Who'd have thought Ed Milliband had it in him?
He looks the type tbh.
Should the UK break international law?
- Thread starter ellal
- Start date
He looks the type tbh.
Sponsored Links
Who'd have thought Ed Milliband had it in him?
To be fair, like child with a stick, poking a beached jellyfish
Ah yes, the brotherly backstabber.Who'd have thought Ed Milliband had it in him?
This poll is a sad reflection of how low this country has got.
Almost half the people think this country, which once stood for law and order, should break international treaties.
That's what you can achieve by manipulating voters.
Almost half the people think this country, which once stood for law and order, should break international treaties.
That's what you can achieve by manipulating voters.
Sponsored Links
And your post is a sad reflection of the attitude of you and others on this forum. You automatically assume you are right, nobody else’s opinion counts and anyone who doesn’t agree with you is either an idiot or has been manipulated. Remind us again, how did you do in the local elections when you stood for office?
I think there is a strong argument that the EU is breaking the withdrawal agreement by not negotiating in good faith.
My understanding is that this bill does not in itself break international law or the withdrawal agreement. However, it gives Parliament the ability to break the withdrawal agreement if the EU applies the withdrawal agreement in such a way that the integrity of the internal market is fractured. I note that the PM has promised that a Parliamentary vote will be required to invoke the powers that will break international law, so its not an instrument that the government can apply unilaterally.
It's also a clearly a negotiating tool to rack up the pressure on the EU, which judging by the noise coming out of Brussels, is having the desired effect.
It's all very well standing on the principle of law, but its a bit silly to rely on the rules when the other side doesn't abide by them.
S
sodthisforfun
He always reminds me of a Nick Park creation.
there is no argument.
the EU has been negotiating exactly in line with the PD
if you can point to any evidence that proves the EU is not acting in good faith, please present them.
yes it does
Really?
again any proof?
the Telegraph wont give you the truth.
they have abided by them
sadly brexiteers refuse to take responsibility for what they voted for
leaving the Single Market has always meant a problem in Ireland.
If you can point to any other external border into the Single market that has no border checks, Im all ears
- Joined
- 17 May 2012
- Messages
- 10,782
- Reaction score
- 849
- Country
Today the right wing press attacked labour leader with siding with the EU.
All he did was agree with the Brexit agreement that Boris and the Tories originally signed and agreed.
Now they want to do something different. It's just a massive joke.
A bit old, but popped up today and made me laugh
All he did was agree with the Brexit agreement that Boris and the Tories originally signed and agreed.
Now they want to do something different. It's just a massive joke.
A bit old, but popped up today and made me laugh
Germany has lost interest in the caperings and contradictions of our Buffoon.
What's the point in negotiating with someone who signs an agreement, makes it central to an election, sacks all naysayers from his party.... then says he won't comply with it?
They have more serious matters to deal with.
What's the point in negotiating with someone who signs an agreement, makes it central to an election, sacks all naysayers from his party.... then says he won't comply with it?
They have more serious matters to deal with.
I think you're wrong on two points in there. I don't believe in its current form it need parliament to approve anything further ,just the government.
The second is that there is no integrity of the internal market. We signed that away clearly and definitely as part of the WA. People have been pointing out that it required a border between NI and GB since it was proposed, whilst it was debated and after it was signed but some people ignored it.
Just because you don't agree with the argument doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
The withdrawal agreement contains clauses like 'recognise Northern Ireland’s integral place in the United Kingdom’s internal market', pledging 'best endeavours to facilitate the trade between Northern Ireland and all other parts of the United Kingdom … avoiding controls at the ports and airports of Northern Ireland to the greatest extent possible', and promising 'to develop in good faith agreements giving effect to this relationship … such that they can come into force by the end of 2020.
In my opinion, attempting to leverage the breakup of a sovereign nation as part of the EU's negotiating strategy is not acting in good faith or abiding by any of the above.
Northern Ireland doesn't need to be an issue for the EU, but they are choosing to make it so as a negotiating tool.
This bill is also a negotiating tool and that's what the EU doesn't like.
The noise i refer to is the various EU figures making statements denouncing this bill and threatening legal action.
In my opinion, this bill will pass and this is just another, similar political legal scenario as the prorogation of parliament where the remainers won the battle but lost the war.
Reading further news today, the Bill allows the government to invoke the clauses unilaterally, but Parliament has to ratify it within 60 days and can overturn it.
It also allows a very similar one to be applied if it isn't rejected. If the government were operating in good faith then they'd never just resubmit a nearly identical version...
I'm not a lawyer but reading it then it only says that items that need ratification have to be ratified. If they can sneak around that then parliament gets no say at all.
Sponsored Links
