Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Lessons from Labour’s conference for the Conservatives
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Lessons from Labour’s conference for the Conservatives
Labour have, on balance, had a good conference, which should of course worry Conservatives like myself. Their leadership is now in full ascendancy – indeed many of the Corbynsceptic PLP stayed away.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/emperor-may-has-no-clothes-it-s-time-to-stop-fooling-us-all-on-brexit-a3948351.html
I think it's simply a nonsense to suggest we could - by our own volition alone - remain a party to the EEA agreement, were we not an EU member.
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2018/sep/28/academics-uk-universities-accused-bullying-students-colleagues
@EuropeElects
5m5 minutes ago
UK, ComRes poll:
LAB-S&D: 40% (-1)
CON-ECR: 39% (-2)
LDEM-ALDE: 9% (+2)
UKIP-EFDD: 5% (+2)
SNP-G/EFA: 3%
GREENS-G/EFA: 2% (-1)
Field work: 26/09/18 – 27/09/18
Sample size: 2,036"
Plenty of time to sort out the border !!!!
Ok, the dispute resolution provisions are going to be problematic, and only decided by a judge should it come to it. It's a big step, however, to suggest that that would somehow invalidate the treaty.
Is that important news - not good on US politics
Imagine the appointment of the latest Judge to the UK Supreme Court getting a mention on US news let alone leading it
Indeed I am astounded at the lack of any compasion in your matter of fact statement.
I watched the hearing over the last two days as the US descended into the sewer
It is tearing the US apart and of course it is receiving huge coverage in the UK
In the short term it also avoids No Deal and in the longer term still allows for the possibility of negotiating a Canada FTA which will take time to formulate
"Yesterday was a spectacle I hope we do not have to experience again. We watched two human beings, Christine Blasey Ford and Brett Kavanaugh, exposed in the rawest possible fashion to the entire world, over the gravest of accusations, with no definitive evidence apart from personal testimony to draw on, 36 years after an alleged crime took place. It was a grotesque political drama, in which everyone lost."
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/09/kavanaugh-ford-hearings-everyone-lost-andrew-sullivan.html
Does your total include the Tory MPs like Wollaton, Allen and Soubry similarly threatened by elements within the party?
What's more, I very much doubt that they'd consent if it were seen as a temporary arrangement for our convenience.
Matches in London, Glasgow, Cardiff, Befast and Dublin. What is not to like
Treaty is here http://www.efta.int/media/documents/legal-texts/eea/the-eea-agreement/Final Act/FinalAct.pdf ...(sorry, my hyperlinking doesn't seem to work - Robert linked to this on the previous thread)
https://esharp.eu/debates/the-uk-and-europe/why-the-uk-will-not-become-an-eea-member-after-brexit
Are you annoyed it took away from Boris
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/07/15/iceland-opens-door-uk-join-efta/
It'd be a sad and insular day if British news decided to only report that which happened in Britain.
https://www.newsweek.com/half-americans-cant-name-supreme-court-justice-poll-finds-1093404
I am not into US politics but my wife and I have watched the hearing in increasing dismay asking what on earth has happened to America
You can say the same about the average Brit could not name their own MP. Doesn't mean they don't vote or pay interest to the news.
Alternatively you can see what the average Brit is reading and watching when they get to choose. #1 most read story on the BBC right now is "Brett Kavanaugh: Trump backs FBI check on top court nominee" with earlier today's article of "Brett Kavanaugh: Senate committee advances nomination amid turmoil" still there at number 9.
Second most watched right now on BBC is "Sexual assualt survivor corners senator in lift".
This is interesting. Those who aren't interested in news won't be watching the news.
I believe in common compassion and you sound like the hardest of those republicans sadly that have created so much fury
Given the Kavanaugh story is all over the BBC news there is little alternative to it but in practical terms even the appointment of a new ECJ Justice or EFTA Court Justice or ECHR Justice would be of more relevance to us than who the next US SC Justice is and how much coverage is given to that? Indeed when has the appointment of a UK SC Justice or formerly the Law Lords ever led our news? So why on earth should the appointment of a US SC Justice lead our news?
Contrary to what is sometimes said, the UK could not « remain » a member State of the EEA after Brexit, because it will automatically[2] cease to be an EEA member when leaving the EU.
Article 126(1) EEA[3] states that « The Agreement shall apply to the territories which the Treaty establishing the EEC (today the EU) is applied (…) and to the territories of Iceland, the Principality of Liechtenstein and the Kingdom of Norway ». These three States are members of EFTA and, in accordance with articles 108(1) and (2) of the EEA Agreement, have established the EFTA Surveillance Authority and the EFTA Court (« Agreement between the EFTA States on the establishment of a Surveillance Authority and a Court of Justice », below « EFTA Agreement »). Both these institutions are only competent for these three States. Their role is to ensure the fulfillment by the EEA EFTA States of their obligations under the EEA Agreement. They are not competent for Switzerland, despite this country being a member of EFTA.
Neither the EU, nor its current 28 member States, are members of EFTA. After Brexit, the UK, not being a member of EFTA, and not anymore an EU member, could not be an EEA member and could not be a candidate to become one.
Procedurally, in order to become a member of the EEA after « the (EU) Treaties shall cease to apply » to it (art 50(3) TEU), the UK would first have to present its candidacy and negotiate and conclude an accession agreement to become an EFTA member (art 56(1) of the Convention establishing the EFTA). This is because the EEA cannot apply to non EU member States, with the exception of Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway, precisely because they are members of EFTA (art 126(1) EEA). Thus, the UK will have to negotiate an accession treaty to EFTA with the four members of this organisation: Switzerland and the three EEA EFTA members.
Once becoming an EFTA member, the UK will then have to negotiate an EEA accession treaty with the 31 entities which are members of the EEA: the EU, its 27 member States and the three EEA EFTA members. The Parties could agree to proceed to both negotiations at the same time.
As for a revamped EEA seen as « an interim step » of a few years for the UK before becoming a third State vis-à-vis the EU, it would politically be even less realistic. Why would EEA members take the risk to open a difficult negotiation with the EU which could lead them to lose their current advantages?
But the author is only the former Legal Counsel of the European Council, so what does he know?
EEA/EFTA, as you say, requires an extensive negotiation. No more than Canada, no more than Chequers. Arguably less than either: it's a fairly off-the-shelf model, and approving it wouldn't require the EU to break precedent. If we have the single market of Norway and the customs union of Turkey, no-one can particularly claim we got a special deal.
I don't think it'll happen, because I have very, very low faith in our current crop of politicians. But technically it's no more difficult than any other alternative currently on the table. The obstacles for EEA/EFTA are domestic-political, not technical.
Longer term as I said Canada may be an option but EEA makes sense for now (plus of course we could have imposed transition controls on FOM from the new accession nations in 2004 even within the EU but Blair refused to do so until 2007 and you can deport those without jobs after 3 months within the EEA)
US SC Justices are, of course, vastly more powerful in their country than ours are here, but normally an appointment, though notable, wouldn’t lead the news. If you haven’t twigged why this one is a little different, you are surprisingly incurious about what goes on in the rest of the world.
Perhaps you should take it as a learning experience ... ?
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/09/brett-kavanaugh-discovers-unfairness-world/571612/
After the hearing, I spoke with a male friend who told me that he was glad he had watched it with his female co-workers. “Almost all of them had a story like hers,” he said. “I never understood that.”