See, this little bit sums up your contribution over the last few pages. Setting aside the fact the EU Council isn’t the EU Parliament, and so your latest hastily googled link has next to no direct relevance, can you help us all out and instead of selectively quoting a little bit half way down the page and then riffing around it, how about you paste the very first paragraph of that page onto here please? Don’t lose the EU’s own bold bits for emphasis either, they’re very important. No need to waffle around it. Just that bit will do. Others can then decide for themselves if resolutions (of the EU Council in this instance but whatever…) are “lawfully binding”. Thanks.
You do it. I think you have the capability... They do not intend to have legal effects (on EU laws), but they do intend to set out the EU's political postition. If you don't think they can be held to having expressed a political position that may have influenced a legal decision, court case (where the stated position led to a decision or contract) or international agreement (we signed this because of your continued rerference to your political position on foreign interefernce, and now you tell us you do interfere?) then I think you are sadly mistaken.
That may be a poor example. It is legally binding in as much as, if the EU says it has such and such a belief, or such and such a position, it can be held to having had that belief up until a time when it withdrew the resolution in which it was said, or changed its content. This would include being held to account in a court of law, and, again, comes under natural law (a person is responsible for what they tell you), rather than direct law, and therefore is assumed without affect on EU law. If the EU make a resolution to say they believe foreign interference in domestic politics is unlawful, and is protected by Human Rights and International Law , the EU cannot then say that it did not say it, or did not mean it. Natural law, The same that is used everyday in every country in the world. Tell me I am wrong.
On the EU Council… The European Council is a collegiate body that defines the overall political direction and priorities of the European Union So what on Earth are you going on about when you infer the council is isolated from the rest of the EU? Is this the reason why you think the EU is an upstanding democracy? The Council is the EU, they just let Parliament LARP about as MEPs. I thought the complete misinterpretation of the level playing field was the silliest misconception on here, until these last few days have revealed that none of you know anything about the EU. Do you know anything about this body that you have been defending and glorifying as the UK’s only chance of salvation for the last ten years?
I just did a stupid thing, I was too intrigued by responses. If HH channeled his energy more wisely, and wasn't consistently wrong about absolutely everything, he could have written his master's dissertation just in this thread. As it is, he is at least providing material for iamofwfc's reading longish words practice.
Physician, heal thyself! I’m no expert on the EU but I’d wager my year spent studying EU law as part of a law degree at least gives me a good start at understanding the basic constitutional framework of the EU, broadly how the different institutions work and why quoting a resolution from one (the parliament) and then using information about another (the Council) to back up an argument about why it's legally binding (it still isn't, by the way) just doesn’t compute. That's literally all I was saying. I don't expect you to get it and even if you do I'm sure you'll head off now on some diversionary line of argument rather than just taking the point square on.
Don't just tell me you are clever and I am wrong, because that is just your opnion. Tell me why I am wrong, sothat I can either learn from you, or respond. That is the basis of reasonable debate. Please try it. Tell me what I have missed, specifically. Otherwise you just look like you are running away from a silly mistake. No matter how clever you are.
I have in my last two posts on this thread. Jeez. I'll try to be even more specific: 1. A few pages back you quoted a resolution of the EU Parliament. 2. I pointed out yesterday it wasn't legally binding anyway. 3. You said it was and provided a link to the EU Council's website which talks about resolutions of the EU Council. 4. The EU Council is a completely different institution to the EU Parliament. 5. It's (sort of) like you producing the Cabinet Manual to try and back up an argument you were having about House of Commons procedures. 6. It's meaningless. 7. The fact the EU Council website says in the first paragraph that its resolutions aren't legally binding either, and puts it in bold just to make it crystal clear, but you persist in arguing the EU itself is wrong, and that I and others don't know anything about the EU, is truly, epically, mindblowing. Or top notch forum trolling. I can't break it down any more than that without using pictures, so I'm afraid that's my last word on this tedium.
Well it bloody should be illegal. EU bastards, can’t even break the law honestly. Thank God we’re out of it.
My entire effort has been to prove that EU law prevents the EU from involvement in UK, or any other members', domestic politics. What you demonstrate above is how you successfully, for a moment, deflected my argument onto a silly side issue that had no baring on the actual discussion being had, and used it to ignore the actual point in favour of flim flam. This is clear from the fact that it is the only thing which you have addressed in the post above. In other words, you gain said and gain said until you had the meanest morsel to bite upon. Let me draw you back to the actual conversation... My argument has alway been to counter absurd claims by yourself and Since63 such as the following. That statement directly contradicts the contents of the treaties on the operaton of the European Union I linked to above. Proving the point I have been making all along, and the only point I intended to make. The only possible way that your claim of EU entitlement to be involved in the Brexit referendum could be correct, and not politically motivated BS, is if a law or agreement existed between the UK and the EU that permitted them to do so. So, rather than just dismiss your claim, I asked you to reference that law, to support your point, just as you asked me to produce my evidence. The difference between us if that I produced mine for you, but chose to act as if I never asked proof of you. Your post above demonstrates exactly how you have ignored my honest attempts to answer your questions and demands for evidence, and instead, as the left on here always do, avoid the issues and get into a redundant argument about sementecs, drawing me on issues that have nothing to do with the argument I am making. I used the resolution, on 'Foreign electoral interference and disinformation in national and European democratic processes' to indicate the EU's thinking on the subject, but rather than accept the contents of the resolution, you came up with the list of things above, in order to skirt that actual point I was making. Gaslighting, eveasion, fake news and falsehoods all lumped together because you, I must assume, did not like having your belief questioned. Saying that this resolution does not prove that the EU believes in the content of its own adopted document, and cannot be used to prove that the EU expressed a belief in the content of its own resolution. I only got into discussing the resolution because you chose to say that it did not say what it said, and could not be considered as proof of the EU's position. Patently rubbish, given it was the EU that published it with the express intention of doing exactly that. But you can claw back some credibility here... Please clarify whether or not you believe the resolution reflects the position of the EU on its stated subject. You don't have to accept any point I was making about what it proved, I would just like to know if you accept that the resolution is a valid EU document that carries some weight. You have so far given it no credibility, reduced it to a meaningless jumble of random words (by saying is not binding) and bleated on about who wrote it. Not a flattering look for you. I believe it speaks for itslef, and is intended to do so, without your interpretation, but again, you can explain why I am wrong in this, but I do not believe you will be able to quote anything other than opinion. I still believe that the EU are bound by what they say, particularly in a meticulously prepared resolution, whether it be from the Council or the Parliament. I would be interested to see your argument as to why they are not. Again, I do not believe you will ever produce anything (the Council website I linked to included) that would excuse them from basic natural law. But you are welcome to go ahead and make that argument. Though I agree, with the website, that it does not, in itself, create any binding law; it does create a binding to a political position which the EU wishes the world to know it posseses. Otherwise what would be the purpose of the resolution? We just wanted to say some pretty words? I understand why you wish to leave my actual points and questions unanswered.
UK experiences 14% fall in exports while the rest of the world averages an 8% increase since 2020: https://www.ft.com/content/021c629d-5853-4111-9600-ab5f0eb65a35 Early 2020 saw the start of Covid and the start of the new Brexit trading conditions with the EU. We have recovered from the former but there is no recovery from the latter:
Are you shilling for FT Sydney? Your link is a simple advert for that organ after all, containing no news or data to support what you are saying. That is called spam in the real world.
To sum up, I simply said that resolution indicated the EU’s opinion. And you came up with all the BS above in an attempt to tell me it didn’t. You have set a precedent in this forum, liked by all the usual crew: you cannot take the EU at its word. Which we have been telling you for years. TFFB. All of you should see yourselves how the rest of the world would see you from outside the bubble. This place is a self help service for the deluded.
So the likes of Jacob Rees Mogg want the government to trigger 16 of the Northern Ireland Protocol because it looks like the majority in NI will vote for parties that actually support the NIP. Let that sink in. NI voted against Brexit. NI is likely to vote in favour of the NIP and yet some in Westminster want to deny them their democratic rights because they don't like the choices the people are making. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/20...r-article-16-expert-warns-irish-nationalists/ And they are not nationalists. Under the GFA they are already Irish if they choose to be. Just as many in the NI populace identify as British or both. Many of my family and friends in NI identify as Irish and will vote for parties that support the NIP but do not want a united Ireland. They are happy with the current relationship with the South of Ireland and GB. They recognise the huge advantages it gives them.
Remainers wanting to take our bargaining chips off the table again. Question is whether they are aware they are being used, again, via EU gaslighting, to undermine their own country's ability to achieve a deal within the agreed NIP parameters, or whether they are actively anti-British in this. Though the liking for ignorance and naivety displayed on this thread over the last few weeks does perhaps leave a little wiggle room. This is project fear being used again to remove obstructions from the EU getting what it wants. The UK does not want to trigger Article 16. If we did, it would have happened a long time ago. The UK want the EU to honour its Good will commitments and has shown great patience so far in doing so, Abd we should not have the tools we were given taken away. If the EU don't want to honour the GFA, they should not have committed to do so. If posters on here are happy for them to ignore it, then it is they who are jeopardising the NIP.
By the EU in January 2021, in what the rest of the world agreed was an incredible act of hostility. The last gasp nuclear option triggered without discussion or notice, for no reason other than they were affronted by our superior vaccine response; affecting everyone in Ireland, including your relatives and everyone else you believe support the NIP. So please. No making out the EU have anything but their own most selfish interests, and hubris, at heart in this, or that they have any moral high ground, because it simply isn't true, based on their shameful track record. But you guys knock yourselves out. Just remember the rest of us do not have such short attention spans, and are less susceptible to gaslighting. And we do not have to make silly arguments to dismiss aEU treaties to persuade ourselves that our arguments are not dead on the ground. I think we all understand why you guys ignore me. TFFB
Despite the best efforts of the government to blame anything and anyone else for our economic woes, most people know Brexit is very much part of the problem: "The latest Opinium poll for the Observer on Sunday finds that 58% of voters think Brexit is helping to push prices up in the shops against just 8% who do not: 49% think it is damaging the economy as a whole, while 16% do not. And 68% think the government should be doing more to ease the cost of living crisis." https://amp.theguardian.com/politic...te-tory-government-goes-from-crisis-to-crisis
The lack of understanding of the politics and history of Ireland this side of the Irish Sea is monumental and jaw-dropping. The Government and much of the media not only doesn't understand but isn't interested and that attitude trickles down to a significant number of people. Bargaining chips = pocket fluff and bus ticket priced in old money.
Unfortunately the ignorance didn't start with Brexit but it certainly was magnified by it. It was the biggest reason I was against Brexit. I feared for the GFA and peace in NI and that fear hasn't gone away. There are still extremists on both sides who would love the troubles to reignite. None more so than the DUP who voted against the GFA. They have emboldened unionist terrorists such as the UVF who are threatening Irish politicians (they already made a bomb threat at a peace rally in Belfast attended by Irish foreign minister Simon Coveney). I know people in NI from both sides of "the divide". They just want to live in peace. The GFA allows that. The terms "republican" and "loyalist" have little meaning now. People can be Irish, British or both. I have a cousin living in a "mixed" community in Lisburn. Her children go to a multi faith school where Protestants and Catholics (and other faiths) learn together and play together. That would have been impossible just 30 years ago. The NIP is not perfect but it's the only current practical solution for avoiding a disastrous border on the island of Ireland. If the extremists in NI, and the people in GB that don't like it, want to get rid of it then that's fine. But they need to provide a working alternative first. We were told that there were lots of potential solutions during the referendum so it shouldn't be hard to provide one now.
Exactly. A couple of friends of mine grew up in Derry and no one normal wants a return to the old days. People have short memories. It was only the mid-90s that terrorist attacks in Britain finally faded out. The monumental arrogance of Brits who claim the EU or the Irish or anyone is 'using' Ireland as a political tool simply by trying to preserve a hard-won peaceful compromise is beaten only by the monumental arrogance of Brits who think that placing a border on the island of Ireland is no big deal. Literally clueless.
And why is it that so many only see it that way? Because the good faith promised by the EU in the NIP was not forthcoming, and the EU have "interfered" with gaslighting the public into believing they have honoured their committments. Just as they were beligerent in avoiding a timely trade agreement (as was predicted exactly by Johnson), which they could have come to months in advance to the benefit of all parties, they are now attempting to bully us into accepting their contempt for the GFA, using UK allies and mindless sheep who believe only evil would oppose the EU. They should be threatened with A16, and we should use it if if they make it impossible not to do so, and the people of Northern Ireland can decide for themselves how to deal with it.
Absolute headwobbling stuff this, old chap! So the people are wrong to think what they think because they were told to think it? That's not an argument the Brexiters like when it's suggested that the reason they voted for Brexit was because they were fed years of absolute nonsense about the EU and were promised things that could not and would not be delivered. The fact of the matter when it comes to a border in Ireland is that all the pie-in-the-sky solutions suggested by those who said the oven-ready deal was tasty and delicious are completely unworkable. There is no card to play here that doesn't cause more problems. None. Article 16 is a hollow threat because everyone knows that it is like Britain shooting itself in both feet with a blunderbuss.
There is load of nonsense spouted about Article 16 by people that have not read it or do not understand it. It does not end the protocol. It only allows either party to suspend specific parts of the protocol as a safeguarding measure and these action must be “restricted with regard to their scope and duration” and must only address the issues explicitly identified. It also specifies in Annex 7 that the party intending to invoke article 16 must notify the joint committee as soon as possible and no actions can be taken for one month during the "negotiation stage". If negotiations fail and article 16 is triggered and unilateral action is taken then the other party can take "proportionate rebalancing measures" e.g. tariffs or other trade restrictions can be introduced. If Article 16 is triggered very little will happen on the ground (especially as many checks have not actually been implemented yet), in fact nothing will happen for that first month. All that will happen then is there will be long and tortuous negotiations while trading conditions between the UK and EU will be even worse. It doesn't fix anything and certainly doesn't end the protocol, despite what some people believe.
Exactly. Every ace card the British Government holds is actually the little card with the rules to Snap written on it.
There you go then. If all I did was spin your argument round, you just switch yours back and save me the bother of replying. The fact of the matter is that it is the EU failing to honour its commitments to the GFA in the NIP that is the issue. The EU are not working with the UK to resolve the issues, yet by the nature of the NIP, they are bound to do so. If there is no threat in A16, then why is it considered a threat? Why has the EU got you and Sydney saying 'take it off the table', just like they did with 'no deal'? But you believe what you want. Or what they want.
Pretty sure you are the only one who has described the effects of A16 on here so far Sydney, so you can only be correcting yourself. Could this be the thing you said that you are now correcting... So it was Sydney what spouted the nonsense he described in that post. Glad he was here to recognise it, take responsibility for it, and put us all right. The ignorance and stupidity of self defeating arguments on here from the left is beyond bizarre, but they keep coming back with more. Love you and ETG's skirting around the fact that the EU already triggered it, the last gasp nuclear option, without consultation or notice, back in Jan 2022. But were so reviled by the rest of the world for doing so that they had to immediately u turn on it. It's a very telling thing that you do, given that you are lecturing everyone on the moral superiority of the EU on the matter of Northern Ireland without reference to the only ACTUAL case of A16 in the history of Brexit. No one is surprised though. You have no credibility on here talking about the EU. Too much rubbish has been spoken about EU treaties that don't apply to the EU, and EU integrity where, when the Union's hubris was tickled, it threw NI under the bus. Your Sylvanian fantasies of the province are not reflected by reality, The EU don't give a damn about it, as their own actions show.
