22 SEPTEMBER: All going splendidly. A few people turned up to hear the boss today. Well, no one important, but at least it wasn’t all empty seats! (I told her Friday matinees weren’t the best idea, but you know her. She always knows best.)
The old dear cackled on a bit in her usual way, and frankly, I dropped off for a bit as you do after a good luncheon. But I’m sure she socked it to Johnny Foreigner. Told them we’d stick around for longer. Ha ha. That made them sit up. Well, those that were awake, anyway.
But we’re Brits. We’ve never felt at home with all these people speaking foreign at us and their foreign courts and, I mean look at the democratic deficit. Why, it’s a European dictatorship. No. The majority of decent hardworking British families up and down the country are jolly glad we’re putting these foreigners in their place at last.
Mark my words, they’ll run after us begging for trades deals, as will the rest of the world. And we’ll return to our rightful place at the head of the list of senior and important countries leading the world forward under Bor… I mean Theresa.
Er, we just need time, and Liam needs to get his royal yacht built… but once we’re up and running, nothing will stop us.
Leaving you some pics I’ve taken or been sent on my journeys around the world to save you decent British people from this European dictatorship.
All the best
DD
![bre4]](https://munguin.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/bre4.jpg?w=840)
MUNGUIN'S NEW REPUBLIC 
If we assume that one,if not the main one,of their objectives is to keep the UK intact,then the longer they can fudge the outcome prior to actually exiting,then the better.
If they can keep the outcome uncertain until after the next Holyrood election,then there is a possibility of Westminster being back in control and independence off the agenda.
Should they exit Europe without Scotland in tow,then they are in deep trouble,so everything will be done to try and prevent this from happening.
May still sounds like a suicidal person,hoping someone will talk her out of it.
One thing is for sure,none of her Tory colleagues will do that!
LikeLiked by 3 people
One other thing.
There is an idea being floated by the Tories that there will be a court outside the EU single market which will handle any disputes arising between tne EU and England on trade within that market.
Dream on.
The EU own the single market and they will decide,based on EU law enforced by EU courts what is in conformance and what isn’t.
Just more self important delusional B/S from England’s Tories.
Boy are they in for a shock.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I totally agree. I listened to a bit of her patronising speech (I couldn’t manage much of it) and my first thought was… Lord, you really believe that the EU, which we are leaving, will change a load of stuff, just to keep you happy, don’t you? You’re mad!
I’m not saying that they can’t do bespoke. Switzerland has bespoke, so they can. But it takes forever to set up; it’s incredibly complex and I think Terry Entoure, who knows a thing or two about this, said that there are many disputes.
Barnier has made it plain that while the Uk continues to be connected to the EU in some sort of transitional period, they will continue to pay and they will continue to be subject to ECJ rulings. If that transitional period continues beyond the two or three years (2021/2022) the same will apply.
So taking back contrio0l won’t happen and it will still cost money, so the £350 million a week will have to come from the same money tree as the DUP loony got hers from, and whilst there will be a reduction in the number of foreign workers here because, frankly, the racism, the lack of value of the pound and the uncertainty of the future, make the place uninviting, we will still need them desperately.
In the meantime, I understand that in common with many other financial firms, Lloyds of London, is now more appropriately called Lloyds of Dublin.
Of course, that doesn’t begin to address the Irish problem … and a very capable and determined Taoiseach in Leo Varadkar who looks as if he will play hardball, and who is clearly infinitely better suited to the role than Mayhem.
Then there’s Gibraltar.
And if she manages to find some way of allowing Gibraltarians and Northern Irish to be sorta European and sorta British at the same time, she’d better expect that the Scots will want at least the same deal.
I’m sure that Fluffy, the useless tosser will be fighting tooth and nail for us from Buenos Aires.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Switzerland and the EU have bi-laterals dating back to the 70s. The main period of negotiation, though, was in the 90s and 00s. It’s an ongoing process, too, that never truly ends. Switzerland is a narrow economy relative to the UK. If it took the Swiss 120 treaties then how many would the UK need? It’s not surprising the EU have ruled this out – even if they weren’t against the idea in principle they definitely will be against it in practice.
It probably all sounds attractive to the Brexit headbangers until they realise how the thing was set up. Switzerland wanted access to EU pharma markets and the cost of that was freedom of movement and Schengen and goodness knows what else. That’s just how negotiations work with a much bigger partner. To be honest, Switzerland has a level of EU integration that would never be accepted by the Brexit headbangers.
There is a lot of tension in this kind of agreement. The bi-lateral agreements reference each other so if one is broken the whole lot falls down. The Cantonal system adds to that pressure because they are effectively independent states that share a military and a currency. I would guess that creates pressure between the Federal government and the Cantonal government. I honestly don’t understand how they manage that. None of that is a problem for Westminster, which views devolution as a “self-denying ordinance”.
I’ve read a few places that the EU aren’t all that satisfied with the Swiss deal. It was set up in the 90s in response to the Maastricht Treaty and a lot has changed since then. As I understand it, the Swiss don’t have to automatically update their laws to match relevant EU law. I think their main obligation is to uphold what is in the existing treaty. I believe, though, that details within the agreements are updated and that is then upheld in Swiss law. It’s still not automatic, though, the way it is in Norway and Iceland. The EU wants to change that but I don’t see that happening any time soon. The stability of the system is that Switzerland is much like its neighbours when it comes to workers’ rights, environmental protection etc. There is never going to be a huge divergence that needs corrected, as threatened by Fox and Johnson.
Mutual recognition is achieved through Swiss/EU committees with specific competences over specific treaties. Again, nothing is forced but if one side believes a treaty has been broken the whole system is in jeopardy. That is quite a pressure to conform, as we saw with the fudged implementation of the referendum for imposing immigration quotas. I would imagine that makes it harder to reform anything because it is an all-or-nothing kind of deal.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks, Terry.
I’d say that the Swiss model is out of the question.
But what is it she wants?
Closer, she suggested than the Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway model, she said. Closer than the Canada trade agreement.
She waffled about it, but in fact it seems to me that she wants the moon on a stick… and she’ll be lucky if she comes away with the stick.,
LikeLike
This is from Mr Dunt’s piece:
The problem goes like this. Frictionless trade requires that you have the same standards as your trading partner. So if the EU has a rule on recycling in food packaging, so do you. That’s why the product doesn’t need to be checked at the border. But of course that means you have to accept all the EU’s rules, despite having no voice in formulating them.
This is the key decision in Brexit. If you want full independence to set your own rules, you will take a hammering on trade. If you want trade to continue as before, you can’t have full independence. You can put this plainly or poetically. You can set it to music or say it upside down. It doesn’t matter. That is the choice which must be faced and it is one the UK government has no position on.
http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2017/09/22/florence-speech-may-kicks-the-brexit-can-two-years-down-the
LikeLike
The Americans – well, the Trump Resistance, anyway – are talking about abolishing the Electoral College and making the choice of President depend on having a majority, or at least a plurality, of Electoral College votes. In recent years, that would have given us Gore instead of Dubya, and Hillary instead of the Donald. The first would have kept the US from invading Iraq, at least until 2004 and possibly permanently, and as for the second…
This is not to say that the rest of the US electoral system is flawless. It is far from it.
In the UK, we do not have free and fair elections because of meeja bias and control by vested interests, both public and private. The fact that the limits on campaign financing are routinely violated by the party currently in power appears to pass without sanction, and even without much comment at all in the aforesaid meeja. Add in a soupçon of gerrymandering and electoral roll manipulation for that added anxiety about the safety of our electoral system. As for stuffing of ballot boxes with dubious postal votes, I’m just not going to go there, except to say that it is cause for concern that the suspicion can even arise.
Neither is it particularly outlandish any more to suggest that the (English) judiciary are compromised through a network of patronage and influence, in other words, of pressure and subtle, or even not so subtle, threat.
Nor can the police or the Crown Prosecution services be considered truly independent, depending as they ultimately do on the will and whims of the Home Secretary.
Recent cases of Home Office malfeasance carried out in contempt of the High Court are indicative of an even more worrying trend: even when the judiciary do render judgements that go against the Government and the various organs of State, the current administration has begun to flout them. Contempt of court is a serious matter – especially when committed by the Government itself. No society can afford a climate of impunity.
LikeLiked by 2 people
The billionaire press in action. Only in the so-called United Kingdom.
Was speaking to a Labour activist friend of mine today; apparently, a constitution and its laws made by fascists are binding…
To be fair to him he was only regurgitating the current SNP BAD press release, i. e. Scotland shouldn’t interfere in another country’s business. I reminded him of all the the times the UK had disregarded *that* piece of sage advice.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I’d like Rudd to be in court over that.
She sent a guy who had helped the allies back to wherever to face a real chance of death. Against the ruling of the courts. I would have thought that contempt of the High Court was an imprisonable offence. If they get him and he dies, then not just contempt of court but an accessory to murder as well, should be the charge.
It doesn’t surprise me that she thinks herself above the law.
They’ve bribed a party to vote with them; they’ve flouted the tradition of having committees reflect the makeup of the commons and they have [passed an enabling act, giving them executive powers over masses of legislation. At least Erdogan had a referendum before he took dictatorial powers to himself.
All this would perhaps be just a little less worrying if they weren’t a bunch of completely and utterly incompetent idiots.
LikeLiked by 1 person
As you say, Conan, imagine if only the UK didn’t interfere in other countries’ business.
LikeLike
Great posts by trispw and bringiton [x2].
I still think it will be a hard brexit and indyref2 will be before the next Holyrood election [bloody better be!]
LikeLiked by 2 people
Thanks, Dan.
Yes, I think it will be hard too. Unless they pay, accept the courts’ jurisdiction, and open movement of services, goods, finance and people, they are going nowhere.
I can’t see them doing that without the Tories being decimated by hard right people defecting to UKIP (does it have a leader these days?), and frankly, at least in parts of England, riots on the streets.
They’d better deliver; get rid of the foreigners and find a lot of money for the NHS, or there will be trouble. That’s what they promised and that’s what a lot of their dimmer voters really thought would happen.
So a hard Brexit and heaven knows what sort of future for our young.
LikeLike
https://www.change.org/p/sadiq-khan-declare-london-independent-from-the-uk-and-apply-to-join-the-eu?recruiter=193795476&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=autopublish&utm_term=mob-xs-share_petition-no_msg&fb_ref=Default
Interesting!
LikeLike
I don’t know how authoritative this is, but a guy has commented on Mr Dunt’s piece about “40”, yes forty, regional and national government having to agree to any deal.
I’m not sure which government these would be, but if it’s true, isn’t it an absolute travesty that the governments of Scotland, Wales, NI and Gibraltar will be allowed no say whatsoever.
Whatever happened to the vow’s promise of the most powerful devolved government in the world for Scotland?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ooops, and the credit rating has gone down, again!
Good day’s work Mrs May.
LikeLiked by 1 person
From Twitter:
Seb Dance MEP
@SebDance
PM says UK “never felt at home in EU”. London is, and will always be, a European city – and the premier one at that.
***********
Unlike Mrs May, I don’t feel I know enough to comment on whether the whole of the UK felt at home in Europe.
Speaking for myself, I always felt perfectly at home. And if the vote is anything to go by, so did almost 2/3 of my fellow Scots.
It would be fair to say that Mrs May looks and sounds as if she wouldn’t ever be at home, anywhere, stumbling, awkward and inarticulate, she gives the impression of not feeling comfortable in her skin.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Liked this article.
So Mayhem makes an intervention and plays the “give us more time card”. Standard negotiating tactic.
In this case a very amateurish one, showing the UK to have an extremely weak hand.
EU has a simple choice
a) continue as though nothing has happened, or
b) agree to an extension, based on conditions, or
c) agree to an unconditional extension
So what are they going to do?
I can’t see any conditions that would favour the EU more than the current timetable.
So Brexit will continue on current timetable and the pressure will mount. Tick tock…..
The real concern at the moment is Catalunya and the EU’s virtual non response. If they don’t assist them in some way then Scotland will be next to feel the Jackboot when we dare to hold our “now is not the time” indyref2.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think they will be granted an extension.
But it will be on terms of UK paying, and accepting the four freedoms and the UCJ and all existing and new laws.
Taking back control … yep!
LikeLike
I would bet on the EU carrying on regardless and saying that an extension was conditional on progress on EU citizen rights, NIreland and the Exit Bill. Until these matters are dealt with then they can’t move on to transitional arrangements or trade deals.
So I am saying there will be NO extension at this time as a result of “Mays intervention”.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well, they wanted the jobs, they should get on and do them.
And if there are queues 10 miles long at ports, so be it.
LikeLike
Barnier has said that the transition period was dependent on a) meeting all EU obligations b) a clear goal at the end of the period. May has only satisfied a) and is nowhere near b). I don’t see the EU granting the UK an extended negotiation period for some time but, yes, it’s hard to see them ultimately turning the UK’s request down. In the meantime, however, they can argue that b) isn’t yet satisfied and use the power of the ticking clock to extract more concessions from the UK.
LikeLiked by 1 person
As with Kangaroo, I would guess that meeting all obligations also means the obligations of departure.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well, as you’ve said before, the smaller partner is always on the back foot, and the UK has made it clear that they are desperate.
Brave talk about no deal being better than a bad deal. No deal is a disaster.
It may be inconvenient for the EU but it is close to starvation for the UK.
So the UK will cave…
LikeLike
One of your better ones – and they’re all good.
I love reading the intelligent comments from your well-informed correspondents.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks very much, Kenzie.
I too appreciate the intelligent and considered opinions of our readers.
I learn a lot on here.
LikeLike