Download the revised withdrawal agreement below;
revised_withdrawal_agreement_including_protocol_on_ireland_and_nothern_ireland.pdf (938.4 KB)
Are you in favour?
- YES
- NO
0 voters
I need a fuctifino button, got lost reading the 1st page, then realised there was another 63âŚ
3 Likes
Please make it stop
4 Likes
It wonât go through parliament as labour said they would vote against before the documents were even released. Just because they want to be in no 10
Reminds me a bit of the halcyon days of English TV - Take your Pick with Michael MilesâŚ
Do you take the money or open the box (which might just be empty)
Well - do you feel lucky?
1 Like
I think this has some relevance stillâŚ
Did I read somewhere that it was no less a personage than the Right (dis)Honourable Jacob Grease Knob who introduced/supported an amendment creating this mess - hoist by his own petard or whatâŚ
Jo Maugham seems to be on a mission to hold Johnson to the law, even if it is an inconvenient one that the ERG itself passed.
I think the legislation in question made if illegal for NI to form part of a separate customes territory from the rest of the UK - However Iâm fairly sure that the revised WA does not do this - albeit by legal and technical sleight of hand.
1 Like
It seems very strange, but I have not heard any mention of this on the news at all.
1 Like
To be fair this was only arranged a few days ago and in reality has little chance of succeeding, there are several Brexit court actions currently ongoing so you canât expect the national media to report on every single one.
Decision of the outer house is expected about 5pm today JaneâŚ
âLibby Brooks (Guardian)
The court of session has finished hearing submissions on the latest legal challenge by anti-Brexit campaigner Jolyon Maugham QC, and Lord Pentland has said that he will give his decision by the end of the day.
Scotlandâs highest court heard that Boris Johnsonâs new withdrawal agreement to leave the European Union involves a âclear and unequivocal breachâ of national law.
The basis of the challenge is that the newly agreed deal with the EU contravenes legislation â originally amended by hardline Brexiters to stymie the backstop arrangement â that prevents Northern Ireland forming part of a separate customs territory.
Sitting before Pentland, the court of session in Edinburgh heard from Aidan OâNeill QC that the provisions of the new withdrawal agreement make it plain that Northern Ireland would also form part of a separate customs territory, that of the European Union, and that this breaches section 55 of the Taxation (Cross-border Trade) Act 2018, which states that it is âunlawful for Her Majestyâs government to enter into arrangements under which Northern Ireland forms part of a separate customs territory to Great Britainâ.
Noting that section 55 â the result of an amendment sponsored by the hardline European Research Group - âintended to tie the governmentâs handsâ, OâNeill added that whether Northern Ireland forms part of a separate customs territory after Brexit is a question of objective lawâ and that it âcanât be plainerâ that the UK government has acted unlawfully.
But Gerry Moynihan QC for the UK government argued that the petition was beyond the competency of the court, saying it was inviting the court to âinhibitâ consideration of the agreement. âThis is a manifest attempt to interfere with proceedings in parliament,â he told Pentland. He added that a substantial part of Northern Irelandâs trade would remain part of the UKâs customs territory and therefore section 55 would be complied with.
Moynihan also presented a letter from the Speakerâs counsel which warned that Maughamâs petition was asking for action that would âinevitably involve interference on proceedings in parliament and as a breach of the separation of powersâ.
The hearing, which concluded just before 1pm, involved testy exchanges between Pentland and OâNeill, as the judge attempted to clarify whether the court was in effect being asked to prevent parliament debating the deal on Saturday.
OâNeill said that he was asking the court to clarify the law for parliament, and that it would be parliamentâs decision whether to then repeal section 55 in order to retrospectively validate the agreement.â
This says it allâŚ
If it is such a good deal for Ireland, then why canât the whole UK benefit?
The easiest way to achieve this is for the UK to remain.
6 Likes
This is a great deal IMO. It is the original NI only backstop deal that the DUP scuppered but with the backstop actually implemented, probably permanently. Because it is unlikely there will ever be a Unionist majority in Stormont again to revoke it, plus sensible unionists already voted remain. The DUP are currently under the number 159 Routemaster and Bojo has his finger in the bell. Corbyn has proved himself to be a dithering, untrustworthy idiot, so no hope there. Another referendum could just as easily endorse as scrap Leave so Libdems useless too. Farrage just hovering to push no deal in an election.
Much as I dislike liar Bojo and the hateful ERG this deal gives a basis for future negotiations. Thatâs where workerâs rights, animal rights, food standards and environmental standards etc. etc. will be thrashed out. AND donât forget, all the cards are still in the EUâs hands.
2 Likes
Ducked again.
Who will guarantee our freedoms from politicians who put up two fingers against the law.
That sums it up nicely for me John, well said.
but why were they removed from this deal and isnât the threat of a âno dealâ exit still in play - if only 1 year down the line?
1 Like
It probably is Graham but then any future government could theoretically propose to change terms at any time after Brexit ?
I just donât trust BloJo and his dishonest band of cretins.
Seems that the British are becoming well known for their disrespect for treaties whilst they expect everyone else in the world to respect themâŚ
3 Likes
I believe Bojo more than Corbyn which doesnât say much for UK politicians.
3 Likes