Home News Forum Articles
  Welcome back Join CF
You are here You are here: Home | Forum | Brexit Development(s) Discussion

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most of the discussions, articles and other free features. By joining our Virgin Media community you will have full access to all discussions, be able to view and post threads, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload your own images/photos, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please join our community today.


Welcome to Cable Forum
Go Back   Cable Forum > General Discussion > Current Affairs

Brexit Development(s) Discussion
Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 15-11-2019, 13:47   #1906
Mick
Cable Forum Team
 
Mick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 13,466
Mick has a nice shiny starMick has a nice shiny starMick has a nice shiny star
Mick has a nice shiny starMick has a nice shiny starMick has a nice shiny starMick has a nice shiny starMick has a nice shiny starMick has a nice shiny star
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K View Post
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.
Mick is offline   Reply With Quote
Advertisement
Old 15-11-2019, 15:49   #1907
jonbxx
cf.geek
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Rickmansworth, Herts
Age: 48
Services: VM VIP Pack
Posts: 909
jonbxx has reached the bronze age
jonbxx has reached the bronze agejonbxx has reached the bronze age
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion

Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking View Post
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?
jonbxx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-11-2019, 17:38   #1908
nomadking
cf.mega poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Northampton
Services: Virgin Media TV&BB 350Mb, V6 STB
Posts: 5,406
nomadking has a bronzed appealnomadking has a bronzed appeal
nomadking has a bronzed appealnomadking has a bronzed appealnomadking has a bronzed appealnomadking has a bronzed appealnomadking has a bronzed appealnomadking has a bronzed appealnomadking has a bronzed appeal
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion

Quote:
Originally Posted by jonbxx View Post
Which EU treaty was that?
Lisbon.
nomadking is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 15-11-2019, 18:33   #1909
jonbxx
cf.geek
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Rickmansworth, Herts
Age: 48
Services: VM VIP Pack
Posts: 909
jonbxx has reached the bronze age
jonbxx has reached the bronze agejonbxx has reached the bronze age
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion

Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking View Post
Lisbon.
Ah, yes I have seen arguments that the WA was in conflict with Article 50 and in particular section 2;

Quote:
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;

Quote:
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;

Quote:
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
jonbxx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-11-2019, 19:27   #1910
nomadking
cf.mega poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Northampton
Services: Virgin Media TV&BB 350Mb, V6 STB
Posts: 5,406
nomadking has a bronzed appealnomadking has a bronzed appeal
nomadking has a bronzed appealnomadking has a bronzed appealnomadking has a bronzed appealnomadking has a bronzed appealnomadking has a bronzed appealnomadking has a bronzed appealnomadking has a bronzed appeal
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion

Quote:
Originally Posted by jonbxx View Post
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
Quote:
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.
nomadking is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 3 (0 members and 3 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 23:34.


Server: xenon.zmnt.net
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.