Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman
I’ve no issue with the USA controlling migration effectively if it’s done in a humane way. Hell even the left wing part of me likes large state funded projects. It’s not an effective way to do it though - given it’ll be a fence for the most part a Mexican with wire cutters is on his way. It’s a big expensive dog whistle to his racist supporters.
Nor am I complaining about the integrity of the EU border - we voted to leave and establish a border - I don’t see why they should make it easier for us to do so by allowing us to ignore our obligations to prevent smuggling over the border.
I really don’t know why people who understand the dangers of the movement of people over borders so well can’t understand the dangers of the illegal supply of cheap, substandard goods.
|
Cheap, substandard goods ALREADY get into the UK and EU. Are following UK rules going to lead to cheap, substandard goods? We ALREADY have to accept EU goods that we consider substandard because they follow lower set EU rules.
Not sure that the backstop is legal in terms of Article 50 and the Withdrawal Agreement. The WA is an optional interim phase to LEAVING. The backstop is not interim, and at the very least extends beyond the period covered by the WA. Any backstop related issues are the subject of the SECOND SEPARATE deal/agreement.
Link
Quote:
Two agreements
The EU and the UK have two years to negotiate a withdrawal agreement setting out the arrangements for how the country will leave the Union, while “taking account of the framework of the future relationship with the Union”. The arrangements setting out the framework for future relations will be part of a separate agreement, which could take considerably longer to negotiate.
|