Quote:
Originally Posted by ianch99
In regards to the years of negotiations, the ones with the EU will be interesting. The overnight report from a "contact in Number 10" detailed on the spectator.co.uk website is illuminating:
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/1...-negotiations/
The response is long with the usual "blame the Irish" stratagem but this part is fascinating and will surely, if true, wind up "our friends and partners" on the continent:
This has Cumming's thinking written all over it .. so must be true  |
The backstop and it's deliberate permanency IS the fault of the Irish, and against EU law in article 50. It wasn't on the EUs radar until the Irish brought it up.
The Guardian
Quote:
The Irish goal was to get the border into a legally binding withdrawal agreement – Dublin’s point of maximum leverage – rather than future trade relations, when Dublin would struggle to be heard.
...
After Leo Varadkar succeeded Kenny in June 2017 the Irish pressed their advantage. The new taoiseach wanted a “win”, said one Fine Gael party colleague, and squeezing the Brits proved popular.
|
According to EU law, it can
only be there as part of
future trade relations, even if the UK agreed to it.
Have the terms "transitional", "limited in time", and "future" been magically redefined?
The EU and the Remain crowd have thrown out all sense of logic, reason, legality, and democracy. All perfectly ok because it's the UK(especially) on the receiving end. Would any other country be expected to put up with this? If any other country had(before the UK) wanted to leave the EU, would they be subjected to all this? Or would all sense of logic, reason, legality, and democracy have mysteriously remained intact? Would Scotland and Wales be treated like this, if they voted for independence?