Tyndall favours a weird kind of utopian internationalism that relies on every country eliminating barriers between each other, but with absolutely no political institutions to agree any common rules.
Being a member of an international organisation which cannot change our laws or its rules without your express permission does not undermine sovereignty. NATO and the UN cannot unilaterally change our laws against our wishes because in the end we have a veto. We therefore retain our sovereignty even though we are part of those organisations.
The EU can change our laws even when we do not want them to and we have no veto. Therefore as long as we remain a member we do not have sovereignty.
I can understand someone resigning over a 24 month extension. Resigning over a three month one, which will still almost certainly be required even if the WA passes, seems silly.
He knows that it's not just going to be a three month extension.
Uk shitting all over the Euro elections then - what fun.
I think the last time a march made a difference to Government policy was probably the great Chartist rally of 1848. And that was as much to do with the rest of Europe having a succession of revolutions so the Government here got frightened we could see the same.
I can understand someone resigning over a 24 month extension. Resigning over a three month one, which will still almost certainly be required even if the WA passes, seems silly.
He knows that it's not just going to be a three month extension.
Hypothetical question: If the EU agree a three month extension to 30th June, could they also insist that we proceed with the EU elections, in order to cover the situation whereby we extend again or revoke A50?
The new EU Parliament sits on 2nd July, and if the UK is still a member on that date it would not be correctly constituted without our MEPs.
This is hardly a new issue, though - it was well known when I was dealing with displaced persons and refugees back in the mid-80s, and even earlier when I was in Yemen. Nothing is better for development than inward investment, rather than state aid, whereas emergency assistance works best with a coordinated international response. All aid should, where possible, use and build up existing local infrastructure (including decision-making) rather than undermining it.
Remarkably, I find myself agreeing with Lammy on this one. Charity is, of course, wonderful. But it is important how it is given.
It's a very downbeat article. Sounds fatalistic about no deal from the EU side.
I think Geoff Cox being there this week has made it clear that the current WA is not going to be agreed by Parliament, but neither is a revocation of A50. If the EU won't reopen the WA, it's crash out or keep talking.
Either it will be like a nationwide tour of the Leadsom for Leader march, or it will be a magnet for yellow vests causing trouble.
Since the 'UK' voted for Brexit, why isn't he starting in Scotland? He could begin in the single Scottish constituency that just *possibly* voted to leave.
March 18 stop at Swainby. March 19 they start at Aldfield March 20 they finish at Pontefrack. Then start at Nostell March 21 they stop at Doncaster and start at Wadworth
It's a very downbeat article. Sounds fatalistic about no deal from the EU side.
This is a a very important article, because it suggests a potential clash between the commission and the member states over the length of Britain's delay. If correct, and the member states go on to dictate a shorter period, this would have major ramifications for the UK.
This is hardly a new issue, though - it was well known when I was dealing with displaced persons and refugees back in the mid-80s, and even earlier when I was in Yemen. Nothing is better for development than inward investment, rather than state aid, whereas emergency assistance works best with a coordinated international response. All aid should, where possible, use and build up existing local infrastructure (including decision-making) rather than undermining it.
Remarkably, I find myself agreeing with Lammy on this one. Charity is, of course, wonderful. But it is important how it is given.
Agree absolutely. Difficult to convince some on here, that said.
I think the last time a march made a difference to Government policy was probably the great Chartist rally of 1848. And that was as much to do with the rest of Europe having a succession of revolutions so the Government here got frightened we could see the same.
I can understand someone resigning over a 24 month extension. Resigning over a three month one, which will still almost certainly be required even if the WA passes, seems silly.
He knows that it's not just going to be a three month extension.
Hypothetical question: If the EU agree a three month extension to 30th June, could they also insist that we proceed with the EU elections, in order to cover the situation whereby we extend again or revoke A50?
The new EU Parliament sits on 2nd July, and if the UK is still a member on that date it would not be correctly constituted without our MEPs.
I think the problem they then have is that if we leave after that date, the distribution of seats amongst the remaining 27 is kind of broken. I am not sure exactly how much of an issue that is - but for example the election of a new president of the Parliament would be interesting if it included the votes of MEPs who then shortly afterwards left their seats.
I can se why the EU would be very keen to avoid such a situation.
Looks like they're planning on going over the Transporter Bridge. Could be a bit of a wait to get across especially if it's high winds. Still, 70p a person to Middlesbrough Council ....
I can understand someone resigning over a 24 month extension. Resigning over a three month one, which will still almost certainly be required even if the WA passes, seems silly.
He knows that it's not just going to be a three month extension.
Hypothetical question: If the EU agree a three month extension to 30th June, could they also insist that we proceed with the EU elections, in order to cover the situation whereby we extend again or revoke A50?
The new EU Parliament sits on 2nd July, and if the UK is still a member on that date it would not be correctly constituted without our MEPs.
I think the problem they then have is that if we leave after that date, the distribution of seats amongst the remaining 27 is kind of broken. I am not sure exactly how much of an issue that is - but for example the election of a new president of the Parliament would be interesting if it included the votes of MEPs who then shortly afterwards left their seats.
I can se why the EU would be very keen to avoid such a situation.
My thinking is that by the time the Parliament actually sits, we either will be members or we won't be - but if we are and haven't conducted the elections then it's a problem.
Given that MEPs are elected from closed party lists, it would be easy enough to redo the D'Hondt counting process and seat distributions once the UK's membership status is confirmed, in order to determine who is eligible from each member state to be in the Parliament. That process being easier than trying to arrange election of the UK MEPs at a few days' notice.
Likely the first of many, although to be honest the payroll has held together pretty well so far.
To be fair his letter and his stated reasons for resigning are very reasonable.
Absolutely. It’s human nature that as things come to the crunch, there will be some ministers who profoundly disagree with the course being taken. While the PM and the whips have done a good job of being ambiguous enough to keep people mostly happy so far, it’s inevitable a few will choose to resign - probably on both sides of the Brexit debate
Anyone who thinks that Britain is not already free can safely be consigned to the category of nutjob.
+1. I'm bored having to explain that we do have sovereignty, or how the fuck did we manage to have an in/out referendum and go to war in Iraq etc. without Brussels agreeing? The sovereignty argument is one of the biggest lies Leave advocates perpetrated on a gullible public
That is probably because you are too dumb to understand what the word means. Which I suspect derives from you not actually caring.
"The power that a country has to govern itself, without any interference from outside sources or bodies"
Just because we are able to do the things you mention does not mean we are sovereign since there are many other areas where we have given up those powers to the EU.
Likely the first of many, although to be honest the payroll has held together pretty well so far.
snip.
Asnipate
Anysnip b.
+snip
That is probably because you are too dumb to understand what the word means. Which I suspect derives from you not actually caring.
"The power that a country has to govern itself, without any interference from outside sources or bodies"
Just because we are able to do the things you mention does not mean we are sovereign since there are many other areas where we have given up those powers to the EU.
So we need to Leave NATO on the same basis
Come on Mike, what was the last thing NATO forced the country to do? This week the Commission introduced a whole new BSE certification regime (2019/319), re-wrote the role of hearing officers in trade proceedings (2019/339), extended financial surveillance over a member state (2019/338), authorised an endocrine disruptor as a pesticide (2019/337), and ruled that Tequila can only come from Mexico (2019/335), amongst other things.
Saying you're fully sovereign because you can leave is like saying you're single because you can get divorced.
Comments
There are a hell of a lot of Tory MPs's who won't wear a two-year extension ; and it may be the only kind of extension the EU are willing to give.
The EU can change our laws even when we do not want them to and we have no veto. Therefore as long as we remain a member we do not have sovereignty.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/28/extension-article-50-must-be-one-off-brussels-eu27-uk-brexit-delay
It's a very downbeat article. Sounds fatalistic about no deal from the EU side.
The new EU Parliament sits on 2nd July, and if the UK is still a member on that date it would not be correctly constituted without our MEPs.
Remarkably, I find myself agreeing with Lammy on this one. Charity is, of course, wonderful. But it is important how it is given.
March 18 stop at Swainby. March 19 they start at Aldfield
March 20 they finish at Pontefrack. Then start at Nostell
March 21 they stop at Doncaster and start at Wadworth
and that continues all the way through the walk.
New thread
btw
I can se why the EU would be very keen to avoid such a situation.
Given that MEPs are elected from closed party lists, it would be easy enough to redo the D'Hondt counting process and seat distributions once the UK's membership status is confirmed, in order to determine who is eligible from each member state to be in the Parliament. That process being easier than trying to arrange election of the UK MEPs at a few days' notice.
Saying you're fully sovereign because you can leave is like saying you're single because you can get divorced.