It is hard to see what all the game playing and foot dragging over so many months have achieved, unless the political climate now is such that the hard leavers will meekly accept what they would have utterly rejected six months ago. In every other respect this deal could have been secured very quickly towards the beginning of this year. And the NI question remains as intractable as ever, kicked into long grass.
It is good that HMG has finally come to understand that any deal is better than no deal, and the prospect of a cliff edge departure is receding. It does however weaken the case for the EU agreeing to suspend the whole process, since they now have less to gain by the UK remaining.
Anyone know what this extract actually means? - "A principle of evidential flexibility will apply, enabling competent authorities to exercise discretion in favour of he applicant where appropriate."
Yep, she’s played a blinder. It’s taken her a fair few months, but she’s managed to convince Leavers they’ve won a great victory by agreeing to all the EU’s red lines. We’re leaving in name only. Rejoice!!!
What's the point in Leaving In Name Only.
On a personal level, I see very little point. But we voted to leave, so symbolically we must.
Clearly Corbyn is right on one thing. The cuts to benefits have gone too far. I have a disabled client who receives the highest level of PIP, but they have stopped his other benefits (pending appeal) WTF is going on, these people are fecking bonkers. Meanwhile my client is really worried, quite naturally. I cannot vote Tory until they start listening, which clearly no one is.
It's hilarious on here this morning watching the Remainers flail around grasping for a new line of attack on the Government.
I've actually read the agreement and I'm surprised at how reasonable and practical it is. The EU has also compromised in a number of areas.
So much bollocks is talked on here.
The question is if this is reasonable and practical why has Her Majesty's Government denounced it as an option on every occasion for the last year? Yes, they will claim success in that we are "leaving" the EEA and CU, but we're keeping all of their rules and regulations which we have just committed to be fully compliant with for an open ended period.
And having fanned the flames that we HAVE to stop free movement as that's what people supposedly voted for or it's a BETRAYAL how will she now sell not ending free movement to those people?
So. We have a solution to how we leave the EU, Single Market and Customs Union without the economy ending event of leaving the Single Market and Customs Union.
So we are "leaving". Not formally a member. But maintaining "full alignment with the rules" of the Single Market and Customs Union. Rules like no external trade deals. Rules like free movement.
Once the EUphoria (see what I did there...) dies away, expect a choice of two options. 1. The nutters point to the fact that we aren't leaving anything in practice, have bent over on every red line and have achieved nothing and say "this is bollocks". May can't carry the deal in her own party and is replaced by Moggmentum 2. Everyone rallies round to insist that black really is white and that by not ending free movement we have ended free movement. Until in 2022 the voters turn around and say "this is bollocks" and once again vote for a 3rd time lucky Farage led UKIP in their millions
I thought that was pretty much the arrangement you wanted.
It is. I'm very happy for the country. As someone who negotiates for a living I remain greatly amused by our absolute capitulation on every one of our red lines. But you have to admit it will be fascinating to see the response from the Tories who allegedly were backed up by millions of foaming dog fever Brexiteers. Apparently if we don't end free movement it's betrayal.
We haven't ended free movement.
I agree with you here and your longer post on this issue. My dad is a Leaver and was absolutely desperate for a Hard Brexit/no deal. He voted to leave purely on the immigration issue (like a lot of Leavers, I suspect). He won’t be very happy at all.
Even if you were right - no-one much will know, because Labour has not been heard in this Brexit process. Mostly because Labour has a leader who talks out of both sides of his mouth on the EU.
Even if you were right - no-one much will know, because Labour has not been heard in this Brexit process. Mostly because Labour has a leader who talks out of both sides of his mouth on the EU.
So. We have a solution to how we leave the EU, Single Market and Customs Union without the economy ending event of leaving the Single Market and Customs Union.
So we are "leaving". Not formally a member. But maintaining "full alignment with the rules" of the Single Market and Customs Union. Rules like no external trade deals. Rules like free movement.
Once the EUphoria (see what I did there...) dies away, expect a choice of two options. 1. The nutters point to the fact that we aren't leaving anything in practice, have bent over on every red line and have achieved nothing and say "this is bollocks". May can't carry the deal in her own party and is replaced by Moggmentum 2. Everyone rallies round to insist that black really is white and that by not ending free movement we have ended free movement. Until in 2022 the voters turn around and say "this is bollocks" and once again vote for a 3rd time lucky Farage led UKIP in their millions
I thought that was pretty much the arrangement you wanted.
It is. I'm very happy for the country. As someone who negotiates for a living I remain greatly amused by our absolute capitulation on every one of our red lines. But you have to admit it will be fascinating to see the response from the Tories who allegedly were backed up by millions of foaming dog fever Brexiteers. Apparently if we don't end free movement it's betrayal.
We haven't ended free movement.
I agree with you here and your longer post on this issue. My dad is a Leaver and was absolutely desperate for a Hard Brexit/no deal. He voted to leave purely on the immigration issue (like a lot of Leavers, I suspect). He won’t be very happy at all.
Ah well, I’m glad Soft Brexit won out in the end!
I've had a scan over the Daily Blaskshirt comments section. They are furious.
Apparently they were promised that leave means leave. Now that leave means not leave they want a May-shaped head on a spike.
The Tory party will get the blame for this. 12 months of vacuous hot air and red lines not only drawn but Boris flicking v-sign at Europe from behind them. Then in the end we capitulate on everything and the same ministers will now try and tell the voters they are stupid and don't understand.
The only way citizens’ rights can be changed is for the entire Withdrawal Act to be repealed. That’s a pretty big guarantee, but it is a compromise. The EU’s red line was never the ECJ per se, it was guaranteeing rights. It’s got what it wanted.
Even if you were right - no-one much will know, because Labour has not been heard in this Brexit process. Mostly because Labour has a leader who talks out of both sides of his mouth on the EU.
Who cares? We’re leaving in name only!
we're heading towards what the UK wanted in 1973 a trading relationship but no integration
given the latest pronouncements of this week re USE thats quite an achievement
Mr. Observer, if we are leaving in name only, I fear the current divisions will only worsen.
Anyway, today I've got a short walk (nothing like a Jessopian sojourn) but it's typical that the only time this winter I've got one (without the hound) there's ice on the driveway and road, and it's about as warm and fuzzy as sharing a coffin with a frost giant.
Yep, so a case brought in Year 8 in the UK will go through first instance, appeal and Supreme Court, and can then go to the ECJ. That’s a long process.
About two cases a year:
The UK courts have not asked the ECJ for help very often, compared with other member states
Negotiators are still locked in a stalemate over the role of the ECJ in enforcing citizens’ rights after Brexit. One point of clash is what the withdrawal agreement, the future partnership agreement and UK law should say about how the UK courts are to regard post-Brexit ECJ case law. Another is whether the UK Supreme Court should be obliged to refer questions of EU law on citizens’ rights to the ECJ after Brexit, as it is now.
Negotiators on both sides should be aware that the UK courts have not made references to the ECJ particularly often in recent years. The number of references from UK courts is average compared with other member states’. Around two references a year concern citizens’ rights.
@mattholehouse: STORY: ECJ to have role in monitoring citizens' rights for eight years.
Cases brought within eight years. So that means the ECJ could be hearing cases into the 2030s. The key point is that citizens’ rights in the UK will be enshrined in the UK legislation implementing the overall Treaty that is finally agreed, so the only way they can be changed is for the entire Treaty legislation to be repealed. Bottom line: EU citizens in the UK will continue to have more rights in certain areas than UK citizens!
@mattholehouse: STORY: ECJ to have role in monitoring citizens' rights for eight years.
Cases brought within eight years. So that means the ECJ could be hearing cases into the 2030s. The key point is that citizens’ rights in the UK will be enshrined in the UK legislation implementing the overall Treaty that is finally agreed, so the only way they can be changed is for the entire Treaty legislation to be repealed. Bottom line: EU citizens in the UK will continue to have more rights in certain areas than UK citizens!
Complete text:
This Part of the Agreement establishes rights for citizens following on from those established in Union law during the UK’s membership of the European Union; the CJEU is the ultimate arbiter of the interpretation of Union law. In the context of the application or interpretation of those rights, UK courts shall therefore have due regard to relevant decisions of the CJEU after the specified date4. The Agreement should also establish a mechanism enabling UK courts or tribunals to decide, having had due regard to whether relevant case-law exists, to ask the CJEU questions of interpretation of those rights where they consider that a CJEU ruling on the question is necessary for the UK court or tribunal to be able to give judgment in a case before it. This mechanism should be available for UK courts or tribunals for litigation brought within 8 years from the date of application of the citizens' rights Part.
I'm not a lawyer but that looks to me to be UK friendly
EU citizens have no right of appeal to ECJ. ECJ decisions shall be given the weight of precedent in interpretation of citizens rights. If there is a question of the interpretation of EU law, UK courts can ask the ECJ for its views (*not on the case but on the interpretation of law*) which the UK court may take into account in making its judgement
Even if you were right - no-one much will know, because Labour has not been heard in this Brexit process. Mostly because Labour has a leader who talks out of both sides of his mouth on the EU.
Who cares? We’re leaving in name only!
we're heading towards what the UK wanted in 1973 a trading relationship but no integration
given the latest pronouncements of this week re USE thats quite an achievement
We have a line in the sand. We’ll be integrated, but there’ll be no more integration unless we specifically agree. It is undoubtedly a solution most can live with. There’ll be no big, bucanerring FTAs, no major deregulation, no chlorinated chicken (!!); but there’s also no chance of sleepwalking into a USE. The headbangers on both sides will be furious. But so what?
@mattholehouse: STORY: ECJ to have role in monitoring citizens' rights for eight years.
Cases brought within eight years. So that means the ECJ could be hearing cases into the 2030s. The key point is that citizens’ rights in the UK will be enshrined in the UK legislation implementing the overall Treaty that is finally agreed, so the only way they can be changed is for the entire Treaty legislation to be repealed. Bottom line: EU citizens in the UK will continue to have more rights in certain areas than UK citizens!
@mattholehouse: STORY: ECJ to have role in monitoring citizens' rights for eight years.
Cases brought within eight years. So that means the ECJ could be hearing cases into the 2030s. The key point is that citizens’ rights in the UK will be enshrined in the UK legislation implementing the overall Treaty that is finally agreed, so the only way they can be changed is for the entire Treaty legislation to be repealed. Bottom line: EU citizens in the UK will continue to have more rights in certain areas than UK citizens!
Complete text:
This Part of the Agreement establishes rights for citizens following on from those established in Union law during the UK’s membership of the European Union; the CJEU is the ultimate arbiter of the interpretation of Union law. In the context of the application or interpretation of those rights, UK courts shall therefore have due regard to relevant decisions of the CJEU after the specified date4. The Agreement should also establish a mechanism enabling UK courts or tribunals to decide, having had due regard to whether relevant case-law exists, to ask the CJEU questions of interpretation of those rights where they consider that a CJEU ruling on the question is necessary for the UK court or tribunal to be able to give judgment in a case before it. This mechanism should be available for UK courts or tribunals for litigation brought within 8 years from the date of application of the citizens' rights Part.
Yep, so a case brought in Year 8 in the UK will go through first instance, appeal and Supreme Court, and can then go to the ECJ. That’s a long process.
Yep, so a case brought in Year 8 in the UK will go through first instance, appeal and Supreme Court, and can then go to the ECJ. That’s a long process.
About two cases a year:
The UK courts have not asked the ECJ for help very often, compared with other member states
Negotiators are still locked in a stalemate over the role of the ECJ in enforcing citizens’ rights after Brexit. One point of clash is what the withdrawal agreement, the future partnership agreement and UK law should say about how the UK courts are to regard post-Brexit ECJ case law. Another is whether the UK Supreme Court should be obliged to refer questions of EU law on citizens’ rights to the ECJ after Brexit, as it is now.
Negotiators on both sides should be aware that the UK courts have not made references to the ECJ particularly often in recent years. The number of references from UK courts is average compared with other member states’. Around two references a year concern citizens’ rights.
So. We have a solution to how we leave the EU, Single Market and Customs Union without the economy ending event of leaving the Single Market and Customs Union.
So we are "leaving". Not formally a member. But maintaining "full alignment with the rules" of the Single Market and Customs Union. Rules like no external trade deals. Rules like free movement.
y Farage led UKIP in their millions
I thought that was pretty much the arrangement you wanted.
We haven't ended free movement.
I agree with you here and your longer post on this issue. My dad is a Leaver and was absolutely desperate for a Hard Brexit/no deal. He voted to leave purely on the immigration issue (like a lot of Leavers, I suspect). He won’t be very happy at all.
Ah well, I’m glad Soft Brexit won out in the end!
I've had a scan over the Daily Blaskshirt comments section. They are furious.
Apparently they were promised that leave means leave. Now that leave means not leave they want a May-shaped head on a spike.
The Tory party will get the blame for this. 12 months of vacuous hot air and red lines not only drawn but Boris flicking v-sign at Europe from behind them. Then in the end we capitulate on everything and the same ministers will now try and tell the voters they are stupid and don't understand.
Marvellous!
‘Daily Blackshirt’ LOL!
Not remotely surprised they are mad, anything which upsets the DM is generally a good thing. The absolute sovereignty which these hardcore Leavers desire is not realistic, it never was, and young people’s futures shouldn’t have to be trashed on and put in the bin so they can carry out their crazed ideological experiment.
Yes, in the long term the immigration issue Leavers will be angry at the Tories, and it’ll be entertaining to see how they deal with those voters. I suspect a few will, as you say march off to UKIP making them semi-relevant again. Farage will suddenly be leader again....
Even if you were right - no-one much will know, because Labour has not been heard in this Brexit process. Mostly because Labour has a leader who talks out of both sides of his mouth on the EU.
Who cares? We’re leaving in name only!
we're heading towards what the UK wanted in 1973 a trading relationship but no integration
given the latest pronouncements of this week re USE thats quite an achievement
We have a line in the sand. We’ll be integrated, but there’ll be no more integration unless we specifically agree. It is undoubtedly a solution most can live with. There’ll be no big, bucanerring FTAs, no major deregulation, no chlorinated chicken (!!); but there’s also no chance of sleepwalking into a USE. The headbangers on both sides will be furious. But so what?
"Fix later" - that no-one will quite find the urgency to fix.
As predicted.
Hmmm - the next sentences look more important.
Any deal on Ireland's border was always going to require a lorry-load of fudge.
Schrodinger's Fudge at that.
If the EU rejects the UK’s solutions, regulatory alignment will apply across the UK. So, either we come up with something the EU approves or we align our regulatory regime in a number of key areas with the EU.
Bye, bye chlorinated chicken!
Pity - chicken needs some help to give some taste...
@mattholehouse: STORY: ECJ to have role in monitoring citizens' rights for eight years.
Cases brought within eight years. So that means the ECJ could be hearing cases into the 2030s. The key point is that citizens’ rights in the UK will be enshrined in the UK legislation implementing the overall Treaty that is finally agreed, so the only way they can be changed is for the entire Treaty legislation to be repealed. Bottom line: EU citizens in the UK will continue to have more rights in certain areas than UK citizens!
@mattholehouse: STORY: ECJ to have role in monitoring citizens' rights for eight years.
Cases brought within eight years. So that means the ECJ could be hearing cases into the 2030s. The key point is that citizens’ rights in the UK will be enshrined in the UK legislation implementing the overall Treaty that is finally agreed, so the only way they can be changed is for the entire Treaty legislation to be repealed. Bottom line: EU citizens in the UK will continue to have more rights in certain areas than UK citizens!
Complete text:
This Part of the Agreement establishes rights for citizens following on from those established in Union law during the UK’s membership of the European Union; the CJEU is the ultimate arbiter of the interpretation of Union law. In the context of the application or interpretation of those rights, UK courts shall therefore have due regard to relevant decisions of the CJEU after the specified date4. The Agreement should also establish a mechanism enabling UK courts or tribunals to decide, having had due regard to whether relevant case-law exists, to ask the CJEU questions of interpretation of those rights where they consider that a CJEU ruling on the question is necessary for the UK court or tribunal to be able to give judgment in a case before it. This mechanism should be available for UK courts or tribunals for litigation brought within 8 years from the date of application of the citizens' rights Part.
UK courts can ask the ECJ for its views (*not on the case but on the interpretation of law*) which the UK court may take into account in making its judgement
UK courts have not made references to the ECJ particularly often in recent years......Around two references a year concern citizens’ rights.
Which rules precisely are these? And of course having no influence over them gives the EU a lot of leeway to keep altering them as we go forward. This is not a position Remain should be crowing very loudly about - it should hope to sneak it under the radar and hope that people forget. If the EU move the goalposts at some stage later, not agreeing a trade deal or trying to use NI alignment to have a swipe at the city (Financial services regulations etc) It's easy to imagine a situation that would turn very ugly indeed, especially if people believe that BRexit has somehow been a con job. even a lot of remain voters will baulk at being conned.
So, was Monday's breakdown real, or all part of an elaborate dance?
I suspect it was real. Quite possibly the UK government didn't (wasn't allowed to?) consult with the DUP enough - but what put the tin lid on it was the leaks to the Irish media - which convinced the DUP they were being steamrollered. Inexperienced Irish PM tried to go over the heads of NI.....
The DUP were in an inherently weak position and have achieved nothing other than some deckchair rearranging and moving political gravity in NI a notch closer to reunification. As always they go short term at their own long term cost.
I suspect they got the fright of their lives as they saw how reaction amongst soft unionist supporters played out. A mate of mine who is a member of an orange order phoned me Monday night to say the idiots have got it wrong again. I think they got a lot of those calls.
So. We have a solution to how we leave the EU, Single Market and Customs Union without the economy ending event of leaving the Single Market and Customs Union.
So we are "leaving". Not formally a member. But maintaining "full alignment with the rules" of the Single Market and Customs Union. Rules like no external trade deals. Rules like free movement.
Once the EUphoria (see what I did there...) dies away, expect a choice of two options. 1. The nutters point to the fact that we aren't leaving anything in practice, have bent over on every red line and have achieved nothing and say "this is bollocks". May can't carry the deal in her own party and is replaced by Moggmentum 2. Everyone rallies round to insist that black really is white and that by not ending free movement we have ended free movement. Until in 2022 the voters turn around and say "this is bollocks" and once again vote for a 3rd time lucky Farage led UKIP in their millions
I thought that was pretty much the arrangement you wanted.
It is. I'm very happy for the country. As someone who negotiates for a living I remain greatly amused by our absolute capitulation on every one of our red lines. But you have to admit it will be fascinating to see the response from the Tories who allegedly were backed up by millions of foaming dog fever Brexiteers. Apparently if we don't end free movement it's betrayal.
We haven't ended free movement.
I agree with you here and your longer post on this issue. My dad is a Leaver and was absolutely desperate for a Hard Brexit/no deal. He voted to leave purely on the immigration issue (like a lot of Leavers, I suspect). He won’t be very happy at all.
Ah well, I’m glad Soft Brexit won out in the end!
I've had a scan over the Daily Blaskshirt comments section. They are furious.
Apparently they were promised that leave means leave. Now that leave means not leave they want a May-shaped head on a spike.
The Tory party will get the blame for this. 12 months of vacuous hot air and red lines not only drawn but Boris flicking v-sign at Europe from behind them. Then in the end we capitulate on everything and the same ministers will now try and tell the voters they are stupid and don't understand.
Marvellous!
I would not take the Daily Mail Comments seriously as a barometer of opinion, they mostly come from Texas or Moscow nowadays.
Even if you were right - no-one much will know, because Labour has not been heard in this Brexit process. Mostly because Labour has a leader who talks out of both sides of his mouth on the EU.
Who cares? We’re leaving in name only!
we're heading towards what the UK wanted in 1973 a trading relationship but no integration
given the latest pronouncements of this week re USE thats quite an achievement
We have a line in the sand. We’ll be integrated, but there’ll be no more integration unless we specifically agree. It is undoubtedly a solution most can live with. There’ll be no big, bucanerring FTAs, no major deregulation, no chlorinated chicken (!!); but there’s also no chance of sleepwalking into a USE. The headbangers on both sides will be furious. But so what?
Even if you were right - no-one much will know, because Labour has not been heard in this Brexit process. Mostly because Labour has a leader who talks out of both sides of his mouth on the EU.
Who cares? We’re leaving in name only!
So no thanks to Labour then....
I reckon most Leavers will be satisfied. They will chunter about the amount we have had to pay to leave - but at least it will be ending. The planes will keep flying, the ports will stay open, people will still move around Europe as they did before. BUT the UK - and the UK alone - can determine who comes to the UK, and on what basis. THAT will be what the majority of leavers - and quite a few Remainers too - will take from Brexit.
That - and comfort in the Little People having been heard, for once. May will generally get credit for implementing that. Those who tried to block Brexit, with their second referendum wankery and the like - not so much.
Even if you were right - no-one much will know, because Labour has not been heard in this Brexit process. Mostly because Labour has a leader who talks out of both sides of his mouth on the EU.
Who cares? We’re leaving in name only!
we're heading towards what the UK wanted in 1973 a trading relationship but no integration
given the latest pronouncements of this week re USE thats quite an achievement
We have a line in the sand. We’ll be integrated, but there’ll be no more integration unless we specifically agree. It is undoubtedly a solution most can live with. There’ll be no big, bucanerring FTAs, no major deregulation, no chlorinated chicken (!!); but there’s also no chance of sleepwalking into a USE. The headbangers on both sides will be furious. But so what?
Can't see anything yet...... Edit : Can't see anything specific yet on preserving FoM, even though we would be subject to all the other rules on the basis of no deal. I wonder how this is intended to work?
@mattholehouse: STORY: ECJ to have role in monitoring citizens' rights for eight years.
Cases brought within eight years. So that means the ECJ could be hearing cases into the 2030s. The key point is that citizens’ rights in the UK will be enshrined in the UK legislation implementing the overall Treaty that is finally agreed, so the only way they can be changed is for the entire Treaty legislation to be repealed. Bottom line: EU citizens in the UK will continue to have more rights in certain areas than UK citizens!
@mattholehouse: STORY: ECJ to have role in monitoring citizens' rights for eight years.
Cases brought within eight years. So that means the ECJ could be hearing cases into the 2030s. The key point is that citizens’ rights in the UK will be enshrined in the UK legislation implementing the overall Treaty that is finally agreed, so the only way they can be changed is for the entire Treaty legislation to be repealed. Bottom line: EU citizens in the UK will continue to have more rights in certain areas than UK citizens!
Complete text:
This Part of the Agreement establishes rights for citizens following on from those established in Union law during the UK’s membership of the European Union; the CJEU is the ultimate arbiter of the interpretation of Union law. In the context of the application or interpretation of those rights, UK courts shall therefore have due regard to relevant decisions of the CJEU after the specified date4. The Agreement should also establish a mechanism enabling UK courts or tribunals to decide, having had due regard to whether relevant case-law exists, to ask the CJEU questions of interpretation of those rights where they consider that a CJEU ruling on the question is necessary for the UK court or tribunal to be able to give judgment in a case before it. This mechanism should be available for UK courts or tribunals for litigation brought within 8 years from the date of application of the citizens' rights Part.
Yep, so a case brought in Year 8 in the UK will go through first instance, appeal and Supreme Court, and can then go to the ECJ. That’s a long process.
Where do Labour go from here? Party of full Remain?
Lol.
Might even lead to defections of MPs, and would probably mean 5 Southern seats are gained at the expense of 45 midland/northern seats.
. It isn’t Labour who will have to deal with a potential backlash from their (mostly Remain voters). The Tories however have many Leaver ‘immigration is the worst thing to happen ever’ voters who won’t be happy that free movement isn’t ending. Tories are in some ways in the worst of both worlds - the party of Brexit which will put off the socially liberal voters, but not the party of Hard Brexit (which will anger socially conservative hardcore Leavers).
That we know of - criminal checks - one of their 'red lines' (Verhofstadt) Suspect - minimum income thresholds for new arrivals after Brexit day Money - who knows? Its more than €20, less than €100.....
The UK is leaving. They have lost a giant economic unit. They have lost their second biggest contributor. They have been unable to stop their USE project from going backwards.
Time's arrow can be reversed. That is a massive compromise on the inevitability of their ambition.
That we know of - criminal checks - one of their 'red lines' (Verhofstadt) Suspect - minimum income thresholds for new arrivals after Brexit day Money - who knows? Its more than €20, less than €100.....
Even if you were right - no-one much will know, because Labour has not been heard in this Brexit process. Mostly because Labour has a leader who talks out of both sides of his mouth on the EU.
Who cares? We’re leaving in name only!
we're heading towards what the UK wanted in 1973 a trading relationship but no integration
given the latest pronouncements of this week re USE thats quite an achievement
We have a line in the sand. We’ll be integrated, but there’ll be no more integration unless we specifically agree. It is undoubtedly a solution most can live with. There’ll be no big, bucanerring FTAs, no major deregulation, no chlorinated chicken (!!); but there’s also no chance of sleepwalking into a USE. The headbangers on both sides will be furious. But so what?
Can't see anything yet...... Edit : Can't see anything specific yet on preserving FoM, even though we would be subject to all the other rules on the basis of no deal. I wonder how this is intended to work?
This is the agreement to get us to Phase Two. That’s when we start talking about things like FoM. The EU27 have what they want. The UK government now has to decide what it wants - within the context of this Agreement and the EU’s wider parameters.
Where do Labour go from here? Party of full Remain?
Lol.
Might even lead to defections of MPs, and would probably mean 5 Southern seats are gained at the expense of 45 midland/northern seats.
. It isn’t Labour who will have to deal with a potential backlash from their (mostly Remain voters). The Tories however have many Leaver ‘immigration is the worst thing to happen ever’ voters who won’t be happy that free movement isn’t ending. Tories are in some ways in the worst of both worlds - the party of Brexit which will put off the socially liberal voters, but not the party of Hard Brexit (which will anger socially conservative hardcore Leavers).
Where do Labour go from here? Party of full Remain?
Lol.
Might even lead to defections of MPs, and would probably mean 5 Southern seats are gained at the expense of 45 midland/northern seats.
. It isn’t Labour who will have to deal with a potential backlash from their (mostly Remain voters). The Tories however have many Leaver ‘immigration is the worst thing to happen ever’ voters who won’t be happy that free movement isn’t ending. Tories are in some ways in the worst of both worlds - the party of Brexit which will put off the socially liberal voters, but not the party of Hard Brexit (which will anger socially conservative hardcore Leavers).
I think freedom of movement still has to be decided upon.
Where do Labour go from here? Party of full Remain?
Lol.
Might even lead to defections of MPs, and would probably mean 5 Southern seats are gained at the expense of 45 midland/northern seats.
. It isn’t Labour who will have to deal with a potential backlash from their (mostly Remain voters). The Tories however have many Leaver ‘immigration is the worst thing to happen ever’ voters who won’t be happy that free movement isn’t ending. Tories are in some ways in the worst of both worlds - the party of Brexit which will put off the socially liberal voters, but not the party of Hard Brexit (which will anger socially conservative hardcore Leavers).
I'd stick to chatting about the soft left which you do know something about.
So from the reaction so far, the middle 80% of Brexit opinion are satisfied with the headlines of the deal. Nigel Farage and the WilliamGlenn tendency are dissatisfied. Well done Mrs May.
Can't see anything yet...... Edit : Can't see anything specific yet on preserving FoM, even though we would be subject to all the other rules on the basis of no deal. I wonder how this is intended to work?
This is the agreement to get us to Phase Two. That’s when we start talking about things like FoM. The EU27 have what they want. The UK government now has to decide what it wants - within the context of this Agreement and the EU’s wider parameters.
That’s pretty well what Tusk says, according to the Guardian. However, he gors on to say 'We need more clarity on how the UK sees our future relations, after it has left the Single Market and Customs Union.’ Presumably after 2019.
"The United Kingdom remains committed to protecting North-South cooperation and to its guarantee of avoiding a hard border. Any future arrangements must be compatible with these overarching requirements. The United Kingdom's intention is to achieve these objectives through the overall EU-UK relationship. Should this not be possible, the United Kingdom will propose specific solutions to address the unique circumstances of the island of Ireland. In the absence of agreed solutions, the United Kingdom will maintain full alignment with those rules of the Internal Market and the Customs Union which, now or in the future, support North-South cooperation, the allisland economy and the protection of the 1998 Agreement."
Could be seen as a bit kicking the can down the road to be honest.
Where do Labour go from here? Party of full Remain?
Lol.
Might even lead to defections of MPs, and would probably mean 5 Southern seats are gained at the expense of 45 midland/northern seats.
. It isn’t Labour who will have to deal with a potential backlash from their (mostly Remain voters). The Tories however have many Leaver ‘immigration is the worst thing to happen ever’ voters who won’t be happy that free movement isn’t ending. Tories are in some ways in the worst of both worlds - the party of Brexit which will put off the socially liberal voters, but not the party of Hard Brexit (which will anger socially conservative hardcore Leavers).
I think freedom of movement still has to be decided upon.
There will be no right to freedom of movement. Because we won't be subject to the treaties of EU membership.
There will be, therefore, by implication, British control over British immigration policy.
Where do Labour go from here? Party of full Remain?
Lol.
Might even lead to defections of MPs, and would probably mean 5 Southern seats are gained at the expense of 45 midland/northern seats.
. It isn’t Labour who will have to deal with a potential backlash from their (mostly Remain voters). The Tories however have many Leaver ‘immigration is the worst thing to happen ever’ voters who won’t be happy that free movement isn’t ending. Tories are in some ways in the worst of both worlds - the party of Brexit which will put off the socially liberal voters, but not the party of Hard Brexit (which will anger socially conservative hardcore Leavers).
I think freedom of movement still has to be decided upon.
For just one day on here can all the armchair negotiators and would-be Kissingers give it a rest.As Margaret Thatcher once put it: "Rejoice, rejoice".I shall rejoice that the only serious political party in the UK the Conservative and Unionist party is dealing with this process. A period of silence would now be most welcome from some of the hysterics on here. You know who you are.
Where do Labour go from here? Party of full Remain?
Lol.
Might even lead to defections of MPs, and would probably mean 5 Southern seats are gained at the expense of 45 midland/northern seats.
. It isn’t Labour who will have to deal with a potential backlash from their (mostly Remain voters). The Tories however have many Leaver ‘immigration is the worst thing to happen ever’ voters who won’t be happy that free movement isn’t ending. Tories are in some ways in the worst of both worlds - the party of Brexit which will put off the socially liberal voters, but not the party of Hard Brexit (which will anger socially conservative hardcore Leavers).
You really don't understand those that voted for Brexit. Just escaping the EU's orbit is the victory.
There really is nothing to be gained from opening up that victory to minor degrees of improvement. A huge portion of the Conservative Party - and its voters - will just think "Job done. Move on to making Brexit Britain the best it can be." Anyone that still wants more could conceivably go to UKIP. But they won't. I suspect that UKIP is dead in the water now. There simply is no "big ticket item" left for it to secure. We are an independent United Kingdom.
Even if you were right - no-one much will know, because Labour has not been heard in this Brexit process. Mostly because Labour has a leader who talks out of both sides of his mouth on the EU.
Who cares? We’re leaving in name only!
So no thanks to Labour then....
I reckon most Leavers will be satisfied. They will chunter about the amount we have had to pay to leave - but at least it will be ending. The planes will keep flying, the ports will stay open, people will still move around Europe as they did before. BUT the UK - and the UK alone - can determine who comes to the UK, and on what basis. THAT will be what the majority of leavers - and quite a few Remainers too - will take from Brexit.
That - and comfort in the Little People having been heard, for once. May will generally get credit for implementing that. Those who tried to block Brexit, with their second referendum wankery and the like - not so much.
I'm not sure, the opposition to migration is far too intertwined with other issues that Brexit could possibly make worse - access to housing, the state of the NHS, the availability of worthwhile, fairly paid jobs, and so on.
It's a classic postmodern problem in the pejorative sense, a problem without a clear link to its referent. If 'there are too many migrants!' is in part fuelled by these other concerns, then no amount of reduction in the numbers of migrants will remove that discontent, because no amount of reduction in the numbers of migrants will solve the issues which fuel it.
Where do Labour go from here? Party of full Remain?
Lol.
Might even lead to defections of MPs, and would probably mean 5 Southern seats are gained at the expense of 45 midland/northern seats.
. It isn’t Labour who will have to deal with a potential backlash from their (mostly Remain voters). The Tories however have many Leaver ‘immigration is the worst thing to happen ever’ voters who won’t be happy that free movement isn’t ending. Tories are in some ways in the worst of both worlds - the party of Brexit which will put off the socially liberal voters, but not the party of Hard Brexit (which will anger socially conservative hardcore Leavers).
I am interpreting this as saying basically that the DUP will have final say on whether we have full alignment or not across the whole UK, if some kind of FTA/customs agreement is not done.
It reads to me as if the DUP have been given a veto on the way forward in the longer run.
That and the firm, warm words on border was probably enough.
"The United Kingdom remains committed to protecting North-South cooperation and to its guarantee of avoiding a hard border. Any future arrangements must be compatible with these overarching requirements. The United Kingdom's intention is to achieve these objectives through the overall EU-UK relationship. Should this not be possible, the United Kingdom will propose specific solutions to address the unique circumstances of the island of Ireland. In the absence of agreed solutions, the United Kingdom will maintain full alignment with those rules of the Internal Market and the Customs Union which, now or in the future, support North-South cooperation, the allisland economy and the protection of the 1998 Agreement."
Could be seen as a bit kicking the can down the road to be honest.
Not really. The final sentence is the agreed line in the sand. The UK either comes up with acceptable solutions or there is regulatory alignment.
Comments
It is good that HMG has finally come to understand that any deal is better than no deal, and the prospect of a cliff edge departure is receding. It does however weaken the case for the EU agreeing to suspend the whole process, since they now have less to gain by the UK remaining.
Anyone know what this extract actually means? - "A principle of evidential flexibility will apply, enabling competent authorities to exercise discretion in favour of he applicant where appropriate."
No deal is off the table.
The rabid wing of the Tory party are seemingly on board the good ship soft Brexit.
Farage is a marginal figure, yesterday's man.
However, let's not get too excited. All we've agreed is the conditions upon which we can leave, and frankly it's all on the EU's terms.
Clearer than ever that the last 12 months have really been about the Tory party negotiating within itself.
I cannot vote Tory until they start listening, which clearly no one is.
https://ianjamesparsley.wordpress.com/2017/12/08/why-taoiseach-but-not-bundeskanzler/
I'd have said the last 12 months have been about the british establishment refusing to try and understand why they lost
that still remains the toxic legacy of the vote
And having fanned the flames that we HAVE to stop free movement as that's what people supposedly voted for or it's a BETRAYAL how will she now sell not ending free movement to those people?
Ah well, I’m glad Soft Brexit won out in the end!
https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/939041567272206337
May supporters today: I have always been in favour of Soft Brexit.
https://twitter.com/mrjamesob/status/939041697786363904
Apparently they were promised that leave means leave. Now that leave means not leave they want a May-shaped head on a spike.
The Tory party will get the blame for this. 12 months of vacuous hot air and red lines not only drawn but Boris flicking v-sign at Europe from behind them. Then in the end we capitulate on everything and the same ministers will now try and tell the voters they are stupid and don't understand.
Marvellous!
https://twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/939033370834583553
given the latest pronouncements of this week re USE thats quite an achievement
https://twitter.com/leaveeuofficial/status/939027453191655424
https://twitter.com/eastantrimmp/status/939034646972477440
Mr. Observer, if we are leaving in name only, I fear the current divisions will only worsen.
Anyway, today I've got a short walk (nothing like a Jessopian sojourn) but it's typical that the only time this winter I've got one (without the hound) there's ice on the driveway and road, and it's about as warm and fuzzy as sharing a coffin with a frost giant.
Lol.
Might even lead to defections of MPs, and would probably mean 5 Southern seats are gained at the expense of 45 midland/northern seats.
EU citizens have no right of appeal to ECJ. ECJ decisions shall be given the weight of precedent in interpretation of citizens rights. If there is a question of the interpretation of EU law, UK courts can ask the ECJ for its views (*not on the case but on the interpretation of law*) which the UK court may take into account in making its judgement
Sounds to me that May has thrown down the gauntlet to Boris and co. Back me on alignment or walk...
Not remotely surprised they are mad, anything which upsets the DM is generally a good thing. The absolute sovereignty which these hardcore Leavers desire is not realistic, it never was, and young people’s futures shouldn’t have to be trashed on and put in the bin so they can carry out their crazed ideological experiment.
Yes, in the long term the immigration issue Leavers will be angry at the Tories, and it’ll be entertaining to see how they deal with those voters. I suspect a few will, as you say march off to UKIP making them semi-relevant again. Farage will suddenly be leader again....
I think it was a show
https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/sites/default/files/publications/IfG_Brexit_ECJ_v10FINAL web.pdf
If the EU move the goalposts at some stage later, not agreeing a trade deal or trying to use NI alignment to have a swipe at the city (Financial services regulations etc) It's easy to imagine a situation that would turn very ugly indeed, especially if people believe that BRexit has somehow been a con job. even a lot of remain voters will baulk at being conned.
I suspect they got the fright of their lives as they saw how reaction amongst soft unionist supporters played out. A mate of mine who is a member of an orange order phoned me Monday night to say the idiots have got it wrong again. I think they got a lot of those calls.
https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/939045649621901312
I reckon most Leavers will be satisfied. They will chunter about the amount we have had to pay to leave - but at least it will be ending. The planes will keep flying, the ports will stay open, people will still move around Europe as they did before. BUT the UK - and the UK alone - can determine who comes to the UK, and on what basis. THAT will be what the majority of leavers - and quite a few Remainers too - will take from Brexit.
That - and comfort in the Little People having been heard, for once. May will generally get credit for implementing that. Those who tried to block Brexit, with their second referendum wankery and the like - not so much.
https://twitter.com/davidallengreen/status/939045597289635840
Edit : Can't see anything specific yet on preserving FoM, even though we would be subject to all the other rules on the basis of no deal. I wonder how this is intended to work?
https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/939045767230230528
Anyway, that's not what the Queen said when I saw her Tuesday morning.
It isn’t Labour who will have to deal with a potential backlash from their (mostly Remain voters). The Tories however have many Leaver ‘immigration is the worst thing to happen ever’ voters who won’t be happy that free movement isn’t ending. Tories are in some ways in the worst of both worlds - the party of Brexit which will put off the socially liberal voters, but not the party of Hard Brexit (which will anger socially conservative hardcore Leavers).
Suspect - minimum income thresholds for new arrivals after Brexit day
Money - who knows? Its more than €20, less than €100.....
Time's arrow can be reversed. That is a massive compromise on the inevitability of their ambition.
https://twitter.com/NicolaSturgeon/status/939043713917030401
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/joint-report-on-progress-during-phase-1-of-negotiations-under-article-50-teu-on-the-uks-orderly-withdrawal-from-the-eu
Presumably after 2019.
"The United Kingdom remains committed to protecting North-South cooperation and to
its guarantee of avoiding a hard border. Any future arrangements must be compatible
with these overarching requirements. The United Kingdom's intention is to achieve
these objectives through the overall EU-UK relationship. Should this not be possible,
the United Kingdom will propose specific solutions to address the unique
circumstances of the island of Ireland. In the absence of agreed solutions, the United
Kingdom will maintain full alignment with those rules of the Internal Market and the
Customs Union which, now or in the future, support North-South cooperation, the allisland
economy and the protection of the 1998 Agreement."
Could be seen as a bit kicking the can down the road to be honest.
There will be, therefore, by implication, British control over British immigration policy.
There really is nothing to be gained from opening up that victory to minor degrees of improvement. A huge portion of the Conservative Party - and its voters - will just think "Job done. Move on to making Brexit Britain the best it can be." Anyone that still wants more could conceivably go to UKIP. But they won't. I suspect that UKIP is dead in the water now. There simply is no "big ticket item" left for it to secure. We are an independent United Kingdom.
It's a classic postmodern problem in the pejorative sense, a problem without a clear link to its referent. If 'there are too many migrants!' is in part fuelled by these other concerns, then no amount of reduction in the numbers of migrants will remove that discontent, because no amount of reduction in the numbers of migrants will solve the issues which fuel it.
It reads to me as if the DUP have been given a veto on the way forward in the longer run.
That and the firm, warm words on border was probably enough.
https://twitter.com/davidallengreen/status/939049529567047682