Britain waives the Rules - Reneging on the WA?

[Notch7]

How many organisation work out of that same address

At least 8

The residents of 55 Tufton Street
• Global Warming Policy Foundation
Set up by Lord Lawson, the foundation is under review by the Charity Commission after one of its leading advisers – Professor William Happer, of Princeton University – was revealed in an undercover sting offering to write an academic paper casting doubt on global warming on behalf of a shame oil company.

• Global Vision
Argues that the regulatory burden of the EU holds back the City of London from reaching its potential and has a detrimental effect on business. It says Britain should leave the EU and negotiate a trading agreement with it.

• The European Foundation
Best known for publishing a report in 2009 arguing that global warming was natural and that there was no proof that human influence had anything to do with it. The group is led by the Tory MP Bill Cash, who has previously served as a vice-president of Eurosceptic campaign group Conservatives for Britain.

• Civitas
This think tank describes itself as ‘classical liberal’ and non-partisan. It is committed to strengthening democracy, upholding limited government, maintaining personal freedom and encouraging free enterprise.


Taxpayers alliance
Known for advocating low taxes, this think tank has criticised renewable energy subsidies and is campaigning for greater British independence.

• Business for Britain
The group argues for fundamental changes to be made to the terms of EU membership. It is led by Matthew Elliott, who also founded the Taxpayers’ Alliance.

• Big Brother Watch
Set up in 2009 to expose the true scale of surveillance in the UK and to challenge the policies it says threaten our privacy, freedoms and civil liberties. It campaigns for more control over personal data.

• UK2020
This think tank is chaired by Owen Paterson, the former Conservative Environment Secretary regarded by many as being a climate sceptic. Among other things the group is calling for ‘a robust, common sense energy policy that would encourage the market to choose affordable technologies to reduce emissions’. These technologies include shale gas and small modular nuclear reactors

 

[fillyboy]

that is a distortion, not surprising as you are quoting from a brexit misinformation site.

Para 74 actually says: "The Parties will use their best endeavours to conclude and ratify their new fisheries agreement....."

and the UK have not been using their nest endeavours, they havent been negotiating at all, just running down the clock.

I know exactly what para 74 says, I've read it, which is more than most on here.

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-political/files/revised_political_declaration.pdf

74. The Parties will use their best endeavours to conclude and ratify their new fisheries agreement by 1 July 2020 in order for it to be in place in time to be used for determining fishing opportunities for the first year after the transition period.

 

[fillyboy]

Where do you get your ******** from? It has been clearly agreed that it would be breaking international law. Which is illegal under our laws.

You would benefit from reading the full text of what Brandon Lewis actually said rather than pull out one line, follow that by reading Article 62 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.
Off you jog.

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

... follow that by reading Article 62 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.

No need

That may suggest, says Catherine Barnard, Professor of Law at the University of Cambridge, that the government is looking at Article 62 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, which enables a state to get out of its treaty obligations when circumstances change radically.

But those changed circumstances have to be pretty dramatic - something like the dissolution of Yugoslavia, when a recognised country ceases to exist.

In the case of the Northern Ireland Protocol, it is less than a year since the government negotiated the treaty in full knowledge of the sensitivity of the situation.

And if the government does go ahead with legislation which appears to contradict the withdrawal agreement?

"There is a chance," says Prof Barnard, "that the EU will decide to trigger the dispute resolution mechanism in the withdrawal agreement, which could lead to arbitration and a case before the European Court of Justice."
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-54073836​

Boris should have read the small print!

He's just resigned.

 

[fillyboy]

"There is a chance," says Prof Barnard, "that the EU will decide to trigger the dispute resolution mechanism in the withdrawal agreement, which could lead to arbitration and a case before the European Court of Justice."

 

[IT Minion]

You would benefit from reading the full text of what Brandon Lewis actually said rather than pull out one line, follow that by reading Article 62 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.
Off you jog.

Pass on links to either and I will (probably just skim 62 unless you can recommend a line). I'm nice like that.

Sadly your quote was *******s (misleading), as was your statement (flat out wrong). You're a bit thin on credibility.

 

[Notch7]

I know exactly what para 74 says, I've read it, which is more than most on here.

but you quoted from a brexit think tank that deliberately changed "the parties to "the EU"

so where has the UK used "best endeavours"?

 

[Notch7]

Article 62 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.

this is another Boris "GATT 24" moment

 

[fillyboy]

but you quoted from a brexit think tank that deliberately changed "the parties to "the EU"

so where has the UK used "best endeavours"?

Err surely the EU and the UK are both parties so no mis-representation there.
Where has the EU used 'best endeavours', they want control of our sovereign waters and refuse to budge from that position.

 

[IT Minion]

Err surely the EU and the UK are both parties so no mis-representation there.
Where has the EU used 'best endeavours', they want control of our sovereign waters and refuse to budge from that position.

Where have we used best endeavours? We want to have unfettered state aid rules and refuse to even explain what limits we might accept.

 

[Notch7]

Where has the EU used 'best endeavours', they want control of our sovereign waters and refuse to budge from that position.

quite simply this:
Within the context of the overall economic partnership the Parties should establish a new fisheries agreement on, inter alia, access to waters and quota shares.

it clearly states: access to waters.

and you are arguing that its not fair the EU are expecting access to our waters.....well its in black and white in the the PD that they can. So clearly they using best endeavours

 

[Notch7]

Err surely the EU and the UK are both parties so no mis-representation there.

but your quote from CAPx said this:

let’s not forget that under the terms of the Political Declaration, under Paragraph 74 the EU was meant to use its “best endeavours”

Read more: https://www.diynot.com/diy/threads/...eneging-on-the-wa.552348/page-7#ixzz6XTjV3lWL

 

[Ryler]

it clearly states: access to waters.

That refers to our access rights to european waters.
Nothing to do with the eu stealing our fish boyo.

 

[Ryler]

So clearly they using best endeavours

They have never used best endeavors.
You are desperately hanging to their coat tails.

 

[Notch7]

That refers to our access rights to european waters.
Nothing to do with the eu stealing our fish boyo.

no it does not.

it is an agreement between EU and UK.... it means what it says "access to waters"