Jump to content
Wanderers Ways - passion not fashion

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, bwfcfan5 said:

Interesting how in the real world remainers like me and ST and Brexiteers like Bolty all just want this deal through. Perhaps that is  somewhat instructional for MPs?

Someone once said that everyone comes out of mediation slightly miffed

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 45.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • miamiwhite

    5124

  • Mounts Kipper

    3444

  • boltondiver

    2989

  • Tonge moor green jacket

    2905

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I would encourage everyone to read the story and background of Emmett Till For those who don’t know who Emmett Till was he was a 14 year old black boy, who wolf whistled at a white lady. As a res

I'll even name names. The following are massive cunts: Me. Bolty. Miami. Cheese. Kent. Casino. Kipper. Royal. Labour. Tories. Scotland. The Welsh. The EU. Americans. People from fucking Yorkshire

My last comment on this... There are people on here who apart from being Bolton fans I have nothing in common with & whose opinions I wheheartedly disagree with, however I would fight for their ri

Posted Images

2 minutes ago, boltondiver said:

Someone once said that everyone comes out of mediation slightly miffed

I think we'd all agree that if everyone was only slightly miffed then it's a good result!

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, bolty58 said:

 

Actually, it is all on belligerent fuckers in Parliament - many of whom want to defy the result of the referendum. I would like to think it will get through so we, and the country, can get on with discussing other stuff and drop the toxic Brexit debate until such time as scheming Europhiles try to get us back in.

There are people saying any deal is defying the result and that is the problem. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, boltondiver said:

Probably all with the DUP?

It is down to the AG to give his legal interpretation of the 'legally binding" changes. The DUP have a role of course and they have 8 eminent euro sceptic lawyers checking the text as we speak so expect them to announce their position this morning. In my view, from what i have read, the changes do not allow us the leave the backstop without recourse to the EU but there is a mechanism to leave however it requires the EU to sanction that. If that is as good as it will get then the Brexiteers may well think that it is worth the risk. If it is rejected i suspect we will be staying in for the foreseeable future

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Salford Trotter said:

It is down to the AG to give his legal interpretation of the 'legally binding" changes. The DUP have a role of course and they have 8 eminent euro sceptic lawyers checking the text as we speak so expect them to announce their position this morning. In my view, from what i have read, the changes do not allow us the leave the backstop without recourse to the EU but there is a mechanism to leave however it requires the EU to sanction that. If that is as good as it will get then the Brexiteers may well think that it is worth the risk. If it is rejected i suspect we will be staying in for the foreseeable future

It basically changes little only that we can unilaterally ask the UN for arbitration on whether the EU are acting in good faith - as can the EU. Legally nothing has really changed it’s just the commitment from both sides is firmed up. There is no unilateral exit or deadline. But it’s the best we are going to get in a deal of this construct. And there is no time or momentum surge to change to any other particular course.

I don’t think the legal advice matters there will be clever language to let those who want to climb down and back it do so. But fundamentally we know the position is the same as it was. What matters is whether enough MPs have been persuaded that the reality is that this is it. And I think despite the bluster very few want no deal even within the ERG I think those that actually want no deal are smaller in number than people imagine.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, bolty58 said:

........and dip our respective lids to Mounts who has predicted that they'll fudge a last minute deal all along because it is in both parties best interests to.

Even Mounts has started to sway recently, by saying he doesn't think any changes the EU make will be enough to get it through......although at least now he has absolutely every single angle covered, so he can claim "as predicted" no matter what happens 🙂

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, boltondiver said:

This might get through.

Then we can get on with our lives

Here's hoping, we can't go on like this, with us all being fucked over by those in Parliament. Fingers crossed the deal passes tonight (even though it is a bit shit), so we can move on to the next stage of sorting out trade deals etc

Edited by Sweep
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Sweep said:

Even Mounts has started to sway recently, by saying he doesn't think any changes the EU make will be enough to get it through......although at least now he has absolutely every single angle covered, so he can claim "as predicted" no matter what happens 🙂

Mounts' position was mix of elements of the WA and the trade deal so by definition that cannot be determined until the final trade deal or not is agreed. Assuming it is agreed, then the ECJ will still hold sway over disputes and the common rulebook will apply to all trade deals the UK negotiate which means we are not free of the EU regulations in the future then his predictions are already scuppered.   

Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem  is how many Labour MPs will follow Caroline Flint's admirable line and defy Corbyn, knowing it may jeopardise their career.

It just may be enough to overcome the rump of ERG (like Bill Cash) who will vote against the Government come what may.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Site Supporter

After some fairly conciliatory words in recent times JRM spoke earlier about how he would be looking at the DUP and their interpretation off the changes.

For me, he is now minded to vote for it, even if it purely out of pragmatism. It also puts the DUP into the spotlight even more.

If the right influencers give it a thumbs up, I reckon it will be a house of cards and it will get through.

Not a done deal yet though.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Site Supporter

 A view no doubt shared by Dominic Grieve.

What do they have in common?

However Geoffrey Cox is equally dismissive. Wonder why?

Managed to catch a large proportion of the statement and questions last night.

Plenty of high profile MPs with law expertise with different feelings about the latest deal. Funny how those feelings tend to fall in line with their in or out stance.

What it does show, is that talks could continue ad infinitum and those with a destructive agenda would find something to twist.

More gossamer veiled subversive attempts to shaft a referendum result, because they don't like it.

And for balance, Mark Francois was out of order last night, when he said the current AG being involved in the discussions then giving his legal interpretation of it, was like someone marking their own homework.

Under the circumstances it would seem pertinent for him (AG)to be involved, and whilst there may be a theoretical question mark, it was close to casting doubt on his character.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

 A view no doubt shared by Dominic Grieve.

What do they have in common?

However Geoffrey Cox is equally dismissive. Wonder why?

Managed to catch a large proportion of the statement and questions last night.

Plenty of high profile MPs with law expertise with different feelings about the latest deal. Funny how those feelings tend to fall in line with their in or out stance.

What it does show, is that talks could continue ad infinitum and those with a destructive agenda would find something to twist.

More gossamer veiled subversive attempts to shaft a referendum result, because they don't like it.

And for balance, Mark Francois was out of order last night, when he said the current AG being involved in the discussions then giving his legal interpretation of it, was like someone marking their own homework.

Under the circumstances it would seem pertinent for him (AG)to be involved, and whilst there may be a theoretical question mark, it was close to casting doubt on his character.

a first class arrogant prick 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Site Supporter
1 minute ago, Salford Trotter said:

a first class arrogant prick 

I've heard him occasionally before and sounded ok. Didn't entirely agree with him on BBC breakfast yesterday morning, though he was polite and measured.

Last night was too far.

That being said, he was not alone, some of the questions being raised were purely grandstanding; as liddington answered: the honourable lady is just trying to re-run the referendum.

How very true. As for the Scottish independence Pollock's...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cox’s advice as everyone knew - legal position unchanged from previous deal.

In real terms nothing has been gained here.

However I sense MPs will back it because not doing so means they risk not getting what they want. On all sides.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Site Supporter
31 minutes ago, boltondiver said:

To which Cox responded;

Bollocks

...and then released his legal advice, which regarding the backstop states "The legal risk remains unchanged".

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Site Supporter

Paragraph 19 only refers only to a situation where neither side is playing silly buggers, but simply cannot agree. In this situation, we (presumably neither) can just walk away without agreement from the other. That, doesn't seem unreasonable- trying to keep a dialogue going.

The rest of the document refers to other aspects of the agreement, and thus does represent legal change.

However, plenty will seek to use this as a reason not to vote for it.

He has a big job on his hands later.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

Paragraph 19 only refers only to a situation where neither side is playing silly buggers, but simply cannot agree. In this situation, we (presumably neither) can just walk away without agreement from the other. That, doesn't seem unreasonable- trying to keep a dialogue going.

The rest of the document refers to other aspects of the agreement, and thus does represent legal change.

However, plenty will seek to use this as a reason not to vote for it.

He has a big job on his hands later.

Looks like that the ERG will align behind the DUP so Foster's meeting with May later is now crucial. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Cheese said:

...and then released his legal advice, which regarding the backstop states "The legal risk remains unchanged".

So does that mean that the tweaks that Mounts guaranteed us that the EU would offer haven't been done yet? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Site Supporter
5 minutes ago, Salford Trotter said:

Looks like that the ERG will align behind the DUP so Foster's meeting with May later is now crucial. 

Yes (certainly largely), JRM suggested as much earlier.

I think anyone expecting Cox to publish a document saying we are completely free to escape the backstop, was expecting too much.

Such complex legal dealings are always subject to interpretation, and it would be virtually impossible for him to categorically say one way or another.

It does however, confirm a strengthening of the UK's position- it will be down to whether MPs are prepared to accept this and not utilise it for their own ends.

I suppose, eventually it becomes a matter of trust. Fwiw, I believe it's (the backstop and it's legal position) not unreasonable.

If folk want a deal, then any such legal position is going to have some fog to it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.