Simple question really. Is she willing to break the law?
Not sure if that's the best way to put it. MPs will not be breaking the law, however they vote. They can vote for what they like. And nobody's even going to arrest the government if the bill passes and they start to implement whatever it actually is that they want to change; it will be the international equivalent of a civil matter. The EU will either take the UK to one or other court of international arbitration, or stop talking to them.
A bigger issue is that it will make the UK a total laughing stock, and a pariah in future international negotiations. But Brexit has arguably already done one and a half of those.
I'm starting to think that the best (in terms of the UK seeing some sense over Brexit; not, perhaps, for the anxiety levels of UK residents) that can happen is for this bill to pass (which it will anyway) and trade negotiations with the EU to stop completely. It's a Mr Prosser-Arthur Dent* situation.
*Mr Prosser: Have you any idea of how much damage that bulldozer would suffer if I just let it roll straight over you?
Arthur Dent: How much?
Mr Prosser: None at all.
Re: Getting Brexit done
Posted: Sun Sep 13, 2020 11:05 am
by veravista
I'm not convinced that she won't be breaking the law, at the very least she's complicit in voting for something that she has been told, in a public forum, that will lead to individuals breaking the law, albeit in a 'limited and specific' way. Breaking the law nonetheless.
I agree that it's a narrow point of accountability, and the consequences you mentioned of breaking an international treaty are far, far worse than a couple of meaningless prosecutions of Tory drones. The mere fact that they are even contemplating it has sent messages to the world that we are, as a nation, untrustworthy. Can't wait for the first WTO court of arbitration case against the UK for restriction of trade (my money is the Japanese wrt to Toyota, Honda and Nissan..)
I'm starting to think that the best (in terms of the UK seeing some sense over Brexit; not, perhaps, for the anxiety levels of UK residents) that can happen is for this bill to pass (which it will anyway) and trade negotiations with the EU to stop completely. It's a Mr Prosser-Arthur Dent* situation.
*Mr Prosser: Have you any idea of how much damage that bulldozer would suffer if I just let it roll straight over you?
Arthur Dent: How much?
Mr Prosser: None at all.
This bill is still at an early stage in its passage through parliament. It may well be that the relevant provisions do not survive the House of Commons. It also is likely that the relevant provisions, if they survive the Commons, do not survive the Lords, because the Lords is in the slightly strange situation of being able to uphold the government's own manifesto commitment against the government, under the so-called Salisbury Convention, which means that they can delay or even vote down relevant legislation which are in breach of a manifesto commitment. But even if it does pass both the Commons and the Lords and receives Royal Assent and becomes primary legislation, it may well be that there is a case which goes up to the Supreme Court to show that this is not an approach which can be adopted in primary legislation. The government cannot put in a provision which says we are above or beyond the law.
Also, the passage of the bill will presumably take some time, so I'm not sure how feasible it would be for the EU to wait to see whether it passes before ceasing trade negotiations. It might be that, if they are going to do such a thing, they have to do it before the eventual fate of the bill is known.
Also, the passage of the bill will presumably take some time, so I'm not sure how feasible it would be for the EU to wait to see whether it passes before ceasing trade negotiations. It might be that, if they are going to do such a thing, they have to do it before the eventual fate of the bill is known.
They need to complete some kind of trade deal before 31 December, which means agreement between the EU and UK over the next 4 weeks or so. So yes, not enough time to wait and see if the legislation passes.
It looks like the legislation is a piece of signalling. I just don't know what the message is intended to be.
It looks like the legislation is a piece of signalling. I just don't know what the message is intended to be.
Re: Getting Brexit done
Posted: Mon Sep 14, 2020 10:40 am
by TimW
I assume it's a contrivance directed at the electorate. Boris needs it to be "somebody else's fault" when there's a NI border in the Irish Sea. Doesn't matter who it is - the Commons, Lords, anyone.
Re: Getting Brexit done
Posted: Mon Sep 14, 2020 2:56 pm
by nezumi
I know it'll have been said and thought by everyone already but
"Yes I murdered that bloke, but let me off cos I only broke the law in a limited and specific way"
I'd venture that the vast majority of law-breaking is done in a very limited and specific way, with the glaring exception of Samuel Little who broke the law in widespread and undiscerning ways.
Just basically solved all prison overcrowding and police under-resourcing in one go there. Well done UK.Gov! Let's let all the criminals out cos, after all, they only broke the law in a limited and specific way, amiright?
Re: Getting Brexit done
Posted: Mon Sep 14, 2020 3:04 pm
by plodder
The FT has just run a piece about the new Japanese trade deal, which apparently has stricter state aid constraints that the EU deal the government are railing against.
Re: Getting Brexit done
Posted: Mon Sep 14, 2020 3:45 pm
by bagpuss
I have not yet had any reply to my email to my MP, Rob Butler (newly elected Tory, fully supportive of Brexit, etc, etc) beyond the automated reply that said I had to include my name and address (which I had) and directing me to his website if I was contacting him on a subject on the long list he then included. It was not on any of those subjects so I await his reply with bated breath*.
*Not really. If I actually get a reply, which is unlikely, it will be whatever Conservative Central Office have deemed to be the correct response to such questions and is unlikely to be in any way enlightening, revealing, or encouraging.
Rather than having no idea of how much we can bring with us when we return from other EU countries, we now have specific quantities - it must help to remove the uncertainty.
a little niggle that these only apply to GB, the situation as regards NI is umm, unclear
Ah, the old duty free limits have returned/are to be returning (oh god, what tense?). Weirdly nostalgic and not in a good way.
To be fair, the allowances for alcohol seem to be a bit higher than pre-1992. IIRC it was 1 or 2 litres of spirits, which could be replaced with 2 or 4 of sparkling wine. The new 9 litres of sparkling wine is two 6-bottle cases of 75cl bottles. Obviously less than the current situation, but it seems to have been designed with an acknowledgement that people would be even more unhappy with the old numbers. For tobacco it seems to be back to pre-1992 levels; I imagine increasing that will be a key part of the next Brexit Party manifesto.
Are those limits per person? Or per vehicle? So if my wife and I did a little cruise down to Reims, could we trek it back with just 12 bottles, or 24?
Re: Getting Brexit done
Posted: Mon Sep 14, 2020 5:32 pm
by El Pollo Diablo
BTW, if anyone fancies a bit of fun, watch that Miliband speech. Genuinely incredible.
Ah, the old duty free limits have returned/are to be returning (oh god, what tense?). Weirdly nostalgic and not in a good way.
To be fair, the allowances for alcohol seem to be a bit higher than pre-1992. IIRC it was 1 or 2 litres of spirits, which could be replaced with 2 or 4 of sparkling wine. The new 9 litres of sparkling wine is two 6-bottle cases of 75cl bottles. Obviously less than the current situation, but it seems to have been designed with an acknowledgement that people would be even more unhappy with the old numbers. For tobacco it seems to be back to pre-1992 levels; I imagine increasing that will be a key part of the next Brexit Party manifesto.
Are those limits per person? Or per vehicle? So if my wife and I did a little cruise down to Reims, could we trek it back with just 12 bottles, or 24?
Per person - that document doesn't make it clear whether there's any intention that there be an age restriction on the allowance for alcohol and tobacco products, I'm pretty sure there will be.
Ah, the old duty free limits have returned/are to be returning (oh god, what tense?). Weirdly nostalgic and not in a good way.
To be fair, the allowances for alcohol seem to be a bit higher than pre-1992. IIRC it was 1 or 2 litres of spirits, which could be replaced with 2 or 4 of sparkling wine. The new 9 litres of sparkling wine is two 6-bottle cases of 75cl bottles. Obviously less than the current situation, but it seems to have been designed with an acknowledgement that people would be even more unhappy with the old numbers. For tobacco it seems to be back to pre-1992 levels; I imagine increasing that will be a key part of the next Brexit Party manifesto.
Are those limits per person? Or per vehicle? So if my wife and I did a little cruise down to Reims, could we trek it back with just 12 bottles, or 24?
BTW, if anyone fancies a bit of fun, watch that Miliband speech. Genuinely incredible.
Was it the one where he tells Boris he has no-one to blame but himself for agreeing a deal he couldn't stick to, and then goes after the govt for being lawless c.nts from Cummings on down?
I have not yet had any reply to my email to my MP, Rob Butler (newly elected Tory, fully supportive of Brexit, etc, etc) beyond the automated reply that said I had to include my name and address (which I had) and directing me to his website if I was contacting him on a subject on the long list he then included. It was not on any of those subjects so I await his reply with bated breath*.
*Not really. If I actually get a reply, which is unlikely, it will be whatever Conservative Central Office have deemed to be the correct response to such questions and is unlikely to be in any way enlightening, revealing, or encouraging.
I've not had any response from my MP's parliamentary account. I notice he directs people to a personal account, which seems wrong to me.
Re: Getting Brexit done
Posted: Mon Sep 14, 2020 9:39 pm
by FlammableFlower
Brrrrrrr
From some reason I thought I'd go and look at the Mail Online. I can't remember the last time I did... bl..dy hell, that was a good example of how people live in entirely different bubbles. Apparently I must have watched a very different Ed Milliband speech to their political correspondent.
Living up to my opinion of the Mail, the main section links in News are as below:
News
Latest Headlines | Coronavirus | Royal Family | Crime | Boris Johnson | Prince Harry | Meghan Markle | World News | Headlines | Most read
In order to find their commentary on the bill's debate (it's not on the main page) you first have to go to News, then Boris Johnson; then you will find a link to it.
Per person - that document doesn't make it clear whether there's any intention that there be an age restriction on the allowance for alcohol and tobacco products, I'm pretty sure there will be.
I seem to remember that historically there was an age limit, but weirdly it was something like 16 or 17 for alcohol, not 18.
Per person - that document doesn't make it clear whether there's any intention that there be an age restriction on the allowance for alcohol and tobacco products, I'm pretty sure there will be.
I seem to remember that historically there was an age limit, but weirdly it was something like 16 or 17 for alcohol, not 18.
The age limit is currently 17 for imports from outside the EU. Probably has been for a while.
