The backstop basically is an open border where people can cross without restriction between 2 EU member countries, Eire and NI (UK). It also means trucks can cross the border with no, or very limited checks, this is obviously a big security problem in this day and age. Think illegal immigrants, terrorists, cattle disease and so on. The EU wanted to keep the backstop open, even after we left the EU. Treasonous May agreed to keep the border open in her deal (dictated by the EU), this would've kept us in the EU, under EU laws and rules which Britain would have to abide by under Treasonous May, even though technically we would've left, in name only. May also wanted to keep us in the singles market (still in the EU). European products are not going to disappear off the shop shelves once we leave the EU, this would hurt the EU countries more than it would the UK. The UK would actually be much better off as we can trade with other countries outside the EU under WTO negotiated rules, regulations and laws between the 2 countries. The negotiations would obviously be based on need and requirement. The continuity deals that the UK has already made with quite a few countries would have been renegotiated under WTO rules, and EU rules and laws free, those continuity deals would come into effect on 31st October 2019. Any continuity deals with present EU countries would include some EU rules and laws, and some UK rules and laws, and probably some WTO rules and laws. If by chance the EU decided to play hardball with Britain and ban all EU countries from trading with us, those, or most of those EU countries would rebel against the EU. Would also open the doors for a big black market. The remoaners scaremongering is all bullshite, an attempt to stop Brexit, funded by the EU and George Soros.
Under Article 50 rules, yes. The EU are well aware of this. Unless of course, Boris agrees to yet another extension, which he doesn't want.
Actually Boris was very clever, he included the word Political, which, if I understood it right means the Justice system cannot intervene, unless a criminal act has happened of course.
LL I didn't question the points highlighted above that you have made. Trade with the EU will continue but there could be some initial hiccoughs as a result of a no deal Brexit, I think everbody agrees on that. Do you know what would happen with the electricity trade between the UK and the EU?
The EU have already said they will not renegotiate the Brexit deal, basically means they won't give an extension, but, the EU corrupt keep changing their stance if they can see a sniff of getting their heads in front and stopping Brexit..
seems we share identical opinions on Corbyn Clarke and johnson. For me we’re likely delaying the inevitable. Labour can’t win with Corbyn in charge, but he’s too up himself to do the decent thing, stand down and let a more moderate central Labour Party have a chance. I think a lot of moderate labour supporters and centralist Tory supporters would go Lib Dem, but likelihood is that just splits the vote, the democrats doing well in an election normally just gets them lots of commendable second places apart from in the south west. The thing is, even with a majority, does boris get no deal through the house... or will he still have deserters within the party. Obviously he’s trying to purge them all now so he can replace them with Brexiteers. Johnson’s a fake. He has no moral’s, no firm belief’s, no plans for anything. He’s guided by self interest and narcissism
Do I look like the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy...... Any laws, rules regulations, agreements and contracts between the UK and EU will cease once we leave the EU, just like all other trade deals. New deals would have to be negotiated, just like any other deal. From what I've read, NI and Eire share the same Electricity grid which is separate from the UK, so I'd say they would renegotiate their own agreement/s.
Looks like Johnson is going to flip again - Following Wednesday's votes, No 10 said the public will get to choose between a deal, no deal, or "more delay". Downing Street said the prime minister will deliver an address later setting out the "vital choice that faces our country". "It is clear the only action is to go back to the people and give them the opportunity to decide what they want: Boris to go to Brussels and get a deal, or leave without one on 31 October or Jeremy Corbyn arriving in Brussels with his surrender bill begging for more delay, more dither and accepting whatever terms Brussels imposes over our nation," the spokesperson said.
As far as I'm aware, if a GE takes place, and Boris wins with a majority, which is likely, then all bets are off and Boris controls leaving the EU with, or without a deal. This is what happened when he replaced T May. So Milky, You obviously think, no, believe Corbyn is a very upstanding MP with high morals and standards and has nothing but great plans for the people of the UK, that he loves so much.
Not so sure I'd call it flipping. I guarantee you Boris, Jacob and a few other British patriots would've had their heads together and worked out every move and avenue taken by the remainers. They would've come up with counter strikes. I think going to the people is a good move by Boris. The people voted to leave, so let them vote on a deal, no deal or delay. I'm willing to bet no deal gets top vote. If the people vote for a no deal, by a majority, then where do the remoaners turn, they'll be backed into a corner. To go against the people's vote would show complete disdain for the people and it would literally hurt, and cause complete pain for the scum MP remoaners, and they'll suffer badly in a GE or by election. This is where we'll probably see quite a few rebel MP's changing their attitudes, and sides.
Re first paragraph. You don’t understand how a parliamentary democracy works. If his own mp’s continue to vote against him, on a particular subject it’s not guaranteed he can leave with no deal. Hence the purge to replace them with Brexiteers. Likelihood is if he wins he gets it through, not guaranteed. Re your second paragraph. If you read my post you’d see i’m no fan of Corbyn. However he does have a set of beliefs and principles - just not ones i happen to agree with.
Boris is not going to get a deal and has no interest in getting a deal - any election before Oct 31 is choosing between No deal or deal/remain. However Boris might not be getting an election before Oct 31 and then will be very funnily forced to either get a deal / delay or revoke. Turns out cunning Boris and Dom cunning are not that smart after all - who'd have thunk it
a Backstop is a safety net. And that’s what it means in this context. If we leave the Eu (with a deal ) there is a 2 year transition period. The idea is we negotiate trade deals that remove the requirement for a hard border. The Problem is what if we don’t agree trade deals that remove the issue within that time frame. EU law says we can’t agree trade deal while we’re still a member so we have to leave first and then negotiate. Surely you would imagine you could still negotiate them concurrently, agree on them, and then sign them on leaving. This is the bit i‘ve never understood. Once we got the fundamentals agreed - eg may’s deal whatever. We could then have sorted out heads of agreement on trade deals, and only leave when all partners were in agreement on them. Then the backstop would be an irrelevance. Obviously that’s too simple and i’m missing something. Wouldn’t be the first time!
Theres only John Mann and Kate Hoey in the labour party with any morals the rest are ****s, like 99% of politicians of all persuasions
