Seems like the new border between the UK and the EU is going to be between London and Kent.
Seems like the new border between the UK and the EU is going to be between London and Kent.
Congratulations America
Barnier's bluff has been called on food. So much for that one!
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/ent...b6718910f4349b
What "bluff"?
When the stars threw down their spears
And watered heaven with their tears:
Did he smile his work to see?
Did he who made the lamb make thee?
Typical sloppy reporting by a British news site. There hasn't changed anything since the so-called row started; the listing still hasn't been done. The British government still has to provide the asked information. Barnier also isn't mandated to award the status which is basically a technical matter.
Congratulations America
The first legal procedure against the UK has started. This one against the mere fact that the proposal of a law violates the written principles of the WA.
Congratulations America
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
The nation is now significantly poorer, but at least sovereignty or something.
Even if all the lies in favour of Brexit were to come true, fantastic trade deals struck up globally, their sum total benefit would pale into complete insignificance compared to this continuing loss to the country.
First of all, the UK has recognized the jurisdiction of the ECJ already (it’s part of your body of law).
But more important, since you are no longer a member state, it is the only case against a third country. On a matter which potentially impedes the ratification of any subsequent agreement. A case which now not even will go away if you retract the proposal.
Congratulations America
The CJEU's jurisdiction over this matter was agreed to by the UK, when it signed the withdrawal agreement. Your violation of international law is egregious enough as it is; if you compound that by violating the dispute resolution procedures provided for by a treaty you've signed, you will be regarded as little better than a rogue state. Only the equivalent of a Trumpist would try to portray that as a good or even tolerable situation.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
Seems that VDL told the Council yesterday that 'no deal is better than a bad deal'.
Congratulations America
Meanwhile in the real world BJ and UvdL have begun the real negotiations and are going to continue them regularly. Because a compromise will go past Barnier's mandate.
Twitter Link
You mean: De Pfeffel gave up another ultimatum hoping everyone had forgotten about it. Talks will be on an agenda set by the EU. As they have been since 2016. And FYI; the mandate of Barnier is the mandate of the Commission. And that means it doesn’t really matter if De Pfeffel calls Barnier or VDL.
Last edited by Hazir; 10-03-2020 at 05:45 PM. Reason: De
Congratulations America
And what is the basis for this claim?
Congratulations America
I imagine that vdL as President of the European Commission has the authority to more easily make political compromises on behalf of the EU that she is the notional President of, especially since she is in regular conversation with national leaders too, in a way that is above Barnier's paygrade.
You might wish to argue that she is a meaningless nobody and the President of the European Commission has no connection to the European Commission, but I'd like to see your logic if so.
Genuinely bizarre worldview. The question is not whether or not the person is a meaningless nobody—or the office a meaningless office—but whether or not anything about the person, the politics, the negotiations or the law provides for a substantial change from the present state. No executive in any democratic institution has unlimited power to implement arbitrary decisions; they operate within a large number of constraints—some of which are very strong. Which specific political compromises do you expect to see her or the commission making that will significantly alter the current situation on their own?
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
I expect her to agree to a compromise on state aid that is standard for treaties with sovereign equals, like the treaties with Canada and Japan.
I expect her to agree to a compromise on fish recognising the UK's sovereign waters as the UK's waters.
In other words I expect the UK to be treated as a sovereign country. Barnier's mandate he has been set is overly ambitious and unrealistic, but why not try for that, if he was negotiating against someone like May it may have worked.
She can agree all she wants, it still has to be ratified by the member states, Rand. Because they, too, are sovereign countries.
When the stars threw down their spears
And watered heaven with their tears:
Did he smile his work to see?
Did he who made the lamb make thee?
Did you mean to just agree that EU countries are sovereign?
None of these fanciful developments would change any of the critical issues arising from the RoI—NI situation and from the UK's willful violation of international law; consequently, they would not alter the current situation on their own. Your characterization of Barnier's mandate as being "overly ambitious and unrealistic" is simply not credible; his mandate is to negotiate a deal that is in keeping with the EU's laws and its strategic interests, and also palatable to member states—or not arrive at a deal at all. If "no deal is better than a bad deal" is sufficiently ambitious and realistic for the UK, it is doubly so for the EU.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
OK. I have a day at the beach and you're responding to Randy like what he said makes any sense? There is no difference in the mandate between Barnier and VDL. The simple reason for this is that the mandate is drafted by the Council and then decided and given to the Commission. The Commission then charges people with the day to day negotiations. Barnier and his team are these people. They report directly to VDL. No part of the Commission has the powers to go outside of the mandate. The only body that can change the mandate is the Council.
Which means that until you hear from the office of the president of the Council (Michel) nothing is going to change in the mandate. For the simple reason that the Council is not talking about any changes.
Congratulations America