Another new Brexit thread

[Vic]

I don't see how a bill automatically overriding EU law when we are not an EU member state is so terrible. Surely it would be more weird to adopt / apply EU law? - no other non EU state does.

You could win a legal case in a UK court about your import business and a minister of the crown comes along and says I'm sorry, you lost.

 

[Vic]

That bill says they can override any domestic or international law basically ever. Not just EU. International and domestic. The G) bit is staggering. It's fucking outrageous to be honest and should be criminal. We are making ourselves out to be rule breakers and untrustworthy just as we're about to try and negotiate a shit tonne of trade deals. I can't quite put into words how fucked up this is. Who is going to trust us again any time soon?

It doesn't. That section is limited to section 42 and 43. But it basically says ministers can make secondary legislation (with no parliamentary scrutiny) that overrides not just EU law but UK law (including Magna Carta).

 

[Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese]

I take that point, but it was all dismissed as Project Fear. I don't recall anyone warning that Brexit would lead to Britain's international reputation being forever sullied, our commitment to international law being trashed, and that there would still be people on a football forum cheering this shitshow on.

I don't think this will sully our reputation or commitment to law as much as our riding roughshod over the un in 2003, or more recent arms sales to other dubious regimes. Once we eventually persuaded the French to stop supplying exocet to Argentina in 82 we were friends again. I'm not saying you are wrong, but that the damage is probably not that significant.

 

[Vic]

This 54 page bill has not been cooked up overnight. There was a white paper in July but I don't think they trailed that it would breach international law.

Will they allow proper scrutiny or will they rush it through "at pace" so they can then claim it was rushed through?

Did the cabinet know? Obviously not if cabinet ministers are resigning.

 

[Vic]

Has Ian Duncan Smith read section 53(4)(k)(iii) that says he can be taken out and shot?

 

[BobKowalski]

I don't think this will sully our reputation or commitment to law as much as our riding roughshod over the un in 2003, or more recent arms sales to other dubious regimes. Once we eventually persuaded the French to stop supplying exocet to Argentina in 82 we were friends again. I'm not saying you are wrong, but that the damage is probably not that significant.

The French imposed an immediate freeze on Exocet missiles to Argentina. The only ones Argentina had were the five originally sold prior to the conflict.

The damage of breaking a treaty will be extensive. You just don’t want to accept it.

 

[blueinsa]

The French imposed an immediate freeze on Exocet missiles to Argentina. The only ones Argentina had were the five originally sold prior to the conflict.

The damage of breaking a treaty will be extensive. You just don’t want to accept it.

It looks increasingly like Johnson, Cummings and this government couldn't give a fuck what anyone thinks.

Will enough Tory MP's rebel and vote it down is the only question now?

 

[journolud]

They'll say he was lying then.

If his mouth was moving and a sound was coming out he probably was

 

[jaseirai]

The French imposed an immediate freeze on Exocet missiles to Argentina. The only ones Argentina had were the five originally sold prior to the conflict.

The damage of breaking a treaty will be extensive. You just don’t want to accept it.

Cool story but not what happened at all

How France helped both sides in the Falklands War

France gave the UK a lot of help during the Falklands War, but a technical team in Argentina helped the country fire Exocet missiles at British warships.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[bluethrunthru]

So its ok for the EU to rip up the WA but not us. ha ha ha indeed.

If thats our avowed intention then I'd say any international agreement with any other country or body is now open to unilateral interpretation and alteration by the other body - thats the signal we would be sending out. What Brexit Ultra's can't get there are two sides to a border and we only influence our side when we leave. They won and they are getting what they want.

 

[blueinsa]

They won and they are getting what they want.

The UK voting to remain?

Ok.

 

[BobKowalski]

It looks increasingly like Johnson, Cummings and this government couldn't give a fuck what anyone thinks.

Will enough Tory MP's rebel and vote it down is the only question now?

No. They will vote for Party. A few will rebel but most are just cannon fodder. They vote how they are told. The outlier is the ERG who will want more concession like blocking the Channel Tunnel.

The problem I have is not that they don’t give a fuck, it’s just they are not very bright. The excuse of not having time is laughable, no one actually thinks they give a fuck about NI anyway and then just telegraphing what they intend to do is moronic and will just invite more discord and division by reopening old wounds. The Lords will pile in, the ERG will be back to being awkward and the EU isn’t going to agree a deal with us if we can’t stick to a deal for longer than nine months.

Oh, and we still in the middle of a pandemic.

 

[bluethrunthru]

 

[BobKowalski]

Cool story but not what happened at all

How France helped both sides in the Falklands War

France gave the UK a lot of help during the Falklands War, but a technical team in Argentina helped the country fire Exocet missiles at British warships.

www.bbc.co.uk

It is. The French put a freeze on missile sales. Argentina only had five in total. That a French team already in Argentina trousered some cash to service them is down to them, but the French Govt did not sell them missiles after the conflict started, which was the allegation.

The article actually states this.

 

[jaseirai]

It is. The French put a freeze on missile sales. Argentina only had five in total. That a French team already in Argentina trousered some cash to service them is down to them, but the French Govt did not sell them missiles after the conflict started, which was the allegation.

The article actually states this.

The original point was about our international reputation being sullied. The French have never had any sort of reputation other than this.

"We asked Mitterrand not to give assistance to the Argentinians. If you're asking me: 'Are the French duplicitous people?' the answer is: 'Of course they are, and they always have been.'"

 

[Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese]

The French imposed an immediate freeze on Exocet missiles to Argentina. The only ones Argentina had were the five originally sold prior to the conflict.

The damage of breaking a treaty will be extensive. You just don’t want to accept it.

Yes, probably a poor example off the top of my head tbh. I think you are right, the damage will be significant/extensive. I just don't think it will be long term.

 

[west didsblue]

Yes, probably a poor example off the top of my head tbh. I think you are right, the damage will be significant/extensive. I just don't think it will be long term.

Phew that’s alright then.
Just significant/extensive damage for just a few years not for decades.

 

[jaseirai]

Yes, probably a poor example off the top of my head tbh. I think you are right, the damage will be significant/extensive. I just don't think it will be long term.

Nothing wrong with your example.
Referring to the Dassault team in the article above

“But it is now clear that, thanks to tests they carried out, the Argentinians were able to fire Exocets at British forces from three previously faulty missile launchers”

 

[BobKowalski]

The original point was about our international reputation being sullied. The French have never had any sort of reputation other than this.

"We asked Mitterrand not to give assistance to the Argentinians. If you're asking me: 'Are the French duplicitous people?' the answer is: 'Of course they are, and they always have been.'"

And the French refer to us as ‘Perfidious Albion’, now that we have established we call each other rude names, the article you referenced states that Mitterrand backed the UK in the conflict and immediately embargoed arms sales.

The article even cites a security advisor to the French Defence Minister condemning the actions of the tech team based in Argentina.

John Nott the Defence Secretary at the time was also generous about French help during the conflict.

 

[The Light Was Yellow Sir]

And the French refer to us as ‘Perfidious Albion’, now that we have established we call each other rude names, the article you referenced states that Mitterrand backed the UK in the conflict and immediately embargoed arms sales.

The article even cites a security advisor to the French Defence Minister condemning the actions of the tech team based in Argentina.

John Nott the Defence Secretary at the time was also generous about French help during the conflict.

Sad to note that Perfidious now seems apt rather than name calling.