And we imported " Consent " via Sewell Motions in our devolution settlement. Devolved administrations have to offer or deny " legislative consent " if Westminster seeks to legislate in an area of their competence. When Carwyn Jones said they other day he wouldn't " consent " to a deal taking the UK out of the Single Market this is what he was hinting at. It was an implied threat to refuse " legislative consent " to repeal the European Communities Act 1972. Now Westminster is Soveriegn and can just amend the devolution settlements as well. Or it could fight a Supreme Court case arguing a devolved administration was acting ultra vires.

SouthamObserver said:

It's kicking off here in Leamington!

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/leamington-spa-sikh-temple-gurdwara-occupeid-armed-men-warwickshire-police-a7236941.html

Don't all Sikh men carry a small blade as part of their religion? Over reaction I suspect.

SouthamObserver said:

Casino_Royale said:

SouthamObserver said:

Casino_Royale said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

TCPoliticalBetting said:

SouthamObserver said:

another_richard said:

SouthamObserver said:

another_richard said:

kle4 said:

another_richard said:

I notice that the Remoaners plan to flood Last Night of the Proms with thousands of EU flags was a resounding failure.

Was that a real plan, or somebody online suggesting it?

M

Not sure 60 backers raising less than £20 is much of a story.

Well 60 out of 16 million seems small to me!

There were a few EU flags in the Hall on camera, it looked to be a ratio of more than 10 UK flags to every 1 EU. No EU flags noticed on camera at Hyde Park and Belfast.

Thankfully, last night's show was rather good. Particularly Rule Britannia, which brought the house down, and a proper conductor's speech which was about the music rather than left-wing identity politics.

If some sore losers want to impotently wave a few blue-and-yellow flags in the crowd, and look like real tossers in so doing, then let them.

They lost. We won.

The BBC hates it so much it funds the whole thing, runs it on primetime TV on a Saturday night, organises events around it across the UK and delays Match of the Day util it ends.

The BBC are happy to stage and show the event, providing it is used to promote their values: internationalism, diversity and modernity.

It's its patriotic, jingoistic Britishness they despise.

Anyway, you absolutely know this, but just feel a reflexive need to defend the BBC from attacks from the Right, so let's move on.

I know what I watched on primetime BBC1 last night. I saw the BBC orchestra play patriotic songs, I heard the BBC choir sing them, I watched as BBC cameras showed union jacks being waved in various locations across the country. I am not sure why you are pretending this did not happen.

It was fantastic last night wasn't it. I enjoyed the BBC's Demos building by including ' National ' songs from the parks events in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. The Welsh vocals were angelic.

The number of European flags visible was just right as well. Enough to be noticable, not enough to have had highjacked it. I hope we see it seek into counter culture more now.

YellowSubmarine said:

And we imported " Consent " via Sewell Motions in our devolution settlement. Devolved administrations have to offer or deny " legislative consent " if Westminster seeks to legislate in an area of their competence. When Carwyn Jones said they other day he wouldn't " consent " to a deal taking the UK out of the Single Market this is what he was hinting at. It was an implied threat to refuse " legislative consent " to repeal the European Communities Act 1972. Now Westminster is Soveriegn and can just amend the devolution settlements as well. Or it could fight a Supreme Court case arguing a devolved administration was acting ultra vires.

Or they could just state that the UK leaving the Single Market is entirely a Westminster area of competence and not a devolved one. Which it is.

SimonStClare said:

SouthamObserver said:

It's kicking off here in Leamington!

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/leamington-spa-sikh-temple-gurdwara-occupeid-armed-men-warwickshire-police-a7236941.html

Looks like the wedding guard of honour had a few too many before the ceremony....

It could be worse - there was a graveside brawl at a funeral in my hometown between the widow and her mother in law....

SouthamObserver said:

Christopher Booker, of all people, gets the Single Market and why membership - not just full access - is so vital:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09/10/the-three-brexiteers-are-overlooking-a-crucial-detail-on-trade/

Because signing up to international agreements in our own right during the period between A50 and Leaving is clearly impossible isn't it. One wonders how new nations can ever exist if orderly transitions are impossible...

I can't remember who but someone once observed we could leave the EU in 13.5hrs. This being the length of time it took the Abdication Act to go through all it's stages. All are EU commitments are enacted by Westminster legislation so we can just do a single repeal bill. What ( nearly all ) Brexiteers confuse is the legal ability to do some and the likely disastrous consequences of speed. Saying something is incredibly complex isn't the same as saying it can't be done.

SouthamObserver said:

That Booker article also shows why May is going to need to throw plenty of red meat to the Tory right before A50 is invoked.

The WCO's strategic plan highlights that its key goal is to facilitate the ratification and implementation of the WTO Trade Facilitation Agreement (TFA, adopted in November 2014), which is a superset of the measures currently supported by the WCO. That TFA will come into complete effect once two-thirds of members ratify the agreement.

https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tradfa_e/tradfa_e.htm#tradfac

WCO strategic plan (TFA is strategic goal 1.2 on p11):

http://bit.ly/2cNEY3K

At this point, I just don't believe what journalists write on the topic, no matter whether they're Remain or Leave. Almost any treatment of newspaper column length is going to be grossly simplistic or inaccurate or both.

We need to address our membership of the WTO. Pretty much everything hinges on that.

SouthamObserver said:

Christopher Booker, of all people, gets the Single Market and why membership - not just full access - is so vital:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09/10/the-three-brexiteers-are-overlooking-a-crucial-detail-on-trade/

Definitely the most unlikely candidate, of all the journalists writing about how leaving the EU is going to be a disaster!

SouthamObserver said:

Casino_Royale said:

SouthamObserver said:

Casino_Royale said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

TCPoliticalBetting said:

SouthamObserver said:

another_richard said:

SouthamObserver said:

another_richard said:

kle4 said:

another_richard said:

I notice that the Remoaners plan to flood Last Night of the Proms with thousands of EU flags was a resounding failure.

Was that a real plan, or somebody online suggesting it?

M

Not sure 60 backers raising less than £20 is much of a story.

Well 60 out of 16 million seems small to me!

There were a few EU flags in the Hall on camera, it looked to be a ratio of more than 10 UK flags to every 1 EU. No EU flags noticed on camera at Hyde Park and Belfast.

They lost. We won.

The BBC hates it so much it funds the whole thing, runs it on primetime TV on a Saturday night, organises events around it across the UK and delays Match of the Day util it ends.

The BBC are happy to stage and show the event, providing it is used to promote their values: internationalism, diversity and modernity.

It's its patriotic, jingoistic Britishness they despise.

Anyway, you absolutely know this, but just feel a reflexive need to defend the BBC from attacks from the Right, so let's move on.

I know what I watched on primetime BBC1 last night. I saw the BBC orchestra play patriotic songs, I heard the BBC choir sing them, I watched as BBC cameras showed union jacks being waved in various locations across the country. I am not sure why you are pretending this did not happen.

I am not sure why you are pretending my posts earlier today did not happen, when I said last night was one of the best in years. But that doesn't negate what I said. The BBC has been trying to scrap the patriotic hymns on-and-off since 1969 and would dearly love to do so:

https://www.theguardian.com/music/2016/sep/07/from-the-classical-archive-1969-proms-ban-land-of-hope-and-glory-rule-britannia

And this prat:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3778782/Don-t-let-Brexit-rowdies-wreck-Proms-spirit-Ex-BBC-boss-warns-Little-Englanders-celebrating-poll-win.html

The BBC continues to offer this (against its will) because it has to.

But discussing the BBC with you is useless, as you are so blinkered.

You are wrong.

YellowSubmarine said:

I can't remember who but someone once observed we could leave the EU in 13.5hrs. This being the length of time it took the Abdication Act to go through all it's stages. All are EU commitments are enacted by Westminster legislation so we can just do a single repeal bill. What ( nearly all ) Brexiteers confuse is the legal ability to do some and the likely disastrous consequences of speed. Saying something is incredibly complex isn't the same as saying it can't be done.

There was pre-vote, the "sticking plaster" option. ie add a line to every treaty to which we are a signatory saying words to the effect of: this treaty remains unaltered in its entirety subject to future UK legislation and negotiation.

The theory being it would then give us the time and space to work out what we wanted and what we didn't want. Can't see the EU27, nor the UK electorate being 100% happy with it although it would allow us to leave, while kicking the can down the road of what leaving would ultimately look like.

Sounds facile, but it came from quite a senior lawyer, albeit pre-vote, when ideas were more theoretical than necessarily practical.

edmundintokyo said:

Casino_Royale said:

edmundintokyo said:

Casino_Royale said:

edmundintokyo said:

Casino_Royale said:

edmundintokyo said:

The treaty reads like they vote first, then the member states do the QMV vote.

Really? How have you deduced that?

"That agreement shall be negotiated in accordance with Article 218(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. It shall be concluded on behalf of the Union by the Council, acting by a qualified majority, after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament."

OK, could that also not be a vote by the European Parliament to grant consent to negotiating an agreement, following which the European Council QMVs on it?

On for the lawyers to argue over, perhaps.

It could be but that would be exceedingly weird. Firstly if you meant you needed them to consent to conducting the negotiation rather than concluding it then why wouldn't you say so, and secondly, why would you give them the option of saying no, you can't negotiate an agreement, and what would happen if they used it?

No need for lawyers here, it's obvious what it means.

I don't think so. Bear in mind the drafting of the article was largely symbolic and never seriously thought through.

I think it's extremely unlikely that the European Parliament would get first dibs on approving the deal, over and above the European Council that actually runs the show.

British right-wingers have this weird denial about the European Parliament. They didn't believe the leader of the largest party would get to be Commission President either. The paragraph I quoted is perfectly clear, you really have to twist your brain into a weird shape to find any ambiguity in it.

Casino_Royale said:

I think a challenge, if that happens, is all-but-inevitable, or the European Council will find some way round it where they sew up the substantial negotiations first.

No, what'll happen is that the European Parliament will send their guy along to the negotiations, and he'll be in close contact with the main groups there, and they'll work out what they can all agree on. So it's unlikely to matter in what order they vote.

Whereas Europhiles like you are wrong, about everything, and also insufferably pompous arrogant whilst you are being wrong.

There is plenty of ambiguity in Article 50. We are about to find out just how it plays out and neither you, nor me, has any clue as to how it will.

I find myself on the side of Colonel Bucket today (no relation). I'm sick and tired of these "pub quiz" questions by some of these smug interviewers, who have the answer in front of them. She probably could have handled it better but at least the question was only marginally better than "do you know the price of a bottle of milk?" I barely watch the news these days, everything is so dumbed-down.

@Yellow Submarine:

On further research, it seems to be a single vote of MEPs looking for a majority accept/reject verdict:

"Consent procedure

The procedure requires the European Parliament's consent to a proposed act, required under the Treaty on European Union or the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, before certain decisions can be taken. It is based on a single vote on consent with the majority of votes cast. The European Parliament may accept or reject a proposed act and cannot amend it. Where the European Parliament does not give its consent, the act cannot be adopted.

As a non-legislative procedure, it usually applies to the ratification of certain agreements negotiated by the EU, or is applicable most notably in the cases of serious breach of fundamental rights under Article 7 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) or for the accession of new EU members or arrangements for the withdrawal from the EU.

As a legislative procedure, it is to be used also when new legislation on combating discrimination is being adopted and it gives the European Parliament a veto when the subsidiary general legal basis is applied in line with Article 352 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU (TFEU)."

Article 218 (to which Article 50 refers) implies it then goes to the European Council for a decision by QMV after.

Casino_Royale said:

SouthamObserver said:

Casino_Royale said:

SouthamObserver said:

Casino_Royale said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

TCPoliticalBetting said:

SouthamObserver said:

another_richard said:

SouthamObserver said:

another_richard said:

kle4 said:

another_richard said:

I notice that the Remoaners plan to flood Last Night of the Proms with thousands of EU flags was a resounding failure.

Was that a real plan, or somebody online suggesting it?

M

Not sure 60 backers raising less than £20 is much of a story.

Well 60 out of 16 million seems small to me!

There were a few EU flags in the Hall on camera, it looked to be a ratio of more than 10 UK flags to every 1 EU. No EU flags noticed on camera at Hyde Park and Belfast.

They lost. We won.

The BBC hates it so much it funds the whole thing, runs it on primetime TV on a Saturday night, organises events around it across the UK and delays Match of the Day util it ends.

The BBC are happy to stage and show the event, providing it is used to promote their values: internationalism, diversity and modernity.

It's its patriotic, jingoistic Britishness they despise.

Anyway, you absolutely know this, but just feel a reflexive need to defend the BBC from attacks from the Right, so let's move on.

I know what I watched onetending this did not happen.

I am not sure why you are pretending my posts earlier today did not happen, when I said last night was one of the best in years. But that doesn't negate what I said. The BBC has been trying to scrap the patriotic hymns on-and-off since 1969 and would dearly love to do so:

https://www.theguardian.com/music/2016/sep/07/from-the-classical-archive-1969-proms-ban-land-of-hope-and-glory-rule-britannia

And this prat:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3778782/Don-t-let-Brexit-rowdies-wreck-Proms-spirit-Ex-BBC-boss-warns-Little-Englanders-celebrating-poll-win.html

The BBC continues to offer this (against its will) because it has to.

But discussing the BBC with you is useless, as you are so blinkered.

You are wrong.

I wish I could be as unblinkered as you :-D

We both saw the same thing last night on primetime BBC1. I am not sure why that upsets you so much.

SouthamObserver said:

Philip_Thompson said:

SouthamObserver said:

Christopher Booker, of all people, gets the Single Market and why membership - not just full access - is so vital:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09/10/the-three-brexiteers-are-overlooking-a-crucial-detail-on-trade/

Because signing up to international agreements in our own right during the period between A50 and Leaving is clearly impossible isn't it. One wonders how new nations can ever exist if orderly transitions are impossible...

Yes, it is impossible. New nations are, by definition, not EU member states.

They also by definition are not a party to any other trade Treaties either.

We can have an orderly transitions by signing Treaties to be formally deposited on the day we become Independent. Which is a more organised situation than some newly independent nations find themselves in.

Oh, and for those who missed it before, another free Sir Edric story, by me:
http://thaddeuswhite.weebly.com/writing-blog/sir-edric-and-the-wig

If you like it, do give The Adventures of Sir Edric (a novel-sized book of two large stories) a look. May Zeno's pumpkin slippers be ever succulent.

To be honest, Tim Kaine stepping into Hilary's shoes at this point would seal the election for the Dems.

So, ideally, for the Republicans, she has to be "sickly" but not actually sick.

Taffys
The EU are NOT about to grant visa free travel for Turkey. http://www.reuters.com/article/us-eu-turkey-visa-idUSKCN11F192

Morris_Dancer said:

The absence of a positive case for the EU was stark.

Trying to make a positive case for the EU is like listing the good things about spiders, at the end of the day they are still bleeding spiders.

NEW THREAD

YellowSubmarine said:

And we imported " Consent " via Sewell Motions in our devolution settlement. Devolved administrations have to offer or deny " legislative consent " if Westminster seeks to legislate in an area of their competence. When Carwyn Jones said they other day he wouldn't " consent " to a deal taking the UK out of the Single Market this is what he was hinting at. It was an implied threat to refuse " legislative consent " to repeal the European Communities Act 1972. Now Westminster is Soveriegn and can just amend the devolution settlements as well. Or it could fight a Supreme Court case arguing a devolved administration was acting ultra vires.

Whether Britain is or is not part of the European Union is not a devolved matter, it is a reserved matter ("reserved" being the Scottish settlement terminology, I think it is known differently in the Welsh legislation).

PlatoSaid said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Miss Plato, I misread that as "Hitler apparently stumbled..." at first. It made your post considerably more ominous.

I still can't get over her Deplorables thing - it's beyond stupid. What an inept campaign and splurging money is getting her nowhere lead wise. I wonder what she'd be polling without it and the media support?

Morris_Dancer said:

Miss Plato, the Establishment seems to be having a hard time addressing the fact a lot of people are unhappy with the status quo, have lost out under globalisation and are tired of being patronised or accused of bigotry when they express concerns about drastic levels of migration.

We saw it here. 'Little Englanders', which most here called out as ridiculous but a few Remainers thought was very clever, is the most obvious example, but there was a lot more during the campaign. The absence of a positive case for the EU was stark.

I wonder how the Italian referendum (which I think has been pushed back) and the Austrian election will go.

It's politics 101. Be rude about your opponents, by all means, but being rude about the voters does you no good. You win no prizes for getting high fives from those who are already committed to your cause.

Richard_Tyndall said:

TCPoliticalBetting said:

SouthamObserver said:

another_richard said:

SouthamObserver said:

another_richard said:

kle4 said:

another_richard said:

I notice that the Remoaners plan to flood Last Night of the Proms with thousands of EU flags was a resounding failure.

Was that a real plan, or somebody online suggesting it?

' Anti-Brexit campaigners are planning to flood the Last Night Of The Proms with thousands of EU flags following a controversial fundraising campaign.

Some 60 backers have donated £1,175 on a Crowdfunder page to buy 5,000 blue EU flags which will be handed out at the annual event at the Royal Albert Hall on Saturday night. '

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/last-night-of-the-proms-anti-brexit-fundraising-campaign-launched-to-flood-event-with-5000-eu-flags_uk_57d26c64e4b0ac5a02ddda89

Not sure 60 backers raising less than £20 is much of a story.

You might not think so but the Guardian and Independent were getting excited beforehand:

' Pro-EU music lovers have been out in force since the early hours of Saturday at the Royal Albert Hall to hand out thousands of EU flags to concertgoers before the Last Night of the Proms. '

https://www.theguardian.com/music/2016/sep/10/european-union-flags-handed-out-last-night-of-the-proms-brexit

' Campaigners are planning to fill the Royal Albert Hall with a sea of blue EU flags on the Last Night of the Proms as part of an anti-Brexit protest.

Audience members at the BBC concert traditionally wave Union Jack flags in a display of patriotic revelry to well-known anthems such as Rule Britannia, Jerusalem and Land of Hope and Glory.

But at this year’s event, which takes place on Saturday, volunteers will hand out 5,000 EU flags so concert-goers can “show UK solidarity with the EU”. '

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/last-night-of-the-proms-brexit-protest-eu-flags-bbc-albert-hall-crowdfunded-a7231546.html

Well 60 out of 16 million seems small to me!

There were a few EU flags in the Hall on camera, it looked to be a ratio of more than 10 UK flags to every 1 EU. No EU flags noticed on camera at Hyde Park and Belfast.

Thing is that there have always been EU flags there - and US, Canadian, Japanese and almost every other country under the sun. It is an International music festival and the flags were always encouraged to reflect that. I think the anti-Brexit crowd were deeply dumb to try and propose such a trick as it was meaningless against the background of the history of the Proms which have been both international and patriotic as long as I have been watching them.

Exactly.