Getting the week off to a terrible start is this new theory of international relations, as apologists for breaking international law continue to debase themselves.
Is the UK not going to sign any more treaties and just rely on "spirit and intent" from others?
Malthouse, his ministerial colleagues, and MPs would do well to read the rather precise demolition of their plan to override the Withdrawal Agreement by former AG Geoffrey Cox in the Times. This paragraph will do if short of time. thetimes.co.uk/article/geoffr…
But, but, but those nasty EU types? Cox covers briskly and correctly. If the EU did threaten us (and it seems the government have exaggerated for effect) we have the powers we need without threatening international law.
Particularly for those claiming the EU is acting in bad faith, remember that no Free Trade Agreement will eliminate checks on goods travelling between Northern Ireland and Great Britain under the Northern Ireland Protocol. They would merely be reduced.
What is particularly difficult now for the EU and all those negotiating with the UK - the government is justifying the right to break any negotiated treaty if they discover it doesn't do what they promised. How do you respond to that?
Incidentally all this talk of the Internal Market Bill breaking international law is distracting from other provisions regarded by both Scotland and Wales governments as a direct attack on devolution, likely strengthening the case of those arguing for independence.
Thus the Internal Market Bill may turn out to be a seminal piece of legislation in UK history, for the future of the country and what it stands for. One would like to hope that would mean it would receive particularly detailed attention in Parliament...
Share this Scrolly Tale with your friends.
A Scrolly Tale is a new way to read Twitter threads with a more visually immersive experience.
Discover more beautiful Scrolly Tales like this.