Thought I'd start a new thread as this is going to be a major talking point this year...have not made up my mind yet...(unlike bucksfizz)....but thinking of voting for an exit as Europe is not doing Britain any good at all it seems....

Ex-legal chief attacks Theresa May’s ‘foolish’ claim on European court of justice:

Doubts cast over Brexit red line as cabinet prepares to reveal more of its thinking this week
Theresa May

Theresa May has repeatedly said that the UK will break free of the ECJ and leave its jurisdiction on the day of Brexit.

Toby Helm and Jamie Doward

Theresa May’s Brexit strategy has been thrown into new doubt as a former head of the government’s legal services ridicules the prime minister’s claim that the UK can break free of all European laws while continuing to reap the economic benefits of the EU’s single market.

Sir Paul Jenkins, who was the government’s most senior legal official for eight years until 2014, told the Observer that the prime minister’s policy on the legal implications of Brexit was “foolish”. He insisted that if the UK wants to retain close links with the single market and customs union it will have no option but to observe EU law “in all but name”.

Farewell to the ECJ?

We may end up obeying laws but having no say in them
Catherine Barnard European law expert

The comments – backed by several other leading experts on EU law – cast serious doubt on the central plank of the government’s latest thinking on Brexit, with less than two weeks to go before Brexit secretary David Davis enters a crucial phase of talks on the exit plans in Brussels.

After a summer of cabinet wrangling, ministers last week published the first of a series of papers on their Brexit negotiating position in an attempt to clarify the UK’s stance. They made clear that while the UK will leave the customs union and single market, it will seek to stay as closely linked as possible to both, and reject any hard border arrangement with the Republic of Ireland.

This week more papers will be released, including one spelling out how legal disputes could be resolved between the UK and EU once the European court of justice (ECJ) no longer has direct jurisdiction in the UK. Leaving the ECJ has been one of the totemic aims of Eurosceptics and any government U-turn on the issue would provoke an outcry among Tory Brexiters. May has repeatedly said that the UK will break free of the ECJ and leave its jurisdiction on the day of Brexit.

Q&As

Why is Dublin opposed to the idea of an invisible border?

UK and EU legal experts are becoming increasingly vocal in asserting that the prime minister’s policy is unrealistic and impossible to achieve. Jenkins, now an associate member of barristers Matrix Chambers, said: “If the UK is to be part of something close enough to a customs union or the single market to remove the need for hard borders, it will only work if the rules are identical to the EU’s own internal rules.

“Not only must they be the same but there must be consistent policing of those rules. If Theresa May’s red line means we cannot be tied to the ECJ, the Brexit treaty will need to provide a parallel policing system.

“That may be a new court but, in reality, any new court will have to follow what the ECJ says about the EU’s own rules, otherwise the new system won’t work. So, never mind Theresa May’s foolish red line; we will have the ECJ in all but name.”

Analysis Breaking with the European court of justice won’t be easy for Britain
Eurosceptics want to ‘take control’ – but if the UK wants to maintain close links with the EU, it will need a compatible legal system


Writing in the Observer, Catherine Barnard, professor of EU law at Trinity College, Cambridge, also casts serious doubt on whether the UK can escape ECJ jurisdiction while staying close to the single market and customs union. Steve Peers of Essex University also says such an approach is “simplistic” and the judicial version of “have our cake and eat it too”.

The remarks highlight the increasing difficulties May and her ministers are having to confront as they try to meet the twin demands of business, which fears a hard Brexit and loss of access to EU markets, and Tory pro-Brexit MPs, who want a complete break from the EU.


In her keynote speech on Brexit in January, May was explicit about the need to break away from the ECJ and its judicial rulings, saying: “We will not have truly left the European Union if we are not in control of our own laws.”

She added: “Leaving the European Union will mean that our laws will be made in Westminster, Edinburgh, Cardiff and Belfast. And those laws will be interpreted by judges not in Luxembourg but in courts across this country.”

The government’s insistence that the UK must leave the jurisdiction of the ECJ after Brexit could also mean Northern Ireland loses tens of millions of pounds in funding for its peace and reconciliation programmes.

Open Britain, which campaigns against a hard Brexit, claims that unless the government gives ground, the EU’s Peace programme – which under its fourth round of funding covering the period 2014 to 2020 is set to receive a total of £208m from the European regional development fund – is in jeopardy. The programme, which aims to boost “cohesion between communities involved in the conflict in Northern Ireland” and “economic and social stability”, applies to Northern Ireland and the six border counties of the Republic.

Analysis What does Brexit mean for people with disabilities?
Disability rights currently safeguarded by EU legislation may be under threat, while grant funding could be withdrawn without replacement

Leading constitutional expert Vernon Bogdanor, also writing in the Observer, says it is becoming clear that an eventual deal on Brexit can only be legitimised through a second referendum because the country and politicians are so divided on the issue.

An Opinium/Observer poll finds that 60% of people now back a transition deal to ensure a smooth exit from the EU, rather than a complete break in 2019. Some 37% of people believe there should be a second referendum on the eventual outcome of negotiations, while 49% are against it.

The findings come after chancellor Philip Hammond and international trade secretary Liam Fox, widely seen as opposed on the issue, made it clear in a joint article last week that the UK would need a transition period.

Lol what a load of tosh especially the £208 million funding for N I which costs us more by being in the EU than if we just pull out and fund it ourselves.

We won't be in the customs union or single market and will be lucky to get any kind of deal in the first instance with the idiots running the EU so they can go stuff their ECJ where the sun don't shine.

Ready to protect England from invasion by immigrants after Brexit?

Why only a hard Brexit will do

By Kent Matthews

21 August 2017



https://capx.co/why-only-a-hard-brexit-will-do/

The Gravy Train pulls in and stops if hard brexit is implemented. No wonder the usual suspects are screaming.

Good article Max.

Guy who wrote it gave an interview Friday on BBC Wales news and talked a lot of sense.

Also heard that only 20% by value of our trade with the EU is actual goods with the rest being service related so hardly the end of the world if we leave the customs union as well as the single market.

Right Dil here's your chance to help us understand some of the waffle in Max's link, I have given you just three... off you go.


1) A hard Brexit will reduce poverty and inequality


Go on then explain in a few sentences in "your" view how exactly.


2) A Soft Brexit or an EEA option would be the worst of all worlds


Go on then explain in a few sentences in "your" own view how exactly.


3) Brexit "should" bring a boost of £40 a week to every household


Go on then explain in a few sentences in "your" view how exactly.

Stan,

Don't worry we have a competent government and a leader many would swap for Trump.

Why would Dil have to spell it out to you Stan ? you and Fred never answer a question .
My advice to you is read it again and try to work it out for yourselves ,that's if you can .

How silly of me Fred to forget that...I feel really reassured now though knowing that -):

Who rang your bell JJ........get back in your box.

Dilbert,

13% of UK GDP comes from the financial services sector, and the UK is a net exporter of financial services to the EU. Most importantly, London clears all euro transactions which account for around 40% of all FX trade.

Aren't you worried that the EU might try to take control of that to, say, Frankfurt?

And yes, you're right, the UK are a net importer of actual goods. So, a hard Brexit and an application of WTO rules will mean more expensive Mercs, Beemers, Porsches and Audis for the Brits.

Is that what you voted for?

There was nothing wrong with the EEC but it warped into the EU which is a multiheaded monster. If German cars being more expensive is a price to pay for getting out of the EU, so be it. I don't buy them anyway. I prefer my Lexus. The new Volvos are a good alternative.

I haven't got all day so come on Dil get back on this board answer my questions.

Are you still on the bridge Stan? Better get under it, looks like rain..

OK Dil out for a bit so some time for you to "consider your position'...Behave yourself IT.

iturama,

Aren't Volvos made in Sweden which, last time I looked, was still in the EU?

So a hard Brexit would make them more expensive too. :o)

Hard brexit will make all continental cars more expensive...good good, buy British or American, Chinese, Japanese, the list goes on.

Years ago the likes of Kia / Hyundai etc were a joke but not now , these cars have superb build quality ,if the EU want to punish us i am quite happy to not buy a German car which i have for at least the last 20 years .

buy british ...... buy a bentley :-)