UK & EU Agree Post-Brexit Trade Deal

Originally Posted by Mr K

Err no, we started it !

And so we should have - but we need to finish it by leaving the rotten disgrace that the EU is. Simples.

[jonbxx]

Originally Posted by nomadking

You mean like the EU treaty that specifies that Article 50 and the WA is to be a transitional agreement and therefore can't include anything like the backstop? And allegedly against WTO rules. To begin with, NI becomes a different customs territory as it will have different customs rules and tariffs.
Link

Which EU treaty was that?

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by jonbxx

Which EU treaty was that?

Lisbon.

[jonbxx]

Originally Posted by nomadking

Lisbon.

Ah, yes I have seen arguments that the WA was in conflict with Article 50 and in particular section 2;

2. A Member State which decides to withdraw shall notify the European Council of its intention. In the light of the guidelines provided by the European Council, the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union. That agreement shall be negotiated in accordance with Article 218(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. It shall be concluded on behalf of the Union by the Council, acting by a qualified majority, after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament.

with particular focus on;

shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union

The argument that the backstop is not part of the withdrawal but a permanent arrangement is somewhat strong. However, there is one killer line in the WA;

This Agreement sets out the arrangements for the withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland ("United Kingdom") from the European Union ("Union") and from the European Atomic Energy Community ("Euratom").

The WA which included the backstop does seem to my non-lawyer eyes comply with Article 50.2.

However, the counter argument I guess is that the backstop will become permanent if the 'unless and until' clauses are not met. This would suggest a lack of good faith which goes against Article 5 of WA, hence the need for an arbitration panel

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by jonbxx

Ah, yes I have seen arguments that the WA was in conflict with Article 50 and in particular section 2;

with particular focus on;

The argument that the backstop is not part of the withdrawal but a permanent arrangement is somewhat strong. However, there is one killer line in the WA;

The WA which included the backstop does seem to my non-lawyer eyes comply with Article 50.2.

However, the counter argument I guess is that the backstop will become permanent if the 'unless and until' clauses are not met. This would suggest a lack of good faith which goes against Article 5 of WA, hence the need for an arbitration panel

Whatever way you look at it, the backstop is not "unambiguously limited in time".
Link

In his presentations to the European Parliament, Barnier has stressed a number of principles for the negotiations: the four freedoms must be indivisible; any transitional agreement must unambiguously be limited in time; EU membership must always remain the most advantageous status; any new relationship must be based on a level playing field and on respect for the rules of competition; the balance of rights and obligations agreed with non-EU countries must be taken into account: and close cooperation is desirable in the field of defence and security

The backstop starts after the end of the WA. Before then the WA applies and the backstop isn't needed. When the period covered by the WA ends, everything in Article 50 ends.


Any negotiations on the "future relationship" can only start until after the WA comes in to force, IE we have left the EU. In theory, the UK might sign up to the backstop at that point, but it can't be required to do so before then, and certainly not as a condition of the WA.

Just bumping this up the list. I’ve a feeling we’ll be needing it very soon.

[pip08456]

I should imagine our resident remainers will be very vocal.

[Sephiroth]

I’m looking forward to the upcoming fisheries spat.

[mrmistoffelees]

Originally Posted by pip08456

I should imagine our resident remainers will be very vocal.

Not really, last night was a clear mandate and reinforcement of the original referendum result.

I'll never agree with it, and I'll always believe it was the wrong thing to do. Personally I hope we will rejoin ASAP.

However ,Boris had better not cock this up, and whilst i don't like the man he's so far achieved what he set out to do (and achieved it very well it must be said) the next stage of the process is even more critical, get it wrong and the tories i suspect will be out of power for a considerable time (of course that requires Labour or the Lib Dems to be able to field a decent leader)

There isn't much to be vocal about really is there? The argument is settled now. The Government has a mandate and the majority to pass the agreement.

I think there are positives here. The size of the majority means Johnson will not be in hock to the whims of the ERG. This will hopefully give him more room to negotiate the next stage of Brexit and make concessions which was what caused issues for May and Johnson during the Article 50 talks.

Most importantly this is hopefully now a period of calm and boredom in British politics. A less fractious time, although I worry the U.K will break up soon.

[spiderplant]

Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees

Not really, last night was a clear mandate

Yep, 53% vs 47%

[jonbxx]

Good take on Twitter;

Karl Tomlinson
@KarlT0
On the plus side, the Brexiters have definitely, undeniably won. Prove us wrong about Brexit being a mess, or own it. It's all yours, lads. The leader of the official Leave campaign is PM, so none of this "wrong kind of brexit" nonsense.

*edited for bad language

[Taf]

We can only hope that Remain dissenters in the Conservative Party don't scupper Boris' plans for Brexit.

Originally Posted by Taf

We can only hope that Remain dissenters in the Conservative Party don't scupper Boris' plans for Brexit.

Or the ERG if they think his deal is BRINO.

Originally Posted by Taf

We can only hope that Remain dissenters in the Conservative Party don't scupper Boris' plans for Brexit.

• A lot of them have left.
• Anyway that remain were elected on a manifesto to pass this specific deal. At the last one they were elected on Brexit generally and found scope within that to argue against No Deal.
• He has a big majority anyway