Shipmate
# 11411
|
Posted
The papers aren't trying to even appear un-biased, yesterdays express had "Thank God the conservatives are in the lead" (or something like that, it might have been stars or something).
Today MP's threaten Brexit chaos, And personally I'd like them to not just threaten but actively stop the Brexit chaos. But to the papers Brexit chaos is a good.
Posts: 1643 | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
I'm increasingly thinking that a "deal" is not going to be possible because both sides have points beyond which it will be impossible to compromise.
Whether or not the British parliament has a say on a deal is a bit of a red herring - because fairly obviously the EU is not going to agree to something that would be thrown out by the British parliament (or, come to that, all the other parliaments in the EU).
The British negotiators are going to stumble unless they can show something to the domestic electorate which presses the buttons on borders, taking back control etc. But those are the exact things that the EU can't offer without destroying the union. It's a mutually impossible situation. Neither side can offer what they other wants.
The only thing preventing the EU pulling the plug now is Ireland, IMO. But this is a complex problem without an obvious solution - as I said earlier, I think the EU has compromised as far as it can possibly do so with the agreement from last week. But even this isn't acceptable to the rabid bigots who hold the balance of power in London.
In terms of Ireland, it seems to me that quite possibly the best solution would be for the EU to hold the line and force no-deal, in which case last week's agreement would come into force. But I'm not entirely sure who would be hurt more by that scenario, in the absence of other agreements, I can't work out what would happen at the Irish border. I suspect nobody really knows.
Gah, what a mess.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anselmina
Ship's barmaid
# 3032
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Augustine the Aleut:
Having spent much time in my student years in Northern Ireland and with many of my friends from there, I would never make the mistake of associating it with British identity. It is part of the UK, but I would not go much further than that. YKMV
I know what you're saying, but make no mistake that most of the ordinary Protestants in NI consider themselves, quite correctly, if that's their choice, completely and utterly British. It may not be a fellow Brit's idea of British, but that's not Ulster's problem, or it shouldn't be.
After hundreds of years of basic British/Westminster rule, how could it be otherwise?
The Queen is their Queen. They wave, and are proud of, their flag - the Union Flag. They sing their national anthem: The Queen. They have British passports and they are British, arguably in a way that those who label their primary national affiliation as 'English' eg, would perhaps struggle to understand. There are several decades of the dead and terrorized in that province to prove that Northern Ireland is British, contains a majority British population (or does it still?) who at least legally, and certainly culturally, not only are but also consider themselves British, and whose security forces and general population have been bombed, killed, shot and tortured for the privilege of upholding that loyalty.
These things are very much associated with our, and therefore your British identity, like or loathe it.
Times are a-changing of course. Quite noticeably young people have been coming back from 'abroad' and realizing that being British isn't particularly special after all. Especially when your fellow Britons don't seem to be aware of the constitution of their own nation, and don't even regard you as British!
More and more Protestants are choosing Irish passports. Milestone symbol that times are changing. In past times, when travelling with mixed school trips you could always tell who were Catholics and who Protestants because only Catholics would've had Irish passports. But now calling oneself Irish is no longer so closely identified with political Republicanism as it was when I was growing up. That's changing big time.
It'll only be a matter of time before those centuries' worth of constitutional attachment to the 'Mainland' lose their grip, and the modern generations create their own sense of where they want to belong. Ironically, Brexit is helping there. The more hard-line the DUP get the more, it seems, moderate Unionism deplores the hard line, and edges closer to friendliness with the 'foreign' country to the south of its border.
The DUP currently does not represent the majority mind of Northern Ireland in certain issues: same-sex marriage and Brexit to name two. And the harder the DUP dig in the filth to keep themselves in power, the more turned-off ordinary non-fundamentalist Protestants get with being identified with Unionism. And perhaps in time with being British, as the Brexit shambles limps pathetically on.
But nevertheless. Make no mistake. The Northern Irish are currently as British as Churchill's backside, whether they like it or lump it, claim it or reject it. We are and have been for a long time very much a big part of British identity.
As per Scotland. As per Wales. (Not sure about England...!)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
--------------------
Irish dogs needing homes! http://www.dogactionwelfaregroup.ie/ Greyhounds and Lurchers are shipped over to England for rehoming too!
Posts: 10002 | From: Scotland the Brave | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jay-Emm:
The papers aren't trying to even appear un-biased, yesterdays express had "Thank God the conservatives are in the lead" (or something like that, it might have been stars or something).
Today MP's threaten Brexit chaos, And personally I'd like them to not just threaten but actively stop the Brexit chaos. But to the papers Brexit chaos is a good.
And today's Heil has got a rogues' gallery of Tories who voted against the government with a "Jones will come back!" threat. It reads like incitement, frankly.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
rolyn
Shipmate
# 16840
|
Posted
Considering that this whole EU leaving business was supposed to put a mile wide schism through the Tory Party, they do actually appear to be holding up fairly well.
Corbyn can only play the waiting game. Question is, will the wind be sufficiently ill by then to blow him into No.10 come 2022?
--------------------
Change is the only certainty of existence
Posts: 3206 | From: U.K. | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by rolyn:
Corbyn can only play the waiting game. Question is, will the wind be sufficiently ill by then to blow him into No.10 come 2022?
Or earlier. Afterall, if the government lose the vote on the Brexit deal (presumably sometime at the end of 2018, or the very start of 2019) one thing is absolutely certain - Mrs May will be ousted as Tory leader. And, a General Election will be very likely. Lose that vote, and we a) don't have a Brexit deal and b) we'll have a GE in spring 2019.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
quote:
Originally posted by rolyn:
Corbyn can only play the waiting game. Question is, will the wind be sufficiently ill by then to blow him into No.10 come 2022?
Or earlier. Afterall, if the government lose the vote on the Brexit deal (presumably sometime at the end of 2018, or the very start of 2019) one thing is absolutely certain - Mrs May will be ousted as Tory leader. And, a General Election will be very likely. Lose that vote, and we a) don't have a Brexit deal and b) we'll have a GE in spring 2019.
I'm not sure the vote in parliament will make any difference, nor an election. We have given Notice to Quit under Article 50. I wouldn't be at all surprised for the powers that be at the EU to tell us that we wanted out so out you will be, hard Brexit, soft Brexit or whatever.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
We have given Notice to Quit under Article 50. I wouldn't be at all surprised for the powers that be at the EU to tell us that we wanted out so out you will be, hard Brexit, soft Brexit or whatever.
There is, of course, talk that an article 50 notice is unilaterally rescindable at any point within the two-year period. And if that's true, then a new government could theoretically just say "we're not doing Brexit" at any point within the two year window.
Whether or not that is really true seems to be untested legal theory. And, of course, it is undeniable that a country acting in such a manner would earn itself the permanent title "arsehole of Europe" with all that that implies.
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
But neither Tories or Labour would actually try to cancel Brexit, would they? It seems unthinkable to me, barring of course, something disastrous happening. Well, yes, I know that has happened. I mean ultimate Götterdämmerung, e.g. empty shelves in shops, ten mile queues at Dover, aircraft unable to fly.
A very soft Brexit could happen, whereby the UK tracks EU regulations and other stuff. In the old saying, pay no say. What a laaf that would be.
[ 14. December 2017, 15:00: Message edited by: quetzalcoatl ]
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
rolyn
Shipmate
# 16840
|
Posted
Jean Claude J. has said that Britain will come to 'regret' leaving the EU. For the cynical and nervous among us an under-his-breath appendage to that statement might well have been We'll make sure of that
Cards are currently being held so close to the chest it is impossible to speculate what the actual difference for the average UK Joe will be cometh the day.
Weak Sterling since the result of June 16 is already starting to make a difference. Good for some, bad for others. ‘Twas always thus, and will continue to be so once this business is hammered through.
--------------------
Change is the only certainty of existence
Posts: 3206 | From: U.K. | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
quote:
Originally posted by rolyn:
Corbyn can only play the waiting game. Question is, will the wind be sufficiently ill by then to blow him into No.10 come 2022?
Or earlier. Afterall, if the government lose the vote on the Brexit deal (presumably sometime at the end of 2018, or the very start of 2019) one thing is absolutely certain - Mrs May will be ousted as Tory leader. And, a General Election will be very likely. Lose that vote, and we a) don't have a Brexit deal and b) we'll have a GE in spring 2019.
I'm not sure the vote in parliament will make any difference, nor an election. We have given Notice to Quit under Article 50. I wouldn't be at all surprised for the powers that be at the EU to tell us that we wanted out so out you will be, hard Brexit, soft Brexit or whatever.
I fear you're right, a lost vote in Parliament isn't going to stop Brexit - and the further we go in pursuing madness the less likely that becomes anyway.
What it could be is the end of the Tory government. Even if it means the incoming (probably Labour) government has to deal with the mess of the Tories trying for an idiotic and unpopular form of Brexit, and leaving the UK with no deal (which doesn't mean no deal in the longer term, just that it will need to be negotiated while there is no transitional arrangement).
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
