I'll go with lazy and a sophist. He's not dim, but he's the kind of bright person that is entirely unsuitable to lead anything, never mind a country.
The fault is with the Withdrawal Agreement
The one that Boris Johnson signed himself and presented as a triumph? And is now illegally reneging on. That one?
And the bit he wants to do away with… that’s the bit that the last PM said we couldn’t sign up to, and when she did he used that to get rid of her, become PM, and then fight an election based on what he wanted. He literally became PM, and won a majority, based on his changes to the WA that he now says needs scrapping, and his supporters now say is the problem.
Ian Hislop on Johnson
Boris Johnson, people always ask me the same question, they say, 'Is Boris a very very clever man pretending to be an idiot?' And I always say, 'No.'
He clearly is rather dim. Well educated but dim. Just look at some of the things he has done like quoting Kipling in a temple in Myanmar or failing to understand his own agreement with the EU or catching covid by shaking hands with covid positive people
the supermarkets are saying in the event of ‘No Deal’ then the tariffs slapped on food will see a big rise in household bills.
Just going back to this...
As someone who works in the industry, we've had internal warnings about this since the referendum was announced. It was reported on, debated and thrown out by the leave campaign as "we'll get a deal, so don't worry about it".
After the referendum costs of food wholesale went up for my buisness by around 5 to 10%, yet the rrp on the product remained the same. Margins which are typically around 20% in food retail were seriously squeezed. Thankfully over the last 4 years rrp's have increased (although most consumers haven't noticed), but margins haven't had a similar increase. Example, Heinz beans were price marked at 59p in 2016, 89p in 2017/18 and now 99p a can....
All I can say is if we still sit with no deal in Dec I'll be emptying the bank account into European stock, as food inflation in curtain areas (olive oil for one) will be hitting 40% rises.
So, all you you incredibly intelligent, well read and articulate people (who are quite quick to judge others for not being so) what is the UK legislation attempting to do? Is it reneging on the entire WA? And why has it been enacted? As you are so intelligent and well read, it's not going to take very long is it...
Deleted
The aim is no deal and put blame on the EU for no deal
I'm sure that there are more intelligent people on here than me and there's probably errors, but from what I understand..... The legislation is trying to make sure that England Ireland Scotland and Wales can trade with the EU on equal terms, and not one country within the uk has preferable conditions...
The problem is that we've signed up to the legal framework that under curtain conditions, doesn't do this and effectively gives preference to NI. By over writing the withdrawal agreement we would brake international law and set a very very bad tone for future agreements.
Basically either BJ didn't read the small print or he did and wants to Scape goat this for no deal.
what is the UK legislation attempting to do?
It gives the UK govt the power to change rules on movement of goods that should be set out in the WA.
what is the UK legislation attempting to do?
The WA basically says that without new arrangements being agreed that minimise border requirements between the UK and the EU... some of the new border arrangements (that would be required both to satisfy international law, and EU law and WTO rules) will be implemented on the island of Ireland, and some will be down the Irish sea. A fudge like this (or a different one agreed by all parties) is essential to ensure that No Deal doesn't completely wreck the Good Friday Agreement. The new legislation is putting two fingers up to all that, and saying that we won't put in place the arrangements required between GB and NI that we signed up to in the WA... and instead will leave Ireland to find some magic way to put all the arrangements in place on the Ireland of Ireland... which they can not.
There are people now running the UK that not only want the UK to be able to operate outside the EU, but want other countries to be pulled out of the EU as well, notably, if possible, Ireland... and they do not want the Good Friday agreement protected, and give not one damn about people living in Northern Ireland who are Irish... actually, that's too charitable... they give not one damn about anyone living in Northern Ireland.
To be honest, one of the main issues that is being faced in the discussions at the moment is that the EU has got used to trying to be firm and watching the Theresa May era team cave in and make changes. Possibly an issue with her wanting to be in control and not listen to others (something she is apparently well known for) and possibly because she was a remainer at heart. The difference now is that the negotiating team are standing their ground and not backing down when the EU team were expecting them to.
FFS, thats the opposite of what actually happened!
Johnson caved completely on NI , something May had steadfastly refused to do for her entire time as PM
Johnson folded in the WA & will fold to get an FTA, he will fold on state aid, he will fold on food standards (so he can declare ending the made-up food blockade of NI a victory) & he will fold on fishing
(& then in 6 months time he will try & get out of those promises too)
The legislation is trying to make sure that England Ireland Scotland and Wales can trade with the EU on equal terms, and not one country within the uk has preferable conditions…
Nope - on the internal market its to make sure that Westminster sets the rules and that pesky Scotland cannot stop the import of substandard US food.
Its sold as a level internal playing field but thats actually what its about
Oh, that's exactly what it is... "taking back control" to Westminster, and specifically to the executive there.
The Internal Market Bill is a naked power grab to centralise power and neuter devolved government.
But its more specific and targetted than 'Taking Back Control' to Westminster. It's being taken back to a specific address. No 10 Downing Street.
The Gruesome Brexiteer trio of Cummings, Johnson, and Gove have nothing but contempt for parliamentary democracy, as they have demonstrated continually since they got into number 10 with their proroguing etc.
Once we're out of the EU, they get the chance to re-write our unwritten constitution and they want to do that with no interference from parliament and certainly not from Brussels or Holyrood or anywhere else.
The arrogance of Cummings is staggering. He's our de facto PM already, but he'd happily tear up all our democratic checks and balances in a heartbeat. That's what all the threats and bullying of the civil service is all about. He doesn't think anything should interfere with the executive (ie: him) and its (his) power to do whatever the hell it (he) likes
I’ll go with lazy and a sophist. He’s not dim, but he’s the kind of bright person that is entirely unsuitable to lead anything, never mind a country.
Yeah, he's basically a very successful blagger. He never believed in Brexit. I am pretty sure he wanted a 55/45 remain/leave result so he could shout loudly and get to challenge for the leadership on a eurosceptic ticket, but with the safety net of not actually being forced to actually 'do' Brexit. When Leave won he simply switched to plan B which was to go all Brexity until he was the only one left to be PM.
He doesn't give a **** about anyone or anything but himself. Kids all over the place that he's walked out on, sticking his todger wherever he fancies, making up quotes in newspaper columns, nailing his colours to the Brexit mast out of sheer opportunism. The list is endless.
He is a freewheeling jazz hatter who just takes the easy option to advance himself whenever he can.
end up in a situation of the EU being in breach of international law. In a bigger way than the UK is. The fault is with the Withdrawal Agreement that, in fairness, both sides agreed. The biggest problem with it is that the UK Govt has made a complete hash of explaining what they are doing and why.
I'm really struggling with your logic here...
Borris Cummings want to break the withdrawal agreement.
Borris Cummings want to break an international peace treaty (the Belfast agreement).
The conservatives want to break 2 international deals, one historic and monumental, and the other to be fair was a compete farce, and unachievable but they are just plain untrustworthy.
These are the sort of people I'd learn quickly never to buy a beer for, because I'd know I'd never get one back as they've demonstrated that they are scroungers and liars.
Europe is thinking the same, and the rest of the word, too.
That's not a good way to make friends and gain trust.
The EU has been completely measured and pragmatic in its responses to the UK hissy fit.
To go back to the comments about voting as an emotional reaction
At least they had something to be aggrieved about... My mum voted out because she wanted to see a certain thing on the robinsons jam jar for FFS..... My dad's reason was far more sinister.. Blaming it on the Germans
Here's an example of his skills of diplomacy
You need to think through your logic again. In actual fact, the recent UK legislation is precisely to prevent breaching the Good Friday agreement. If we keep to the WA and end up with a no deal, there is the potential then for the EU to invoke / exercise "direct effect". Which effectively then interferes within the sovereign jurisdiction of the UK through applying tariffs to goods passing between mainland Britain and Northern Ireland. This contradicts article 4 which states that “Northern Ireland is part of the customs territory of the UK”. The basis of the WA is that we would agree and reach an FTA with the EU. However, if that doesn't happen then we get a problem with the WA. And that then potentially leaves us in the position of an entity (the EU) appearing to interfere with the affairs of a sovereign state (the UK). The purpose then of this recent legislation is to prevent that happening - in the event of a no deal.
Quite possibly / probably BJ wanted a no deal Brexit all along and the strong negotiations stance over the recent months has been part of that plan. We don't really know. It is also arguable that the EU still can't quite get its head around the fact that a member state would wish to leave and still wants to be able to meddle / interfere / influence UK affairs. But the point of leaving the EU is to prevent that.
The basis of the WA is that we would agree and reach an FTA with the EU. However, if that doesn’t happen then we get a problem with the WA. And that then potentially leaves us in the position of an entity (the EU) appearing to interfere with the affairs of a sovereign state (the UK). The purpose then of this recent legislation is to prevent that happening – in the event of a no deal.
No… the WA sets out exactly how NI will be dealt with in the absence of a FTA+ to reduce border friction… and ‘we’ signed up to that. To retrospectively change that, without involving the Irish government, is ripping up the Good Friday agreement, and putting Ireland in the impossible position of implementing border controls on the island of Ireland to make up for our own lack of will to do as we said we would, agreed we would, signed we would, and legally bound ourselves to do.
In actual fact, the recent UK legislation is precisely to prevent breaching the Good Friday agreement.
By knackering trade completely and plunging the whole of the uk into (more) poverty? that's what I meant by logical fallacy. It's not a strategy for growth, lets be honest. Don't forget, the WA was borrises 'oven ready' deal. He now says it's ridiculous.
Quite possibly / probably BJ wanted a no deal Brexit all along
I don't actually think he did, he's just playing his cards and lining his pockets before he gets the hell out of dodge, leaving the country to burn... that would be in line with his previous form. You can see it in PMQ's , he just doesn't care as long as he delivers brexit. Then he'll high tail it into the sunset shouting 'I succeeded'!
Keep drinking the Kool Aid!
The EU hasn't interfered with UK jurisdiction, it's the current executive who are playing around. When BJ stripped out the safeguards from the WA and presented it as his own it was pointed out to him that it meant an internal border in the UK. Of course he then blustered and moved the subject on, such is his way. What Cummins/Johnson are now doing is tearing up an international agreement (that has nothing to do with the EU) that they find inconvenient.
Of course the UK reneging on the GFA also means that there'd be no trade deal with the USA - Congress has stated as such. Also odd that Cummins/Johnson seem so keen on a trade deal with the USA at a possible benefit of 0.16% of GDP over five years yet not so keen for one that prevents a massive hit to the UK economy.
The EU's stance throughout this reminds me of the Black Knight scene from Monty Python and the Holy Grail:
EU: "you've shot yourself in the foot!"
UK: "'tis only a scratch."
EU: "Now you've cut your leg off!"
UK: "'tis but a minor flesh wound!"
Etc.
the point is that Johnson knew all of this when he signed
it was specifically flagged up that it was a problem at the time
https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainers/brexit-deal-withdrawal-agreement
In actual fact, the recent UK legislation is precisely to prevent breaching the Good Friday agreement.
No it is not. Jeepers. the GFA mweans no border on the island of ireland. By reneging on the Irish sea boarder they are forcing a border on the island of ireland thus breaching the GFA
We've agreed to mutually incompatible things. Whose fault is that? It's not the EU's is it? It's no good pissing and moaning at them.
It is also arguable that the EU still can’t quite get its head around the fact that a member state would wish to leave and still wants to be able to meddle / interfere / influence UK affairs.
The EU will always have ‘influence’ as regards NI, while Ireland is a member, because the Good Friday Agreement says that the people of Northern Ireland can choose to be Irish, without having to move South. The people of Northern Ireland have rights granted to them that the rest of us in the UK do not, some of those rights are as EU citizens, even if they have never lived outside the UK.
NI is not Kent.
The Good Friday Agreement is a legally binding international treaty. A *ing important one too.
The EU is a signatory to that. As is the UK. Only one of those parties is presently taking it’s legally binding duties as signatories seriously.
Guess which one?
The other party has a dimwit like Suella Braverman engaging in legal gymnastics to seek to justify breaking international law
If you want to refer to that as interference and meddling you may want to lay off the Farage speeches/rants for a while.
And this government need to stop acting like petulant *s and take their legal responsibilities seriously
@Binners - actually the signatories to the GFA were the UK and Eire so not really the EU. Your other points stand.
Fair do’s @whitestone. I’ve just had a read up on it. More than Dominic Raab managed 😂
I thought the EU and the US we’re co-signatories too. Sort of guarantors?
They’re clearly both taking the matter of legal obligations seriously. Unlike our shower of a government. The EU is simply representing the interests of a member state, and in doing so demonstrating admirably the advantages of EU membership
The irony.
Having spent a lot of time in Northern Ireland during the troubles, the flippant manner with which the GFA is treated by these idiots - as a mere inconvenience to be got round - is the thing that annoys me most about Brexit. And there are many, many things that annoy me about Brexit. Pretty much everything about it, in fact
I had to look up (Wikipedia) who the signatories were.
The Wikipedia article has this telling paragraph:
Because the Agreement commits the government to enshrine the European Convention on Human Rights in law and allows Northern Ireland residents access to the European Court of Human Rights, it required enactment of the Human Rights Act 1998. Consequently, the Agreement was a significant factor preventing the repeal of that Act and its replacement with the proposed British Bill of Rights that Prime Minister David Cameron had promised.[29]
Which is very telling - get rid of the GFA and the government could remove protections for human rights.
Brexit being (partly) about control of borders there are basically there are three options:
1. Northern Ireland remains in the UK with a hard border between NI and the Republic.
2. Northern Ireland remains in the UK but with a border in the Irish Sea.
3. Northern Ireland is ceded to the Republic and unification takes place.
1. would breach the GFA
You could just Read the actual document:
Its an international agreement between the UK, and Ireland, it says so at the bottom.
TJ - I know. Going that route would mean little to no chance of getting favourable trade deals with anyone (with any sense).
No ‘infrastructure’ to be on the border
I seem to recall intellectual heavywight David Davis saying they would get round this by ...erm... something, something.... ‘technology’
That went well.
And if Dave can’t find a solution, what hope for the rest of us?
the problem is that there is no other place in the world that the GFA could exist where 2 countries share a border but are able to keep it entirely open for the residents to move goods & people across freely, the CU & SM underpin the agreement as it was negotiated
RIGHTS, SAFEGUARDS AND EQUALITY OF OPPORTUNITY
• the right to equal opportunity in all social and economic activity, regardless of class, creed, disability, gender or ethnicity;
I guess this is the paragraph that really sticks in the conservatives throats...
The problem is that Vote Leave/The Brexit wing of the Tory party have lied and lied again about NI - claiming that somehow you could have it being both still fully in the UK and having no border with the republic/the EU.
There was some muttering about a magical tech solution that seems to have been forgotten about, but AFAICS there is actually no way of resolving this - let alone their claims that it can be done without extra costs/hassle/red tape.
The richest person in the UK - Jim Ratcliffe - head of Ineos and a big vote leave supporter has just moved to Monaco to save £4bn in tax payments.
Cheers pal
Came here to post that. What a total scumbag.
'We send 350m a week to the EU - why not use that to plug that taxation black hole left by that Ineos ****er?'
But you just have to remember how much money his UK based businesses will save once they no longer have to worry about the environmental controls and the rights of their workers, presently seen as a cost imposed on them by the EU.
That’s why him and his mates supported Brexit. They’re going to make a killing from the race to the bottom it will usher in
Until the EU decides to ban the import of petrochemicals from plants that more polluting than those that comply with EU regulations. I'd like to see that happen, it might be Brexit that provokes it.
Where is his Grenadier going to be produced now? Still Wales? Or elsewhere, to avoid the Brexit mess he encouraged the rest of us to trap ourselves in. Sticking it to the elites again... they can always step out of the shit they convinced the average Joe to saddle themselves with for the rest of their UK* bound lives.
*England&Wales long term... not taking any route out of this would be madness for the people of NI and Scotland now... especially as most of them were wise enough to vote against this self imposed destruction of life chances for all but the elites.
