UK & EU Agree Post-Brexit Trade Deal - Page 82

jfman · 10-10-2019, 20:12

An effective border in the Irish Sea would be amazing.

Mr K · 10-10-2019, 20:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carth

I've seen nothing that really mentions what concessions were made, only that they've had talks that were . . . "very positive and very promising"

Nothing new to see . . . move along

You sound like you're trying to convince yourself

Carth · 10-10-2019, 20:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr K

You sound like you're trying to convince yourself

I don't need convincing about anything, and I certainly don't need to blindly follow or take as gospel everything posted on Twitter, Facebook etc.

No offence intended to those that feel the need though

nomadking · 10-10-2019, 20:55

Link

Quote:

He said he was now "convinced" the UK wants an agreement, saying: "I do see a pathway towards an agreement in the coming weeks."
However, there were still issues over the issue of "consent and democracy" and ensuring there is no customs border.

Nice to know the the EU has such a big problem with "consent and democracy". Says it all really.

**Hugh** · 10-10-2019, 21:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by nomadking

Link

Quote:

He said he was now "convinced" the UK wants an agreement, saying: "I do see a pathway towards an agreement in the coming weeks."
However, there were still issues over the issue of "consent and democracy" and ensuring there is no customs border.

Nice to know the the EU has such a big problem with "consent and democracy". Says it all really.

I believe he meant there needed to be appropriate consent and democracy (such as not being vetoed by the DUP or SF) - interesting that you read it another way...

nomadking · 10-10-2019, 22:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugh

I believe he meant there needed to be appropriate consent and democracy (such as not being vetoed by the DUP or SF) - interesting that you read it another way...

So what could the "issue" be that the EU have with "consent and democracy"? A super-majority is not consent and is not democratic. Yet again, where else in the world and in what other context would that be acceptable? Scottish devolution? Scottish Independence? Welsh devolution? Welsh Independence? Reunification of Ireland? How about Remaining in the EU requiring a super-majority?

ianch99 · 10-10-2019, 23:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by nomadking

So what could the "issue" be that the EU have with "consent and democracy"? A super-majority is not consent and is not democratic. Yet again, where else in the world and in what other context would that be acceptable? Scottish devolution? Scottish Independence? Welsh devolution? Welsh Independence? Reunification of Ireland? How about Remaining in the EU requiring a super-majority?

Not too sure what planet you are on. A super majority is the *only* democratic solution when deciding macro economic & social decisions.

nomadking · 10-10-2019, 23:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by ianch99

Not too sure what planet you are on. A super majority is the *only* democratic solution when deciding macro economic & social decisions.

Link

Quote:

THE Scottish Government has ruled out setting a higher threshold for a second independence referendum, claiming it would leave democracy in “tatters”.
Constitutional Relations Secretary Michael Russell also attacked the media for proposing the idea of a higher than 50 per cent threshold for Indyref2 to produce a stable result.
He told MSPs moving away from a simple majority could result in a “cheat”, citing the 1979 devolution referendum that did not pass because too few voters backed it.
...
Ms White said the Venice Commission on referendums, the advisory body on the Council of Europe, had warned a super-majority could encourage people not to vote.
...
“The Venice Commission is entirely clear. A turnout quorum, threshold or minimum percentage is wrong because it assimilates voters who abstain with those who vote No, and an approval quorum, which is approval by a minimum percentage of registered voters risks involving a difficult political situation.

Of course it all depends on the question. With the NI situation the super-majority is intended to force the backstop for all eternity. If you asked the question "do you agree with the backstop" or "do you want to continue with the backstop", it might give a different answer. Then you can bring the issue of "consent" into it. Constant attacks and threats by the IRA and their supporters, is NOT consent.

**Hugh** · 11-10-2019, 09:04

The Venice Commission Code of Good Practice on Referendums also states

Quote:

Effects of referendums

a. The effects of legally binding or consultative referendums must be clearly specified in the Constitution or by law.
b. Referendums on questions of principle or other generally-worded proposals should preferably not be binding. If they are binding, the subsequent procedure should be laid down in specific rules

Quote:

In the event of a failure to abide by the statutory requirements, for instance if the cap on spending is exceeded by a significant margin, the vote may be annulled.

ianch99 · 11-10-2019, 09:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by nomadking

Link

Of course it all depends on the question. With the NI situation the super-majority is intended to force the backstop for all eternity. If you asked the question "do you agree with the backstop" or "do you want to continue with the backstop", it might give a different answer. Then you can bring the issue of "consent" into it. Constant attacks and threats by the IRA and their supporters, is NOT consent.

My position remains: super majorities combined with minimum turnouts are the only objective and apolitical solution to macro socioeconomic plebiscites.

However, there are two issues to contend with here:

1. the people calling for or objecting to a specific proposal have vesting interests. Their interests, not the majority of the population's

2. the UK is rubbish at referendums

Add the two together and we get where we are ..

papa smurf · 11-10-2019, 17:18

Brexit is on! Government signs £86m freight contracts bring medicines into UK for no deal

THE GOVERNMENT has signed contracts with four ferry operators to provide freight capacity to transport medicines in the event of a no-deal Brexit.

glad to see preparations are going ahead.

Pierre · 11-10-2019, 17:44

Quote:

http://news.sky.com/story/stephen-ba...talks-11832697

Who knows what it is, but it is last chance saloon. If he has the DUP on board it may get through.

If it’s a decent deal and Corbyn goes against it he loses all credibility ( not that he has any).

I hope it is significantly improved upon Mays deal, all it really needs to be is no backstop and no ECJ oversight in our affairs and it will probably fly.

**Chris** · 11-10-2019, 17:54

11th hour brinkmanship is the EU’s M.O. It was always going to go down to the wire and I suspect all they really needed was to understand that the wire is now truly upon them.

Mr K · 11-10-2019, 18:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris

11th hour brinkmanship is the EU’s M.O. It was always going to go down to the wire and I suspect all they really needed was to understand that the wire is now truly upon them.

Urrmm looks like it's the other way round, they rejected his latest plan, blinking Boris as he realises any deal is better than no deal.

Any they're entering the 'tunnel', how exciting

jfman · 11-10-2019, 18:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr K

Urrmm looks like it's the other way round, they rejected his latest plan, blinking Boris as he realises any deal is better than no deal.

Any they're entering the 'tunnel', how exciting

Yep. Can Johnson win an election with scandal after scandal. The pole dancer, Cummings advising big pharma. Time to cut and run for the Brexiteers at the top of Government.