Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
The controlling BREXIT legislation is European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018.

horshit: "Johnson's promises to find a way out of the backstop mechanism for Northern Ireland, the main sticking point." HoC forgot about breaking this law.
See
Main powers in connection with withdrawal 9. Implementing the withdrawal agreement;
Devolution 10. Continuation of North-South co-operation and the prevention of new border arrangements;
Parliamentary approval of outcome of EU negotiations 13.Parliamentary approval of the outcome of negotiations with the EU

horshit: "unprecedented constitutional crisis if he tried to defy the law passed last week and not seek a Brexit extension." HoC forgot about breaking this law.
See
SCHEDULE 7, Part 2, Scrutiny of other powers under Act. ¶14, Power to amend the UK [!] definition of TEU "exit day"; European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2019 regulating "exit day" 29 Mar => 12 Apr => 22 May => 30 June => 31 Oct

horshit: "The purpose of the Bill is simple: to ensure that the United Kingdom does not leave the European Union on 31 October without an agreement." Actual non sequitur.
See European Union (Withdrawal) (No. 6) Bill (HC Bill 433), "exit day"
Form letter set out in the Schedule to this Act to obtain extension

...I am writing therefore to inform the European Council that the United Kingdom is seeking a further extension to the period provided under Article 50(3) of the Treaty on European Union, including as applied by Article 106a of the Euratom Treaty...
I'm sure, BoJo could not say, "We don't give a damn," any cruder.

Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.
by Cat on Mon Sep 9th, 2019 at 01:53:02 AM EST
If only I understood law the way you do, I might understand your comment.

Things are going to slide, slide in all directions
Won't be nothing
Nothing you can measure anymore
L. Cohen
by john_evans (john(dot)evans(dot)et(at)gmail(dot)com) on Mon Sep 9th, 2019 at 06:47:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]
European Union (Withdrawal) (No. 6) Bill (HC Bill 433) in it's entirety is linked above.

That's the bill Phil is supposed to have read for you so you don't have to. It regulates debate, passage, and receipt of HoC's requested "exit date" by Minister of the Crown .

That's the bill that replaces Yvette's bill which forgot the requested "exit date," so T. May took a stab at it several times, only to be schooled by EU Council.

That's the bill that expressly prescribes the HoC FORM LETTER < wipes tears > Bojo must deliver, or purportedly risk criminal charge, to the President of the Council. Please, note, HoC explanation in it of "sufficient progress" toward ratification of the WA.

See controlling UK leg, European Union (Withdrawal) Act of 2018. You remember that? It spawned "1,000" UK regulations of separation in the background of horshit on the yella sheets.

Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.

by Cat on Mon Sep 9th, 2019 at 03:06:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Did you read the law yet?

Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.
by Cat on Mon Sep 9th, 2019 at 06:42:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]
the sections you link to, of the Act and the Bill (enacted yesterday). I can't see what motivates your peremptory judgements. I don't see why you qualify a number of things as horseshit. In fact, I don't know what you mean to say. How about trying to say things simply, you know, like for dummies?

On a point of vocabulary: yella sheets to me means criminal records. What do you mean by it? Are you referring to the yellow press, that in Britain is generally called tabloid?

Things are going to slide, slide in all directions
Won't be nothing
Nothing you can measure anymore
L. Cohen

by john_evans (john(dot)evans(dot)et(at)gmail(dot)com) on Tue Sep 10th, 2019 at 08:12:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Good. I offered the index and pertinent citations of legislation at issue in press reporting.

What I quoted are from the DW article posted in the prompt above --which you've also read-- except for the Hansard transcript lede, which I linked in my comment. horshit signifies my informed observation: Reportage alleging "rule of law," procedural or criminal conduct, does not demonstrably rely on relevant code as enacted by HoC. Much of current and past reportage contradicts specific code as enacted by HoC, a most conspicuous example being, legal prohibition of barriers established by UK gov at NI border with IE.

Another being the FORM LETTER, "and other purposes," prescribed by the European Union (Withdrawal) (No. 6) Bill (HC Bill 433) which contravenes as written, prima facie, EU stipulated merits of a successful petition by UK gov of A.50 extension pursuant to "exit day". UK yella sheet amateur and expert opinion, however, proceeds to "criminalize" any amendment to that instrument before any has been proffered by either Minister of the Crown or HoC "debate" stenographers. Such events have not occurred.

Consider before proceeding a recent, scarcely earnest disclaimer or correction of "myths", published by the Guardian.

Of course, I preempt suspicion, rumor, and "plain bullshit."  I have reason to distrust journalism purporting to report facts--especially in this "high tech" period--that are self-referential. There really is no good excuse to omit a hyperlink to public source material, namely the bill or law disputed.

Although I have been informed that I have "no right to be read," I nonetheless encourage everyone to familiarize themselves--republican or democrat--with the construction and language of of legislative acts (law) in the jurisdiction where they domicile. I, reading for you, would defeat the purpose of you practicing how not to be led by the nose of UNCERTAINTY of TRUTH, TRADITION, and JUSTICE prportedly thought by a populus, ironically, to distinguish "rule of law" from primitive civilizations.

DICTION CORNER
yella sheet (US-Eng., idiom) a pejorative specification for a daily publication given to "yellow journalism"; publicizing sensational, likely defamatory, and gruesome narratives of events which may or may not be true, eg. the New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, *Telegraph(s), possibly related to yella dog Democratic Party members

[MASTHEAD] blotter (US-Eng., colloquial) a daily newspaper given to publicizing records of local police activities.

Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.

by Cat on Tue Sep 10th, 2019 at 04:54:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Did you make an attempt at writing for dummies yet?

Things are going to slide, slide in all directions
Won't be nothing
Nothing you can measure anymore
L. Cohen
by john_evans (john(dot)evans(dot)et(at)gmail(dot)com) on Tue Sep 10th, 2019 at 05:54:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]
as I am replying to you.

Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.
by Cat on Tue Sep 10th, 2019 at 06:02:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]
We all have our inner dummy...

Sincerely, the combination of legal-instrument technicality with repetitive idiomatic expressions which characterises your diction is, to say the least, disconcerting. I find myself thinking wut? (sorry, what?) as in, what does this mean, what is Cat driving at?

An example that I think (could be wrong) is central to what you're saying here is this:

Reportage alleging "rule of law," procedural or criminal conduct, does not demonstrably rely on relevant code as enacted by HoC...

UK yella sheet amateur and expert opinion, however, proceeds to "criminalize"...

Does this (my comment here) fall under those headings:

A former Supreme Court justice has also said it would not be legal for Boris Johnson to apply for a Brexit extension while simultaneously trying to get the EU to reject it in a second letter.

Lord Sumption was asked if it would be legal for the PM to do so.

He told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "No, of course it wouldn't. The Bill, or Act as it's about to become, says that he's got to apply for an extension. Not only has he got to send the letter, he's got to apply for an extension.

"To send the letter and then try to neutralise it seems to me, plainly, a breach of the Act. What you've got to realise is the courts are not very fond of loopholes."

That's verbatim commentary, unsullied by journalism yellow or otherwise,  from one of Britain's highest authorities on the law. The form letter is presumably there to prevent any chicanery in the expression of the application, but the essential point is that the PM must apply for an extension.

As for the legitimacy of a law that lays an obligation on the executive, the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018, that you so rightly draw our attention to, abounds in instances of obligation: "a Minister of the Crown must... A Minister of the Crown must... A Minister of the Crown must...". In the case of the newly enacted law, we have

"The Prime Minister must seek to obtain from the European Council an
extension of the period under Article 50(3) of the Treaty on European Union
ending at 11.00pm on 31 October 2019 by sending to the President of the
European Council a letter in the form set out in the Schedule to this Act
requesting an extension of that period to 11.00pm on 31 January 2020."

What exactly is wrong with suggestions that the PM would be breaking the law if he (as he has publicly stated he will) refused to comply with this obligation? Is the Act itself corrupt and incapable of withstanding scrutiny in the courts, or does the PM, in your reading, simply have the power to do as he wishes without consequences? If you see a weakness or loophole in the Act, please share!

Things are going to slide, slide in all directions
Won't be nothing
Nothing you can measure anymore
L. Cohen

by john_evans (john(dot)evans(dot)et(at)gmail(dot)com) on Tue Sep 10th, 2019 at 07:30:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]
What exactly is wrong with suggestions that the PM would be breaking the law if ...?

I will reply with reference to relevant facts, law, and scrutiny of BoJo's hypothetical offense in a diary entry.

Because even I couldn't easily re-locate this comment!

Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.

by Cat on Tue Sep 10th, 2019 at 10:50:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]
If it's this comment, here's a different link.

Things are going to slide, slide in all directions
Won't be nothing
Nothing you can measure anymore
L. Cohen
by john_evans (john(dot)evans(dot)et(at)gmail(dot)com) on Wed Sep 11th, 2019 at 05:56:30 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Are you alluding to the fact that Parliament would also have to amend the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 to give effect to any extension of the A.50 as requested by the PM under  the European Union (Withdrawal) (No. 2) Act 2019?

I'm sure if there is a majority for one change, there will be a majority for the other. I'm also sure BoJo will seek to find some legal loophole whereby he will be able to avoid the provisions of either.

What also seems in little doubt is that a no-deal Brexit will be legally chaotic and there may not be a Parliamentary majority for all sorts of enabling legislation which will be required to give effect to a proper transfer of powers from the EU to the UK.

Just the sort of legal chaos beloved of disaster capitalists...

Index of Frank's Diaries

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Mon Sep 9th, 2019 at 08:05:10 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I'm not alluding.

Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.
by Cat on Mon Sep 9th, 2019 at 03:07:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Top Diaries

Occasional Series