,
26 tweets,
9 min read
Read on Twitter
This latest no deal Brexit paper is full of false or misleading statements. Surprise! I will supplement David's excellent comments with some comments of my own.
Contingency arrangements for no deal Brexit have not been "agreed" in any legal sense. They are unilateral measures by the EU. Also if there's no withdrawal agreement, how can there be an "alternative arrangements protocol"?
The argument about the percentage of voters voting for the withdrawal agreement doesn't take them far, since only 35% of the vote went to parties supporting no deal. Two thirds of voters rejected their position then.
The no dealers have no grasp of the details of no deal. Again, the EU measures are unilateral, and have already been adopted. They don't cover @the3million or @BritishInEurope except for aspects of social security coordination.
The "remaining part of multilateral agreements" line is highly intellectually dishonest. Such agreements do not reproduce single market participation.
The £39 billion is less than that, due to our extended period of membership. It's also payable over a longer period than two years. The numbers take no account of the public finance hit due to reduced exports because of no deal.
The "period of uncertainty" point is dishonest in multiple ways. Business will be subject to the uncertainty of not knowing what the future relationship will be, and the costs of adjusting twice.
Also, no deal creates *additional* uncertainty compared to membership or the withdrawal agreement, as I explained here
This is the key point: the UK can control what it does with imports, but exports will be curtailed: not just to the EU, but to several non-EU trading partners with which EU FTAs have not been rolled over.
Negotiating a services treaty by October. Come on. Anyone producing such dishonest 💩 in any other line of work would lose their professional reputation.
The US tries to prevent its trading partners from signing FTAs with China. The authors also seem unaware of UK/India issues which partly made the EU/India FTA talks difficult.
The trade in services agreement talks will raise additional public concerns about the NHS and other public services. Threatening the EU in the WTO ignores the difficulty facing the WTO dispute settlement system due to their buddy Trump:
As usual, I don't expect much effective scrutiny of this nonsense by the media. Please try to politely challenge no deal politicians and their shills who peddle this stuff. Remember their claims about what the EU will do have been consistently wrong for three years now. //
More thoughts on the ERG no deal paper, based on this list of things they would demand to change in the withdrawal agreement. It shows both a profound lack of understanding of the subject, and utter contempt for @the3million and @BritishInEurope 
A removal of references to EU law means removal of substantive protection for @the3million and @BritishInEurope because their legal status is based on EU law. Removing CJEU jurisdiction removes a mechanism to secure their rights.
Removing direct effect removes another mechanism to protect their rights.
The power to exit any part of the agreement with at most two years' notice means that whatever protection is left for them can easily be removed entirely.
The power to exit any part of the agreement with at most two years' notice means that whatever protection is left for them can easily be removed entirely.
Removing "indirect" CJEU jurisdiction removes interpretations of concepts like "worker" and "family members" - in particular threatening the position of precarious workers and people with non-EU family members.
The claim that the withdrawal agreement would create a new category of "citizen" is false. It would create a new category of *migrants* with acquired rights, on the basis that they moved between the UK/EU planning their lives on the basis of the law as it stood at the time.
Put this in context: such acquired rights were *what the Leave campaign had promised* - telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopic…
The citizens rights chapter might as well be removed from the withdrawal agreement.
Equally removal of all references to EU law makes most of the rest of the withdrawal agreement redundant. The financial settlement is calculated by reference to the EU relevant legislation.
Equally removal of all references to EU law makes most of the rest of the withdrawal agreement redundant. The financial settlement is calculated by reference to the EU relevant legislation.
Removal of references to EU law makes the separation provisions redundant too:
These have practical importance for businesses large and small, but also for pending extradition proceedings, and cross border litigation over maintenance and child custody.
These have practical importance for businesses large and small, but also for pending extradition proceedings, and cross border litigation over maintenance and child custody.
And removal of the references to EU law ends the prospect of a transition period, even though elsewhere the ERG say that they want an interim FTA on current terms. Dudes, current terms are *membership of the single market*.
Back to @the3million and @BritishInEurope. I discuss these issues in abstract legalese for professional reasons, but make no mistake: I am motivated by concern about the impact of uncertainty in real people's lives. And this is what infuriated me this morning ⬇️
Kudos to EU27 citizens who call out and laugh at xenophobic abuse, but not everyone is so resilient. Every day I see people on here who are concerned and anxious about their future.
Although the UK government has rolled out settled status based on acquired rights, and there are positive signs like Antonio Costa's campaign for ring fencing rights, it's clear that the ERG want to move the Overton window on the protection of @the3million and @BritishInEurope
Of all the lying, cheating and gaslighting by these cynical charlatans, this is their vilest hour.
We must, and will, keep fighting them. No pasaran, sociopaths. //
We must, and will, keep fighting them. No pasaran, sociopaths. //
