Lloyds Banking Share Discussion Threads

[stonedyou] 19/10/2019 09:30

Lovely what!!!!


3.The European Court of Justice is decreed to be our highest court, governing the entire Agreement


4.The jurisdiction of the ECJ will last until eight years after the end of the transition period. (Article 158).

[grahamite2] 19/10/2019 09:11

Steve Baker and Mark Francois have both come out in favour of Boris's deal.

That should be enough for any reasonable person.

[stonedyou] 19/10/2019 08:33

3. Prevents an independent tax policy

The Political Declaration still obliges the UK to adopt a future relationship

which will impose EU State Aid rules and "relevant tax matters" on the UK (para

77), the EU specifically intends to curb the UK's ability to have "harmful tax

practices", the Withdrawal Treaty also applies EU law to the UK during the

transition period (Article 127) - allowing the EU to sue the UK, including

infringement proceedings for: as yet unidentified breaches of State Aid rules

(which can take the form of tax exemptions); and billions in unpaid VAT on

commodity derivative transactions dating back to the 1970s (Articles 86 and 93).

[stonedyou] 19/10/2019 08:32

2. Restricts independent trade policy

Although there is no longer any reference in the Political Declaration

to "building on the customs territory" the new provisions may still create

difficulties for the UK in agreeing trade deals because any FTA with the EU must

satisfy principles and objectives that include "ensuring a level playing field for

open and fair competition" (para 17) and "deep regulatory and customs cooperation"

(para 21). This will make it difficult for the UK to reduce non-tariff barriers as

a means to facilitate a trade deal with a third country - particularly the United

States.

The Political Declaration requires that a FTA "ensure no tariffs, fees, charges or

quantitative restrictions across all sectors with... ambitious customs objectives

that are in line with the Parties' objectives and principles" (para 22). This does

not exclude the possibility of a Customs Union. It is not clear how the UK could

protect its industries against dumping by third countries with which the EU has FTAs.

The problem also remains that there is no definition in the Withdrawal Treaty for the word "goods"

and so its scope will be interpreted as the ECJ determines from time to time (Articles 127, 184).

[xxxxxy] 19/10/2019 08:28

At the end of the day, we will say,Two cheets for Democracy.The People have to keep pushing to take the EUSSR shackles off.

[xxxxxy] 19/10/2019 07:56

What is a fair and effective Act of Parliament?

By JOHNREDWOOD | Published: OCTOBER 19, 2019

The criminal law in our country has for long been a mixture of common law principles and decisions by judges, and Statute law where Parliament legislates to clarify and guide common law practice.

There have been various disagreements between the courts and Parliament over the law. In the end Parliament can legislate to change the law for the future despite a previous pattern of judgements or in place of established court principles. In that sense Statute law is superior law.

In effect though courts still retain powers especially if the law may be unclear as drafted by Parliament or it may be unenforceable. Whilst Statute law is usually supreme, both courts and Parliament have to recognise there are limits to their respective powers to move the law in the way they wish.

Today given the fluid and uncertain constitutional background created by Remain campaigners and lawyers, we need to ask are there any limits on what laws Parliament can pass? Let us take three prospective cases of possible Acts of Parliament.

The first, “The Sunny Sundays Act” would widely be recognised as bad law. This Act states the government must ensure every Sunday is sunny so people can enjoy their day off. Any such idea would be void as it is unenforceable, as government does not have the power to ensure it happens.

The second, “The reduction of rough sleeping Act” is a bit more difficult. This Act says that the Prime Minister has to sleep rough once a week until Parliament thinks he or she has done enough to curb rough sleeping and passes a motion accordingly. Surely this too should be void, as it infringes the human rights of the Prime Minister and puts that office holder at security risks out on the streets.

The third is “The breaking of the Prime Minister’s promises Act” which requires the Prime Minister to reverse certain specified policies he had set out and campaigned for, because opposition forces in Parliament do not like them. The opposition with a small temporary majority got this through in order to undermine the Prime Minister’s popularity. Is this a fair and enforceable Act? Isn’t our constitutional way of dealing with a PM who no longer commands a majority to remove him by a vote of No Confidence?

These hypothetical proposals show the difficulties of having a minority government and taking away from it the sole right to initiate legislation. The country can become ungovernable with a headstrong Parliament that cannot supply a majority government yet refuses an election.

[corpbull] 19/10/2019 06:40

BORIS HAS BETRAYED QUEEN AND COUNTRY!

www.brugesgroup.com/blog/the-revised-withdrawal-agreement-and-political-declaration-a-briefing-note

[maxk] 19/10/2019 00:22

I know its been mentioned, but you really have to look at what Boris's deal entails.

[leoneobull] 18/10/2019 22:26

So what shall we call BoJo's new deal? The Surrender Deal, the Do or Die Deal or the Panic Deal?

[cheshire pete] 18/10/2019 22:23

Debate in the HofC should be interesting tomorrow. If an extension is forced on Boris, we could yet find out if he really is prepared to leave with no deal after playing his ace. If he is and he does he will get massive popular support at the GE.

[leoneobull] 18/10/2019 22:04

"Feeling quite smug this evening, I replied to a leaver post that said MP's should support Boris' deal because it finally gets us out of the EU - I replied, Brexiteers are so desperate for a deal Michael Palin could put a dead parrot on the counter and if he called it Brexit they would think it was a good deal".Chapeau