brexit

314

Brexit

E.Mail link above

0n 25th November 2018 all 27 EU states have accepted the withdrawal agreement and political declaration.

Rees Mogg has posted objections, most of which relate to the "backstop" which it is the intention of all negotiators to AVOID. So, to put it bluntly, why the hell were they still arguing about it!

BREXIT is done, but that hasn't stopped some total EU stupidity, like confiscating cheese and ham sandwiches and possibly banning sausages from the UK because of supposed "different standards" here, when exactly nothing here has changed!

EU DAFT DEMANDS.

The EU are being unrealistic. We have LEFT the EU. There is no reason on earth why we should adhere to ANY of their rules as we are now a totally separate country. Can they not get this through their thick skulls? They cannot foist their terms and conditions on non member countries! It may be reasonable for the UK to still follow (and probably decide to exceed) some existing standards, but NOT to accept ANY they choose to change for whatever reason. That is simply crazy.

Blocker bully Barnier strikes again.

He doesn't negotiate, he just blusters and bullies. The EU should not control our fish or how we support firms.

He should GO.

Why the UK has introduced the internal uk market bill.

FOOD FIGHT Brussels threatened to block British food exports to Northern Ireland in Brexit power play.

Veiled threats from Michel Barnier’s team are the reason for the UK move.

NB it could only come into force in the event of no trade deal being reached.

But The Sun has learnt that London's attempt to “clarify” parts of the 2019 exit treaty came after what they saw as veiled threats from Michel Barnier’s team that the EU could exploit parts of the Withdrawal Agreement if the UK did not bow to their trade deal demands.

Under the terms of the deal export of "products of animal origin" such as meat, fish, shellfish, eggs and dairy from the UK mainland over to Northern Ireland will become subject to EU oversight.

The EU has a “Third Country” list of approved third parties that can legally import agricultural goods into areas subject to their rules.

The UK being put on that approved list was assumed to be a given and not subject to negotiation, but Brits were left seething after Michel Barnier’s team hinted the UK may not be given that legal status if talks collapse.

In a No Deal scenario it left open the chance that the EU could declare food exports from Great Britain to Northern Ireland illegal.

The perceived threat prompted ministers to demand a “safety net” to address the problem with new domestic legislation.

Boris won. Time to stop the chanting and banner waving.

Blair is to blame for brexit negotiation difficulties.

The "meaningful vote". Lost by 202 to 432 tonight. This is not a good position, resulting from over egging of the so called "backstop". Both parties have NO intention of invoking the "backstop", Yet MP after MP rabbited on about being "trapped in the backstop". Talk about groundog day! The backstop is a bad position for both sides. Where we go from here is anyone's guess!

Corbyn has finally tabelled a "No Confidence" motion, praised by the anti brexit SNP who also misrepresent much of the deal and backstop. That will take up all of tomorrow - I'm assuming PMQ's will be shelved? Corbyn hasn't suggested anything the EU would be likely to consider. The term "cherry picking" comes to mind.

BBC report.

But business groups said their members' patience was wearing thin.

"There are no more words to describe the frustration, impatience, and growing anger amongst business after two and a half years on a high-stakes political rollercoaster ride that shows no sign of stopping," said Adam Marshall, director general of the British Chambers of Commerce.

He implored MPs to come to an agreement, and was joined in this plea by business groups including the Federation of Small Businesses, the Institute of Directors and the Confederation of British Industry.

Daily Mail Report.

Follow the other linked comments on that page.

YouTube rant against the deal.

This contains a good deal of inaccurate assertions, notably by Rees Mogg. The narrator is, however 100% correct about Comrade Corbyn.

More bluster from Labour.

The road to power is a "people's vote". Come on, Labour – let's take it.

We already had a referendum. That IS a "people's vote". Labour have just invented a trendy new term to sow doubts in the public mind and cause confusion.

Tusk has said we are also withdrawing from the European Atomic Energy Community. Why is that? This has hardly had a mention, but it involves the ECJ in its rules etc. Tusk's statement confirms that we are withdrawing from ECJ jurisdiction unless the "backstop" is triggered..

See here.

Belt up Donald!

US President Donald Trump told reporters on Sunday the withdrawal agreement "sounds like a great deal for the EU" and meant the UK might not be able to trade with the US.

In reality, any bilateral agreement between the UK and the US is likely to take years to negotiate given its complexity, differing standards in areas such as agriculture, and the fact it would require ratification by the US Congress.

Re debate today 11th December.

And before the emergency debate we will get an urgent question on whether or not the government has to make a statement to MPs by 21 January if no Brexit deal has been agreed.

In the Commons yesterday (10th) Theresa May implied this deadline still stood. But House of Commons officials have said that, because the government has agreed a deal (even though it has not passed the Commons), that deadline no longer stands.

Hopefully the UQ should clear the matter up.

This may sound like a procedural yawnathon, but in fact it is quite important, because if the Commons officials are right, and May does not have to hold her vote until 28 March, then the “Grieve amendment”, which would enable MPs to vote for a “plan B” (and arguably take control of the whole process), might turn out to be of no or little value.

THIS is what the impasse in Parliament is about. There is hardly any mention of the actual deal itself, other than by Corbyn who is looking for political opportunism and has only suggested "options" which don't satisfy Brexit at all!

Here is the full quote from what Lord Callanan, the Brexit ministers, said as he arrived at the EU general affairs council meeting this morning. Asked what exactly Theresa May was requesting from EU leaders, in terms of changes to the Brexit deal, Callanan replied:

She wants additional, legal reassurances that the UK cannot be permanently trapped in the Irish backstop. That’s been the issue all along and that’s the issue at the heart of the concerns expressed by many members of parliament ... It is very important that these have to be additional, legally binding reassurances.

Below are the comments Mrs May made in Brussels on Nov 25th.

Mrs May said she will back her deal ”with all my heart" but acknowledged it was now out of her hands.

She said: "I will take this deal back to the House of Commons, confident we have achieved the best deal available and full of optimism about the future of our country.

"In Parliament and beyond it, I will make the case for this deal with all my heart and I look forward to that campaign."

If the deal was rejected by MP’s Mrs May ruled out a second referendum and refused to comment on her position.

She added: “I believe there should not be that second referendum, we gave the choice to the British people, they voted, they voted to leave the EU, I think we should now deliver on that."

Earlier Jean-Claude Juncker warned those who opposed the deal would be “disappointed within seconds” and this was the “only deal” on the table.

The President of the European Commission said: “This is the best deal possible for Britain, this is the best deal possible for Europe.
"This is the only deal possible."

Corbyn, Rees Mogg (Captain Mainwaring) etc should take note of the last two comments!

Jeremy Corbyn has confirmed Labour will reject Theresa May’s Brexit deal when MP’s vote in parliament - in a snub to European Union officials. The Labour leader called the Prime Minister’s deal the ‘worst of all worlds’ after the EU endorsed the withdrawal agreement and political declaration on the future relationship between the UK and EU.

Labour has said the deal fails to meet the party’s six tests and will work with others to ensure the deal is blocked in the House of Commons.

Mr Corbyn added: "We will work with others to block a no-deal outcome, and ensure that Labour's alternative plan for a sensible deal to bring the country together is on the table.

"That includes a permanent customs union with a UK say, a strong single-market deal and guarantees on workers' rights, consumer and environmental protections."

Starmer, the shadow Brexit secretary, will later today lay out Labour’s six tests for any deal – saying that it the new relationship between Britain and the EU must be based upon “partnership” and begin with a comprehensive trade agreement as well as continued cooperation on science, security, research and technology.

Starmer’s six tests for the Brexit deal are:

Comment.

1. Does it ensure a strong and collaborative future relationship with the EU?

Yes.

2. Does it deliver the “exact same benefits” as we currently have as members of the Single Market and Customs Union?

To expect it to do this exactly is mission impossible. The EU has tied "Customs Union" to "Free movement. This is not acceptable.

3. Does it ensure the fair management of migration in the interests of the economy and communities?

Yes. New criteria are to be put in place, including a visa system, as yet unclarified.

4. Does it defend rights and protections and prevent a race to the bottom?

Yes. Rights and protections are not under threat.

5. Does it protect national security and our capacity to tackle cross-border crime?

Yes.

6. Does it deliver for all regions and nations of the UK?

Yes. There is no intention to trigger the "backstop"

Labour has not produced a stable alternative position in all the time negotiations have been in progress. To hold with Customs Union and Single market with attatched EU extras will not float as "brexit"

This Page created November 25th. 2018 Most recent edit 12th January 2021

Blocker bully Barnier strikes again. He doesn't negotiate, he just blusters and bullies. The EU should not control our fish or how we support firms. He should GO.
Why the UK has introduced the internal uk market bill.	FOOD FIGHT Brussels threatened to block British food exports to Northern Ireland in Brexit power play.
Veiled threats from Michel Barnier’s team are the reason for the UK move. NB it could only come into force in the event of no trade deal being reached.	But The Sun has learnt that London's attempt to “clarify” parts of the 2019 exit treaty came after what they saw as veiled threats from Michel Barnier’s team that the EU could exploit parts of the Withdrawal Agreement if the UK did not bow to their trade deal demands. Under the terms of the deal export of "products of animal origin" such as meat, fish, shellfish, eggs and dairy from the UK mainland over to Northern Ireland will become subject to EU oversight. The EU has a “Third Country” list of approved third parties that can legally import agricultural goods into areas subject to their rules. The UK being put on that approved list was assumed to be a given and not subject to negotiation, but Brits were left seething after Michel Barnier’s team hinted the UK may not be given that legal status if talks collapse. In a No Deal scenario it left open the chance that the EU could declare food exports from Great Britain to Northern Ireland illegal.
The perceived threat prompted ministers to demand a “safety net” to address the problem with new domestic legislation.

Belt up Donald!
US President Donald Trump told reporters on Sunday the withdrawal agreement "sounds like a great deal for the EU" and meant the UK might not be able to trade with the US.
In reality, any bilateral agreement between the UK and the US is likely to take years to negotiate given its complexity, differing standards in areas such as agriculture, and the fact it would require ratification by the US Congress.

THIS is what the impasse in Parliament is about. There is hardly any mention of the actual deal itself, other than by Corbyn who is looking for political opportunism and has only suggested "options" which don't satisfy Brexit at all!
Here is the full quote from what Lord Callanan, the Brexit ministers, said as he arrived at the EU general affairs council meeting this morning. Asked what exactly Theresa May was requesting from EU leaders, in terms of changes to the Brexit deal, Callanan replied:
She wants additional, legal reassurances that the UK cannot be permanently trapped in the Irish backstop. That’s been the issue all along and that’s the issue at the heart of the concerns expressed by many members of parliament ... It is very important that these have to be additional, legally binding reassurances.
Below are the comments Mrs May made in Brussels on Nov 25th.

Starmer’s six tests for the Brexit deal are:	Comment.
1. Does it ensure a strong and collaborative future relationship with the EU?	Yes.
2. Does it deliver the “exact same benefits” as we currently have as members of the Single Market and Customs Union?	To expect it to do this exactly is mission impossible. The EU has tied "Customs Union" to "Free movement. This is not acceptable.
3. Does it ensure the fair management of migration in the interests of the economy and communities?	Yes. New criteria are to be put in place, including a visa system, as yet unclarified.
4. Does it defend rights and protections and prevent a race to the bottom?	Yes. Rights and protections are not under threat.
5. Does it protect national security and our capacity to tackle cross-border crime?	Yes.
6. Does it deliver for all regions and nations of the UK?	Yes. There is no intention to trigger the "backstop"