[nomadking]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

I'm afraid that the best legal minds in the country disagree with you.

Meanwhile, this is what looks likely to me.

---------- Post added at 23:27 ---------- Previous post was at 23:12 ----------


I'm long on facts and short on emotion which is the counter-part to my previous discussant. The curency value impacts the wealth of the country and its ability to invest in education, the armed forces, healthcare and the technologies of the future. It's not an abstract figure.

My answer to all of the above questions is that it depends what we get in return.

All to play for at the car plants with new models on hold at Sunderland and Ellesmere Port delayed pending Boris giving the EU a good deal. And BMW is ceasing MINI production in the Netherlands in 2024 so potentially some of that could find its way to Cowley. Let's hope Boris doesn't revert to his F-business mindset.

What I think is in the capability of the UK govenment is:
1. Arrange for a staggered wind-down to new fishing arrangements.
2. Agree to a level playing field as in practice it won't have any on the UK as we are a rich country with no recent history of significant interevention in industry.
3. Come up with a compromise on the ECJ.

The "bill" is only needed where certain NI matters are not agreed with the EU. It is a legal requirement for there to be agreement by the "Joint Committee" on the details of various matters connected to the NI Protocol. If the EU doesn't agree to anything on those matters, then THEY are the ones breaking the NI Protocol.

Before the end of the transition period, the Joint Committee shall by decision establish the criteria for considering that a good brought into Northern Ireland from outside the Union is not at risk of subsequently being moved into the Union. The Joint Committee shall take into consideration, inter alia

What would happen WHEN the EU doesn't agree on something like that? Would that mean no goods whatever from GB to NI? In the absence of any agreements, then something has to be put in place.
Agenda for Joint Committee meeting of TODAY(19th Oct).

1. Introduction and opening remarks from the co-chairs
1.1 Stocktake of recent Specialised Committee meetings
1.2 Future Specialised Committee meetings
2. Updates on Implementation of the Withdrawal Agreement
2.1 Citizens’ rights
2.1.1 Joint Implementation Report
2.1.2 Progress on Joint Committee Decision on triangulation
2.2 Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland
2.2.1 Progress on Joint Committee Decisions foreseen by the Protocol
2.2.2 Progress on Joint Committee Decision on correction of errors and omissions
2.3 Dispute settlement – Discussion on progress on Joint Committee Decision on the establishment of a list of arbitrators

1) It's about who has control, It's not a matter of simply shutting everybody else out. If the French wanted a staggered wind-down, they could've asked for one. They HAVEN'T. They want complete unfettered access. As I've previously pointed out, the situation would arise where fish caught in UK waters by EU boats wouldn't be subject to tariffs when sold in the EU, but those caught be UK boats would be. So much for a "level playing field".
2) The WTO has it's own set of rules for financial support. What is wrong with those? The UK level of support is nowhere near Germany's level of support, so again what are the EU complaining about?
3) Nothing to comprise about. Should be the same rules as for everybody else. Eg Goods sold by China into the EU are subject to ECJ rules, goods in China and outside the EU are not. Nothing complicated or unreasonable about that. Does the ECJ rule over goods produced and sold in Vietnam? Of course not.