Brexit, for once some facts.

[oldgroaner]

Cummings is having a whale of a time, with stunts to inflame the right wing press and discredit opposition

1. Walkouts of Mp's in the HOC
2. Press printing lies spoon fed to them and clearly patterned
3. BBC broadcasting too playing down the size of the Anti Brexit Demo
4. Staging Harassment situations with unnecessary police presence
5. Getting Boris to pull the childish refusal to comply with the law to appeal to the dimmer voters.
6. Trying to get the courts involved by making Boris appear a noble victim

What stunt next will he try next? Burn the Reichstag?

 

[oldgroaner]

No flecc, I don't think there is any evidence from any authoritive EU source,that it will be considered. I expect that EU lawyers will be mulling this over today and tomorrow. They have a signed letter from the PM .That must take precedence over anything else. The EU tends to use an odd phrase... "In conformance with the constitutional norms" of the country.
I can see EU ambassadors discussing potential scenarios in private

The constitutional norms of this country do not empower the PM to flout the law, the letter signed by Boris that says he doesn't want a delay is of no more significance than a piece of used toilet paper.

 

[Danidl]

Actually you are replying to me! but never mind

..No. it was a question that 50 had posed two days ago,and to which I had given an inaccurate answer. I had assumed that the only change was the backstop

 

[flecc]

An anonymous letter does not constitute a request as no one can prove it isn't a forgery. And the act requires him to SEEK TO OBTAIN not hinder, a clear breach of the law if ever there was one.

As I've posted, the EU are treating it as a request, remember it came from the Cabinet Office through a secure official channel, undoubtedly electronically since the Royal Mail aren't that quick. So there couldn't be a received physical signature but that's still legal these days. I send secure electronic communications to my bank and they to me, and they are legally binding.

So we may get an extension whether we like it or not. In any case the courts have confirmed that they can verify the request, as can The Speaker.

Try cashing a Cheque without authorisation

Actually it's been successfully done many times as the complaints about it have verified. Again it's because the cheque content is internally transmitted electronically, paying in slips too.
.

 

[oldgroaner]

..No. it was a question that 50 had posed two days ago,and to which I had given an inaccurate answer. I had assumed that the only change was the backstop

Sorry but this is your post

• #65,130

oldgroaner said:
Reading again May's deal contained this
"“fundamental rights at work, occupational health and safety, fair working conditions and employment standards ... [the parties] shall ensure that the level of protection provided for by law, regulations and practices is not reduced below the level provided by the common standards applicable within the Union and the United Kingdom”. .

That paragraph is deleted in Boris Johnson's deal.
Any labour MP who votes for it should be deselected.

So Sorry 50 I had assumed , as did virtually everyone else, that the BJ Deal was identical to the May deal except for the Backstop elements. This is sharp practice at a level unacceptable in European parliamentary systems. The USA is full of these pork barrel clauses in their legislation..but it is not the norm in Europe. We would view this as an attempt to mislead parliament

You were replying to me!

 

[Danidl]

Sorry but this is your post

• #65,130

So Sorry 50 I had assumed , as did virtually everyone else, that the BJ Deal was identical to the May deal except for the Backstop elements. This is sharp practice at a level unacceptable in European parliamentary systems. The USA is full of these pork barrel clauses in their legislation..but it is not the norm in Europe. We would view this as an attempt to mislead parliament

You were replying to me!
[/QUOT

We are at cross purposes here. Yes ,it was your post,but I was using it as a vehicle to answer an erroneous response I had made to a question by 50 two days ago.

 

[Zlatan]

EU will refuse an extension
BJ will then confront parliament with a vote on his deal or No Deal,which by that time will be the only alternatives. I wonder which will get through.
Its all been planned, and I suspect with EU knowledge.
Time will tell.

 

[oldgroaner]

Part of the propaganda was that a photocopy of Boris's letter had been sent

Clever photocopier that changes spacing and fonts!
And the rest of the letter doesn't contain any mention of telling the EU not to comply

Interesting the address must be wrong, there is no mention of dying in a ditch

 

[oldgroaner]

We are at cross purposes here. Yes ,it was your post,but I was using it as a vehicle to answer an erroneous response I had made to a question by 50 two days ago.

Fair enough!

 

[flecc]

I can see EU ambassadors discussing potential scenarios in private

That's a guess or you have paranormal vision.

Donald Tusk has personally Tweeted that he has received the request and is now consulting the EU leaders about the request.

I don't see anyone in the EU disputing his move, and no-one here realistically can in view of the Benn Act law.

As I've inferred, it's a fait accompli whether Johnson has signed or not, since either of the other verification sources are inevitable if required and requested.
.

 

[daveboy]

An anonymous letter does not constitute a request as no one can prove it isn't a forgery
Try cashing a Cheque without authorisation
And the act requires him to SEEK TO OBTAIN not hinder, a clear breach of the law if ever there was one.

I've just requested an insurance renewal online.....never signed a thing.
The important thing is whether the EU accept it or not.

 

[flecc]

Part of the propaganda was that a photocopy of Boris's letter had been sent

Clever photocopier that changes spacing and fonts!

As I posted, the request was undoubtedly sent on a secure official electronic channel. Any photocopy cannot be of the received electronic message, it can only be a photocopy of a draft.

You may have both there, a print out of the transmitted message and a photocopy of a draft.
.

 

[oldgroaner]

As I posted, the request was undoubtedly sent on a secure official electronic channel. Any photocopy cannot be of the received electronic message, it can only be a photocopy of a draft.

You may have both there, a print out of the transmitted message and a photocopy of a draft.
.

It appears that the form on the right is of the approved format of internal EU documents according to one tweeter.
So it would appear to have been converted before sending.

 

[oldgroaner]

I've just requested an insurance renewal online.....never signed a thing.
The important thing is whether the EU accept it or not.

Did the EU offer you a cheaper premium?
(just kidding!)

 

[oldgroaner]

It's such a shame for that ditch, it could have become a place of pilgrimage

 

[oldgroaner]

Oh Dear oh Dear, just found Proof Boris has Broken the law

Time to have this creature in court

 

[flecc]

It's such a shame for that ditch, it could have become a place of pilgrimage

The one certain thing BJ ditches is principles.

I wonder how the Tory old dears who voted him into being PM feel now about him "living in sin" with his girlfriend (as they would see it) in 10 Downing Street.
.

 

[flecc]

Oh Dear oh Dear, just found Proof Boris has Broken the law
Time to have this creature in court

Probably not necessary. Note that he wrote the UK permanent representative would submit the mandated request, not himself. That should satisfy the legal requirement since he has clearly approved that step and the PM doesn't have to send the request. It only has to be officially approved by him
.

 

[Danidl]

Probably not necessary. Note that he wrote the UK permanent representative would submit the mandated request, not himself. That should satisfy the legal requirement since he has clearly approved that step and the PM doesn't have to send the request. It only has to be officially approved by him
.

Well in this case he has complied with the Law. He are directed his creature / agent in Brussels,to do an action in a letter signed by his hand.
Mind you I can agree with him that any additional delay will further damage relationships, but unsaid is that a no deal crashout will damage them more. Nor has he admitted that his tinkering with the May Agreement in ways not published, or generally known,is what contributed to the decision in Parliament not to give him a blank cheque

 

[oldgroaner]

Well in this case he has complied with the Law. He are directed his creature / agent in Brussels,to do an action in a letter signed by his hand.

Really? where it the letter signed by his hand that does that? the letter signed by his hand does no such thing.
He has clearly stated that he is against it.
This needs to be tested in court, it is far too serious a breach of trust to be brushed under the carpet.
He was ordered to "Seek" an extension, no ifs, buts or maybe's and he deliberately tried to persuade the EU not to comply.
That is treacherous behaviour.