DO SEE OUR MAIN WEB SITE
@ CLICK HERE

DO MAKE USE of LINKS,
>SEARCH<
&
>Side Bars<
&
The Top Bar >PAGES<
~~~~~~~~~~#########~~~~~~~~~~
.
Beware Of Those In Parliament Too Thick OR Too Mallign To Know What The Vote Is About! …
.
~~~~~~~~~~#########~~~~~~~~~~

Posted by:
Greg Lance – Watkins
Greg_L-W

eMail Address:
Greg_L-W@BTconnect.com

Blog About The Main Web Site:
https://InfoWebSiteUK.wordpress.com

The Main Web Site:
www.InfoWebSite.UK

~~~~~~~~~~#########~~~~~~~~~~

Hi,

Theresa May’s attempts to make the backstop more palatable to MPs, the so-called ‘Operation Figleaf’, have culminated in the publication of an exchange of letters between May and EU Presidents Tusk and Juncker. As expected, the EU’s letter consists of statements of diplomatic intention and legal interpretation rather than binding legal changes to the Withdrawal Agreement and backstop, although interestingly The Times reported these might be on the cards but at a later stage. Not the gamechanger May needed right now…

Juncker & Tusk have made the same mistake Parliament has made in believing they have the support of Labour etc in opposing May – in reality they do have the support of some weenie wagglers in Parliament who are delusionally of the opinion this is Theresa May’s ‘Deal’.

Having been charged with implementing the Peoples Vote and both Tory & Labour gave their undertaking to implement Withrawal from the EU in their manifestos, an unconditional vote of the British Peoples Vote. As Prime Minister Theresa May was charged with the responsibility of seeking to negotiate the terms of the withdrawal which would clearly be on basic WTO terms, minded of the provisions of No Traiffs for 10 years or on any better terms the Parliament ie Government could negotiate.

On Tuesday 15-Jan-2019 Parliament will vote on the best terms in varience of WTO terms they can obtain – IF it is a majority againast the varied terms that will NOT be a vote against May or the Tory Party but against the best terms Parliament could obtain.

There will of course be the odd fool in Parliament who does not understand what is going on, such as Vince Cable, Caroline Lucas their followers and the SNP and many charlatans on or near the front bench of the Labour Party + a few benighted Tories who may well vote against what is on offer in a self serving act of anti British political weenie waggling.

There is of course less to fear from the complexities of a Deal on WTO terms than from either remaining in the odious EU or having a Labour Government or alliance, particularly led by Corbyn and his claque of extremists.

Read the letter in full: 

Dear Prime Minister,

Thank you for your letter of 14 January 2019.

As you are well aware, use regret but respect the decision of the United Kingdom to leave the European Union. We also consider that Brexit is a source of uncertainty and disruption. In these challenging times, use therefore share with you the determination to create as much certainty and clarity as possible for citizens and companies in a situation where a Member State leaves the European Union after more than four decades of closest economic and political integration. That is why the Withdrawal Agreement that you and the Leaders of the 27 EU Member States agreed after long negotiations is so important. It represents a fair compromise and aims to ensure an orderly withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union, thereby smiting the negative consequences of Brexit. That is also why we wish to establish as close as possible a relationship with the United Kingdom in the future, building on the Political Declaration, which the Leaders of the 27 EU Member States agreed with you. It is also why we want negotiations to this effect to start as soon as possible after the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union.

As you know, we are not in a position to agree to anything that changes or is inconsistent with the Withdrawal Agreement, but against this background, and in order to facilitate the next steps of the process, we are happy to confirm, on behalf of the two EU Institutions we represent, our understanding of the following points within our respective fields of responsibility.

A. As regards the President of the European Council:

On the 13 December, the European Council (Article 50) decided on a number of additional assurances, in particular as regards its firm commitment to work speedily on a subsequent agreement that establishes by 31 December 2020 alternative arrangements, so that the backstop will not need to be triggered.

The European Council also said that, if the backstop were nevertheless to be triggered, it would only apply temporarily, unless and until it is superseded by a subsequent agreement that ensures that a hard border is avoided, and that the European Union, in such a case, would use its best endeavours to negotiate and conclude expeditiously a subsequent agreement that would replace the backstop, and would expect the same of the United Kingdom, so that the backstop would only be in place for as long as strictly necessary.

In this context, it can be stated that European Council conclusions have a legal value in the Union commensurate to the authority of the European Council under the Treaties to define directions and priorities for the European Union at the highest level and, in the specific context of withdrawal, to establish, in the form of guidelines, its framework. They may commit the European Union in the most solemn manner. European Council conclusions therefore constitute part of the context in which an international agreement, such as the Withdrawal Agreement, will be interpreted.

As for the link between the Withdrawal Agreement and the Political Declaration, to which you make reference in your letter, it can be made clear that these two documents, while being of a different nature, are part of the same negotiated package. In order to underline the close relationship between the two texts, they can be published side by side in the Official Journal in a manner reflecting the link between the two as provided for in Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU).

B. As regards the President of the European Commission:

The Political Declaration agreed at the November Special European Council (Article 50) describes a future relationship of unprecedented depth and breadth, reflecting the continuing strength of our shared values and interests. The Withdrawal Agreement and the Political Declaration represent a fair balance of European Union and United Kingdom interests. They will ensure a smooth withdrawal and a strong future relationship in the interests of all our citizens.

As the European Council has already stated, it will embark on preparations for a future partnership with the United Kingdom immediately after signature of the Withdrawal Agreement. As regards the European Commission, we will set up the negotiating structure for these negotiations directly after signature to ensure that formal negotiations can start as soon as possible after the withdrawal of the United Kingdom, having in mind the shared ambition of the European Union and the United Kingdom to have the future relationship in place by the end of the transition. Should national ratifications be pending at that moment, the Commission is ready to propose provisional application of relevant pads of the future relationship, in line with the legal frameworks that apply and existing practice. The Commission is also ready to engage with you on a work programme as soon as the United Kingdom Parliament has signalled its agreement in principle to the Withdrawal Agreement and the European Parliament has approved it.

There is an important link between the Withdrawal Agreement and the Political Declaration, reflecting Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union. As stated in Article 184 of the Withdrawal Agreement and reflected also in Paragraph 138 of the Political Declaration, the European Union and the United Kingdom have committed to use best endeavours, in good faith and in full respect of their respective legal orders, to take necessary steps to negotiate expeditiously the agreements governing their future relationship referred to in the Political Declaration.

In light of your letter, the European Commission would like to make the following clarifications with regard to the backstop:

The Withdrawal Agreement including the Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland embodies the shared commitment by the European Union and the United Kingdom to address the unique circumstances on the island of Ireland as part of ensuring the orderly withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union. The Commission can confirm that, just like the United Kingdom, the European Union does not wish to see the backstop enter into force. Were it to do so, it would represent a suboptimal trading arrangement for both sides. The Commission can also confirm the European Union’s determination to replace the backstop solution on Northern Ireland by a subsequent agreement that would ensure the absence of a hard border on the island of Ireland on a permanent footing.

The European Commission can also confirm our shared understanding that the Withdrawal Agreement and the Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland:

  • Do not affect or supersede the provisions of the Good Friday or Belfast Agreement of 10 April 1998 in any way whatsoever; they do not alter in any way the arrangements under Strand II of the 1998 Agreement in particular, whereby areas of North-South cooperation in areas within their respective competences are matters for the Northern Ireland Executive and Government of Ireland to determine;
  • Do not extend regulatory alignment with European Union law in Northern Ireland beyond what is strictly necessary to avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland and protect the 1998 Agreement; the Withdrawal Agreement is also clear that any new act that the European Union proposes should be added to the Protocol will require the agreement of the United Kingdom in the Joint Committee;
  • Do not prevent the United Kingdom from facilitating, as part of its delegation, the participation of Northern Ireland Executive representatives in the Joint Committee, the Committee on issues related to the implementation of the Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland, or the joint consultative working group, in matters pertaining directly to Northern Ireland.

The European Commission also shares your intentions for the future relationship to be in place as quickly as possible. Given our joint commitment to using best endeavours to conclude before the end of 2020 a subsequent agreement, which supersedes the Protocol in whole or in part, the Commission is determined to give priority in our work programme to the discussion of proposals that might replace the backstop with alternative arrangements. In this context, facilitative arrangements and technologies will be considered. Any arrangements which supersede the Protocol are not required to replicate its provisions in any respect, provided that the underlying objectives continue to be met.

Should the parties need more time to negotiate the subsequent agreement, they could decide to extend the transition period, as foreseen in the Withdrawal Agreement. In that case, the Commission is committed to redouble its efforts and expects the same redoubled efforts from your negotiators, with the aim of concluding a subsequent agreement very rapidly. Were the backstop to enter into force in whole or in part, it is intended to apply only temporarily, unless and until it is superseded by a subsequent agreement. The Commission is committed to providing the necessary political impetus and resources to help achieving the objective of making this period as short as possible. To this end, following the withdrawal of the United Kingdom, and until a subsequent agreement is concluded, the Commission will support making best use of the high level conference foreseen in the Political Declaration to meet at least every six months to take stock of progress and agree the appropriate actions to move forward.

Finally, in response to your concern about the timetable, we would like to make it clear that both of us will be prepared to sign the Withdrawal Agreement as soon as the meaningful vote has passed in the United Kingdom Parliament. This will allow preparations for the future partnership with the United Kingdom immediately thereafter to ensure that negotiations can start as soon as possible after the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union.

To view the original article CLICK HERE

 

Regards,
Greg_L-W.

~~~~~~~~~~#########~~~~~~~~~~
Posted by: Greg Lance-Watkins
tel: 44 (0)1594 – 528 337
Calls from ‘Number Withheld’ phones Are Blocked

All unanswered messages are recorded.
Leave your name & a UK land line number & I will return your call.

‘e’Mail Address: Greg_L-W@BTconnect.com

~~~~~~~~~~#########~~~~~~~~~~

With an avg. 1.2M voters per MEP & Britain with 16% of EU GDP and 13% of the EU’s population yet  having only 8% (if united) say, whilst holding less than 3% of the various offices within the EU Do note The EUropean Parliament has no ability to make policy and has a Commission of unelected bureaucrats, thus clearly the EU is not even a pretence of being a democracy despite its protestations!
Do note that many senior apparatchicks and even elected politicians speak openly of the ‘Post Democratic era’ with no sense of shame or irony and in complete contempt of the so called electorate – yet The EU & many of its vassal States/Regions are all too willing to slaughter people in Sovereign States, to impose The EU’s chosen brand of democracy on them!

Now as President Junker announced in his ‘State of the union’ speech 2017 the aim is to create an EU military force and centralise ever more of the decision making and control!

The imposition of a Government and policies upon its vassal regions such as the peoples of Greece shows just how far from being a democracy the EU is.

Just follow the recent EU display of so called ‘Democracy’:
France and the Netherlands voted against the proposed EU constitution in 2005, only to have those votes ignored.
Ireland voted against ratifying the Lisbon treaty in 2008, but then later under pressure & threats had to change its mind.
Greece for me was the final straw. It became clear in 2015 that it didn’t matter which way the Greek people voted. The birthplace of democracy had become its tomb. That was enough. I was going to vote to leave the EU when the chance came.

No political party of any significance in Britain took active steps to achieve a Referendum – the task was eventually taken by an Indipendent West Midlands MEP Nikki Sinclaire who personally launched and funded the gathering of a petition of 225,000 signatures delivered to Parliament via Downing Street, thus forcing a debate in the House of Commons on an IN/OUT Referendum, which led to David Cameron’s first consequential rebellion.

It was due to winning that debate, officially opposed by every party including Ukip that David Cameron was forced to include a promise of an IN/OUT Referendum in the Tory Manifesto at the next General Election. The rest is history & despite no Parliamentary Party backing the OUT vote & Government spending Millions of Pounds of public money leafletting & promoting ‘Project Fear’ to try to persuade the British people to Remain just as they had at the first Referendum in 1975 – This time their lies and threats were not heeded and in the largest vote in British history Britain voted by a clear majority to Leave.

Nikki Sinclaire’s OUT result left Cameron & his co conspirator Osborne with no option but to resign, sadly some of the other traitors have remained to try to hinder progress to BreXit, aided by their corrupt allies in the EU and \eu funding and bribes!

There will be little or no change in Britain’s economic position, if we leave the EU, using a better negotiated, customised & updated version of the ‘Norway Model’ as a stepping stone to becoming a full member of the Eropean Economic Area, where all will benefit, as we secure trade relations with the EU’s vassal regions, with an EFTA style status and can trade and negotiate independently on the global stage, as members of The Commonwealth and the Anglosphere.

This is of course dependent on a modicum of intelligence on the part of Britain’s politicians and negotiators but it also requires the integrity of Parliament to uphod democracy and the integrity of EU politicuians & apparchicks to act ethically and without their normal vindictive mallice.

I believe Leaving the EU will be turned into something of a rough ride by the ignorant and the corrupt but I have no doubt that in the long run Leaving the EU will prove conclusively to be in the best interests of Britain and our true allies. I also believe that Britain leaving the EU will prove to be the catalyst to great changes within the EU and hopefully its democratisation as without great changes it is indubitably doomed.

Do not overlook the fact that politicians have plotted and schemmed since the 1950s and we have actually been vassals of the EU, when it was still using the aesopian linguistics and calling itself The Common Market in the early 1970s, a name the bureaucrats arbitrarily changed to EUropean Union in the early 1990s as they worked towards their long term goals of an ever closer centrally controlled Political and economic Union with its own anthem, currency, flag and rigid central control by its self appointed bureacrats towards a new Empirate –

It will take many years to rectify the mess our political class got us into and we have no other peacefull means by which to extricate ourselves than to depend on that self same self styled elite, who all too often forget they work for us!

One huge benefit of BreXit will be that we can negotiate with bodies like the WTO, UN, WHO, IMF, CODEX and the like, directly, in our own interest and that of our partners around the world, in both the Commonwealth and the Anglosphere at large; rather than having negotiations and terms imposed by unelected EU bureacrats and their interpretation of the rules handed down, as if they were some great achievement of the EU’s!
The greatest change and benefit will be political, as we improve our democracy and self determination, with the ability to deselect and elect our own Government, with an improved Westminster structure, see >Harrogate Agenda<.
How we go about the process of disentangling our future wellbeing from the EU is laid out in extensive, well researched and immensely tedious detail see >FleXcit< or for a brief video summary CLICK HERE
~~~~~~~~~~#########~~~~~~~~~~

DO MAKE USE of LINKS,

>SEARCH<
&
>Side Bars<
&
The Top Bar >PAGES<Also:

You will find me on both Skype & Twitter but I do not utilise the attrociously regulated FaceBook nor similar social media.

Skype: GregL-W
TWITTER: @Greg_LW

You are encouraged to contact me with information or to effect a correction on any of my postings – BUT I only respond to individuals providing a verifiable name, address and land line telephone.
NB:
  1. I NEVER post anonymously on the internet
  2. ALL MY BLOGS & WEB SITES are clearly sourced to me
  3. I DO NOT use an obfuscated eMail address to hide behind
  4. I DO NOT use or bother reading FaceBook, Instagram etc.
  5. I DO have a Voice Mail Message System
  6. I ONLY GUARANTEE to answer identifiable eMails
  7. I ONLY GUARANTEE to phone back identifiable UK Land Line Messages
  8. I DO NOT accept phone calls from witheld numbers
  9. I REGRET due to BT in this area I have a rubbish Broadband connection
  10. I AM opposed to British membership of The EU & have actively opposed it since C1960
  11. I AM opposed to Welsh, Scottish or English Independence within an interdependent UK
  12. I AM NOT a WARMIST
  13. I DO NOT believe the IPCC Climate Propaganda re Anthropogenic Global Warming
  14. I AM strongly opposed to the subsidy or use of failed technologies eg. WIND TURBINES
  15. I AM IN FAVOUR of rapid research & development of NEW NUCLEAR, Thorium, Hydrogen & Psi/Si technologies
  16. I see no evidence to trust POLITICIANS at any level or of any persuasion
  17. I DO NOT believe in GODS singular or plural, Bronze Age or Modern
  18. I VALUE the NHS as a HEALTH SERVICE NOT a Lifestyle support
  19. I BELIEVE in a DEATH PENALTY for serial or GBH rape.
  20. I BELIEVE in a DEATH PENALTY for serial, terrorist, mass or for pleasure, gain or profit murder.
  21. I BELIEVE in a DEATH PENALTY for serial gross child abuse including sexual.
  22. I DO NOT trust or believe in armed police
  23. I DO NOT believe in prolonging human life beyond reasonable expectation of sentient participatory intellectual existence
  24. I BELIEVE in EUTHENASIA under clearly defined & legal terms
  25. I DO TRY to make every effort to NOT infringe copyrights in any commercial way & make all consequential corrections of fact brought to my attention by an identifiable individual

Please Be Sure To
.Follow Greg_LW on Twitter.

Re-TWEET my Tweets

& Publicise My Blogs
To Spread The Facts World Wide

 

~~~~~~~~~~#########~~~~~~~~~~

Posted by:
Greg Lance – Watkins
Greg_L-W

eMail Address:
Greg_L-W@BTconnect.com

Blog About The Main Web Site:
https://InfoWebSiteUK.wordpress.com

The Main Web Site:
www.InfoWebSite.UK

~~~~~~~~~~#########~~~~~~~~~~