The EU isn't going to take such a view.tabascoboy wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 1:56 pm Well my understanding is no doubt simplistic, but it seems that we aren't going to break the agreement, but plan to change our law so we can ignore the bits we don't like concerning the NIP. Goods can be certified to UK standards for trade in NI rather than EU standards because even though we won't have a hard border for Ireland / NI there is no way these goods will end up in the EU zone, something like that?
Keep in mind the UK is already in breach of the agreement, & this is just adding insult to injuryThe European Commission Vice-President Maroš Šefčovič has released a statement following Liz Truss' update to MPs. It warns that the EU will "respond with all measures at its disposal".
It begins by saying the EU wants "a positive and stable relationship with the United Kingdom".
"This relationship must be based on the full respect of the legally binding commitments that the two sides have made to one another," it says.
On the protocol, it says the EU has shown understanding, but says: "Should the UK decide to move ahead with a bill disapplying constitutive elements of the protocol as announced today by the UK government, the EU will need to respond with all measures at its disposal."
It's been obvious all along the claims this was all legal are bollox, the text of the agreement specifically calls out that the UK couldn't just legislate it's obligations away.tabascoboy wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 2:44 pm "We're not going to break the agreement but instigate a' Special Operation'"?
Referring to someone who was one of Britain's foremost statesmen of an era as from your country is only a disgrace or a sign of idiot nationalism in a very small corner of the internet, particularly as later on in the same speech he refers to him as being 'Irish-British'.JM2K6 wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 1:07 pmNah. Ireland wasn't part of Great Britain. Burke was born in Dublin to Irish parents. And this is what Frost called Burke:Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 11:52 am Without trying to get involved in a PR style
one of my country’s great political philosophers
No, wrong again. In 2020 he gave a speech that referred to Burke as "one of my country's great political philosophers". The following year he gave another speech referencing Burke, and called him Irish-British in that one. Your very small corner of the internet probably needs to do some basic information gathering before wading in.Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 3:08 pmReferring to someone who was one of Britain's foremost statesmen of an era as from your country is only a disgrace or a sign of idiot nationalism in a very small corner of the internet, particularly as later on in the same speech he refers to him as being 'Irish-British'.JM2K6 wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 1:07 pmNah. Ireland wasn't part of Great Britain. Burke was born in Dublin to Irish parents. And this is what Frost called Burke:Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 11:52 am Without trying to get involved in a PR style
one of my country’s great political philosophers
Apologies for not remembering all Frost speeches verbatim. Both descriptions of Burke are entirely valid.JM2K6 wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 3:51 pmNo, wrong again. In 2020 he gave a speech that referred to Burke as "one of my country's great political philosophers". The following year he gave another speech referencing Burke, and called him Irish-British in that one. Your very small corner of the internet probably needs to do some basic information gathering before wading in.Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 3:08 pmReferring to someone who was one of Britain's foremost statesmen of an era as from your country is only a disgrace or a sign of idiot nationalism in a very small corner of the internet, particularly as later on in the same speech he refers to him as being 'Irish-British'.
Especially as it's only being used as a reference to describe Frost as a careless idiot, rather than some sort of world war triggering international incident.
I think JM has some of the same reading habits as me, or he's as insightful as David Allen Green.Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 3:08 pm Referring to someone who was one of Britain's foremost statesmen of an era as from your country is only a disgrace or a sign of idiot nationalism in a very small corner of the internet
https://davidallengreen.com/2021/10/a-h ... ord-frost/A hard look at the latest Brexit speech of Lord Frost
13th October 2021
Yesterday the Brexit minister David Frost gave a speech – and it is a speech that is worth considering carefully.
One reason to consider it carefully is that – unlike many ministerial speeches (and articles) that are produced by advisors and other functionaries – it is plain that this speech is the product of the minister’s mind.
As such, the speech has more historical and probative value that the usual erratic yet dry sequences of banalities, evasions and misdirections that constitute most ministerial communications.
We have an actual insight into one key minister is thinking (or not thinking) at this key moment, and this is rare, and we should appreciate it.
And as he is the minister who negotiated the two Brexit agreements – the withdrawal agreement and the trade and cooperation agreement – an insight into his thought (and lack of thought) is especially important at this time.
*
The explicit inspiration for the title of yesterday’s speech is a pamphlet by the eighteenth-century Whig writer and politician Edmund Burke.
And yesterday’s speech is, in turn, expressly a sequel to Frost’s Brexit speech in February 2020, which was also named after a publication by Burke.
In that February 2020 speech, English-born Frost described Burke as ‘one of my country’s great political philosophers’.
Burke was Irish.
And Burke died in 1797, before the Act of Union between Great Britain and Ireland.
This is just not a debating point: the slip is indicative of the shoddy combination of showiness and shallowness – about Ireland and other matters – in both of Frost’s speeches.
The Burke cited is the Burke of the quotation dictionaries, and of the beginnings and conclusions of C-grade A-level history essays, and not the Burke of history.
The Burke of history would probably have impeached this illiberal government in an instant.
*
The two Frost speeches, looked at together, reveal tensions.
For example, the February 2020 speech praised agreement negotiation at speed.
Referring to the then-prospective trade and cooperation agreement, 2020 Frost said:
‘…we can do this quickly. We are always told we don’t have enough time. But we should take inspiration, I think, from the original Treaty of Rome back in 1957. This was negotiated and signed in just under 9 months – surely we can do as well as that as well as our great predecessors, with all the advantages we have got now?’
But 2021 Frost does not like agreement negotiation at speed: the Northern Irish Protocol was ‘drawn up in extreme haste in a time of great uncertainty’.
The problem here is that there is no deeper thought beneath the phrases employed.
Frost has a fine phrase for negotiation at speed, and he has a fine phrase against negotiation in extreme haste.
But he does not realise nor care that the two phrases conflict: they are both simple expedients to get him through to his next paragraph.
This explains why during the Brexit negotiations Frost has been so constantly wrong-footed.
There is no substance, for all the paraded erudition.
The big negotiation taking place here is not between the United Kingdom and the European Union, but between the David Frost of 2020 and the David Frost of 2021.
And, somehow, both are losing.
*
Looking more closely at yesterday’s speech, you will see that it is structured (superficially) as a sequence of five ‘points’:
‘First to say that Brexit has changed our international interests and hence will change our patterns of European relationships – not necessarily fundamentally, but significantly. Second, that Brexit means competition – we will be setting a different path on economic policy. Third, that Brexit was about democracy – it is a democratic project that is bringing politics back home. Fourth, that the EU and we have got into a low-equilibrium somewhat fractious relationship, but that it need not always be like that – but also that it takes two to fix it. And fifth and finally, that fixing the very serious problem we have in the Northern Ireland Protocol is a pre-requisite for getting to a better place.’
Each of these points, however, turn out to be exercises in characterisation.
The United Kingdom position is characterised, and the European Union position is characterised.
Each characterisation is loaded and self-serving: the United Kingdom is portrayed as blameless and misunderstood, and the European Union is depicted as ignorant and even spiteful.
These characterisations are so extreme that both are better described as mischaracterisations.
And so the characterisations dissolve on closer examination as nothing more than excuses and accusations.
For example, take the issue of policy.
At one point Frost says that the United Kingdom will develop more substantial policy relationships with some European Union countries and not others, rather than the European Union as a whole.
But then he complains that the European Union is too rigid in binding the member states together in matters of policy:
‘In most EU member states many important things can’t be changed through elections – trade policy, monetary policy, fiscal policy, important elements of immigration policy, indeed some important aspects of industrial policy.’
Frost does not seem to realise that the United Kingdom is – and will be treated as – a ‘third country’.
The tactic of trying to circumvent the European Union and with engaging member states directly did not work during the Brexit negotiations, and there is no reason to believe it would work now.
*
But the most important part of this speech is about Northern Ireland.
Here he makes some general contentions about sovereignty and the role of the European Court of Justice.
He then insists that the import of these contentions is that the Northern Irish protocol needs to be replaced.
In a way this is a reversal of the usual caricature of continentals being obsessed with airy abstractions, in contrast to our robust Anglo-Saxon empiricism.
For the complaint as articulated by Frost does not amount to much more than a general objection to the European Court of Justice on conceptual grounds.
And, in the meantime, the European Union is proposing a range of practical measures to give efficacy to the Protocol but without removing the minor and residual role of the European Court of Justice.
And so he is wrong-footed again.
*
The one thing in common between the two speeches is that Frost is brashly defiant in his support for Brexit.
He is certain that it was a historical necessity that the United Kingdom had to break free.
This, in turn, means he sneers at the European Union for not understanding the true nature of Brexit and its implications.
But both the 2020 and 2021 speeches reveal that the real failure to understand the implications of Brexit are with Frost and other United Kingdom ministers.
The European Union, on the other hand, seem to understand the (current) United Kingdom government all too well.
Frost complains about lack of trust: ‘we are constantly faced with generalised accusations that can’t be trusted and are not a reasonable international actor’.
But these accusations are not ‘generalised’ – instead they are, to use a phrase, ‘very specific and limited’.
And, according to statements today from a former Brexit adviser, the accusation of bad faith is well grounded.
good faith blah. listen to babble of student politics from sw1 insiders infantilised by EU membership. it was international diplomacy vs *people trying to cut our balls off*. of course there wasn't 'good faith' you. NEWSFLASH: cheating foreigners is a core part of the job
— Dominic Cummings (@Dominic2306) October 13, 2021
*
So, yes.
Frost’s speech has historical and probative value.
But it is not an impressive piece of work.
Characterisations (and mischaracterisations) do the work of propositions; accusations pile upon excuses; assertions are implicitly undermined by other assertions; and (ahem) very specific and limited concerns are dismissed as too general to matter.
And so the true historical and probative value of the speech is not as an insight into the thinking of the government at this stage of Brexit, but to its lack of thought.
Here it should be noted that Frost relies on the (supposed) popularity of Brexit as its ultimate justification:
‘That’s why I don’t see anything wrong with Brexit being described as a populist policy. If populism means doing what people want – challenging a technocratic consensus – then I am all for it.’
The wise counterpoint to this populism, of course, was once put as follows: that our ministers and representatives owe us their judgement – and that they betray us instead of serve us if they sacrifice their judgement to public opinion.
And who made this compelling counterpoint so eloquently?
Edmund Burke.
_Os_ wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 7:17 pm
The wise counterpoint to this populism, of course, was once put as follows: that our ministers and representatives owe us their judgement – and that they betray us instead of serve us if they sacrifice their judgement to public opinion.
And who made this compelling counterpoint so eloquently?
Edmund Burke.
We're starting to stray off the subject of the thread. But I would give a decent chance of the UK undergoing constitutional reform larger than during the New Labour era (less chance than a united Ireland, more chance than Scottish independence).fishfoodie wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 7:36 pm This is the core of the weakness in Party Politics, & is so especially in the UK.
Tory MPs were selected,not on their wisdom, or Intelligence, on integrity, but on their allegiance to the Dogma of Brexit, & the knowledge that they would owe their election to their Leader.
So when Bills were put before them to undercut the right to peacefully protest, to protect the independence of their Courts, & many others; they disengaged any personal morality, & ethics, & ignored any concerns from their own minds, & walked thru the lobbies the Whips told them to !
Once a cunt always a cunt ... like father like son!
Johnson returns from his Belfast train crash empty handed
The prime minister's fruitless visit to Northern Ireland yesterday is forcing him into a corner of his own making
There are few situations that an intervention by Boris Johnson cannot make worse. So it was with his visit to Belfast yesterday in a belated attempt to close the destabilising rift that he personally created through a combination of the Northern Ireland protocol and an ultra-hard Brexit.
He went to urge the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) to join the power-sharing executive, but came away empty handed. It was an absolute train crash.
In the run up to the visit, the prime minister had spoken with Irish Taoiseach Michael Martin, later described by sources in Dublin as “the single worst call [Martin] ever had with anyone”. The FT’s Peter Foster claimed he had been told the call was “very difficult”, “stubborn”, “eulogising on sovereignty” and “little grasp of detail” …not even close to “conciliatory”.
Not to be outdone the foreign secretary, Liz Truss, then managed to annoy EU vice president Maroš Šefčovič in a telephone conversation that one EU source characterised as “horrendous”, adding that they had “seldom seen Šefčovič so cross and so upset”.
It’s examples like these that demonstrate why Britain is wise to employ professional diplomats.
whole article at https://yorkshirebylines.co.uk/politics ... ty-handed/
tabascoboy wrote: ↑Wed May 18, 2022 9:19 am
Johnson returns from his Belfast train crash empty handed
The prime minister's fruitless visit to Northern Ireland yesterday is forcing him into a corner of his own making
There are few situations that an intervention by Boris Johnson cannot make worse. So it was with his visit to Belfast yesterday in a belated attempt to close the destabilising rift that he personally created through a combination of the Northern Ireland protocol and an ultra-hard Brexit.
He went to urge the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) to join the power-sharing executive, but came away empty handed. It was an absolute train crash.
In the run up to the visit, the prime minister had spoken with Irish Taoiseach Michael Martin, later described by sources in Dublin as “the single worst call [Martin] ever had with anyone”. The FT’s Peter Foster claimed he had been told the call was “very difficult”, “stubborn”, “eulogising on sovereignty” and “little grasp of detail” …not even close to “conciliatory”.
Not to be outdone the foreign secretary, Liz Truss, then managed to annoy EU vice president Maroš Šefčovič in a telephone conversation that one EU source characterised as “horrendous”, adding that they had “seldom seen Šefčovič so cross and so upset”.
It’s examples like these that demonstrate why Britain is wise to employ professional diplomats.
whole article at https://yorkshirebylines.co.uk/politics ... ty-handed/
Not remember the police being called to the flat when neighbours were concerned about a domestic taking place? Smoke ... fire ....
Sadly predictable ... sunlit uplands!petej wrote: ↑Fri May 27, 2022 1:08 pm https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... -batteries
Not surprising. It seemed like we were in a good place pre-brexit.
This sort of thing upsets me far more than lock down partiesdpedin wrote: ↑Fri May 27, 2022 1:19 pmSadly predictable ... sunlit uplands!petej wrote: ↑Fri May 27, 2022 1:08 pm https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... -batteries
Not surprising. It seemed like we were in a good place pre-brexit.
Yep, if the UK isn't making batteries themselves, they'll never meet the Rules Of Origin for importing the car into the EU.dpedin wrote: ↑Fri May 27, 2022 1:19 pmSadly predictable ... sunlit uplands!petej wrote: ↑Fri May 27, 2022 1:08 pm https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... -batteries
Not surprising. It seemed like we were in a good place pre-brexit.
The danger is we are all becoming immune to the industrial scale of the feck ups, lies, cheating, illegality, criminal acts and general shittery! Both the self harm of Brexit and how it was achieved and Partygate would lead to any other normal PM in previous times resign or be held to account by their own party. Trying to decide which was worse is a bit like trying to decide which one of Peter Sutcliffe's victims least deserved to get brutally murdered!petej wrote: ↑Fri May 27, 2022 1:29 pmThis sort of thing upsets me far more than lock down partiesdpedin wrote: ↑Fri May 27, 2022 1:19 pmSadly predictable ... sunlit uplands!petej wrote: ↑Fri May 27, 2022 1:08 pm https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... -batteries
Not surprising. It seemed like we were in a good place pre-brexit.
Rotting food while the numbers relying on food banks increase.GogLais wrote: ↑Tue May 31, 2022 5:50 pm Watching the local news on the telly. Lettuce and leeks rotting in the fields in Lancashire and chaos at Manchester Airport because of worker shortages. Gets me so ffykin angry. Weren’t we told that immigrants had stolen our jobs and our young people could have them back now? Lying bastards.
JRM would say it was just a temporary glitch whilst the markets realign? However this ignores farmers going broke and ordinary folk going hungry in the interim.petej wrote: ↑Tue May 31, 2022 5:55 pmRotting food while the numbers relying on food banks increase.GogLais wrote: ↑Tue May 31, 2022 5:50 pm Watching the local news on the telly. Lettuce and leeks rotting in the fields in Lancashire and chaos at Manchester Airport because of worker shortages. Gets me so ffykin angry. Weren’t we told that immigrants had stolen our jobs and our young people could have them back now? Lying bastards.
They never made any attempt to hide their agenda, & yet turkeys still voted for Christmasdpedin wrote: ↑Wed Jun 01, 2022 10:18 amJRM would say it was just a temporary glitch whilst the markets realign? However this ignores farmers going broke and ordinary folk going hungry in the interim.petej wrote: ↑Tue May 31, 2022 5:55 pmRotting food while the numbers relying on food banks increase.GogLais wrote: ↑Tue May 31, 2022 5:50 pm Watching the local news on the telly. Lettuce and leeks rotting in the fields in Lancashire and chaos at Manchester Airport because of worker shortages. Gets me so ffykin angry. Weren’t we told that immigrants had stolen our jobs and our young people could have them back now? Lying bastards.
JRM honestly doesn't care about these 'details' - his Dad laid all this out in his 'Sovereign Individual' book as did Kwarteng, Raab, Patel, Truss et al in their book 'Britannia Unchained'. We honestly shouldn't be surprised about any of this - they told us in advance exactly what they were going to do!
Farming get subsidies, ergo, according to Minford, & Mogg, it isn't, "economic", so it's in your interests to run it down.Leading Brexiteer Jacob Rees Mogg has urged the public to listen to a Cardiff economist who said Brexit would lead to running down the car industry “in the same way we ran down the coal and steel industries”.
The comments from Cardiff University’s Professor Patrick Minford have come under the spotlight after Mr Rees-Mogg praised him in a newspaper article.
In 2012, he told MPs on Westminster’s Foreign Affairs committee that car manufacturers in the UK would have to be wound down if Britain left the EU.
In the run up to the referendum in 2016, he also said that Brexit would "eliminate" manufacturing.
Professor Minford came to prominence as a champion of Margaret Thatchers’ economic policies at time when she was under heavy attack by academics – and today he is one of the highest-profile economists in favour of Brexit.
Mr Rees-Mogg is an admirer of the professor’s work and argues he “deserves to be listened to because of his remarkable track record”.
Concern about the future of car production in the UK is high, following warnings from Toyota, which has an engine plant in Deeside, that a no-deal Brexit could affect investment decisions. Jaguar Land Rover has warned of “tens of thousands” of jobs being at risk, and Ford, which has major operations in Bridgend, has described a no-deal outcome as "pretty disastrous".
Mr Minford now argues that the automotive sector has the potential to thrive outside the EU.
During the 2012 hearing , Tory MP Rory Stewart asked the economist if he was talking about the “collapse of the entire UK car industry” and the “wiping out of the manufacturing industry”.
According to the transcript of the committee, Mr Minford said: “It is perfectly true that if you remove protection of the sort that has been given particularly to the car industry and other manufacturing industries inside the protective wall, you will have a change in the situation facing that industry, and you are going to have to run it down.
"It will be in your interests to do it, just as in the same way we ran down the coal and steel industries.
“These things happen as evolution takes place in your economy. In the long run they are in your interest, but of course you have to deal with the compensation problems along the route.”
When asked about Britain’s leverage to negotiate transitional arrangements, he said: “If, for some reason, there were no willingness by the other countries’ car owners and governments to cooperate in this and there were a faster run-down of our car industry as a result of that lack of cooperation, we would have to compensate them in a way rather like the steel and coal industry...
“That is a quite good parallel. If you have an industry that is not economic, it is your interests to run it down.”
Mr Minford’s comments have now been widely shared on social media.
You can see which age demographics have been most negatively impacted.
Very British - we voted for posh cunts who have screwed us stupid but we will be content with staring pointedly at foreigners! That'll do it!
. NEWSFLASH: cheating foreigners is a core part of the job