EU referendum, brexit and the aftermath

In the case of the DUP: They always take the Cons money, always did. Even though Carson (your man who was there around the time of the border split when NI was formed) said they played him and betrayed him.

Arlene Foster lost somebody in a bus bombing, I can imagine she's somewhat distrustful. There is a sentiment among some that if a united ireland happens the "terrorists won" and the unionist alphabet groups were just defending areas.

So if anything happens, well, they can always "Blame themmuns"

Now, for the distant observer that is all bullshit. But, that is the gallery she is playing to.

And the border areas are mostly nationalist, some people think this is part of a plan to cause misery there, as most of the attacks will be there, not in the well off unionist areas at the coast, and I doubt the working class areas have much of an appetite for violence.

Sure, plenty of sectarianism still about, but they are also the areas that actually lost people to actual violence... not the posh unionist voters at the coast, Belfast/L/Derry are where the hassle is going to be.

Besides, most of those groups are drug dealers these days, not idealists.

There is a very strong sense of "we don't want this!!!" among the some in older generation, and the younger ones don't care much either way. It'll all depend how "bad" it gets.

And in time things are slowly improving, but then none of us live forever ;)

A lot of stuff pre-referendum seemed to be "Fuck it, remain is going to win anyway, why bother putting the effort in".

Well, that's what some people said. Which is not smart, considering all the anti EU propaganda. Never underestimate your enemy or stupidity and all that.

At the same time, every time the risks and contradictions were pointed out it was "EU bad, UK rules the waves" and "Project Fear".

Perhaps a positive campaign pointing out the UK basically offered a lot of great ideas (common market) and got many ideas signed off and has lots of influence in the EU may have worked.

But I don't know, as some votes were also "screw the Tory votes". It might have, as it was so tight. But the main leave campaigns (less so the smaller lexit/flexit ones) never cared about facts or constraint of fear/anger.

I mean, once the "vote leave cos turkish immigrants" posters went up, it was kinda clear what the game was gonna be...

Going well for Johnson then:

The head of the UK’s government legal department has quit over suggestions that Boris Johnson is trying to row back on parts of last year’s Brexit deal relating to Northern Ireland.
https://twitter.com/PickardJE/status/1303265142826823680

Fair play to that man, but it may mean anybody with principles and integrity is quitting. So what are we left with then...?

https://www.ft.com/content/6186bf1c-055b-4de6-a643-4eea763e1b94?fbclid=IwAR2kGRJ6z41pUS7h-3bmG6zz5K00ezwkKH6BA9ocosY7XLVpcIb2nxzA4_s more here

Exactly, sadly some one more compliant will pop up and take the position

PMQs might be interesting tomorrow.

Going more and more towards a banana republic with no bananas.

It should be. But it'll just follow the usual...

Non-Tory MP: pressing question that really should be answered urgently

PM: Yayayaya, bluster, bluster, fudge, change subject... (wait for response)

Tory benches: Raaaaaaa! + pointing and shaking of papers

Tory MP: easy soundbite question made with as many words as humanly possible

PM: Bluster, soundbite, "Take back control!"

Tory benches: Raaaaaaa! + pointing and shaking of papers

(Interspersed with a few here’s a really specific question about my constituent/oh yes, I will look into it moments)

This seems a bonkers thing to be saying:
https://twitter.com/AdamJSchwarz/status/1303307680329740288

It’s all about preparing us for the gaslit uplands

gaslit

Fracked, yeah?

#rep

Murder breaks domestic law in a very specific and limited way.

The amendments to UK law are arguably not in breach of international law. The VCLT does not strictly apply to any treaties between the EU and the UK.

https://www.blackstonechambers.com/news/article-62-vienna-convention-law-treaties-foreseeing-unforeseen/#:~:text=The%20VCLT%20makes%20clear%20that,within%20the%20international%20organisation%20itself.

Last paragraph doesn't sound like it's ok either; It must surely be incumbent on the UK to seek to amend the default positions which apply in the event of no further agreement, rather than to exercise a unilateral right of withdrawal which could not be justified under Article 62 VCLT

My point wasn't clear. The amendments to UK law would normally breach art 27 of the VLCT but in the case of the Withdrawal agreement it could be argued that the VLCT does not apply to treaties involving the EU.

The UK has already left the EU. The Withdrawal agreement contains a number of legal traps which give the ECJ authority after December. I think the amendments are an attempt to prevent UK judges continuing to follow the development of the Factortame case, and to prevent the UK being pursued for years in the ECJ.

The Factortame case and its development in UK law are the reverse example of how long it will take the UK to extricate itself from EU law. It took years to establish the limits of EU law in the UK and it will take years to remove.

The amendments to UK law are arguably not in breach of international law.

Which would suggest that Brandon Lewis was wrong in his answer?

And that Jonathan Jones made a rather hasty decision to resign.

"prevent the UK being pursued for years in the ECJ" in other words.... cherry picking.

The EJC mediates trade AND the citizen rights agreement. This all came up years ago, the EU said no to a separate court and it would mean the same, under another name.

Whatever flavour they put on it, or law they change, they can't just sneakily try to work around prevention of goods dumping in Ireland over the NI border.

And that means playing chicken with Ireland over an actual hard border and the optics and practicality of that are....not good. "Oh Ireland if you do it YOU break the GFA" 🙄

Though renaming/rewriting may be an easier sell to the "sovereignty" crowd,this is just a way to make yourself look untrustworthy as hell.

Now I have to say I honestly don't understand the intricacies of the legality of this. Perhaps it needs done, in a hush hush way the EU can trust enough to look the other way.

But doing it like this, wow, and now Biden is firing warning shots.

The Withdrawal agreement contains a number of legal traps

They're not really traps, though, are they?

Unless you're metaphorically stumbling about with your eyes closed and your trousers around your ankles.

Oh, wait...

OMG, just get fucked, 'Festival of Brexit'.

The organizers sound like good eggs, but like the celebrations of Northern Ireland's 100 years of existence, I honestly can't say my first reaction isn't: "well I am just gonna stay home and drunk myself into a hangover"

How on earth can you turn that into a positive??? Sure, the UK still has plenty of good in it, but both events are so divisive by their own nature. You can't just pretend we are all friends here.

It isn't a celebration of all that is Brexit, it's an opportunity to give your mate £120m to put up a couple of booths and bunting for a weekend.

opportunity to give your mate £120m to put up a couple of booths and bunting for a weekend

I assume on current form, the company/ies given the contract have no experience of running a festival and have no booths or bunting or any substantial assets of which to speak?

You'll be luckily if the company it officially goes to has even been registered with Companies House yet.