I've repeatedly asked how'd they solve the Irish Border Problem, all I get is "Irish Border Problem?".bilateralrope wrote: ↑2020-02-01 01:35pm Have they decided on a plan for handling the Irish border yet ?
![Mr. Green :mrgreen:](./images/smilies/icon_mrgreen.gif)
Moderators: Alyrium Denryle, Edi, K. A. Pital
I've repeatedly asked how'd they solve the Irish Border Problem, all I get is "Irish Border Problem?".bilateralrope wrote: ↑2020-02-01 01:35pm Have they decided on a plan for handling the Irish border yet ?
And the UK continues to compete strongly with the US for "country most thoroughly and pointlessly fucking itself over."European fugitives could flee from the UK to their home countries as three EU countries confirm they will not extradite their own nationals to Britain now that Brexit has happened.
Austria, Germany, and Slovenia have confirmed they will not extradite their nationals to the UK during the 11-month Brexit transition period which starts tomorrow.
The UK left the EU at 11pm on Thursday, marking the end of three-and-a-half years of dramatic political turmoil.
Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.
European fugitives could seek to escape justice by fleeing to their home countries after Brexit, it has emerged.
Austria, Germany, and Slovenia confirmed they would not extradite their nationals to the UK during the 11-month transition period which starts tomorrow.
All three countries are forbidden by their own constitutions to extradite their own citizens to non-EU countries, which the UK will became on Thursday, and each country would likely to have to change its constitution in order to close the potential loophole.
It raises the prospect that a German, Austrian, or Slovenian national could commit a crime in the UK before fleeing to their respective home country, thereby escaping criminal prosecution in the UK during this year.
Currently, the UK's extradition powers are governed by the European Arrest Warrant, which EU member states are signed up to.
Once issued, it requires another member state to arrest and extradite a criminal suspect, or sentenced criminal, to the state which has issued the warrant so the person can be put on trial or detained.
The Home Office told Business Insider it expected each country to prosecute those suspected of committing crimes in their own countries.
"The European Arrest Warrant continues to apply during the Implementation Period," a spokesperson said.
"Where a Member State cannot, for reasons related to fundamental principles of their national law, surrender an own national to the UK during the Implementation period, they will be expected to take over the trial or sentence of the person concerned."
The UK will remain signed up to the European Arrest Warrant, but the three countries have notified the European Commission that complying with the treaty would be unconstitutional.
The loophole only applies to each country's own citizens. Each of the three member states will still be able to extradite UK citizens, or other EU nationals under the European Arrest Warrant during the transition period.
The UK left the EU at 11pm on Friday, marking the end of three-and-a-half years of dramatic political turmoil.
In a message which was broadcast as the UK left the EU, Prime Minister Boris Johnson said Brexit was "not an end but a beginning
In a video message filmed inside his Downing Street residence, Johnson said: "The most important thing to say tonight is that this is not an end but a beginning."
"This is the moment when the dawn breaks and the curtain goes up on a new act.
"It is a moment of real national renewal and change."
Our Brexit Insider Facebook group is the best place for up-to-date news and analysis about Britain’s departure from the EU, direct from Business Insider’s political reporters. Join here.
I'd argue the US is working (or rather, not working) exactly as Putin has intended.
Countries founded by rich people for other rich people tend to be like that. Be it the US, UK or whatever.
Elgin Marbles, other treasures to become tense point in Brexit negotiations
A long-running dispute between Britain and Greece over ancient treasures has spilled into tensions over Brexit after a demand for the return of stolen cultural artefacts was added to the draft of a European Union negotiating mandate.
The British Museum in London has refused to return the Parthenon Marbles, 2,500-year-old sculptures that British diplomat Lord Elgin removed from Athens in the early 19th century when Greece was under Ottoman Turkish rule.
A draft of the 27 EU nations' position on negotiations with Britain on their future relationship seeks the "return or restitution of unlawfully removed cultural objects to their countries of origin".
The document did not specify any cultural objects.
However, an EU diplomat said the line was added at the request of Greece, with support from Italy.
Greece's Culture Minister said last month that Athens would step up its campaign for the return of the Parthenon Marbles — also known as the Elgin Marbles — from London and expected to win more support from European peers when Brexit diminished Britain's influence.
The British Museum said the marbles, which are roughly half of a 160-metre frieze that adorned the fifth-century BC Parthenon temple, were acquired by Lord Elgin under a legal contract with the Ottoman empire. Greece said they were stolen.
A British Government spokeswoman, commenting on the draft EU document, said the UK's position on the sculptures remained that they were "the legal responsibility of the British Museum".
"That is not up for discussion as part of our trade negotiations," the spokeswoman said in a statement.
British Prime Minister Boris Johnson led the UK out of the European Union on January 31, more than three years after Britons voted in a referendum to leave.
Rhetoric between London and Brussels over the terms of their future relationship has grown sharper this month ahead of negotiations that are due to start in early March.
An EU source, who declined to be named because discussions on the negotiating mandate were confidential, said the reference to stolen artefacts was included in an earlier draft of the document last week.
The source said the reference also had support from Cyprus and Spain and that, Greece's concerns about the marbles aside, EU countries were more broadly concerned about the illegal trade of artefacts through London auction houses.
“Absolute disaster”: The UK’s social care sector reacts to the post-Brexit immigration system
LondonFebruary 19, 2020
Annabelle Timsit
By Annabelle Timsit
Geopolitics reporter
Representatives of Britain’s social care sector—an industry made up of professionals who look after those who cannot look after themselves, such as the disabled or the elderly—reacted badly today (Feb. 19) to the British government’s new post-Brexit immigration plan. “An absolute disaster,” is one description. “A difficult pill to swallow,” another.
Under the plan, workers hoping to immigrate to the UK after Dec. 31, 2020—the date at which the “transitional period” of Brexit ends—will be assigned points based on their specific skills, professional and academic qualifications, and job prospects in the UK. Work visas will only be given to those who meet the first three requirements—meaning they speak English and have a job offer in the UK that matches their skill level—and have at least 70 points overall.
Home secretary Priti Patel announced the new system, saying it would “open up the UK to the brightest and the best from around the world.” The system reflects many of the grievances that propelled the Brexit referendum and helped elect Boris Johnson to government: It favors high-skilled migrants over low-skilled ones and considers EU and non-EU citizens equally.
While EU nationals who currently live and work in the UK can stay in the country after Dec. 31, experts say the new rules would make it impossible for most low-skilled EU migrants to come to the UK after that date. The government estimates that “70% of the existing EU workforce would not meet the requirements of the skilled worker route.”
Britain’s social care crisis
This is a problem for Britain’s social care sector, which overwhelmingly relies on low-skilled foreign workers to plug existing gaps and meet the rising demand from an aging population. Sadiq Khan, the mayor of London, has already expressed his concern over these vital services:
“We were really anxious that there would be some kind of provision to enable migration for that sector to continue,” said Mark Dayan, who leads the program on Brexit at the Nuffield Trust, a research group dedicated to healthcare policy in the UK. “Unfortunately, we haven’t seen that at all.”
The social care sector is severely under-funded in the UK, and successive Labour and Conservative governments have promised and failed to fix it. Boris Johnson has also promised to “fix the crisis in social care once and for all.” Meanwhile, under-staffing and under-budgeting in social care have affected the National Health Service (NHS), Britain’s sprawling public healthcare system, as vulnerable people who are otherwise well take up NHS beds because there is no one to care for them at home.
The new immigration plan makes provisions for recruiting “shortage occupations,” like nurses and doctors, into the NHS. It also has a separate track for top scientists and seasonal agricultural workers.
But, as Suzie Bailey, director of leadership and organizational development at The King’s Fund, a health-related think tank, points out in a statement, “the NHS workforce is only half the story; with more than 120,000 vacancies in social care, many people are struggling to access the support they need to live independently and avoid long stays in hospital.”
Bailey argues that, in the absence of workers from the EU to fill gaps in the UK, “the social care sector would need to significantly improve care worker pay and conditions to attract more home-grown staff.” But, as Dayan points out, “Nobody should underestimate how difficult it will be to put those resources in, because you’re effectively giving more money to a sector that needs a lot more money anyways.”
It is not clear if there is any more money available, as the government has already committed to spending £33.9 billion ($44 billion) per year on the NHS by 2024 and investing £2.8 billion to build or upgrade NHS hospitals.
The world is aging and the prevalence of age-related diseases (pdf) like dementia continues to climb. Experts have made it clear that social care is a necessary part of the solution to this global challenge. But with its latest immigration plan, it’s not clear that the UK has understood the message.
Additionally, a report in the Independent has Bojo apparently reneging on the withdrawal agreement, with particular reference to Northern Ireland, on the basis that manifesto commitments override said agreement.UK says it will consider walking away from Brexit talks in June
Negotiating mandate reveals Johnson seeks Canada-style deal and ‘regulatory freedom’
Rowena Mason Deputy political editor
Thu 27 Feb 2020 10.33 GMT
Boris Johnson is saying Britain will not accept any role for the ECJ in dispute resolution mechanisms.
Boris Johnson is asking the EU for a Canada-style trade deal but will consider whether to walk away from talks in June and prepare for an “orderly” exit from the transition period.
Setting out its negotiating mandate for EU talks, Downing Street said it wanted “regulatory freedom” from the EU and would not accept any role for the European court of justice (ECJ) in dispute resolution mechanisms.
The government said it hoped to achieve “the broad outline” of an agreement by June with the aim of finalising a deal by September. But it said that if not enough progress has been made by June, then the government would “need to decide whether the UK’s attention should move away from negotiations and focus solely on continuing domestic preparations to exit the transition period in an orderly fashion”.
The UK’s demands put it at odds with the EU, which wants some degree of regulatory alignment, with the option of imposing tariffs if one side reneges. It would also like a role for the ECJ.
Downing Street says this goes further in restricting the UK’s sovereignty than the EU’s offers to other nations such as Japan, Canada and the US.
The UK’s negotiating mandate asks that:
• A liberalised market for trade in goods, with no tariffs, fees, charges or quantitative restrictions on trade in manufactured or agricultural products.
• Competition and subsidies should not be subject to the final agreement’s dispute resolution mechanism, which had been previously signalled in the political declaration.
• A separate agreement on fisheries that would allow for annual negotiations on access to each other’s waters including allowable catch and shares. The EU wants fishing to be considered as part of the overall agreement.
• An agreement on equivalence on financial services to be decided before the end of June.
The UK rejected the EU’s negotiating mandate when it was set out on Tuesday. Downing Street said it did not recognise the need for a “level playing field” for competition.
It said Brussels was trying to impose “onerous commitments” that would undermine the UK’s legal autonomy and right to set its own regulations.
In return, Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief negotiator, told reporters on Tuesday the EU would “not conclude an agreement at any price”.
He warned that if there was to be any chance of a deal by the end of the year, there could be no “backtracking” by the UK on past commitments made in the withdrawal agreement and the accompanying political declaration.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... ks-in-june
With us all working from home, that could yet happen.His Divine Shadow wrote: ↑2020-04-01 04:18am Ho hum ho hum... The state of the UK in 2020... Conservatives nationalized passenger rail, implementering massive stimulus and government intervention in the economy. I know they said Jeremy Corbyn decided the government agenda from the opposition benches but this is getting silly now. What next, Boris nationalizes the broadband companies?
I am interested to see what Brexiters think about the proposal to delay Brexit. On one hand it seems reasonable given the extent of the coronavirus pandemic, but on the other, Brexit seemed to have been delayed for so long, that I can understand this might seem like another attempt to delay what the public voted for.EU pushes Britain to extend Brexit talks over virus outbreak
Gabriela Baczynska
4 MIN READ
BRUSSELS (Reuters) - The European Union expects Britain to seek an extension of its post-Brexit transition period beyond the end of the year, diplomats and officials said on Monday, as negotiations on trade have ground to a halt due to the coronavirus pandemic.
Europe has gone into a deep lockdown in a bid to curb the spread of the disease, with more than 330,000 infections reported on the continent and nearly 21,000 deaths.
In Britain, Prime Minister Boris Johnson and his health minister have both tested positive for the virus and the prime minister’s senior adviser Dominic Cummings - one of the masterminds behind Britain’s departure from the EU earlier this year - was self-isolating with symptoms.
“The coronavirus pandemic complicates the already very ambitious schedule,” said David McAllister, a conservative German EU lawmaker who chairs the European Parliament’s Brexit group.
“The EU has always been open to extending the transition period. The ball is now clearly in the British court ... So far, the UK government has constantly rejected such an option. Under the current circumstances, London should carefully re-examine a prolongation.”
London and the EU have been seeking to agree a new trade pact by the end of the year to kick in from 2021, even though the bloc has long said that such a timeframe was extremely short to agree rules on everything from trade to security to fisheries.
EU diplomats said on Monday they expected a request from London in May or June.
Johnson has ruled out delaying the date when Brexit would finally take effect following Britain’s 2016 vote to leave, and said London was also ready to withdraw from its current cooperation accords at end-year without a new deal.
His spokesman repeated on Monday the deadline for the transition ended on Dec. 31 and “this is enshrined in law”.
“We have shared legal texts and they are the subject of informal discussions between ourselves and the EU commission ... I would expect those sorts of conversations to be carrying on this week,” he told reporters.
“The structure of the negotiations has changed to reflect the current situation with regard to coronavirus, so there are more continuous discussions taking place rather than the set rounds which were originally envisaged.”
PANDEMIC SAPPING ENERGY
Sources on both sides of the English Channel said tackling the pandemic was sapping political energy and government resources to the detriment of Brexit negotiations.
Several British civil service sources told Reuters many officials previously focusing on the Brexit talks have been shifted to teams dealing with the outbreak.
In Brussels, diplomats and officials said there have been no formal negotiations since the sides exchanged their drafts of a new trade agreement in mid-March, though some contacts between officials were taking place to exchange views on the documents.
“It’s increasingly obvious the transition period will have to be extended,” said an EU diplomat. “It’s a matter of political momentum - when things get so bad in Britain that Johnson can do a U-turn and say he is prioritising saving lives and hence delays Brexit.”
Both sides would have to agree by the end of June on the extra time of one or two years. In Britain, parliament has passed laws ruling that out.
As if they've been smart about anything else Brexit related so far.....EnterpriseSovereign wrote: ↑2020-04-05 03:23pm They were never going to make the end of the year even without the outbreak, with it's completely impossible. With the world shut down, really they have no alternative but to extend the transition period. If they're smart about it they'll just quietly extend while everyone's attention is elsewhere.
It's a long thread, and it's not pretty.I've spent hours going through the leaked Labour document. Below is a thread of all the evidence I have found (so far) that shows senior staffers and party HQ damaging, undermining and abusing Corbyn, his allies and the Left.
The fact that they were working so diligently to try to tank the political prospects of the party they nominally belonged to says a lot. And if this is all coming out about the 2017 election, I can almost guarantee that they probably doubled down in the most recent one, with apparently better results.His Divine Shadow wrote: ↑2020-04-15 08:31am And it won't make any waves at all despite being a massive scandal.
Well it certainly wins you elections. But winning elections and governing the country well is entirely separate issue. In part, that's the underlying issue of democracy.
Its a symptom, mostly of rabid racism and xenphobia, and a cause, of a great deal of chaos and instability.
And also of under-investment in many areas of the UK.The Romulan Republic wrote: ↑2020-04-16 04:15pm Its a symptom, mostly of rabid racism and xenphobia, and a cause, of a great deal of chaos and instability.