Cont: Brexit: Now What? Magic 8 Ball's up

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

You're arguing with a position that has confused itself with its own misdirection.

Any kind of open border was tossed out by the Brexit supporters. That point of negotiation collapsed long before any votes because it meant the four freedoms and that conflicted with "taking back control" rhetoric. Then the EU, representing a valid concern of a member-state (the one now contemplating a land border with an outside state), started offering ideas on how to address that.

Once FTA and/or CU were off the table, this issue was the natural default.

So all the howling of contempt at the devious EU for inventing this issue for crafty-cunning reasons of negotiating prowess is just an ego defense so they don't have to deal with the fact they did this to themselves (and everyone else).

It's just Leaver nonsense as always. The EU no more invented the backstop than someone warning you about jumping out of a plane without a parachute invented gravity.

The border issue was raised by both sides prior to negotiations, the EU spelled out that it needed resolved and that there were a limited number of resolutions that were possible, even fewer within the UK red lines.

The softness or hardness of a border is pretty much defined by the extent to which the regulations differ on either side. If you want a soft border you need to have regulatory alignment. If you want to set your own rules and take back control you need to have a harder border.

None of this novel. The only novel things are the extent to which people denied the reality before and after the referendum.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

I think that is overstating things. Everyone born in Northern Ireland has Irish and therefore EU citizenship. Unless they refuse it.

No, the UK will not recognise the Irish citizenship for British nationals. if you are born in the UK they will regard you as British even if you tell them you are Irish.

There is a current case going through the courts on this very matter.

 

[Guybrush Threepwood]

I think that is overstating things. Everyone born in Northern Ireland has Irish and therefore EU citizenship. Unless they refuse it.

Not so much

In cases like this, the website here is a useful guide, and it is almost always right.

 

[angrysoba]

No, the UK will not recognise the Irish citizenship for British nationals. if you are born in the UK they will regard you as British even if you tell them you are Irish.

There is a current case going through the courts on this very matter.

Wow! I didn't know about this case.


I assume that this is the one you are talking about...

Taoiseach Leo Varadkar has previously said that the “UK has got it wrong in the DeSouza case” and that “the Good Friday Agreement is explicit on this matter – the people of Northern Ireland are entitled to be British or Irish or both.”

The Department of Foreign Affairs will have an observer in the courtroom to watch today’s proceedings.

“Their objective is to make me leave that courtroom as a British citizen,” Emma DeSouza said, “which would mean my husband would have to leave the country – if we lose, there’s every chance that they will push to have him leave.”

DeSouza said that the UK government’s legal argument is effectively “rewriting” the Good Friday Agreement, and makes the people in Northern Ireland “harden” their identities rather than the opposite.

https://www.thejournal.ie/emma-desouza-court-case-4801788-Sep2019/

 

[angrysoba]

Not so much

Ah, yes! I just found it. Thanks.

In cases like this, the website here is a useful guide, and it is almost always right.

Also, very handy website that I may have to consult from time to time.

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

This update from the Supreme Court appears to be saying that the government's defence isn't denying that Johnson prorogued parliament in order to silence MPs and to protect his leave plan:

Boris Johnson sought to suspend Parliament to avoid the risk of MPs "frustrating or damaging" his Brexit plans, the Supreme Court has heard.

Lawyers for campaigners challenging the suspension said there was "strong evidence" the PM saw MPs "as an obstacle" and wanted to "silence" them.

But a government lawyer said the PM was "entitled" to suspend Parliament, and it was not a matter for the courts.

 

[catsmate]

According to the papers Boris was 'ambushed' by the duplicitous EU and his humiliation at the press conference is a humiliation for all of the UK and a good example of why we should leave.
Can't have a pipsqueak country like Luxembourg humiliating our Prime Minister.

He needs very little assistance...

 

[ponderingturtle]

This update from the Supreme Court appears to be saying that the government's defence isn't denying that Johnson prorogued parliament in order to silence MPs and to protect his leave plan:

So much for restoring the sovereignty of parliament.

 

[catsmate]

so you agree with my statements. ThanksThe WTO requires a border, unless there is a customs union. When we leave the EU we will leave the customs union. The UK then needs to decide whether to break WTO rules or break the GFA.

The EU will not break WTO rules and will put up a border in Ireland and will blame the UK for leaving the framework that allow the GFA to operate.

Facts seem to be anathema to Brexiteers.

 

[The Don]

So much for restoring the sovereignty of parliament.

I think that it's rather like the Christian right in the US who want someone's religious beliefs to supersede civil rights legislation - as long as they are the correct religious beliefs.

Parliament should be sovereign (though of course it always was) as long as it's to do things that the Brexiteers agree with.

 

[catsmate]

The Supreme Court session is underway. Despite lodging an appeal against the Scottish decision, Johnson has not submitted a written statement.

Up to 16:00 (end of heading for today) there were 4.4 million stream accesses, 6,600x normal levels. There seems to be some interest...

Lord Keen (for the government) couldn't answer the question from Lord Hodge (one of the eleven judges) about how the government can comply with regular NI reports to Parliament if it has been forcibly closed.
I rather like the way Lady Hale was unimpressed by Keen's attempt to find similarities with BoJo's prorogation and Attlee's in 1948.

 

[catsmate]

That may or may not be factually true. But it's not what that article actually implies. Which is what was at issue here.

Maybe you need to do some reading; that is exactly what the article in question says.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

This update from the Supreme Court appears to be saying that the government's defence isn't denying that Johnson prorogued parliament in order to silence MPs and to protect his leave plan:

Indeed. Because the English court ruled in the first case that proroging parliament wasn't a matter for the courts regardless of the reasons. They never considered therefore whether his stated reason was true or false.

The Scottish court initially had taken the same position but on appeal the higher court ruled that the fact that he was doing it to attempt to frustrate the will of parliament and to avoid proper oversight in fact made it a matter for the courts even though it may well normally not be.

There seems to be little to no debate on whether Johnson is a liar legally. Merely whether his being a liar is a matter for the courts or not.

This is also why it was dishonest for the Tories to paint the decision in the English court as agreeing with them. It was merely a statement that 'there is nothing we can do about it'

 

[catsmate]

It's also worth remembering that the UK government is also attempting to rip up the GFA by insisting that Northern Irish people are automatically British rather than Irish when dealing with their rights.

Yes, the DeSouza case has some interesting implications. But then the UKHO is handling citizenship and residence matters badly atm.

 

[catsmate]

No, the UK will not recognise the Irish citizenship for British nationals. if you are born in the UK they will regard you as British even if you tell them you are Irish.

There is a current case going through the courts on this very matter.

Emma DeSouza.
She won her case now the Home Office is appealing and crapping all over the Belfast Agreement and the Northern Ireland Act 1998 in the process.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

Emma DeSouza.
She won her case now the Home Office is appealing and crapping all over the Belfast Agreement and the Northern Ireland Act 1998 in the process.

Rather sinister that they proposed she renounce her UK citizenship as a solution to the problem.

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

Up to 16:00 (end of heading for today) there were 4.4 million stream accesses, 6,600x normal levels. There seems to be some interest...

Yeah, I feel like I ought to be watching it, but it's three days of court proceedings, and I think I'll stick to summaries and clips.

 

[catsmate]

Yeah, I feel like I ought to be watching it, but it's three days of court proceedings, and I think I'll stick to summaries and clips.

I recommend this.

 

[jimbob]

The vote leave website still says "there is a European free trade zone from Iceland to the Russian border and we will be part of"

Free trade means no customs duty, no import taxes, no quotas. Effectively a customs union.

Farage was saying that the Norwegian model wouldn't be too bad.

 

[Garrison]

Indeed. Because the English court ruled in the first case that proroging parliament wasn't a matter for the courts regardless of the reasons. They never considered therefore whether his stated reason was true or false.

The Scottish court initially had taken the same position but on appeal the higher court ruled that the fact that he was doing it to attempt to frustrate the will of parliament and to avoid proper oversight in fact made it a matter for the courts even though it may well normally not be.

There seems to be little to no debate on whether Johnson is a liar legally. Merely whether his being a liar is a matter for the courts or not.

This is also why it was dishonest for the Tories to paint the decision in the English court as agreeing with them. It was merely a statement that 'there is nothing we can do about it'

Yean the entire government defence appears to be that they did prorogue parliament to escape any scrutiny of whatever deal Johnson came up with and that's the generous interpretation. More likely is that Boris was indeed trying to engineer a No Deal Brexit thwarting the will of parliament in the process.

I suspect he failed to provide a statement to the court not for any strategic reasons but simply because writing it would have been too much like hard work.