Is Brexit actually going to happen?

[gosub]

How did he vote?

Remain. did an article saying added customs checks would make filming top gear impossible
Opps article already linked to

 

[Santino]

Your strategy seems to rely on all countries eventually leaving the EU, or at least, enough countries leaving the EU that its in your opinion undemocratic leadership changes its ways so as to protect itself from complete dissolution. To me, that strategy doesn't seem to offer any practical hope in the short or medium term.
The mechanism that I'm privy to is the fact that the EU does have an elected parliament and that it is subject to influence from the elected national governments of its member countries. You presumably feel that this mechanism does not work in practice, and that the whole system ends up reflecting the interests of business and so on. I'd say that is maybe true as long as the same applies to the majority of the national governments that are part of that system. And if it applies to the national governments too then I don't really see that citizens can have more influence outside of the EU but still governed by those institutions.

You misunderstand my strategic objective.

 

[Raheem]

did an article saying added customs checks would make filming top gear impossible

Just so long as he is held to that in the eventuality.

 

[SpookyFrank]

Back to whether Brexit is going to happen, Davis has put some interesting markers on what "regulatory alignment" means: "alignment does not mean the same standards"....it means regulations "that give similar results"

If he's happy with the results why does he want to change the regulations?

 

[Silas Loom]

If he's happy with the results why does he want to change the regulations?

It's Legatum speak.

https://lif.blob.core.windows.net/l...ult-library/brexitinflectionvweb.pdf?sfvrsn=0

"The challenge is therefore to agree regulatory recognition between the UK and EU on the basis that the regulatory systems meet the same objectives, even if the detail of technical regulation diverges."

Essentially, it's back to "cake and eat it" and the Lancaster House red lines. Amazing that Varadkar ever went for it.

 

[teuchter]

You misunderstand my strategic objective.

And you're not going to tell me in what way. Oh well.

 

[flypanam]

The mechanism that I'm privy to is the fact that the EU does have an elected parliament and that it is subject to influence from the elected national governments of its member countries.

A genuine question, when has the European Parliament overridden a decision by the European commission? And has that changed the opinion of the commission?

 

[Santino]

And you're not going to tell me in what way. Oh well.

I wouldn't want to volunteer information that you hadn't expressly asked for, as I know this can upset you.

 

[Winot]

It's Legatum speak.

https://lif.blob.core.windows.net/l...ult-library/brexitinflectionvweb.pdf?sfvrsn=0

"The challenge is therefore to agree regulatory recognition between the UK and EU on the basis that the regulatory systems meet the same objectives, even if the detail of technical regulation diverges."

Essentially, it's back to "cake and eat it" and the Lancaster House red lines. Amazing that Varadkar ever went for it.

And who decides if the same result has been reached? Presumably not the ECJ?

 

[SpookyFrank]

And who decides if the same result has been reached? Presumably not the ECJ?

I suspect it would be down to whoever drew up the new regulations at our end simply telling everyone that the outcomes would be the same. Although again, I can't see how there's any need to have new regulations at all if we're happy with the existing outcomes. Clearly the intention is not to get back to where we started via a different set of procedures, but to deregulate. If this weren't the case then people would be more open about exactly which EU regulations they (or their corporate sponsors) actually object to.

And that's before we even get to the challenge of drawing up new regulations for absolutely everything in 18 months. Most likely we'll be reclaiming our sovereignty by phoning up Trump or Putin or Xi and asking what they'd like our new regulations to be.

 

[Raheem]

"The challenge is therefore to agree regulatory recognition between the UK and EU on the basis that the regulatory systems meet the same objectives, even if the detail of technical regulation diverges."

Essentially, it's back to "cake and eat it" and the Lancaster House red lines. Amazing that Varadkar ever went for it.

Because "regulatory systems meet the same objectives, even if the detail of technical regulation diverges" = "regulatory systems are identical except in ways that matter to no-one".

 

[Silas Loom]

And who decides if the same result has been reached? Presumably not the ECJ?

Presumably not.

 

[teuchter]

A genuine question, when has the European Parliament overridden a decision by the European commission? And has that changed the opinion of the commission?

eg
http://www.ciel.org/news/historical...ocrine-disrupting-chemicals-stands-eu-health/

and the European Council can also block Commision proposals.

Directive Proposal - Soil - Environment - European Commission

 

[teuchter]

I wouldn't want to volunteer information that you hadn't expressly asked for, as I know this can upset you.

Oh well.

 

[Dogsauce]

This is the mental picture I have of May and Davis rocking up in Brussels.



Two big fucking misadventures, the referendum and an early election. They're never climbing out of this hole, the hopeless shits.

 

[DotCommunist]

This is the mental picture I have of May and Davis rocking up in Brussels.



Two big fucking misadventures, the referendum and an early election. They're never climbing out of this hole, the hopeless shits.

tbf to may (just this once) it was Cameron who made the first miscalculation about peoples opinion on the SQ

the hung parliament is all hers to own tho lol

 

[Mr Retro]

<shoves head around the door>

Any of you lot seen Jeremy?

 

[Pickman's model]

<shoves head around the door>

Any of you lot seen Jeremy?

no, i don't think the attorney general's been much in evidence recently

 

[DotCommunist]

<shoves head around the door>

Any of you lot seen Jeremy?

I saw him on the cover of GQ. I don't know how they airbrushed the scruff out but they did. His beard was trimmed with the precision of a beppe de marco

 

[gosub]

<shoves head around the door>
Any of you lot seen Jeremy?

too busy reading the Guardian

 

[ska invita]

<shoves head around the door>

Any of you lot seen Jeremy?

I think he was in Portugal yesterday?

 

[Silas Loom]

too busy reading the Guardian

That'll be his big focus in PMQs tomorrow then.

 

[gosub]

That'll be his big focus in PMQs tomorrow then.

nah. that'll be


sailing into wind if he's trying to change Today's news agenda.

 

[Pickman's model]

That'll be his big focus in PMQs tomorrow then.

Corbyn would have focused forensically on NHS waiting lists.

and you wonder why you enjoy such an unhappy reputation.

 

[gosub]

<shoves head around the door>

Any of you lot seen Jeremy?

you're not the only one asking.

 

[Pickman's model]

That'll be his big focus in PMQs tomorrow then.

tbh he could produce world peace and happiness ever after and you'd still be whining on and on

 

[SpookyFrank]

you're not the only one asking.

I think he'll do exactly this sooner or later, he just wants to give the tories a tiny bit more rope first.

 

[DotCommunist]

you're not the only one asking.

they should let Stormzy run Corbyn's twitter account. Just for the lols

 

[Silas Loom]

you're not the only one asking.

Doesn't feel like Labour thinks this is the time for clarity.That Polly Toynbee stuff about Steptoe having converted to remainism looks increasingly like wishful thinking.

 

[SpookyFrank]

Doesn't feel like Labour thinks this is the time for clarity.

Opening sentence is pretty clear by current standards. Particularly coming on the back of the failure of negotiations around the Ireland question.