BREXIT - Is This Really Still Rumbling On? 😴

TheBigBean

Rick Chasey wrote:

BB: explain how "Regulation without representation and an overall change in status of NI without a referendum probably are [against the GFA}", because I don't really follow.

Have you read it? Or Trimble's view on it?

cycleclinic

Gibraltar like all overseas territories are routinely ignored by the u.k. to stop ignoring them they would have to become part of the u.k and then they would still be ignored in the current system.

cycleclinic

TheBigBean wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

BB: explain how "Regulation without representation and an overall change in status of NI without a referendum probably are [against the GFA}", because I don't really follow.

Have you read it? Or Trimble's view on it?

Then please explain rather than restate your statement.

tailwindhome

TheBigBean wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

BB: explain how "Regulation without representation and an overall change in status of NI without a referendum probably are [against the GFA}", because I don't really follow.

Have you read it? Or Trimble's view on it?

NI still wouldn't have representation.

kingstongraham

Have we done the conspiracy theory that says we need to be out by January 2020 to avoid enacting tax avoidance legislation? I can't remember if this means we need to be out without a deal.

TheBigBean

TailWindHome wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

BB: explain how "Regulation without representation and an overall change in status of NI without a referendum probably are [against the GFA}", because I don't really follow.

Have you read it? Or Trimble's view on it?

NI still wouldn't have representation.

Hence my comment about it being imperfect and likely to be refined.

TheBigBean

thecycleclinic wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

BB: explain how "Regulation without representation and an overall change in status of NI without a referendum probably are [against the GFA}", because I don't really follow.

Have you read it? Or Trimble's view on it?

Then please explain rather than restate your statement.

From before. Ignore the fact it is on a Tory website, he has written widely on the subject.

TheBigBean wrote:

David Trimble on the backstop not being in line with the GFA/BA.

https://www.conservativehome.com/platfo ... ement.html

The Commission certainly has expertise in what is required to ensure the integrity of the internal market, but it does not have the expertise to make a judgment on what does or does not uphold the Belfast Agreement. It does not have, nor should it claim to have, the authority to decide upon this.

Here lies the problem right at the heart of the failure of the Brexit talks. The Commission alone, on behalf of the EU27, is negotiating the terms of the UK’s withdrawal; yet the subject matter on which we are all stuck is an area that is not entirely within the jurisdiction of the EU. The EU recognises in its original negotiating guidelines of 2017 the bilateral arrangements between the UK and the Republic of Ireland; these include the Agreement – an international treaty between two sovereign states which allows no third party arbitration and no alteration without the approval of both governments and, where necessary, that of the parties in Northern Ireland too.

The Belfast Agreement wrote:

(iii) acknowledge that while a substantial section of the people in Northern Ireland share the legitimate wish of a majority of the people of the island of Ireland for a united Ireland, the present wish of a majority of the people of Northern Ireland, freely exercised and legitimate, is to maintain the Union and, accordingly, that Northern Ireland’s status as part of the United Kingdom reflects and relies upon that wish; and that it would be wrong to make any change in the status of Northern Ireland save with the consent of a majority of its people;

rick_chasey

I still don’t really see what status has changed.

Spell it out because I’m being thick clearly.

TheBigBean

Rick Chasey wrote:

I still don’t really see what status has changed.

Spell it out because I’m being thick clearly.

I've presented the evidence, you are free to interpret it how you like.

cycleclinic

TheBigBean wrote:

thecycleclinic wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

BB: explain how "Regulation without representation and an overall change in status of NI without a referendum probably are [against the GFA}", because I don't really follow.

Have you read it? Or Trimble's view on it?

Then please explain rather than restate your statement.

From before. Ignore the fact it is on a Tory website, he has written widely on the subject.

TheBigBean wrote:

David Trimble on the backstop not being in line with the GFA/BA.

https://www.conservativehome.com/platfo ... ement.html

The Commission certainly has expertise in what is required to ensure the integrity of the internal market, but it does not have the expertise to make a judgment on what does or does not uphold the Belfast Agreement. It does not have, nor should it claim to have, the authority to decide upon this.

Here lies the problem right at the heart of the failure of the Brexit talks. The Commission alone, on behalf of the EU27, is negotiating the terms of the UK’s withdrawal; yet the subject matter on which we are all stuck is an area that is not entirely within the jurisdiction of the EU. The EU recognises in its original negotiating guidelines of 2017 the bilateral arrangements between the UK and the Republic of Ireland; these include the Agreement – an international treaty between two sovereign states which allows no third party arbitration and no alteration without the approval of both governments and, where necessary, that of the parties in Northern Ireland too.

The Belfast Agreement wrote:

(iii) acknowledge that while a substantial section of the people in Northern Ireland share the legitimate wish of a majority of the people of the island of Ireland for a united Ireland, the present wish of a majority of the people of Northern Ireland, freely exercised and legitimate, is to maintain the Union and, accordingly, that Northern Ireland’s status as part of the United Kingdom reflects and relies upon that wish; and that it would be wrong to make any change in the status of Northern Ireland save with the consent of a majority of its people;

The status of northern ireland is not being changed though. The regulatory environment is but that's not changing the legal status of northern ireland within the uk. There are still the devolved institutions. Trade regulations which are not part of the northern ireland devolved responsibilities are being changed. That runs into the good friday agreement not the Belfast agreement. That my take anyway.

darkhairedlord

KingstonGraham wrote:

Have we done the conspiracy theory that says we need to be out by January 2020 to avoid enacting tax avoidance legislation? I can't remember if this means we need to be out without a deal.

with the plethora of conspiracy theories the other way presenting the only explaination for leaving, I'm sure it doesn't matter if true or not.

Pross

TailWindHome wrote:

Some electoral math geekery
https://twitter.com/leonardocarella/sta ... 43296?s=09

Has anyone checked his methodology and maths? I got lost in the first Tweet!

tailwindhome

It would seem to be a more stable arrangement to apply an NI only backstop (including CU) subject to it having it's own Article 50 notification (a 2 year notice to quit) which can only be delivered by the office of the F&dFM following either cross community support in the assembly or a referendum.

tailwindhome

Boris making a statment

Very unclear as to *exactly* what the customs arrangement would be NI > ROI

tailwindhome

cycleclinic

What hea saying tactical voting will decide the next election. Brexit party is strong in strong con areas. This we know. Where labour are weak lib dems are stronger this we know. So the brexit party threatens a tory majority. This we know. Tactical voting is the wild card. If voter for labour and lib dems are not tribal then the result is up in the air. I'm a lib dem but at the last election and this I will vote labour simply because conservatives vote 33000 votes labour 15000 and the LD 3300. If I vote for my party I might as well not vote. Safe tory seat is an understatement.

rjsterry

Pross wrote:

TailWindHome wrote:

Some electoral math geekery
https://twitter.com/leonardocarella/sta ... 43296?s=09

Has anyone checked his methodology and maths? I got lost in the first Tweet!

I'd have to do a lot of revision to comment, but he does make the point that this is an illustration of a point - about the relative location of Con/TBP voters (tend to be in direct competition) and LD/Lab/SNP/PC voters (some evidence of less direct competition within a given constituency) - not a specific projection.

tailwindhome

Stevo_666

KingstonGraham wrote:

Have we done the conspiracy theory that says we need to be out by January 2020 to avoid enacting tax avoidance legislation? I can't remember if this means we need to be out without a deal.

What tax avoidance legislation? I am not aware of anything that is reliant on the above scenario.

There's a faint whiff of leftiebollox here...

pblakeney

TailWindHome wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Love how Gibraltar is just ignored entirely.

We've decided to focus on the hard place and ignore the rock

I for one like what you did there.

pblakeney

thecycleclinic wrote:

... I have 900 rims due this weekend in port. A shipping company handles the HMRC and customs clearance...

As I pointed out a couple of weeks ago it takes over 4 week to process paperwork if you are a company planning on importing or exporting. The 31st is 4 weeks away today. Best get on it if you are planning any future orders.
Tick tock.

cycleclinic

4 weeks for paper work. No it does not. I'll get an email.of interways on Friday or monday requesting commodities codes. I then get a vat a duties bill which I pay and a few days later the goods are cleared. It takes including unloading time from the ship 1.5 weeks. I have done this many times before. 4 weeks is bollox.

cycleclinic

I export too and if I ship with ups it with the customer within 2 days. Theres a lot of bollox going about trade and customs. Most hard goods from outside the eu come and go very easily. So seamless I barely notice customs part from the bill.

rjsterry

Not discussed yet, but a number of people have claimed that the proposal conflicts with Section 10 of the European Union Withdrawal Act 2018 – which prohibits any “border arrangements” between the Irish Republic and Northern Ireland. Johnson has claimed that the Customs checks in the proposal do not amount to border arrangements, but what else are they?

pblakeney

thecycleclinic wrote:

4 weeks for paper work. No it does not. I'll get an email.of interways on Friday or monday requesting commodities codes. I then get a vat a duties bill which I pay and a few days later the goods are cleared. It takes including unloading time from the ship 1.5 weeks. I have done this many times before. 4 weeks is bollox.

Have you checked the government brexit.gov website?
Things that work pre 31/10/19 may not work post 31/10/19.
Good for you if you have everything in place. Finger out if not...

Stevo_666

PBlakeney wrote:

thecycleclinic wrote:

... I have 900 rims due this weekend in port. A shipping company handles the HMRC and customs clearance...

As I pointed out a couple of weeks ago it takes over 4 week to process paperwork if you are a company planning on importing or exporting. The 31st is 4 weeks away today. Best get on it if you are planning any future orders.
Tick tock.

Got a source for that 4 week claim? It isn't in line with the experience of our logistics & distribution operation.

pblakeney

Stevo 666 wrote:

PBlakeney wrote:

thecycleclinic wrote:

... I have 900 rims due this weekend in port. A shipping company handles the HMRC and customs clearance...

As I pointed out a couple of weeks ago it takes over 4 week to process paperwork if you are a company planning on importing or exporting. The 31st is 4 weeks away today. Best get on it if you are planning any future orders.
Tick tock.

Got a source for that 4 week claim? It isn't in line with the experience of our logistics & distribution operation.

As pointed out, the .gov site. I ran a trial and they give expected times for processing depending on company status.

rjsterry

From Peter Foster (who is adamant that we are just going through the motions and this can't be agreed by the EU).

Peter Foster
@pmdfoster
·
2h
THIS is an important thread.

It is AMAZING how macro discussion on #Brexit consistently take place without reference to what is practically achievable in that time.

None of these two borders can be stood up by Dec 2020. So that = more transition, more cash. Shhhh.

My bold. Even if this does go through we will need to extend the transition in order to set it up. Get Brexit Done my a*se

Stevo_666

PBlakeney wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

PBlakeney wrote:

thecycleclinic wrote:

... I have 900 rims due this weekend in port. A shipping company handles the HMRC and customs clearance...

As I pointed out a couple of weeks ago it takes over 4 week to process paperwork if you are a company planning on importing or exporting. The 31st is 4 weeks away today. Best get on it if you are planning any future orders.
Tick tock.

Got a source for that 4 week claim? It isn't in line with the experience of our logistics & distribution operation.

As pointed out, the .gov site. I ran a trial and they give expected times for processing depending on company status.

Simply not in line with the reality pointed out by cyleclinic and myself. i suspect they are trying to spur smaller businesses into action. That said, I'm surprised you set so much store by a government website given your views on government competence overall.

rick_chasey

Stevo 666 wrote:

KingstonGraham wrote:

Have we done the conspiracy theory that says we need to be out by January 2020 to avoid enacting tax avoidance legislation? I can't remember if this means we need to be out without a deal.

What tax avoidance legislation? I am not aware of anything that is reliant on the above scenario.

There's a faint whiff of leftiebollox here...

Imagine it's referring to the eu tax avoidance directive 2020