My issue with the brexit deal

Carryfast:

Winseer:
May will have earned our respect for being the craftiest politician and pro-Monarchy Democrat since Churchill - IF she pulls this off the way I’m crossing my fingers and hoping my read on it all is correct.
“If I’m wrong” - we’re all gonna get shafted in plain sight by Remainer May pretending to be a born-again Brexiteer, actually acting behind the scenes as a crafty Remainer, intent on getting past people like Johnson, Gove, and Rees-Mogg…

I don’t think all three of THEM – have made this huge mistake in “siding with Theresa May” - and what I’d like to REALLY find out is "what went on at the one-to-one meetings she had with the ERG, now seen as bigger Pro Brexiteer Rebels than UKIP’s lot. :open_mouth:

How do you get from May’s BRINO deal to her supposedly being a closet Brexiteer and BRINO suddenly turning into WTO ?. :confused:

As for what really went on at the ERG meeting maybe something along the lines of we can’t possibly go for Brexit on the basis of the return of sovereignty because of the implications of that regarding Liz’s original signing up to the European Communities Act and complicity in all the following from Single European Act to Lisbon.So BRINO,after much smoke and mirrors and muddying of the waters to convince the Leave vote that it actually means WTO ( which in itself ain’t exactly the gold standard of anti race to the bottom global free market economics ),is the foregone conclusion it has to be.Which just leaves the formality of parliament signing up to it sooner rather than later possibly even well before March 28th.

Whilst you’re probably correct thinking that “people voted Brexit for a variety of different reasons” - there isn’t any case for arguing that any ONE of those many reasons - is in fact mutually exclusive with any other major reason for voting Brexit. Eg. You find me one Brexiteer who badly wants an end to the shengen zone, but doesn’t doesn’t want an end to free movmement of EU citizens… OR One Brexiteer who wants to provoke the ire of the EU courts, but doesn’t think there’s anything wrong with ■■■■■■■ off the British people by handing over £39bn of taxpayer’s money that’ll surely keep Tory Austerity in place for another decade at least…

I’m not that worried about immigration for example. We can flood this country with as many EE’s as required, no skin off my nose.
I’m only for slamming the door in the face of Pretend Refugees, Fake Asylum seekers, and Economic Migrants only here for benefits, access to our NHS, and intent to work in the black economy, rather than becoming a useful member of OUR society, rather than attempting to subvert those of the same type as they already here into their vision of an expanding caliphate.

I voted Leave first and foremost - to end Austerity. I didn’t vote for Cameron * Osbourne’s nightmare that in my mind was totally unnecessary following Brown’s dithering, when he’d started off so well as Chancellor.
Now it is time to ditch the Evil Empire II before we get roped into something that even Remainers will end up regretting - such as the Draft to fight future EU wars of expansion, such as taking East Ukraine off the Russians on behalf of ■■■■ and Borgia like Kiev politicians, who don’t mind if the world burns down around them, as long as Putin gets it in the neck.

Meanwhile, back here - Ask people born around 1954 what life was like for them as Teenagers in particular… There’s good reasons why people look back in nostalgia upon the times during which that generation grew up. Everyone had jobs, there were no shortages once rationing ended in 1953, and “changing jobs” was like Mr Benn walking into the shop, and deciding “What job would I like to do today?”

Mr Benn.jpg

Fast forward a couple of generations, and those of us that were kids in the 70’s such as myself - have more of the Sam Tyler view of “Nostalgia” to look back up.
The glorious past where Political INCORRECTNESS was Key.

We’ll never end Austerity all the while we pay the EU billions per year “just to support a handful of political-correct follies back home” via the rebate system, which keeps on shrinking at that.
I’m not worried about “What might happen” such as Turkey’s future EU membership, etc.
I’m only worried that my own offspring can’t afford Uni fees, despite wanting to do a useful degree.
I’m worried about “No police” - unless there is a “political angle” to arresting the perp.
“Don’t arrest that burglar, nor that Hate Preacher - but DO go around the house of whomever is “mean tweeting” this week about Pro UKIP or Anti Islamic stuff…”

I’m worried that the NHS ask you “Are you on benefits?” in which case - you get priority treatment. If you’re NOT on benefits - then not only do you go to the back of the queue, you’re leaned on to cough up more than just phlegm to move your place in that queue forward again. :imp:

I’m worried that laws already on our statue books “don’t get enforced”, whilst Foreigners without our own interests as a nation at heart - stack the deck with new laws designed to stop people resting THEIR rule over US. We didn’t surrender to Germany at the end of WWII, so KeinHofStadt can bugger off back to his bunker (or his Juncker) - 'cos Brexit needs to happen, even if our poltiicans are on the whole - not ready to deny their EU paymasters yet, at least not in the majority. :bulb:

In a year’s time, hopefully we’ll be wiping our arses on anything to do with the now-gone EU.
The Ring of Stars - will be a reminder of “How close to being in the total ■■■■■ we once we just 12 months earlier”.


I call this "Having 20:20 vision" btw. :stuck_out_tongue:

Carryfast:

Franglais:
Even if the National unemployment rate were low (I’m no longer saying it is) then if labour is available from abroad, it would mean no need to increase wages etc.
Although we have labour coming in from the EU currently, leaving wouldn’t necessarily make an improvement for us:
Michael Gove addressing the worries of farmers about labour, has said the Gov would allow in labour from outside the EU. I think it was last Feb he spoke about even cheaper labour from Ukraine and Vietnam? He said seasonal, but it still depresses local rates and it’s easy to see which way the Tory Leavers wish to go.
Those who think Brexit means less immigration and hence better pay are in for a rude awakening!

No surprise that your argument is all based on the selective idea that we can only ever have a Tory government after Brexit.When it’s obvious that the idea is all about us then having democratic control over our own country.In which case vote real Labour get real Labour without EU free movement of labour and capital and competition rules coming to the rescue of the defeated Cons.

Citizen Smith.jpeg

Carryfast:

Winseer:
If I’m wrong, then I’ll have to be putting on my yellow vest 7 days a week, rather than just the 4-5 I’m working whilst wearing one at the moment. :wink:

To be fair there’s a big difference between bat zb delusional v ‘wrong’. :open_mouth:

Trust me the idea that Liz is a Brexiteer is the first delusional premise in that lot and on which all the rest founders.As you’ll see on March 29th when we end up as a vassal state of the EU with all of the nuisance UKIP MEP’s in that regard banished according to plan and as she’s already shown her true colours since 1972.

I’d argue that our Monarchy is 100 times more likely to be abolished under future EU rule than after any time we might yet break away…

The EU doesn’t like those member states which continue with this out-dated system (as they see it) known as a “Constitutional Monarchy”.

Personally, I reckon the Queen should get MORE involved in politics, rather than less. Use that “Royal Perogative” a lot more often, to be sure!

It is a lot easier to for the EU to become the “European Union of Socialist Republics” - if all the member states are … Republics! :unamused:

Winseer:

Carryfast:
Trust me the idea that Liz is a Brexiteer is the first delusional premise in that lot and on which all the rest founders.As you’ll see on March 29th when we end up as a vassal state of the EU with all of the nuisance UKIP MEP’s in that regard banished according to plan and as she’s already shown her true colours since 1972.

I’d argue that our Monarchy is 100 times more likely to be abolished under future EU rule than after any time we might yet break away…

The EU doesn’t like those member states which continue with this out-dated system (as they see it) known as a “Constitutional Monarchy”.

Personally, I reckon the Queen should get MORE involved in politics, rather than less. Use that “Royal Perogative” a lot more often, to be sure!

It is a lot easier to for the EU to become the “European Union of Socialist Republics” - if all the member states are … Republics! :unamused:

[/quote]
No it’s a lot easier for the EU to do what Stalin couldn’t by pretending to be onside with the European Royal families.Just so long as those Royal institutions return the favour by getting onside with the assimilation of the ( former ) European nation states into the EUSSR by totally relinquishing all their powers.Or at least not taking the job too seriously by turning a blind eye to the EU’s activeties and clear treason by government in handing the country over to it,as in Liz’s case.All to provide the ‘illusion’ that the EU is a Confederation of existing Nation States as the remainers keep trying to pretend here.When it’s clearly just another dictatorial malignant Federal zb pile led by megalomaniacs like Juncker and Macron trying to take over Europe.

On that note notice how the EU Federalists also try to confuse the now totally powerless European Royal in name only dynasties,with the totally different definition and ongoing role and still existing supreme powers of the Brit head of state/sovereign regarding matters of …‘state’ and …‘sovereignty’.Who would have thought it.But would have expected those like you and Juddian to be able to see through the scam.

On that note this is the type of evil that is at the heart of the EU and which our monarch is condoning if not tacitly supporting.Who would have thought the son of a ■■■■ sympathiser and soldier likes euthanasia to the point of over ruling and arbitrarily removing the powers of his own monarch on the issue.Obviously a case of like father like son in Juncker’s case. :imp:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henri,_Gr … troversies

Carryfast:

Winseer:

Carryfast:
Trust me the idea that Liz is a Brexiteer is the first delusional premise in that lot and on which all the rest founders.As you’ll see on March 29th when we end up as a vassal state of the EU with all of the nuisance UKIP MEP’s in that regard banished according to plan and as she’s already shown her true colours since 1972.

I’d argue that our Monarchy is 100 times more likely to be abolished under future EU rule than after any time we might yet break away…

The EU doesn’t like those member states which continue with this out-dated system (as they see it) known as a “Constitutional Monarchy”.

Personally, I reckon the Queen should get MORE involved in politics, rather than less. Use that “Royal Perogative” a lot more often, to be sure!

It is a lot easier to for the EU to become the “European Union of Socialist Republics” - if all the member states are … Republics! :unamused:

No it’s a lot easier for the EU to do what Stalin couldn’t by pretending to be onside with the European Royal families.Just so long as those Royal institutions return the favour by getting onside with the assimilation of the ( former ) European nation states into the EUSSR by totally relinquishing all their powers.Or at least not taking the job too seriously by turning a blind eye to the EU’s activeties and clear treason by government in handing the country over to it,as in Liz’s case.All to provide the ‘illusion’ that the EU is a Confederation of existing Nation States as the remainers keep trying to pretend here.When it’s clearly just another dictatorial malignant Federal zb pile led by megalomaniacs like Juncker and Macron trying to take over Europe.

On that note notice how the EU Federalists also try to confuse the now totally powerless European Royal in name only dynasties,with the totally different definition and ongoing role and still existing supreme powers of the Brit head of state/sovereign regarding matters of …‘state’ and …‘sovereignty’.Who would have thought it.But would have expected those like you and Juddian to be able to see through the scam.

On that note this is the type of evil that is at the heart of the EU and which our monarch is condoning if not tacitly supporting.Who would have thought the son of a ■■■■ sympathiser and soldier likes euthanasia to the point of over ruling and arbitrarily removing the powers of his own monarch on the issue.Obviously a case of like father like son in Juncker’s case. :imp:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henri,_Gr … troversies
[/quote]
OK, so the Queen has ‘supreme powers’. News to me, but, whatever.
Do you think you should get out of your mother’s spare room more often? Maybe take some time away from your keyboard and, well, basically, get out more?

Messed it up again. My bit was the last paragraph. Why is this board so difficult to format?

Am I the only one on here who wants out mainly because of…EU army…god forbid (germany near french nukes ). Ever closer union god no .no .no. I voted to join when I was younger but after ten years I felt I was not for us and that it was a busted flush,I may be wrong but past history says I am not…

If the common market is so good and we have had 40 years to find out why did remain not win easy .my dad said to me when first vote taken that germany would run the show in 50 years he was not far wrong…funny he wished he had got demobbed from the RN navy while in Australia after end of war.

I bet Parliament now decides they DON’T want a general election any time soon! :imp: :imp: :imp: :imp: :imp:

Parliament - will be quite satisfied with May’s performance - as she has succeeded in kicking Brexit down the road from the line in the sand that couldn’t be crossed.

April 12th will soon be May 22nd and then the only concensus in Parliament - would be a majority vote for “Let’s forget the whole thing”, OR “May’s Deal”, which isn’t going anywhere, as we are already well aware.

“No election until 2022, and May gone before then” - means that we don’t get to punish Parliament for their outrageous behaviour, alas.

The one fly in the ointment - is that “Not enough Brexit voters over Remain voters are going to net-die off by 2022.”

May - could have finished off UKIP for all time yesterday - but now, like Dracula rising from his coffin when some idiot pulled the bit of wood out - UKIP are going to be back in play again, and with plenty of time to prepare as well.

I’ve been getting election literature through the post this week - but that also looks like being a bit premature now.

Edit: The election literature is from Tracey Crouch, who’s not even my MP and the Labour Council - whom I’ve never ever voted for. :question: :question: :question: :open_mouth:
(The upside, is that least I’m not on Momentum’s hit list for the time being, if these local idiots think I’m a “mainstream voter only” rather than a full-on Floating Voter.)

Corbyn - continues to sit on the fence, because he doesn’t want to alienate the Remainer vote.
He’s probably wise to behave thus: He don’t stand much chance of winning much support from the furious and disenfranchised Brexiteers now - does he?

Corbyn? - The “Anti Establishment Candidate”? - The only thing he has in common with Trump - is the colour of his political Party. :unamused:

Juddian:
Time will tell CF, in 6 weeks time you can come on here and put lots of rolling eyes smilies on your posts aimed at Winseer and myself if the Tories have decided to self destruct.

It’s now the 30th March.Remind us what happened yesterday. :unamused: :unamused: :unamused: :smiling_imp: :smiling_imp: :smiling_imp: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing:

Carryfast:

Juddian:
Time will tell CF, in 6 weeks time you can come on here and put lots of rolling eyes smilies on your posts aimed at Winseer and myself if the Tories have decided to self destruct.

It’s now the 30th March.Remind us what happened yesterday. :unamused: :unamused: :unamused: :smiling_imp: :smiling_imp: :smiling_imp: [emoji38] [emoji38] [emoji38]

Juddian can speak for himself I’m sure, but will he say, as he has before
“The ball is still up in the air”?
I think that is quite true. Isn’t the outcome more important than the exact date?
The Brexit ball is up in the air.
The Tory ball is up in the air.
Parliament’s ball is up in the air.
Surely we can all agree it is a total balls up!

Sent from my SM-G361F using Tapatalk

Franglais:

Carryfast:

Juddian:
Time will tell CF, in 6 weeks time you can come on here and put lots of rolling eyes smilies on your posts aimed at Winseer and myself if the Tories have decided to self destruct.

It’s now the 30th March.Remind us what happened yesterday. :unamused: :unamused: :unamused: :smiling_imp: :smiling_imp: :smiling_imp: [emoji38] [emoji38] [emoji38]

Juddian can speak for himself I’m sure, but will he say, as he has before
“The ball is still up in the air”?
I think that is quite true. Isn’t the outcome more important than the exact date?
The Brexit ball is up in the air.
The Tory ball is up in the air.
Parliament’s ball is up in the air.
Surely we can all agree it is a total balls up

Leave it out.Juddian and Winseer were both under the bonkers delusion that remainer May was actually a closet Brexiteer and working to some sort of unfathomable master plan to run the clock down to specifically 29/3.At which point by some obscure miraculous process that somehow then translating to proper no deal Brexit by default by 23.00. :confused:

As opposed to the reality of this whole charade being a pre planned insurance policy,just in case the Federalist establishment couldn’t rig the referendum vote sufficiently,with the aim of sealing us into the EU Federal project permanently,because the state funded propaganda didn’t work leading to an impossible to lose/destroy/miscount mountain of Leave votes.Which as it turned out actually happened.So there we have it a referendum act with a non binding clause in it thereby making it totally pointless.But of course only to be applied if the vote went the wrong way or couldn’t be rigged.Given the ‘right’ vote result ( remain ) it would have been all too binding.In addition to crowning remainers May and Hammond to sabotage the Leaving process by pretending to deliver Brexit while actually working for a Remain +/BRINO agenda which ties us to Lisbon with the win win of chucking UKIP out of the EU parliament.With parliament going along with the subterfuge in the form of section 13 of the withdrawal act.To the point where 3 years after the referendum we are still in the EU with the government doing all it can to keep us in it in the form of the ongoing sabotage of Brexit.

On that note no the ball never went into play because 3 years later we are still waiting for the bent ref to blow the whistle for kick off.Because too many people support Germany and too many people have bet on Germany to win,including the sax coburgs who’ve infiltrated our head of state role,and they all know that allowing the game to take place will be a re run of the 1966 World Cup when Germany lost to England. :unamused:

As for your argument in all that.You might as well give up on your silly pretence that all this is a so called balls up as opposed to your lot having infiltrated the Leave agenda from the start with the aim of sabotaging it.Which from your point of view is working perfectly to plan.Which is why we’ve got loads of Federalist traitors marching around London still flying their stinking EU Flags in the knowledge that remainer May has kept them/you in the game.As I said this was a fait accompli since 1973 and it will probably take a military coup,against both parliament and dodgy head of state,to get our country back from this malignant,treasonous handover of it to a foreign power.If not a Yugoslav type Nationalist v Federalist war of secession maybe not in our lifetime.

A no Deal on April 12th - I’d reluctantly have to admit - is better than Theresa May’s deal on the 29th March, it’s true…

Let’s just make sure it IS No Deal for April 12th then…

Can we trust our parliament though? I expect the EU to offer us as many extensions as we want - providing we don’t field candidates in the Euro elections in May.

But there’s another tack they can take now that parliament have admitted that they’ll “never agree with a majority” even among 8 hot picks of their own like last week’s…
Perhaps the powers will try and concentrate on rigging the EU elections then, rather than any “people’s vote” which was never going to happen, any more than an election that’ll decimate the main parties right now…

Imagine where we’d be if in the Euro elections - UKIP end up losing all their seats?
That would be “Brexit Dropped” on the SPOT I reckon. How hard would it be to rig?

Simple. Most votes are postal on this one. Simply lose entire mail batches rather than ballot boxes from any strongly leave-voting areas, and explain it all away as “Brexiteers have lost confidence in Brexit ever happening, now that March 29th has come and gone ‘Nothing done’…” These votes are even counted outside the eyes of the public, and who stands over the EU when it comes to “Free and fair elections”? Who watches the watchers??

The SNP, Libdems, Tories, and Labour - picking UP all those ex-UKIP MEP seats - would be delighted of course - and consequently won’t be investigating very strongly at all - “were there any irregularities” - especially if the EU itself quicky declares “The result stands, and they’re weighed-in”. :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry:

I reckon the EU would have to step up funding for the police and armed forces though - 'cos they’re gonna need it, if election results around the world more akin to “banana republics” are anything to go by of late! :open_mouth:

Carryfast:

adam277:
UKIP need a new leader and a clearout.
Bringing Tommy Robinson in was stupid.

He just keeps doing and saying stuff without thinking and his past doesn’t help either.

TR isn’t even a UKIP member because unfortunately he doesn’t fit the exact script of the party’s ‘rules’.So what are you moaning about. :unamused:

As for Batten probably the best leader that the country let alone UKIP could ever have.While if Batten isn’t your type of leader then maybe you’d be better off voting for Cable or May or Corbyn instead.So there we have it UKIP shows sympathy for TR and gets branded as irrelevant,if I’ve got it right,by supposed TR supporters ? like Juddian who for some reason prefers Mogg and also gets told to have a clear out by those who want to see it become just another pointless pro establishment rabble like Farage’s new circus.On that note there’s probably more UKIP members going by the idea of if Batten goes then they go with him,than your obvious ideas for the Party like the Bolton fiasco.That went well.

Looks like I agree with CF on this one. If you don’t like UKIP being “too far right” - then vote for Farage’s new Brexit Party. He’s clearly moved to the center, as did Theresa May of course.

Batten has made a bold gamble taking on TR - but it could pay off large, should UKIP combined with The Brexit Party now field candidates with little or no overlap across the entire country.

A two-shades-of-purple coalition? - Who would have thought!

Winseer:
A no Deal on April 12th - I’d reluctantly have to admit - is better than Theresa May’s deal on the 29th March, it’s true…

Let’s just make sure it IS No Deal for April 12th then…

Can we trust our parliament though? I expect the EU to offer us as many extensions as we want - providing we don’t field candidates in the Euro elections in May.

But there’s another tack they can take now that parliament have admitted that they’ll “never agree with a majority” even among 8 hot picks of their own like last week’s…
Perhaps the powers will try and concentrate on rigging the EU elections then, rather than any “people’s vote” which was never going to happen, any more than an election that’ll decimate the main parties right now…

Imagine where we’d be if in the Euro elections - UKIP end up losing all their seats?
That would be “Brexit Dropped” on the SPOT I reckon. How hard would it be to rig?

Simple. Most votes are postal on this one. Simply lose entire mail batches rather than ballot boxes from any strongly leave-voting areas, and explain it all away as “Brexiteers have lost confidence in Brexit ever happening, now that March 29th has come and gone ‘Nothing done’…” These votes are even counted outside the eyes of the public, and who stands over the EU when it comes to “Free and fair elections”? Who watches the watchers??

The SNP, Libdems, Tories, and Labour - picking UP all those ex-UKIP MEP seats - would be delighted of course - and consequently won’t be investigating very strongly at all - “were there any irregularities” - especially if the EU itself quicky declares “The result stands, and they’re weighed-in”. :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry:

I reckon the EU would have to step up funding for the police and armed forces though - 'cos they’re gonna need it, if election results around the world more akin to “banana republics” are anything to go by of late! :open_mouth:

If I’ve read it right both you and Juddian were convinced and obviously bought the delusional notion that May is really a closet Brexiteer and was somehow going to produce no deal Brexit on the 29/3 by default ?. :confused:

Everything seems on course for what she and the establishment ( including dodgy HM ) intended from the start.That being the choice between Remain or BRINO the latter obviously creating the bonus win win of destroying UKIP in the EU parliament.In either case it’s obvious that parliament was always going to take the slow cook approach rather than just revoke Brexit immediately after the referendum vote went wrong for Cameron.All using the built in insurance policy of the non binding referendum followed by section 13 of the laughably named ‘withdrawal’ act.

As for EU ‘funding’ isn’t this the same EU that kept us paying net contributions in addition to the costs of our ever increasing trade deficit while we had to go begging to the IMF to cover the payments on the resulting loans.All that while floating on a sea of our own oil.In which case expect more crocodile tears from Corbyn’s rabble for the Brit working class stuffed by yet more austerity to pay for the costs of our EUSSR membership.

Having said that yes I agree that it’s likely that the EU elections will be rigged,or circumvented,if the establishment goes for the extension/revokation of article 50.

Although does it really matter when it’s clear that the issue has long since become one for the military to sort out what is a clear threat to the country’s very existence let alone national security here.IE either the military is for the country and by definition against the EU or its for the EU and by definition against the country.Bearing in mind that both the Head of State and Parliament have gone rogue on this.On that note push came to shove in that regard in 1973 let alone 29/3 and the forces ( so far ) don’t come out of this smelling of roses.

Carryfast:

Juddian:
Time will tell CF, in 6 weeks time you can come on here and put lots of rolling eyes smilies on your posts aimed at Winseer and myself if the Tories have decided to self destruct.

It’s now the 30th March.Remind us what happened yesterday. :unamused: :unamused: :unamused: :smiling_imp: :smiling_imp: :smiling_imp: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing:

We left the EU yesterday.

Taken from comments section in Telegraph.

''An agreement by the UK with the EU can only be valid in international law if constitutional due process has been followed.

The Gina Miller case established that if the British Government wishes to agree an extension of the Article 50 period beyond 29th March 2019 with the EU, it must do so with the authority of an Act of Parliament passed for that purpose.

No such Act of Parliament existed when, on 22nd March 2019, Sir Tim Barrow, UK Representative to the EU, wrote a letter to the EU requesting an extension of the Article 50 period from 29th March to either 12th April or 22nd May 2019.

On 27th March 2019, Parliament passed a Statutory Instrument amending the exit date in the EU Withdrawal Act 2018 from 29th March to either 12th April or 22nd May. The ‘agreement’ with the EU of 22nd March was made contingent on Parliamentary approval for the Withdrawal Agreement being given before 29th March. This contingent condition also indicated that the exit date did not change under international law on 22nd March. Under international law, the exit date continued to be 29th March, regardless of any public statements by the EU or the British Government.

The power by the British Government to amend the exit date in the EU Withdrawal Act under Section 20 (4) of the Act applies only where the day and time specified in the definition of exit day differ from that when the treaties will cease to apply. Since the exit date had not in fact changed in international law, the power to amend the exit date in the EU Withdrawal Act did not exist when the Statutory Instrument was passed on 27th March. The validity of the Statutory Instrument is therefore questionable. This also indicates why a separate Act of Parliament would be required to authorise a request to the EU to change the exit date in international law.

Even if the Statutory Instrument were valid, constitutional due process has not been followed, because no request was made by the British Government to the EU to change the exit date on the basis of the Statutory Instrument between 27th March (when the SI was passed by Parliament) and 29th March, which continued to be the exit date in international law, given that due process was not followed.

This means that in international law, the UK left the EU at 11pm GMT on 29th March 2019.

If, in international law, the UK has now left the EU, this must have legal consequences if both the British Government and the EU continue to behave as if it has not done so.
If the British Government continues to pay money to the EU as if the UK were still a member state after 29th March, the legality of any such payments can be challenged in the courts, and the recipients of any such money (the EU, member states, organisations or individuals) may be liable to repay it. (A related point is that the expenditure of money by the British Government, particularly major expenditure, normally requires primary legislation, and using a Statutory Instrument for this purpose may be open to legal challenge.)

There will also be legal consequences in a wide range of other situations. For example, businesses may incur costs from continuing to apply EU regulations, and may be eligible to sue the British Government and the EU for recovery of those costs.‘’

So many thanks to Gina Miller, we left the EU yesterday in the eyes of International Law as a direct result of the court case she brought.

Juddian:

Carryfast:

Juddian:
Time will tell CF, in 6 weeks time you can come on here and put lots of rolling eyes smilies on your posts aimed at Winseer and myself if the Tories have decided to self destruct.

It’s now the 30th March.Remind us what happened yesterday. :unamused: :unamused: :unamused: :smiling_imp: :smiling_imp: :smiling_imp: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing:

We left the EU yesterday.

Taken from comments section in Telegraph.

‘‘An agreement by the UK with the EU can only be valid in international law if … EU regulations, and may be eligible to sue the British Government and the EU for recovery of those costs.’’

So many thanks to Gina Miller, we left the EU yesterday in the eyes of International Law as a direct result of the court case she brought.

You wont be surprised to hear there are other opinions ! Here is a link to one: [publiclawforeveryone.com/2019/0 ... l-reality/](https://publiclawforeveryone.com/2019/03/23/extending-article-50-separating-myth-and-legal-reality/) Youll see the author is a Professor of Law at Cambridge and advises Parliament.
I wont try to interpret or precis the piece, it is written in plain language, and isnt too long.

Juddian:

Carryfast:

Juddian:
Time will tell CF, in 6 weeks time you can come on here and put lots of rolling eyes smilies on your posts aimed at Winseer and myself if the Tories have decided to self destruct.

It’s now the 30th March.Remind us what happened yesterday. :unamused: :unamused: :unamused: :smiling_imp: :smiling_imp: :smiling_imp: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing:

We left the EU yesterday.

Taken from comments section in Telegraph.

''An agreement by the UK with the EU can only be valid in international law if constitutional due process has been followed.

The Gina Miller case established that if the British Government wishes to agree an extension of the Article 50 period beyond 29th March 2019 with the EU, it must do so with the authority of an Act of Parliament passed for that purpose.

No such Act of Parliament existed when, on 22nd March 2019, Sir Tim Barrow, UK Representative to the EU, wrote a letter to the EU requesting an extension of the Article 50 period from 29th March to either 12th April or 22nd May 2019.

On 27th March 2019, Parliament passed a Statutory Instrument amending the exit date in the EU Withdrawal Act 2018 from 29th March to either 12th April or 22nd May. The ‘agreement’ with the EU of 22nd March was made contingent on Parliamentary approval for the Withdrawal Agreement being given before 29th March. This contingent condition also indicated that the exit date did not change under international law on 22nd March. Under international law, the exit date continued to be 29th March, regardless of any public statements by the EU or the British Government.

The power by the British Government to amend the exit date in the EU Withdrawal Act under Section 20 (4) of the Act applies only where the day and time specified in the definition of exit day differ from that when the treaties will cease to apply. Since the exit date had not in fact changed in international law, the power to amend the exit date in the EU Withdrawal Act did not exist when the Statutory Instrument was passed on 27th March. The validity of the Statutory Instrument is therefore questionable. This also indicates why a separate Act of Parliament would be required to authorise a request to the EU to change the exit date in international law.

Even if the Statutory Instrument were valid, constitutional due process has not been followed, because no request was made by the British Government to the EU to change the exit date on the basis of the Statutory Instrument between 27th March (when the SI was passed by Parliament) and 29th March, which continued to be the exit date in international law, given that due process was not followed.

This means that in international law, the UK left the EU at 11pm GMT on 29th March 2019.

If, in international law, the UK has now left the EU, this must have legal consequences if both the British Government and the EU continue to behave as if it has not done so.
If the British Government continues to pay money to the EU as if the UK were still a member state after 29th March, the legality of any such payments can be challenged in the courts, and the recipients of any such money (the EU, member states, organisations or individuals) may be liable to repay it. (A related point is that the expenditure of money by the British Government, particularly major expenditure, normally requires primary legislation, and using a Statutory Instrument for this purpose may be open to legal challenge.)

There will also be legal consequences in a wide range of other situations. For example, businesses may incur costs from continuing to apply EU regulations, and may be eligible to sue the British Government and the EU for recovery of those costs.‘’

So many thanks to Gina Miller, we left the EU yesterday in the eyes of International Law as a direct result of the court case she brought.

Blimey.

Which leaves the question why ■■ did Dominic Raab’s office reply to my question of 29/3, ‘‘I assume that I could if I wanted as of 30/3 now import a vehicle from Australia or the US without it being subject to EU type approval or EU imposed tariffs and quotas and that the Common Fisheries policy no longer applies among other examples of us ‘taking back control’’ like an end to ECJ juristiction etc’’ with the simple statement/question ‘‘Are you aware we are NOT leaving the EU today’’.Bearing in mind Raab’s qualifications and experience in international law.

The fact is we ain’t leaving the EU unless the military generals decide to get off their fat over paid back sides and take over parliament,arrest all the quisling traitors and ‘advise’ HM to do her job of stopping the country being handed over to a foreign power.As opposed to enthusiastically going along with it by helping HM to hand over our forces as well as the country to the European 4th Reich.Now awaits the usual bs that HM and her forces isn’t the ultimate decision maker regarding matters of State,Sovereignty and National Defence.

Also for the Telegraph’s information it’s section 13 of the withdrawal act which is the Brexit killer in giving parliament the final say on ‘any’ agreement to implement Brexit or how it’s implemented including the option of BRINO,or to delay it,or even to revoke it,not section 20. :wink: On that basis prepare for the foregone conclusion of either BRINO or Remain.After the pre planned long slow ,deliberately deviating,slow cook charade,all to wrong foot the leave vote,to get there.Just as Cameron and May and even controlled opposition Farage intended from the start.

Franglais:

Juddian:

Carryfast:

Juddian:
Time will tell CF, in 6 weeks time you can come on here and put lots of rolling eyes smilies on your posts aimed at Winseer and myself if the Tories have decided to self destruct.

It’s now the 30th March.Remind us what happened yesterday. :unamused: :unamused: :unamused: :smiling_imp: :smiling_imp: :smiling_imp: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing:

We left the EU yesterday.

Taken from comments section in Telegraph.

‘‘An agreement by the UK with the EU can only be valid in international law if … EU regulations, and may be eligible to sue the British Government and the EU for recovery of those costs.’’

So many thanks to Gina Miller, we left the EU yesterday in the eyes of International Law as a direct result of the court case she brought.

You wont be surprised to hear there are other opinions ! Here is a link to one: [publiclawforeveryone.com/2019/0 ... l-reality/](https://publiclawforeveryone.com/2019/03/23/extending-article-50-separating-myth-and-legal-reality/) Youll see the author is a Professor of Law at Cambridge and advises Parliament.
I wont try to interpret or precis the piece, it is written in plain language, and isnt too long.

If Juddian is correct I’m sure that Trump would have loaded a few shiploads of US vehicle exports destined for UK with unilateral de recocognition of UK’s EU member state status attached to the export paperwork and customs documentation.Oh wait picture the scene when Texans then say great move now what about the referendum on Texit.

Can we take this so called ‘professor’ seriously though? He seems very uninformed. Not once does he mention the 4th Reich.

Sent from my H8314 using Tapatalk