Reneging on the Withdrawal Agreement

Is this just some negotiating tactic, or is the government really prepared to turn the UK into a pariah? And, if the former, is that really any more acceptable?

Quite apart from being shoddy behaviour, it's also a slap in the face for the electorate. I, and probably most others, only voted Cobservative because of the WA. 

Absolute disgrace. I gave to admire Ursula for her diplomatic and understated response, in the circs.

(It'll probably never get through the Lords, anyway)

I suggest you write to your Tory MP and tell them that, Dux. 

The Lords can't do anything apart from slow it down and beat their chests. Ultimately the commons decides.

This feels like the scene in the movie where the bank robbers kill one of the hostages and throw the corpse out the window to show how serious they are. It never ends well for the bank robbers.

They don't give a shit about the electorate.  They know they only got over their win because of Corbyn and a portion of people like you who had a nuanced view to supporting their Brexit approach, and know by next election those won't be factors anymore.  So they are doing what they want to further Dom's agenda.

CAN ANYONE ACTUALLY EXPLAIN WHY BREXIT BRITAIN - HAVING ONLY JUST UNSHACKLED ITSELF FROM THE TOTALITARIAN JACKBOOT OF THE EUSSR - SHOULD STICK TO AN AGREEMENT IT MADE?!?

#SOVEREIGNTY #LIBERATION #FREEDOM

I think Geoffrey Cox QC saying he won't vote for it could signal they would lose a vote if put.  That would be mega lolz.

My suspicion is that this is a tactic to remove Barnier from the process and get van der Leyen, Merkel and Macron more directly involved. The U.K. negotiators clearly (whether rightly or wrongly) see Barnier as a blockage.

It’s quite a crude and crass way of trying to do it but I suspect if they get a deal with more sensible Tories will forget about it and there’s some red meat for the headbangers in the meantime.

Probably also a calculation that it puts Starmer in a difficult place because his natural instinct will be to oppose but why international treaty obligations are important is unlikely to be a vote winner in Bishop Auckland.

^^^^^ That is quite interesting analysis, but i think it is giving them FAR too much credit for thinking.

Dux - they actively want a no deal Brexit. Cummings really believes it is the best outcome (because he is a fvcking loon).  They were a little bit scared of it pre-covid because the short term disruption might have played very badly politically but that will be lost in the chaos of the covid disruption. The tin foil hat wearing voice in the back of my head actually wonders whether the reason the government is so keen to lock down again is to make sure they have this cover when the Brexit sh1t hits the fan. 

What you have to remember is that Cummings & Co don't really care about economic growth, let along progress more broadly for the UK. They care about having as much freedom as possible to re-make London into Singapore on Thames because that sort of environment is how they and their mates will get ultra rich.  

Threatening to breach the Withdrawal Agreement gives the EU cover to walk away from the talks.  Which is what the government actually want at this stage.

The UK is utterly turbo fvcked. 

I don't believe it will be lost in Covid disruption, we know that Covid caused a a couple of weeks of panic buying, that was it.  It did not cause lorry jams across the south and east coasts of England, it did not cause chaos in northern Ireland.  If they think covid will cover no deal brexit chaos they are very much mistaken.  

"I suggest you write to your Tory MP and tell them [sic] that, Dux."

I'll be writing to her this afto.

Never had much time for Cameron but at least he understands and is prepared to say publicly that there are extreme circumstances where you might have no choice. I think a threat by a confederation of foreign states to partition the UK falls into that category and I suspect so does he.

I think a threat by a confederation of foreign states to partition the UK

fortunately no such threat has been made

Yeah, this isn't what you voted for!  You voted for the honest, competent version of Johnson!

"fortunately no such threat has been made"

Lord Frost begs to differ.  In a no deal brexit (That's what we all voted leave for, not some BRINO invented by remainers like May) the WA (not a law) provides that the GB would be prevented from trading with NI, a threat made by Barniers negotiators.

All you champions of the EU are a fvcking disgrace to the country.

Cameron is right: it should be a last resort. However, as we are told that the EU has explicitly threatened to isolate NI from the rest of the UK in respect of food imports, no government worthy of the name would refuse to take steps to be in a position to counter that; it is after all the government of the United Kingdom which obviously includes NI. We heard a lot from the EU and their supporters in our own parliament during the earlier negotiations about the importance of the "NI backstop", well this should be viewed in exactly the same light - a backstop against malicious behaviour against the integrity of the UK by the EU post January 1st. It isn't only their precious Single Market that deserves protection; the UK does too and I cannot for the life of me understand how MPs who call themselves Unionists can threaten to vote down what is, after all, only an insurance policy no different in intent or merit from the famous backstop that the EU itself demanded and many of them supported. Exactly whose interests are these people elected to protect?Cameron is right: it should be a last resort. However, as we are told that the EU has explicitly threatened to isolate NI from the rest of the UK in respect of food imports, no government worthy of the name would refuse to take steps to be in a position to counter that; it is after all the government of the United Kingdom which obviously includes NI. We heard a lot from the EU and their supporters in our own parliament during the earlier negotiations about the importance of the "NI backstop", well this should be viewed in exactly the same light - a backstop against malicious behaviour against the integrity of the UK by the EU post January 1st. It isn't only their precious Single Market that deserves protection; the UK does too and I cannot for the life of me understand how MPs who call themselves Unionists can threaten to vote down what is, after all, only an insurance policy no different in intent or merit from the famous backstop that the EU itself demanded and many of them supported. Exactly whose interests are these people elected to protect?

"threatened"

Who says all brexiteers are as thick as a bowl of pigshit?

Where are the German car and Italian Prosecco manufacturers running to our rescue?

There was so much talk of them but it’s now gone very quiet. 

You have to wonder how far remainers would be prepared to go down that road C3P0.

Seems like some would be quite happy to see full on war for independence on the streets of NI just so they could gloat told you so.

"In a no deal brexit (That's what we all voted leave for)"

Nobody told Gove, who co led the campaign - to quote him

"But we didn’t vote to leave without a deal. That wasn’t the message of the campaign I helped lead. During that campaign, we said we should do a deal with the EU and be part of the network of free trade deals that covers all Europe, from Iceland to Turkey.

"Leaving without a deal on March 29 would not honour that commitment. It would undoubtedly cause economic turbulence. Almost everyone in this debate accepts that"

 

Oh we've got to the "it's all the remainers' fault" bit have we? Lovely. 

The Sunday Telegraph genuinely blamed remainers for forcing Johnson to sign a bad withdrawal agreement (not withstanding that he campaigned on it and told everyone it was a brilliant deal) .   You couldn't make it up if you tried.

I don't trust Frost as far as I could throw him

but on the wider point: any problems in trading between GB and NI would be caused by the government's decisions about what standards etc to apply within the UK

the withdrawal agreement, signed by BJPM, has always threatened to put divisions between GB and NI. That was BJPM's way of solving the intractable problems of leaving the single market whilst avoiding a hard border in Ireland, as opposed to TMPM who preferred to keep the UK tied to EU rules as a whole in the backstop.

As a matter of interest, it remains COMPLETELY FUCKING UNCLEAR how, if the government wishes to diverge from EU standards whilst breaching the Withdrawal Agreement in respect of NI, it would stop there being a hard border in Ireland.

In other words, all we are really seeing at the moment is the UK seeking to open up the intractable problems of Brexit and NI a few months after they decided to sign the WA. It's boring and their attempt to blame the EU nothing short of mendacious.

IT'S ALL THE FAULT OF REMOANERS AND FOREIGNERS: I'VE ALWAYS SAID SO!!

As a matter of interest, it remains COMPLETELY FUCKING UNCLEAR how, if the government wishes to diverge from EU standards whilst breaching the Withdrawal Agreement in respect of NI, it would stop there being a hard border in Ireland.
 

they expect the EU to implement checks between ROI and mainland Europe heff 

its what they’ve always wanted the EU to do and they got mighty pissed off at the start of negotiations when the EU (rightly) showed its strong support for ROI as a member of the single market

the idea that the UK govt has always been a strong upholder of the rule of law is somewhat laughable to those in the Irish Republic who have come to expect this kind of treatment (tho to be fair the govt doesn’t usually announce it so brazenly in parliament)

Excatly Heffa, if we don’t follow EU rules there has to be a border somwhere either in Ireland or along the North Sea - either will destroy the peace agreement.  Nice one brexiteers

Can't we just go back to or rather keep on with totally ignoring the Irish border?  Sure, there is a line there.  We'll have the groundskeeper paint it every third Wednesday.

There is a lot of blame that can be thrown around on both sides here.  Neither side has behaved well frankly.

The idea that there should be a hard border between two parts of the UK on a permanent basis is clearly absolutely unacceptable in any situation unless that has been agreed to, specifically by the people of that part of the UK (and frankly probably by the people of the rest of the UK as well).  I agree that is what the government signed up to but frankly they shoudn't have. From a historical and human perspective it is a much, much bigger decision than leaving the EU. 

It's a clusterfvck but too much blood has spilled over the Irish question (on both sides) to effectively hand NI over to Ireland, against the will of its people to facilitate a fvcking trade deal.  

Any new hard border be it between Ireland and NI or NI and the rest of the UK is a pretty certain road to bloodshed. 

 

wang, that is basically the argument Jacob Rees-Mogg puts forward

a less than usually funny gag for an (otherwise usually top of his class) occasional banter merchant on a random website

not so good for the Lord President of Her Majesty's Privy Council apparently proffering it as government policy 

thanks for that statement of the bleeding obvious donny

what's your suggested solution?

The "solution" is what's already been agreed by international Treaty and ratified by the UK electorate in a general election which was held on that very subject.

Glad to see you accept that the principle that a hard border between two parts of the UK is completely unacceptable Heff.  An awful lot of people seem to think that is no big deal really.

The only solution is that a trade agreement is agreed between the UK and the EU on fair terms that avoids the need for a border.  Both sides should be getting their big boy pants on and agreeing one.

If that is not possible there should be referendum in NI on where the border should sit. If that votes for a border in the Irish sea then there should be a referendum in the rest of the UK as to whether that is acceptable.  Whatever consequences flow from that decision will flow.  

’the WA (not a law) provides that the GB would be prevented from trading with NI, a threat made by Barniers negotiators.‘

maybe you should blame the dickhead PM who signed it then you dozy fucking cunt 

Hang on, you want how many referendums Donny? Let's start with one about whether we all still think Brexit was a good idea in the first place eh? What do you think the result would be?

DD: I don't think there are many people who regard a hard border as acceptable

indeed, the search for a solution to avoid a hard border led to the downfall of TMPM's government 

obviously one way would be to negotiate a sufficiently wide free trade agreement, though unfortunately that is foundering on the Tory party's new found love for state aid

none of this is new. It's all old and well trodden and very boring. 

"An awful lot of people seem to think that is no big deal really."

Including the large number of us that support a united Ireland.

also, faod, the WA is a law, and moreover it has direct effect in UK law as retained by s.7A of the EU (Withdrawal) Act 2018

Glad to see you accept that the principle that a hard border between two parts of the UK is completely unacceptable Heff.  An awful lot of people seem to think that is no big deal really.

 

Well, no, it's a huge deal but if the clowns in charge are now pushing a hard Brexit with the outside of the SM, it's an inevitable consequence that there's a hard border either outside the island of Ireland (why in the name of fuck would anyone countenance this?), in the island of Ireland (why in the name of fuck would the EU countenance this?  Seriously why should they?) or in the Irish sea.  Unfortunately Wang's suggestion is a bit unworkable.

It is so simple it absurd, the problem is brexiteers just refuse to acknowledge the truth that was always inherent in brexit

(1) we follow EU rules and obviate the need for border checks

(2) we diverge from EU rules and there will need to effectively be a hardish border either down the Irish Sea or between Eire and NI.

That's it, all three options are likely either to restart civil war in NI or render Brexit utterly pointless.

Nice work chaps - how dare you blame anyone else?  Its ALL on you.

Brexiteers are taking delight in this as this apparently gives the EU a bloody nose and perhaps in ways forces their hands. 

Now that the gloves are off, there is nothing wrong with the EU breaking the cardinal rule and making a move on Gibraltar and escalate that to States closer to home. 

Boris is way out of this depth in this game. 

 

 

Because continuing to put food on the shelves at Tesco in Belfast is really going to wind-up the IRA.

The entire future of Great Britain (or "rUK" if you prefer) is being determined by some hardline Protestants in Northern Ireland, despite an international Treaty having being entered into. How can that be right?

it's either that or letting the catholics score a point in the endless tit-for-tat of NI politics.

 

 

there's a hard border either outside the island of Ireland (why in the name of fuck would anyone countenance this?)

the UK thinks the EU will have to do this in practice to protect the rest of the SM if there is a porous border between ROI/NI

there were brexiteers basically saying this last year when the story was “well we won’t implement any border checks between NI/ROI, if the EU puts checks in to protect the ROI market it’s their fault for putting in a hard border” (ie they can check the goods in France)

tbh as patronising and dishonest as it is i don’t actually think it won’t work if the UK simply ignores the WA. nobody wants a border across Ireland

a less than usually funny gag for an (otherwise usually top of his class) occasional banter merchant on a random website

really? i’d put it in wang notm7’s top 20%

i have a theory of relativity too

Weirdly, I am not sure Boris is out of his depth in this matter. I think this is just about the one thing he does 'get'. He is not going to be the PM that 'gives away' NI. 

If state aid really is the stumbling block that is just absolutely stupid on both sides but its not actually the stumbling block. The UK government wants a completely different sort of relationship to what the EU wants. 

Threep - the UK is entitled to leave the EU and that is happening. If there is hard brexit but the UK is willing to leave the border in NI open (which I think is the likely position we will end up in) then Ireland and the EU will have to decide whether an open border is more important than the integrity of the single market.  

It would of course be open to the EU to seek to impose sanctions on the UK for its breach of the withdrawal agreement if that is a road it feels it needs to go down and is willing to live with the consequences of that.  

As an Irish Republican, I am absolutely loving all of this. 

Threep - the UK is entitled to leave the EU and that is happening. 

um - that has happened

Ireland and the EU will have to decide whether an open border is more important than the integrity of the single market.
 

yes CC - this is in practice forcing ROI out of the single market as well, for a Brexit they had no say in and never wanted

i agree with you that it is the most likely outcome

heamus - you should be happy, this whole thing has meant I am convinced we will see a united Ireland within my lifetime (prob next 10 years)

If there is hard brexit but the UK is willing to leave the border in NI open (which I think is the likely position we will end up in) then Ireland and the EU will have to decide whether an open border is more important than the integrity of the single market.

VERY GOOD POINT!

AND LET’S HAVE NO NONSENSE FROM ANY REMOANERS ABOUT THEIR BEING MOST-FAVOURED-NATION ISSUES WITH SUCH AN APPROACH UNDER WTO RULES: THAT’S JUST A SMOKESCREEN!!

MAYBE IT’S ABOUT TIME THE IRISH GAVE UP ON THEIR SILLY HOME RULE NONSENSE AND REJOINED THE UNITED KINGDOM?!?

SURELY THEY MUST SEE THAT IF IT WASN’T FOR THEIR SO-CALLED “HOME RULE” THERE WOULDN’T BE ANY PROBLEMS???

and there we are back to needing to agree a free trade agreement BREXIT. Something that was designed to deal fairly specifically to deal with this point could be put in place however. 

Something that was designed to deal fairly specifically to deal with this point could be put in place however.

NOW THAT’S A VERY GOOD IDEA: SOMETHING COULD BE AGREED TO DEAL WITH THIS POINT!

Or indeed, BI, that the Gov has signed up to stricter state aid rules in the Japan agreement than those the EU is requiring.

Watching the "debate", it seems that "food blockade" is the cannard upon which the Tories will hang this particular piece of deception.  A direct descendant of "Turkey" borne of a government that is utterly incapable of engaging with the electorate other than by conning and trickery.

Ed Stone giving Boris a proper working over. I expect Bojo to challenge him to a bacon sarnie eating contest any minute.

OP's first mistake was to trust the Tories at their word. 

They told us again and again and again that there 'was no magic money tree' but that turned out to be the biggest lie ever. It wasn't an idle statement of no effect like 'oh, its sunny outside right now'. It led to austerity which led to capping of salaries and benefits and underfunding public services which has caused untold misery on large swathes of the population.

They told us that Labour was responsible for crashing the economy when it was global crisis that brought the recession about.

They told us so many whoppers that they have no credibility left as a party of truth.