Forum menu
No deal = unilateral revocation of A50 and we start from scratch.
Not a safe assumption, extracts from Supreme Court judgement in Miller case.
Para 36
The applicants’ case in that connection is that when Notice is given, the United Kingdom will have embarked on an irreversible course that will lead to much of EU law ceasing to have effect in the United Kingdom, whether or not Parliament repeals the 1972 Act. As Lord Pannick QC put it for Mrs Miller, when ministers give Notice they will be “pulling … the trigger which causes the bullet to be fired,with the consequence that the bullet will hit the target and the Treaties will cease to apply”. In particular, he said, some of the legal rights which the applicants enjoy under EU law will come to an end. This, he submitted, means that the giving of Notice would pre-empt the decision of Parliament on the Great Repeal Bill. It would be tantamount to altering the law by ministerial action, or executive decision,without prior legislation, and that would not be in accordance with our law
We start by addressing the fact that the EU Treaties contained no provision entitling a member state to withdraw at the time of the 1972 Act, and that such a provision, article 50, was introduced by the TFEU in 2008. Although its invocation will have the inevitable consequence which Lord Pannick described (as mentioned in para 36 above), article 50 operates only on the international plane, and is not therefore brought into UK law through section 2 of the 1972 Act, as explained in para 79 above.
Mefty - thank you. You just produced figures that show in the 2014 to present range France and the UK are virtually identical. Which backs up the figures I posted previously (which you said I didn’t).
Did you look at your link? Click on your link. Highlight UK and France. Set to 2014 onwards. Try and spot difference.
I agree that France shows more temporary employment. Does UK zero hours count as temporary or permanent on that graph?
when Notice is given, the United Kingdom will have embarked on an irreversible course
That's the UK supreme Court opinion though, in the context of that case, the European Court is the highest court in this particular context, as membership is a matter between the EU and the UK? If the European Court agrees its reversible, then surely its reversible?
The UK supreme Court cannot really judge international cases.
article 50 operates only on the international plane
End of the day, these are all uncharted legal waters, if all concerned parties agree, I. E. The EU commission and the UK, there is not really a legal case to answer anyway in my view. They can just do it.
[quote=jambalaya ]@matty, thecaptain amd mrleb did you watch the QT clip ?
I tried, but sadly found it impossible to pay any attention to somebody describing MPs acting as part of a democracy as "treacherous". He's just another vocal Brexiteer who doesn't understand, and far from typical even of Leave voters.
In 15-19 yes, but not 20-24.
The UK supreme Court cannot really judge European cases.
The Supreme Court is more than capable of interpreting International Treaties it is part of their role and frankly, most lawyers would say it has better judges than the ECJ - this isn't a "we are best point", Germans would probably say the same about their highest court judges, it is just the judges will generally have much more influence in their home jurisdiction.
If all EU countries agree then it can be revoked, but it is unsafe to assume this can be done unilaterally.
[i]What's happened is Parliament will now have a say on the final deal, which is only democratic.[/i]
We should have a Referendum on the final deal . . . .
Meanwhile back in Brussels....
At least some people are looking forwards not backwards
We're all looking forwards. I'm not quite sure what you're saying THM. We are looking forward to solve our problems.
We should have a Referendum on the final deal . . . .
No. Will of the people must be obeyed.
Oh.. hang on...
Yes,we're not all looking back to before 1974 😯
Given that a large %age of remoaners argue that we don’t have a sufficiently informed electorate - and providing evidence to prove this - why would anyone be proposing another referendum? Illogical
[quote=mefty ]If all EU countries agree then it can be revoked, but it is unsafe to assume this can be done unilaterally.
That's a fair point, it can't be unilateral, the court was correct in their judgement about that. However they didn't make any ruling on the politics - just to borrow a Leaver's argument, WTO Brexit is bad for the EU and they won't let that happen if they can avoid it. If MPs vote against the deal then that certainly isn't what we'll get, which is why jamba is upset about the rebellion (if it really would result in WTO then he'd be jumping for joy).
Mefty - fair play.
Of course split men and women and you get a different answer again.
Checking the minimum school leaving age doesn’t answer the question - appears to be identical - though that isn’t the average school leaving age of course.
Checking the trends, France has slightly lower NEETs in the 15-19 throughout, and slightly higher (but similar to the UK) 20-24 until 2015. By eye it looks like France is better off overall than the UK until 2015.
Then there is s step change - maybe 5% higher overall in France.
Did something happen in a France in 2014/15?
Also the discrepancy between the Eurostat data and the OECD data is interesting - the Eurostat data only had a 1.6% difference, not around 5%. I wonder what the collection methodologies are like.
Given that a large %age of remoaners
What’s “large”?
What evidence do you have for this statement?
The Supreme Court is more than capable of interpreting International Treaties it is part of their role
IS it really ?
Genuine Q FWIW
“the general rule is that the power to make or unmake treaties is exercisable without legislative authority and that the exercise of that power is not reviewable by the courts - see Civil Service Unions case cited above, at pp 397-398.” 3. But it went on to explain: “This principle rests on the so-called dualist theory, which is based on the proposition that international law and domestic law operate in independent spheres. The prerogative power to make treaties depends on two related propositions. The first is that treaties between sovereign states have effect in international law and are not governed by the domestic law of any state. …. The second proposition is that, although they are binding on the United Kingdom in international law, treaties are not part of UK law and give rise to no legal rights or obligations in domestic law.
Goes on to cite cases where they dont rule on International law - seems fairly obvious UK courts cannot rule on international law
Lord Mance current deputy chair of Supreme court giving a lecture - no expert but did read the judgement Re Miller
EDIT: Reading on my own ink 😳 you are correct
Dualism does not therefore mean that international law issues never come before domestic courts. Increasingly over the last two or so decades, they have done so. In the United Kingdom, this is in part due to the European Convention on Human Rights (the “ECHR”), which only became part of our domestic law in October 2000. I shall return to the ECHR later in this talk, But, even apart from the ECHR, there has been a striking increase in reliance on and the potential relevance of international law in domestic courts.
This thread DD with the IB being particularly vociferous
The good news is the EU have said no renegotaition, the bad news is if Grieve, Labour etc vote down the deal we will get WTO with just a few short months to prepare, perhaps less.
Ah, so this is the starting point for blaming the likely bit of a mess on remainers ? I thought leavers thought wto would be ace?
IS it really ?
Yes because we import alot of treaties into domestic law, double tax treaties, echr etc.
Did something happen in a France in 2014/15?
Their recovery isn't creating jobs to the same extent that ours has, however their productivity is higher but at what cost?
@spekkie “we” ? You are eligible and registered to vote in the UK ?
Re QT I think the speaker managed to challange all the STW Remain steriotypes and made a clear and simple point. A50 is irreversible and works to a specific schedule, MPs voted 498 vs 114 to Leave the EU. That was the moment democracy spoke at Westminster, the deal is irrelevant to triggering the exit. Grieve et al are being highly duplicitous.
@Horatio yes hugely divisive. I read a piece recently on fall out from the Scottish Indy Ref where the fall out in social groups is still being felt. That’s the reason the vast majority of people in the UK don’t want a second referendum. As for the WTO option one of the reasons that is my preferemce is it guarantees a genuine [b]clean Brexit[/b]. I have little trust that May will deliver anything other than a fudge. Payment for a transition we’ve already seen and I have no doubt we will see more messy “compromises”. Short sharp shock of switch to WTO then get on with focusing globally.
Good to see Boris in Japan drinking Fukushima fruit juice, powerful and highly visible international statement of support. A few US steaks and some KFC next will do nicely.
[quote=chestrockwell ]I thought leavers thought wto would be ace?
The hardcore like jamba would, which is why I know he's [s]lying[/s] using alternative facts here, because he doesn't appear to be happy with the rebellion.
[quote=jambalaya ]Re QT I think the speaker managed to challange all the STW Remain steriotypes
By describing democratically elected MPs having a democratic vote as "treacherous"? 😆 - yep, that's really knocking down the Brexiteer stereotype.
A50 is irreversible
Until it isn't. If that really is the case, why are you and he so upset?
That was the moment democracy spoke at Westminster
we understand that to Brexiteers democracy is a one time only thing.
Good to see Boris in Japan drinking Fukushima fruit juice, powerful and highly visible international statement of support. A few US steaks and some KFC next will do nicely.
It's nice to agree with you on something - I'd also like to see Boris spending more time eating and drinking, best use for his mouth I can think of.
"unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned, unanimously decides to extend this period."
There's no legal issue here a 50 states it.
the starting point for blaming the likely bit of a mess on remainers ?
Well they are are already blaming parliament for parliaminting. Judges for judging, I don't imagine that landscape will change.
[url= http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/media/dacre-proud-of-himself-for-trousering-half-a-million-in-eu-subsidies-while-branding-people-traitors-20171214141024 ]http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/media/dacre-proud-of-himself-for-trousering-half-a-million-in-eu-subsidies-while-branding-people-traitors-20171214141024[/url]
WTO makes sense if you prepare for it - hence all the anger at Hammond dragging his feet - if the deal gets voted down on say March 15 what happens then ?
The rebels are deeply untrsutworthy.
There's no legal issue here a 50 states it.
Well it is a statement of the obvious, if all parties to an agreement agree to change it then they always can.
That was the moment democracy spoke at Westminster
To me that reads a lot like you are saying that democracy had had its one chance to speak and now it should shut up and get out the way so ministers can roll through new laws unchallenged and decide the future of the country without parliamentary scrutiny and democratic voting messing things up.
[quote=mefty ]Well it is a statement of the obvious, if all parties to an agreement agree to change it then they always can.
Glad to see you agree. What do you think the chances are of everybody agreeing to do something which is in all of their interests?
Given that a large %age of remoaners argue that we don’t have a sufficiently informed electorate - and providing evidence to prove this - why would anyone be proposing another referendum? Illogical
Perhaps, but also illogical to use that fact to rule out a second referendum (where people are now somewhat more informed about the issues) whilst sticking to the result of the first one, no?
Also ludicrous to keep banging on about democracy as if it's one single thing. I can't understand why otherwise intelligent people don't get this. We don't have a democracy. We have a system of government that has elements that are described as democratic. Like everywhere else. Democracy is a concept that has to be implemented. Like freedom. Or capitalism, or socialism.
Glad to see you agree. What do you think the chances are of everybody agreeing to do something which is in all of their interests?
I think it is dangerous to depend upon assumptions.
The assumption being that a vote against the deal agreed will lead to WTO?
No, but I think you know that
The rebels are deeply untrsutworthy.
Well, they are Tories after all..
[quote=mefty ]No, but I think you know that
Oh, that's a relief - you disagree with jamba and THM then?
[quote=jambalaya ]if Grieve, Labour etc vote down the deal we will get WTO
[quote=teamhurtmore ]More realistically- no deal = WTO not the status quo
looking forwards
Always.
What I see is a party stricken with division trying to lead the country down a path with little or idea on how to achieve their aims.
On top of that trying to do their best to ensure that it all happens behind closed doors.
All this time a section of the populace is being spoon fed lies of treason & enemies f democracy.
To cap it all you brazenly mock anyone who tcan see the truth of what is being attempted.
I've said this before & I'll say it again: you & your ilk would be resisting like mad if it weren't your own mob at the wheel.
Your hypocrisy is staggering.
The underlying reason most brexies don't want a second referendum is for one reason only.
After the utter mess even the start of the Brexit process has been and a lot of truths coming out about what Brexit really DOES mean a lot of people are likey to change their vote. Simple as that.
If Brexit is still the shining star for this country a second referendum should be a massive reaffirmation of the first ref, yes?
Some how I doubt it though.
Oh, that's a relief - you disagree with jamba and THM then?
No, but most would understand that.
Well now I'm really confused - so you agree with jamba and THM and assume that a vote against the deal will lead to WTO?
FFS your side is full of fully paid up BS everything they have said was a lie. £350 for the Nhsthrough to they can whistle for a paymentThe rebels are deeply untrsutworthy.
In general very few people are doing well on the trustworthy scale, politicians or STW posters, but the leave campaign are amongst the worst offender
As for you Turkey, the EZ "errors", Immigration etc its hard to think of a poster on here who has been seem as less trustworthy than you hence the hashtag for your claims. Glass houses dude glass houses
I'm sure you will get there.
[quote=mefty ]I'm sure you will get there.
Oh, I get it, it's Schrodinger's assumption, you both agree and disagree with jamba and THM depending on what point you're trying to make. But to help me out, just for the duration of your post, what is your assumption of what will happen if the deal is voted down?
😆
Mefty, you've either not been paying attention or you are deliberately trying to mislead. The UK supreme court was not asked to rule on whether A50 could be revoked or not. All educated commentary argued that it is, though I admit it is not crystal clear. However it is practically impossible that the EU would attempt to eject the UK against its will.
Fully aware, disagree fundamentally with your view on consensus, commentary by Supreme Court judges is to be taken seriously even if not part of the ratio decidendi.
Are you suggesting there is no possible mechanism which could be found for the UK to stay in the EU?
Mefty - had another look at your OCED data. The discontinuity seems to be just in the 20-24 data. It’s not reflected in the 15-19 data, it is in the 25-29 data but to a far lesser degree than if it carried through (ie it’s only in the 20-24 data) and it’s not in the Eurostat data. It’s also mainly in the male data - though that could be real.
Looks like dicky OECD data in the 20-24 range.
It happens.
Can you think of any non-anecdotal reason why only 20-24 year olds would be affected?
Jamba - you said
That’s the reason the vast majority of people in the UK don’t want a second referendum.
Now while I personally don’t want a second referendum, that statement is bollocks. As you well know.
42:33 and falling is not the vast majority.
[url= https://whatukthinks.org/eu/questions/do-you-think-there-should-be-a-second-referendum-to-accept-or-reject-the-terms-of-britains-exit-from-the-eu-once-they-have-been-agreed/ ]Click here[/url]
You’ll be claiming 51.9:48.1 is an overwhelming majority next.
The real problem with s second referendum is how would you agree a question?
Its odd the number of times he needs to be asked to just state his view- you really should be a politician
Its pointless debate of hypotheticals
Like our pledge to the EU to pay none of it is a deal till all of it is a deal.
Its still most likely we leave, but not inevitable, and it obvious we can stop this process if we want and the EU cannot make us leave if we choose not to.
Are you suggesting there is no possible mechanism which could be found for the UK to stay in the EU?
No, you will get there if you try harder.
[quote=Junkyard ]the EU cannot make us leave if we choose not to.
cite 😉
My understanding is that we would have to get agreement from the EU if we chose not to leave - otherwise the strict implementation of A50 comes into play and we officially leave in March 2019. We can't unilaterally retract A50.
It's just that I can't see any situation in which the EU wouldn't agree to a request to retract A50.
aracer - someone’s enjoying being a bit of an idiot tonight. Let him.
I think you’re not a million miles from reality.
[quote=mefty ]No, you will get there if you try harder.
anybody here have experience of nailing down a jelly?
@igm - I'm enjoying watching him squirm
Can you think of any non-anecdotal reason why only 20-24 year olds would be affected?
That's when people have come out of training, if you look at papers on the subject France appears to take a fair bit longer than the UK to transition youth into the workforce. Do the Eurostat figures have the same splits?
apparently you need to try harder 🙄
Now stop picking on him by asking him what he thinks and expecting him to tell you ....what sort of debate will that lead to ?
I think THM may have two users
[quote=Junkyard ]apparently you need to try harder
Is that somehow different to persistence?
That's when people have come out of training
So your argument is that school leavers go straight into work while graduates take a few years?
Not buying that one. Very poor.
The split in Eurostat is 15-24 as I recall. You can mirror that in OCED and you get a different answer.
Still looks like an anomaly in the OCED data, both in time series and in age split.
There will be a reason but it will be deep in the methodology and a reminder as to why data has to be treated with caution until you can show provenance and corroboration. As any scientist would know. (Engineer here honest).
My understanding is that we would have to get agreement from the EU if we chose not to leave - otherwise the strict implementation of A50 comes into play and we officially leave in March 2019. We can't unilaterally retract A50.
Well done
It's just that I can't see any situation in which the EU wouldn't agree to a request to retract A50.
Plenty of Federalists are quite happy to see us leave.
Has anyone else done an idiot troll scale / ranking for the posters on here?
Clearly I would never post such a thing.
So your argument is that school leavers go straight into work while graduates take a few years?
No short term technical training very common in France, which begins immediately after school, if you look at the tertiary education figures this is much higher in France than anywhere but Spain.
You still need to explain the time series discontinuity in that one age group and the disagreement with the Eurostat data.
(PS previously you told me tertiary education was about the same in France and the UK - I didn’t check, but given your last statement on tertiary education, you weren’t lying were you?)
Just to prevent stealth edits.
No short term technical training very common in France, which begins immediately after school, if you look at the tertiary education figures this is much higher in France than anywhere but Spain.
previously you told me tertiary education was about the same in France and the UK
It isas percentage of overall population, which are the numbers I did on a back of an envelpe, we have far more doing degrees but less doing technical so the two more or less net out.
[quote=mefty ]Plenty of Federalists are quite happy to see us leave.
Interesting assumption
for the love of god dont ask him to prove it 😉
mefty - Member
previously you told me tertiary education was about the same in France and the UK
It isas percentage of overall population, which are the numbers I did on a back of an envelpe, we have far more doing degrees but less doing technical so the two more or less net out.
Lovely theory. The problem is your nested theories have to all be true for you to be correct, but don’t tie up with the numbers. And while you use one part of your theory to try and explain discrepancies in one way, that introduces discrepancies which you try to explain using another theory that doesn't tie up with the first.
You still can’t offer a salient, men only event that would explain why men aged 20-24 in 2015 and 2016 on the OECD data seems out of kilter with the rest of the OECD data for other years or men or women and also with the Eurostat data.
You are hanging the your entire theory on two data points out of dozens. And more worryingly they are the last two data points in a series - might be a trend starting, might just be a couple of odd years, might be dicky data.
Ultimately the French and UK positions are similar and have swapped around a bit over the last 10 years.
‘A’ for effort though.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-42375059
EU leaders have agreed Brexit talks can move on, with the UK staying in the customs union, single market and under the European Court of Justice's jurisdiction during the transition.Conservative MP Jacob Rees-Mogg said that would be unacceptable.
But Tory remainer Ken Clarke said the UK must not "go off a cliff edge".
You can see why TM obviously doesn't want to let MP's have too much say is that can't agree on anything at all and she knows that whatever deal she manages to get will probably only keep 20% of them happy while making the other 80% irate.
Like the rest of the country then.
Not sure the views of of Rees Mogg as a religious fundamentalist/Victorian mill owner/anti women's rights supporter should be kept happy by TM? As a human being I find him unacceptable. Ken Clarke on the other hand is driven by common sense.
Not sure the views of of Rees Mogg as a religious fundamentalist/Victorian mill owner/anti women's rights supporter should be kept happy by TM? As a human being I find him unacceptable.
[img] 
[/img]
Neither do I but he has a vote and a bunch of other MPs who seem to agree with him - remember it's how we ended up in this mess.
The people who decided Rees Mogg is fit to hold office worry me more than Rees Mogg.
And I agree Mogg Jenkins redwood Johnson gove and whole load of backbench closet racists yearning for the 1950s who have no desire to integrate/work with the world at large (unless it turns a profit) Has anyone noticed how this group of people only ever talk about trade (money) and nothing else.
Oh and while I am on a rant the question time Barnsley bloke who was much lauded by the press as a loyal working class Tory was talking out of his arse, as I have said before I want this Brexit to be as miserable as possible due to the fact that a awful lot of "working class" people need to ****ing wake up!,
Put your trust in Rees Mogg poor people he has a job at "Mill" waiting for you and your children.
The "mill" will be a call centre where they call up Indians and try and get them to switch their electricity supplier.
Put your trust in Rees Mogg poor people he has a job at "Mill" waiting for you and your children.
They love him reading the comments on the express website.. 😥
I couldn't think of anyone worse for the 'working class' to back, but they seem blind to his wider philosophy because he's a brexiter...
I saw this come up. Speaks for itself really.
[url= https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4639/38208136015_6b0961c729_z.jp g" target="_blank">https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4639/38208136015_6b0961c729_z.jp g"/> [/img][/url]
Ok let's have a Swiss type deal. But would Mogg thinks that's out of Europe enough?
Switzerland is in Schengen.
Ok let's have a Swiss type deal. But would Mogg thinks that's out of Europe enough?
He would probably prefer to be on another planet. I think most of us would be pleased to see him go.
Switzerland is in Schengen
This is the level of idiocy we are dealing with.
Hannan is an MEP, he probably knows damn well, he certainly should given his job title.. but doesn't give a damn.
Swiss deal is far from complete.
You “should” be wishing and supporting a deal that specifically addressed OUR needs. Radical thought I know 😯
(IGM. Did you alter ego appear yesterday? Unlike you )
(@thm: I don't think you looked at my post on page 1,161).