UK.gov admits Investigatory Powers Act illegal under EU law Police forces will no longer be able to grant themselves access to surveillance data if new government proposals to the Snooper's Charter are accepted. The move is one of a number of proposed changes (PDF) to the data retention rules in the controversial Investigatory Powers Act, which the government has been forced to admit …
This post has been deleted by its author
They are, after all, the service that sorts stuff out.
Meanwhile, I’m impressed that the UK is being transparent about their “data-retention illegality,” many EU MS have continued to DR as much as possible, possibly only Slovenia stopped?
More transparency at http://statewatch.org/news/2017/nov/eu-ctc-data-ret.htm
I see you were only joking, but it's becoming ever harder to laugh at the clusterfuck called Brexit. There's credible evidence that "Gove and Johnson are pushing for hard deregulation under the cover of hard Brexit. With the European Research Group and the highly influential Legatum Institute on their side, the duo have demanded that the prime minister drop taxes and make a bonfire of the regulations that protect us."
I know, I could cry. I had my mother cry to me worrying that she's going to be deported (she's from Ireland) after the vote.
But I'm optimistic that it won't happen. Optimistic to the end. And if you're crying you should be laughing and getting drunk. It eases the pain.
Optimistic to the end.
So am I.
That is not stopping me from rebuilding an old 19th century farmhouse in a Eu country to serve as a backup base of operations. I would prefer not to have to pack up our belongings in a couple of containers and move there in 2019, but I will do so if I have to.
Your mom should look at it as an opportunity. While it is impossible to even get an appointment with a real estate in county Wicklow at the moment, there are possibilities elsewhere. Not bad ones too.
The market around the rapid transit into Dublin on the south side has been bonkers for more then half a year - since the beginning of the year. Regardless of what they are saying publicly, most of the large city shops have had active evacuation plans for more than half a year now.
All in all - If it is OK for the "very patriotic" vultures to plan their "leave", I do not see why it should be unpatriotic for me, you and your mom.
I haven't got the cash to invest in overseas property but I have been spending the last year learning German (from scratch) and finding alternative income streams from overseas. I still have nearly a year before Jr finishes education and then I can reassess the situation.
Whats the old Chinese proverb - "Prepare for rain, hope for sun"
I haven't got the cash to invest in overseas property but I have been spending the last year learning German (from scratch) and finding alternative income streams from overseas.
At the moment you can have your pick of employers: German IT companies are screaming for developers.
"what dreadful job the government is making of a stupid idea."
The stupidity lies with John Major's government signing Maastricht back in 92. But like all PMs he wanted his "legacy" and he's certainly got it. Though I suspect it'll turn out not to be quite what he had in mind.
The stupidity lies with John Major's government signing Maastricht back in 92.
What are you on about? Act of Parliament, like all the rest. That's how the UK's democracy is supposed to work. Except now parliament allows itself to be ruled by the mob and the government has decided important matters should be decided by fiat. I guess that is one way of taking back control! We'll all be back being tenant farmers.
"What are you on about? Act of Parliament, like all the rest."
Eh? You think acts of parliament happen without the government having any say in them? What are you smoking? The Major government made a decision to sign that treaty, no one forced them too and more to the point, no one asked the british public if they wanted them to.
"Yes, Irish nationals could vote in the referendum, but not other EU nationals.
WTF?"
Plus Commonwealth citizens resident in the UK at the time of the vote.
Who could vote in the EU referendum?
Commonwealth migrants from 54 states - including Australia, Canada, India, Pakistan and Nigeria - could join the electoral roll as long are they are residents in the UK.Unlike in general elections, Commonwealth citizens in Gibraltar were allowed to vote and have gone to the polls in the EU referendum.
...
Citizens from other European countries - apart from Ireland, Malta and Cyprus - did not get to vote on whether the UK remains part of the EU.
Malta and Cyprus are both Commonwealth countries.
"then the UK really will have gone off the rails"
It has, as far as I can see. If the Commons had the slightest inclination to act on facts and evidence rather than on beliefs and fantasies, the No Confidence motion would have been passed months ago. There's renewed hope that the Irish impasse will blow away the DUP 'confidence and supply' agreement in the next few weeks. Even a minority government led by Corbyn would be better than what we have now, but a cross-bench coalition would be much better.
In any case, they will have to keep RIP aligned with EU law - this is the sort of condition that will be attached to any conceivable future trade agreement if (despite everything) Brexit comes to pass.
"I had my mother cry to me worrying that she's going to be deported (she's from Ireland) after the vote."
My sympathy to your mother and I'm sure you've reassured her. However she and you are the lucky ones. My wife and children were all born in Belfast so dual nationality is available to them and the grandchildren. So it's just me who doesn't have that line of retreat.
If they get dual nationality, you'd be married to an Irishwoman with Irish children. Even if the CTA does go down the pan, the chances of you being refused residency in Ireland are precisely 0.0 recurring and the chances of you being refused citizenship after three years are the same.
Most European countries don't actively try to split up families unlike the Home Office in the UK.
"My wife and children were all born in Belfast so dual nationality is available to them and the grandchildren. So it's just me who doesn't have that line of retreat."
Its good to know so many people came to the UK, not because they had any interest or love for our country and were prepared to stick with it through good times and bad, but because it was economically expedient and now that economically things might be paling due to brexit they're all preparing to clear off. To those people I say: Pack your bags, close the door behind you and good riddance! We don't need fareweather friends.
Mod me to hell, I don't give a s**t.
To those people I say: Pack your bags, close the door behind you and good riddance! We don't need fareweather friends.
There's so much to choose from, where do we start.
- We did it to ourselves. But perhaps we do need friends who stick with us while we have some kind of collective national nervous breakdown.
- Are you complaining about his wife and kids? NI is part of the UK.
- Are you complaining about him? He could be British and born in rUK.
- Are you complaining about foreigners? Oh dear.
"as well as failing to understand the benefits of migration for innovation and economic growth?"
The only benefits of migration are to corporations who can make a rush to the bottom in conditions and salary for blue collar jobs. Perhaps you've just come back from a monastic retreat and haven't noticed the housing shortage in the SE, the strain on the NHS, schools and transport? Anyone who thinks a unlimited migration to a small island like this either has an agenda or is a fucking idiot. Which one are you?
"Perhaps you've just come back from a monastic retreat and haven't noticed the housing shortage in the SE, the strain on the NHS, schools and transport?"
The strain on the NHS is because of old natives. Those working at NHS are to a large degree immigrants. And very good ones too. That's likely to change. Then you can really start moaning about waiting time. Enjoy, you fool.
Its good to know so many people came to the UK, not because they had any interest or love for our country and were prepared to stick with it through good times and bad, but because it was economically expedient and now that economically things might be paling due to brexit they're all preparing to clear off.
You really are as thick as a Brexiter!
What is it you don't get with people being told they will be asked to leave? That the PM refuses to guarantee EU citicens rights? That the only one doing so is the serial lier BoJo who says anything that he feels is right for that particular moment. The tabloid press spewing out agressive xenophobic hate (led by that immigrant Murdoch).
Even a native Brit might think this is just a little too much.
But, the government added, creating such a body will require "significant" effort, include setting up IT systems and processes that can handle electronic applications from 600-plus public authorities.
The number of public bodies mentioned before was 50-odd. They seem to have stopped the police accessing it but judging by the number of public authorities mentioned, it seems councils are now included. Is this some giant pisstake?
This post has been deleted by its author
Is this some giant pisstake?
What it is is a smokescreen. They want to make out that the issue is technically so big that they can avoid making any progress until they're clear of ECJ jurisdiction. The only constraint left then with be the European Court of Human Rights, and they've got a standing manifesto commitment to repeal the Human Rights Act and thus get out of that as well. All statutory power will be returned to Westminster and our journey to the dark side will be complete.
The Good Friday Agreement is a fly in that ointment but the way things are going I can't see that lasting much longer.
I sincerely hope the UK isn't going to last much longer. I voted against Scottish independence last time, but there is no question of me doing so again after this little Englander coup d'état. That has implications for the Irish question as well since Ulster has always been culturally closer to Scotland than England and unionism is primarily driven by irredentism south of the border than anglophilia per se.
Aha, it seems we have a little Scotlander in our midst
No, what you have is a European Federalist. I'm not interested in an independent Scotland per se, I'm interested in getting back into the EU. As things stand, that means cutting loose the xenophobic appendage south of the border who want to live under a regime where May/Gove/Johnson etc. are free from all restraint and can enact any oppressive lunacy they like (the subject of this thread being a case in point).
"No, what you have is a European Federalist."
You do know that after brexit you can still be part of that. The EU will still exist and so will an independent UK as well. However I do think it odd that you care so much about the UK (dont know if you are from here, came here or never even visited) which has so many opt outs and our rejection of the Euro removed our eligibility to be part of a federalist EU (until some traitor sold us out further).
In fact you should be happy for brexit as the UK people have been against ever closer union and being part of the EUSSR/USofE and now that obstacle is leaving freely. It does however mean the other members who dont want to federalise will need some persuasion but it brings you closer to your dream.
So noting all that why do you hope it is the end of the UK? What has the UK done to so offend you? And instead of demanding freedom of choice be removed and that democracy is second to your oh wise opinion maybe you should consider applying to move to your utopia? Instead of your attacks on this country.
However I do think it odd that you care so much about the UK (dont know if you are from here, came here or never even visited)
I was born in Scotland to a Scots Mother and an English Father. so I can't still be part of the EU (not without getting Irish citizenship anyway).
That also answers your second question: what England has done to me is revoke my EU citizenship against my will. My opinion isn't the issue: Scotland as a whole voted to remain and England voted to leave. Under this new principle of majoritarianism (as opposed to representative democracy), that means the whole UK has to tag along with whatever England decides from here on in. That's not a future I want to be part of. It's not even the UK - it's just Greater England.
As for your final point: with a British passport and a Father from Yorkshire I'll attack "this country" and the toxic, racist xenophobes it harbours whenever I feel it is warranted.
@ Lysenko
"I was born in Scotland to a Scots Mother and an English Father. so I can't still be part of the EU (not without getting Irish citizenship anyway)."
So you can (looking in your brackets).
"England has done to me is revoke my EU citizenship against my will"
Funny I thought this was a UK vote voted for over the UK and beyond and still the result came in to leave. What you are saying is your (individual) will is more important than the UK, which is basically opposition to democracy. If you dont like democracy thats fine, thats your opinion, but dont expect people to be all for your benevolent dictatorship where you take away our will.
"Scotland as a whole voted to remain and England voted to leave"
Scotland voted to remain.... IN THE UK. So a UK vote for the UK is a UK vote for the whole of the UK.
"that means the whole UK has to tag along with whatever England decides from here on in."
You seem to have difficulty with size. UK vote, not England vote. England in UK, UK not in England.
"That's not a future I want to be part of."
Thats fine, I have no problem with that. Go move to your beloved EU and the good news is it will be more likely to be federalist supporting than the UK is. Here you still wouldnt have your federal dream unless some dictator took over and sold us out.
"As for your final point: with a British passport and a Father from Yorkshire I'll attack "this country" and the toxic, racist xenophobes it harbours whenever I feel it is warranted."
Ok thats fine but your opinion is fuelled by what seems to be a hatred for us, which again is your opinion and I dont care. But it does kinda expose why you would want to remain in the EU.
I do note that you are a more obvious example of what I do encounter in vocal remain advocates. If we dont remain in the EU you want to see us crash and burn and turn into the horrible place you seem to see us as. We didnt change overnight so why do you stay in such a horrible country you like to attack as racist xenophobes? Why stay with us horrible Englanders you really do seem to have something against?
First you say it's a UK vote when obviously due to numbers it's just England which decides the outcome of the vote (as seen by the immediate constitutional crisis on the 24th which is still running till this day) then secondly you say if he doesn't like the English he should go and live in his beloved EU.
Way to prove his point.
The only claim I have to Irish citizenship (which is none) is one great-grandfather - maybe - no one is really sure if he was Irish or not. My point is it is the closest EU country (to Scotland).
Any "one man, one vote" referendum in the UK is a de facto English vote. The appropriate criterion in a federation or union is "one country, one vote" or "one country, one veto". Otherwise, you have majoritarianism which (to borrow from Benjamin Franklin), is two wolves and a sheep debating what to have for lunch. What I am saying is that in a representative democracy you're supposed to have checks and balances to preserve minority rights. With this majoritarian principle now established, only the English vote matters because of relative population size and England can railroad the other three countries in the union any time it so chooses. That's not the union I voted to preserve - it's Greater England.
I don't hate the UK. I hate what small minded, insular nationalists have done to it. I come from a family of sailors and merchants. Nearly everyone (male) in my family, going back at least 5 generations, was born here but was out in the world by the age of 18. Colonies and the Empire mostly, though in my case it was Eastern Europe and Pakistan. I hate the fact that Brexiteers have succeeded in piloting this country into a dead end of isolation and irrelevance not seen since ... probably Henry Tudor. It's been half a millennium since we've been holed up on this island with no meaningful presence abroad, no real geopolitical influence and frankly, no respect worth a damn.
Brexiteers are the ones who hate this country - it is patently obvious from their herculean efforts to destroy everything it used to stand for. I've seen this sort of thing before. Get rid of foreign influences. Take back control of the laws. Expel people who don't share our culture. Make everyone speak Pashto.
"only the English vote matters because of relative population size and England can railroad the other three countries in the union any time it so chooses. "
I think you missed the point. "England" is not an homogeneous single mass of people. AT the very least, you may have heard of the North/South divide. That's a very real thing. Not mention all the other divisions.
As an example, it's been stated that 68% of Scots voted to remain in the EU but "little" Scotland is being forced out by "bigger" England. Just for comparison, the Scottish independence vote, had it gone the other way, had the potential to drag "little" Orkney out of the UK by "bigger" Scotland, despite their vote being a shade under that same 68% to remain in the UK The few Orkney Islanders I know see themselves as being as much Scottish as some Scots see themselves as British, ie not very.
I hope you can see the comparison I'm making here between the actuality of democratic votes and your opinion.
@John Brown
I think you missed the point. "England" is not an homogeneous single mass of people.
Constitutionally, it is and it has been (for the purposes of this discussion) since 1707. England and Wales are a single country for the purposes of legislation. England and Scotland are not. You can argue that they should be and, with majoritarianism, you can make it happen.
In a "mob rule" version of democracy (which is what unfettered one man, one vote is), you can do whatever you like. You can also reinstate the death penalty as soon as there's a nasty child murder - then repeal it again as soon as the first innocent is executed. Wash, rinse, repeat. Representative democracy is supposed to curb reactionary mob instincts and oppression of minorities. You might think a country ruled by the same voting system as the X-Factor is utopia, but I don't.
As for the Orcadians, they're perfectly welcome (from my perspective) to stay in Greater England, or adopt a similar status to the Isle of Mann or rejoin Norway. They have their own history, identity and until quite recently, language as well.
"Any "one man, one vote" referendum in the UK is a de facto English vote. The appropriate criterion in a federation or union is "one country, one vote" or "one country, one veto"."
It's not appropriate. You think it's appropriate because you are in a state that is a tenth of the size of another. If we have majority rule by states, then Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, population about ten million, gang up and outvote England, population about 55 million. The tyranny of the minority seems to be even worse than the tyranny of the majority, no?
There is no 'appropriate' system of voting. There are a variety of administrative areas inside the UK, cities, counties, 'states' (ESWNI) and the whole country. The only appropriate plebiscite for an EU vote (if there should be one) is a national one. If you come from the Highlands you might also complain about Lowland Scots outvoting you, and you want your own veto. London, population greater than Scotland, forms a culturally different area of the UK, so should it not have a veto?
What I don't understand is that anyone in Scotland still supports independence, after seeing what a complete fucking disaster being a weak negotiating partner in divorce proceedings looks like. In Scotland-rUK divorce proceedings, it would be statements like 'you will take on a population-share of the debt, and for that you get the ability to route freight through rUK rather than across the North Sea'. Exactly as the EU is doing with the UK.
Perhaps the referendum should have been set up so every part of the UK had to vote leave in order for the UK to leave.
There are after all four geopolitical regions and if some vote to leave but others vote to stay then the first question that immediately arises is about the break-up of the UK.
@ Dan 55
"There are after all four geopolitical regions and if some vote to leave but others vote to stay then the first question that immediately arises is about the break-up of the UK."
Well that doesnt work does it? First we are the UK, not 4 independents. Scotland had a vote to leave and decided to remain (although the leave proposals didnt really appear to be leave in any sense anyway) so it is a UK decision on the UK.
Second if it requires all 4 to vote leave then what you are saying is we can be held hostage by the few and that the UK wouldnt have a choice. A similar thing happened with a tiny part of the EU holding the Canada trade deal hostage when the EU (to try and keep its members) allowed all members a veto over the trade deal. I do wonder if Lysenko would disagree with your suggestion as it allows a few to dictate to the many, something he accused of England in this UK wide vote.
The good news is the rules are set before the vote and the result comes from those pre-agreed rules instead of moving goalposts after the fact.
I do wonder if Lysenko would disagree with your suggestion as it allows a few to dictate to the many, something he accused of England in this UK wide vote.
However you measure it, England is not the few.
Second if it requires all 4 to vote leave then what you are saying is we can be held hostage by the few and that the UK wouldnt have a choice.
Sort of like 37%* of the electorate voting for Brexit, the Tory government deciding leaving the EU would mean leaving the single market and customs union too despite only receiving 29%* of the vote in the 2017 elections, and what the DUP are doing now when it comes to how the Irish border will be implemented?
* Taking into account abstentions.
@ Dan 55
"However you measure it, England is not the few."
Very true. But if all but one of the 4 voted one way we would all be hostage under your proposal. Good job the vote rules were laid out before the vote took place instead of moving goalposts afterward to get the 'right' result.
"Sort of like 37%* of the electorate voting for Brexit"
Which would make it vastly wrong to be ruled by the 32%. The leave vote won by majority and to be ruled by the few would be wrong, which is kinda the argument you seem to be making but with a spin for your desired result.
"the Tory government deciding leaving the EU would mean leaving the single market and customs union too despite only receiving 29%* of the vote in the 2017 elections"
Which by the electoral process of this country is how we elect leaders. Agree or disagree with it the rules are set before the election.
"and what the DUP are doing now when it comes to how the Irish border will be implemented?"
The Irish border is the EU's diktat which isnt our problem as we are leaving the EU. We can or not implement a border if we desire but thats not for the EU to decide. The EU can decide to make a border if they want one but that wont make Ireland very happy. And if the Irish care so much about no border they could always leave the EU if they like.
By definition a customs union has a hard border. It has to, otherwise goods could go from the countries outside the CU over the border to the countries inside of the CU avoiding any and all tariffs and controls. If the UK wanted out of the CU, this is the logical result.
Ireland is an independent country, empire is no more, your suggestion that they stop being upperty and do what the their betters in the UK do is not realistic or useful.
By the way, the DUP have just scuppered a deal. They wanted no border, this was a deal which kept NI inside the CU, and they didn't want that either citing differences between NI and rUK, as if 12.5% corporation tax in NI and the GFA and all that entails aren't differences. Brexit is being driven by the Protestant Taliban which won less than 1% of the vote. Has there ever been a worse government in modern British history?
@ Dan 55
"By definition a customs union has a hard border. It has to, otherwise goods could go from the countries outside the CU over the border to the countries inside of the CU avoiding any and all tariffs and controls. If the UK wanted out of the CU, this is the logical result."
Kind of but you missed an important part of that logic, It is the EU who want a border. Step by step- we leave the EU. N Ireland in the UK and so the UK can do as it pleases which includes no border. It is entirely our choice if we do or do not put up a border. Likewise the EU has S Ireland and has the same freedom of choice. We cannot dictate to the EU for them to put up a border and they cannot dictate to us.
"Ireland is an independent country, empire is no more, your suggestion that they stop being upperty and do what the their betters in the UK do is not realistic or useful."
You seem to be putting words in my mouth and making assumptions of some sort of empire. Ireland N and S dont want a border. The EU wants a border. So if the Irish truly dont want a border and the EU is dictating it then they can choose to leave too if they wanted. Its also logical.
"By the way, the DUP have just scuppered a deal. They wanted no border"
I dont see how that is a problem? No border (from our side) is fairly easy to implement. We dont need to change anything there. The EU could but then that would be the EU to blame for the actions of the EU because the EU want it. And I can understand why the EU want a border (hard to run a cartel with a hole) and why they dont want to do it (cost and pissing off the Irish). The EU want their cake and eat it too.
"Brexit is being driven by the Protestant Taliban which won less than 1% of the vote."
Oh wow is this a religious thing now? What about us atheists/agnostics? Who are you then? Al-Qa'ida? ISIS? Since the Taliban ruled the country at one point I am assuming you see yourself as one of the resistance forces fighting to change the country to your perceived right way?
Also you have too many words at the end of your sentence. "Won the vote" is enough. Where do you get 1% from? The difference was greater. So it seems your arguing we should be governed by (using your figure) the -1%, the ones who lost the vote although the difference is more than 1%.
Part of the reason for Brexit as proposed by Leave was taking back control and slowing down immigration. How do you propose that gets done without a border?
Every country has a customs border except for those countries in a customs union who have a customs border around the outer edge of the countries that make up the union.
What would happen if, as threatened by the likes of Farage, the whole of Turkey went through Northern Ireland, do you think the DUP, the Tories, and people who voted leave would be okay with that?
Oh wow is this a religious thing now?
I didn't make it up and it's a good name for a bunch of backward God bothering types who want abortion to remain illegal and homosexuality to be illegal.
"Won the vote" is enough. Where do you get 1% from? The difference was greater.
Your quote is wrong, you've changed the text. 1% was the DUP's share of the vote in the elections and as remain won in NI, they cannot be said to be representing NI.
NI doesn't want a border. The DUP said they didn't want a border. The government struck a deal without a border. The DUP, who don't represent NI, rejected the deal and forced the government to backtrack.
There is no way you can describe the DUP as anything other than a minority, and they don't even represent wishes of the part of the UK which they claim to represent.
@ Dan 55
"Part of the reason for Brexit as proposed by Leave was taking back control and slowing down immigration. How do you propose that gets done without a border?"
Taking back control yes. Having control over our immigration yes. Control being to do what we want not what others dictate.
"Every country has a customs border except for those countries in a customs union who have a customs border around the outer edge of the countries that make up the union."
So your saying the EU might make a border if they want one? That solves it then. Not our problem and if one appears it is not our fault.
"What would happen if, as threatened by the likes of Farage, the whole of Turkey went through Northern Ireland, do you think the DUP, the Tories, and people who voted leave would be okay with that?"
No. I expect they would demand the illegals be deported. A demand generally shared as far as I am aware.
"I didn't make it up and it's a good name for a bunch of backward God bothering types who want abortion to remain illegal and homosexuality to be illegal."
Ahh so this is only an insult against the Irish. Thats ok then. And are you getting them onside with this? What is your side of this? Do you want a border or no?
"Your quote is wrong, you've changed the text. 1% was the DUP's share of the vote in the elections and as remain won in NI, they cannot be said to be representing NI."
Ahh that makes sense. I didnt realise you were talking about only NI. Ok, but they are supporting brexit so thats good at least.
"NI doesn't want a border. The DUP said they didn't want a border. The government struck a deal without a border. The DUP, who don't represent NI, rejected the deal and forced the government to backtrack."
Did they? Unless the EU has changed their mind they have been insistent on a border. They made it one of 3 dictations before they will negotiate. Which raises the question why they have a negotiator or even talk to ours since we reject their dictations.
"There is no way you can describe the DUP as anything other than a minority, and they don't even represent wishes of the part of the UK which they claim to represent."
Ok. The point is still pretty solid that we voted brexit and so we are doing brexit. No amount of goalpost moving negates that.
Ahh so this is only an insult against the Irish. Thats ok then
No, it's only an insult against the DUP.
And are you getting them onside with this?
I really think I have very little bearing on the Brexit negotiations.
What is your side of this? Do you want a border or no?
I am able to recognise that a Brexit which includes exiting the CU and SM logically means there will be border which in turn means the Troubles will restart. Therefore the UK's best options are cancelling Brexit or staying in the CU and SM.
Ok. The point is still pretty solid that we voted brexit and so we are doing brexit. No amount of goalpost moving negates that.
Not really. If as Davis says it's "regulatory alignment" for all the UK then that's as good as the EEA. All Brexit was then was a vote to give a lot of money to the EU, to have no say in the SM and CU rules, and to pay yearly EEA subs which are a little cheaper but get you much less.
And at that point, many people will start to ask the question, "why not stop Brexit"?
@ Dan 55
"I am able to recognise that a Brexit which includes exiting the CU and SM logically means there will be border which in turn means the Troubles will restart. Therefore the UK's best options are cancelling Brexit or staying in the CU and SM."
Or we dont put up a border. If the EU do they can have troubles if they want but why do we need to? The EU are banning us from access to the SM and it is their right if they want. The EU is refusing to negotiate, they have said this openly and without shame. Cancelling brexit would be a stupid idea to appease the unappeasable and undemocratic.
"Not really. If as Davis says it's "regulatory alignment" for all the UK then that's as good as the EEA."
Although it means when we have an election we can actually vote for changes without the EU being in the way. We dont let the US or China run our regulations.
"All Brexit was then was a vote to give a lot of money to the EU"
Ouch what a huge mistake you made. I assume you mean brexit bill which is the EU wish list of fantasy and stupidity. Firstly it is ment to be for the commitments the EU has already made that they want us to pay toward. Which means the bill is the cost of being in the EU not getting out of the EU and that cost can only increase. Second if there is no deal we dont have to give them anything at all (we can choose to if we so wish but its up to us if we want to). So the EU automatically get nothing. No money, no border and no special rights over their citizens unless they negotiate. What concerns me is the people struggling with this concept is the EU and remain supporters.
"And at that point, many people will start to ask the question, "why not stop Brexit"?"
It is a real proof of concept that if you so badly dont want to do something you can make poor excuses not to do it. But just because you dont want to leave the EU for whatever actual reason you are chucking out some of the most laughable problems that you are creating then claiming they are unsolvable. So far I have solved those problems pretty quick and easy. Here is one for you-
Since 2008 the BoE and Treasury have been trying to reduce the strength of the pound to recover from the recession and bring the country back to a normal state before the next one hits. After the referendum result the currency fell sparking inflation and prompting the BoE to prepare for a rate rise. As a result the property market to stop rushing away from affordability.
So lets compare this again in case you somehow think thats bad. The US- rate rises as the economy improves and they are heading towards normal. The UK now out of the EU is starting to move that way. The EU is years behind the recovery.
Or we dont put up a border. If the EU do they can have troubles if they want but why do we need to?
Immigration, customs, the usual thing that all countries or trading blocs in the world do.
The EU are banning us from access to the SM and it is their right if they want.
May banned the UK from access to the SM in the Lancaster House speech, she ruled it out then.
The EU is refusing to negotiate, they have said this openly and without shame.
I believe there has to be agreement on three other items first. How can you decide what kind of trade you're doing if you don't even know what the NI/Ireland border looks like first?
Cancelling brexit would be a stupid idea to appease the unappeasable and undemocratic.
"If a democracy cannot change its mind, it ceases to be a democracy." - David Davis.
Although it means when we have an election we can actually vote for changes without the EU being in the way. We dont let the US or China run our regulations.
We won't be able to change regulations. We can't make our own TV or electrical standards, we'll be tagging on the coat-tails of the rest of the continent. As part of the EU we help set these standards.
Ouch what a huge mistake you made. I assume you mean brexit bill which is the EU wish list of fantasy and stupidity. Firstly it is ment to be for the commitments the EU has already made that they want us to pay toward. Which means the bill is the cost of being in the EU not getting out of the EU and that cost can only increase.
It's for the commitments the UK agreed to fund and signed off.
Second if there is no deal we dont have to give them anything at all (we can choose to if we so wish but its up to us if we want to). So the EU automatically get nothing. No money, no border and no special rights over their citizens unless they negotiate.
Yeah. How do you think the UK will attract inward investment after that?
What concerns me is the people struggling with this concept is the EU and remain supporters.
That's why the PM had to be told in Parliament that there would be no transitional period if the UK crashed out.
It is a real proof of concept that if you so badly dont want to do something you can make poor excuses not to do it. But just because you dont want to leave the EU for whatever actual reason you are chucking out some of the most laughable problems that you are creating then claiming they are unsolvable. So far I have solved those problems pretty quick and easy.
If you consider a sort of collective national suicide as a way of solving problems, yes.
Since 2008 the BoE and Treasury have been trying to reduce the strength of the pound to recover from the recession and bring the country back to a normal state before the next one hits. After the referendum result the currency fell sparking inflation and prompting the BoE to prepare for a rate rise. As a result the property market to stop rushing away from affordability.
Wages are stagnant, zero hours contracts are through the roof, inflation is up, your average millennial doesn't have the money to buy a house, and food bank usage in the UK has never been higher. Glad it's working out for you though.
The UK now out of the EU is starting to move that way.
Sorry, what was that? Did you really write that? Do you have the remotest clue what's going on? Or to put it succinctly, WTF?
The EU is years behind the recovery.
That'll be why the ECB is winding up QE next year.
And after the clusterfuck that is this week in politics in the UK, there really is no reason for Brexit as it is envisioned. A year and a half later and we find out there has been not one in-depth study and the cabinet hasn't even been able to talk to work out what kind of exit from the EU they want, the whole charade was brought to a screeching halt by the DUP, and there's two days to sort it out otherwise the next EU summit will be missed. But when you're in the Brexit suicide cult and are about to drink the kool-aid, I guess you've got a different perspective.
@ Dan 55
"Immigration, customs, the usual thing that all countries or trading blocs in the world do."
Ireland as a whole dont want a border. We dont need to put one in the way if we dont want. This is not difficult. If the EU want to make one thats up to them.
"May banned the UK from access to the SM in the Lancaster House speech, she ruled it out then."
Was that before or after the EU dictated that we are in the EU or out of the EU and SM?
"I believe there has to be agreement on three other items first. How can you decide what kind of trade you're doing if you don't even know what the NI/Ireland border looks like first?"
Of course you do you support the other side who are dictating with no leverage. We are leaving. With no deal they get nothing not even those 3. They wont negotiate until we solve their Irish border demand, agree to give them money so they dont have to reduce spending like a net contributor left, and give them rights we wouldnt grant to any country over citizens in this country. That isnt a negotiation and nobody with a brain would agree to such (would you agree to it for the US, China, india, Africa, or anywhere?).
""If a democracy cannot change its mind, it ceases to be a democracy." - David Davis."
And yet you insist we cannot change our mind and get out of the EU. Even trying to reject the result of a vote over this exact matter.
"We won't be able to change regulations. We can't make our own TV or electrical standards, we'll be tagging on the coat-tails of the rest of the continent. As part of the EU we help set these standards."
What rubbish are you talking? To export it has to meet the target countries standards. Are you telling me we dont trade beyond the EU because you think we need to apply foreign standards here to export to their countries? I cant believe people can be this uninformed.
"It's for the commitments the UK agreed to fund and signed off."
That directly conflicts with your previous statement- "All Brexit was then was a vote to give a lot of money to the EU". As you now agree it is the bill of being in up to a point in the past not the bill to leave. It is a partial cost of staying that will inflate further if we remain. And its legitimacy is in question too.
"Yeah. How do you think the UK will attract inward investment after that?"
Depending on the direction the country takes in its policies very good.
"If you consider a sort of collective national suicide as a way of solving problems, yes."
Again you make a statement based on your assumptions which so far have been shot down in balls of fire. You are the one making up problems, claiming we cant get passed them (not one has yet stood up btw) and insist we must remain. You have a conclusion and will make anything up to reach it. Try the other way.
"Wages are stagnant, zero hours contracts are through the roof, inflation is up, your average millennial doesn't have the money to buy a house, and food bank usage in the UK has never been higher. Glad it's working out for you though."
And you dont seem to understand what is and isnt the EU's fault. All but inflation is because we are still trapped in the EU. Inflation is because finally our currency has come down as the gov and BoE have been trying to do since 2008 to get the country back to working. We are lagging behind because we were trapped in the EU, the EU is years behind recovery, we should be much further on except we are in the EU. The rest of that is because we were trapped in the EU and are still bound by its tariffs.
"That'll be why the ECB is winding up QE next year."
Are you seriously arguing the EU is not years behind recovery? When you say wind up QE what do you mean? They are looking at halving their bond buying. Their interest rates are at 0% and not looking to move. For comparison the US is already unwinding the QE it has already done taking back the money it put in through QE. The UK is looking at raising rates before unwinding the QE it has already done. What you are talking about in 2018 is hopefully to stop increasing QE but to keep the amount the same. So not expanding QE. While the US is already unwinding and heading to normal. The UK is now after the referendum looking to do the same. The EU is still flooding with QE and 0% interest rates and trying to get that inflation you are complaining about further up.
"But when you're in the Brexit suicide cult and are about to drink the kool-aid, I guess you've got a different perspective."
Can you seriously read the above (and please do a little research if you dont believe me) and still think I am the one drinking the kool-aid? Do you honestly believe what you are saying or are you starting to realise you are literally talking nonsense? Not only do you seem to be making up poor excuses for us to remain but you apparently dont even realise the state the EU is in nor understand what is(nt) caused by the EU or brexit, never mind what is or isnt good news.
I dont expect anyone would ever change your opinion but at the very least I hope you look into what you are saying before being so monumentally wrong.
@DavCrav
It's not appropriate. You think it's appropriate because you are in a state that is a tenth of the size of another. If we have majority rule by states, then Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, population about ten million, gang up and outvote England, population about 55 million.
Correct. That's how Estonia (pop. ~=1.3M) can veto Germany (pop. ~=82M) on anything fundamental within the EU. It's also how the European constitution failed - getting a simple majority in a 500M population would have been possible.
You think the "one man, one vote" principle is appropriate because you live in a bigger country. The residents of California likely feel the same way about Wyoming.
As I stated at the outset, I'm not in favour of Scottish independence and I voted against it. However, I'm not in favour of Greater England either - particularly an isolated and internationally irrelevant England. I want to stay in the EU and, if I can't, I want to get back in the EU. That makes Scottish independence (now) a means to an end.
I don't want Holyrood running riot with unfettered legislative supremacy any more than I want Westminster doing it. This thread is a case in point of the ECJ standing in the way of oppressive Westminster legislation. You might be happy to hand ultimate power to May, Gove and Boris but I'm certainly not - and that goes equally for the SNP leadership.
@ Lysenko
"I'm not in favour of Scottish independence and I voted against it. However, I'm not in favour of Greater England either"
I dont care about Scottish independence, in the sense that I am happy for the Scots to have their independence vote and choose. And they did. Knowing the size of England and the other countries making up the UK and they made their choice. Not saying they cannot vote again but a neverendum is not the way to go about it.
"I want to stay in the EU and, if I can't, I want to get back in the EU. That makes Scottish independence (now) a means to an end."
Actually you can, you can move to your beloved EU. If they are such a loving bunch of niceness then they will welcome you. Why do you feel you must inflict your will on a country (which wouldnt be allowed EU access anyway independently) when the whole of the UK voted and the decision was made? I will point out that the UK is a member not Scotland and so an independent Scotland would need to reapply, fix its huge deficit to meet the rules, create its own currency not the GBP to be eligible before accepting the Euro and membership without opt outs. It would be easier and less painful for you to just move.
"I don't want Holyrood running riot with unfettered legislative supremacy any more than I want Westminster doing it."
And so you would hand over that supremacy to the EU. The EU who made a signed agreement with Cameron not to use our contribution to bail out the Euro, then did it anyway? The EU who shocked the Fed by inflicting economic suffering on its members? The EU which is shrinking in its share of global wealth? You want to hand over such power to those guys instead of those you can actually vote for/against and have a greater influence? Or do you just blindly want to be in the EU but not willing to go alone, wanting to drag everyone else with you?
This post has been deleted by its author
"Scotland as a whole voted to remain and England voted to leave."
Scotland as a whole voted to remain part of the UK and the UK as a whole voted the leave the EU.
Personally, I'm not too happy about Brexit, especially the way it's being handled, but you can't argue both for and against votes based on "regional" choices when it's the "whole" that counts, when you are part of that "whole". We had 13 years of Scottish Labour PMs running the UK. Hardly "little englanders".
This is exactly why I voted remain : our fundamental rights are *not safe in tory hands*.
Along with many other reasons, of course (see NHS migrant workforce, consumer protection laws, the general political oilyness of Johnson et al, potential economic impact of WTO tarriffs, take your pick; these are all valid concerns).
The way the current government is handling Brexit can only be described as shambolic at best.
So the "Office for Communications Data Authorisation" will replace the Home Secretary's personal monicker as the stamp of authorisation.
OMG worst case scenario: warrants issued by an AI system pre-authorised to do so by the Chief Officer (who left last month).
"Hi, Sarge, where do you work now?"
"The Office for Communications Data Authorisation, Constable Pleece."
"Oh, great, can you *uck up the warrants for my gangland paymasters? Here's the list."
"Right, I'll get on Vulture Central and see what the latest unpatched USB exploit is."
... etc.
I also have a letter from the Secretary of State that explicitly states that they would never do anything illegal.
Then spends the rest of the letter trying to say that the law doesn't apply to them.
Don't remember what I did with it though. I suppose I should write back with a photocopy and a "so I can never trust anything anyone in your position says, bevause you knowingly and intentionally break the law. Also, I reming the dishonest gentleman that ignorance is not a defence."
When they introduced this it would fall at the first hurdle if challenged under a variety of laws but it gave them a good run of your local civil servants looking at your data to find out if the bloke down the road likes dwarf porn.
The funny part is that Brexit won't change this, even if the headbangers like Rees Mogg and Redwood demand it as it would prevent an adequacy decision under GDPR meaning a whole host of other data processing, storage and transfer issues for the UK.
So with Brexit we will lose our seat on the A29WP and any influence on how data protection law in our largest neighbouring market moves forward and we will have to comply fully to allow for trade to occur.
Either that or we join Kim Jong Un and become as ronery as the Norks.......
>The funny part is that Brexit won't change this, even if the headbangers like Rees Mogg and Redwood demand it as it would prevent an adequacy decision under GDPR meaning a whole host of other data processing, storage and transfer issues for the UK.
Does the UK currently have any method of granting adequacy to third countries? - It seems to me that a lot of outsourcing contracts for India/South Africa/EU could become legally "interesting" as of 23:00:01 on 29.3.19.
"So with Brexit we will lose our seat on the A29WP and any influence on how data protection law in our largest neighbouring market moves forward and we will have to comply fully to allow for trade to occur."
It's called taking back control. And when we've taken back sufficient control (and discovered that the reason all those non-EU countries were anxious for trade deals only so they could sell us stuff) that it's clear to the meanest intelligence that we have to go back to prop up what remains of our economy it'll be good-bye to the pound as a condition of re-entry.
"(and discovered that the reason all those non-EU countries were anxious for trade deals only so they could sell us stuff [...]"
Not the only reason. IIRC they are all also insisting on the loosening of our immigration rules for their citizens. Here's India's view. They are not interested in crop picking or sandwich making though - they have their sights on "professional" jobs.
Other Commonwealth countries are also touting the same immigration conditions for post BREXIT trade deals.
"So with Brexit we will lose our seat on the A29WP and any influence on how data protection law in our largest neighbouring market moves forward and we will have to comply fully to allow for trade to occur."
That will be true for anything we wish to trade with the EU - conform but have no say.
A few years ago a successful Norwegian business explained how they were forced to change their product line if an EU directive changed. Having no representation in the EU decisions - they often only had a very short time to make changes after new specifications were published. Norway's otherwise favourable association with the EU is much closer than the UK hard BREXIT ministers want.
No consequences for implementing an illegal law??
This clearly bullshit.
Such behaviour should be regarded equal to high treason.
If a landowner decided that trespassers would be treated contrary to the established law by holding them in a basement for a week, or even as in this case, collecting information on everyone who passes by his land on the offchance one might decide one day to violate his property he wouldn't get the luxury to shrug it off as a bureaucratic issue.
I'll think you'll find that the only landowner in the country is The Crown and anybody else who thinks that they are landowners are actually just tenants of the Crown and that the Crown does not have to worry about the Law of the Land because of the dictum that the Crown can do no wrong and is above it's own Law, and its administrators, judges and ministers are just servants of the Crown.
>No consequences for implementing an illegal law??
Shouldn't this mean that anyone that was prosecuted with information obtained through the application of this law should now be automatically be facing a retrial without that information being available to the prosecution. This could potentially result in a number of "guilty" people now looking forward to significant compensation claims against the government.
This should, of course, come directly from the Minister who proposed the law in the first place :)
>They can set up a massive, entirely new, government department to handle the phenomenally complex Brexit negotiations and machinations in a few short days, but a small unit to monitor one small area of responsibility is impossible.
To be fair, DeXEU (or at least the Minister) do seem to be making an almighty balls-up of it. Where exactly are the (58/39/none) impact assessments that were due to be published earlier this week?
This post has been deleted by its author
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
