How is it that the BBC opts to paint this as a negative for Brexit negotiations whilst everyone else, the Remain backing FT included, interpret it as a positive for Britain?
Listening to the radio in the car and I hear from the BBC that a recent ECJ ruling concerning an EU-Singapore trade deal means that any deal between the UK and the EU will need ratification by all EU member states and many regional parliaments as well….this will of course, the BBC tells us, be bad for Brexit and will mean we are mired in negotiations for years.
Thought I’d check…just because….here’s the BBC web report…
An EU-Singapore free trade deal cannot take effect fully unless parliaments in all 28 member states approve it, the EU’s top court has decided.
The legal opinion at the European Court of Justice (ECJ) could delay progress towards a UK free trade deal with the EU during the Brexit negotiations.
Indirect “portfolio” investments and commercial arbitration are issues that need national approval, the ruling said.
The verdict makes it more likely that any UK-EU free trade deal will have to be ratified by national and regional parliaments in the EU.
Note that last line…because it is rubbish, false, fake.
The Institute of Directors, one of Britain’s leading business organisations, welcomed the decision. “This ruling will probably make it easier for the EU to conclude trade deals without fear of as many hold-ups from national and sub-national legislatures,” said Allie Renison, head of EU and trade policy.
Er…isn’t that the exact opposite of what the BBC is peddling?
And as for all states and parliaments having to ratify…only two issues would need that….
In its widely awaited decision, the ECJ ruled that the EU had exclusive competence in all but two aspects of the Singapore agreement. Only for issues in those two areas — portfolio investments and a dispute-settlement regime for investments — would a deal require unanimous backing by member states.
The Telegraph reports…
Boost for Brexit free trade deal chances after landmark EU court ruling
Britain’s ambition to sign a quick Free Trade Agreement with the European Union after Brexit has received a significant boost after a landmark ruling by the European Court of Justice handed expanded trade negotiation powers to Brussels.
The much-anticipated decision from the court in Luxembourg surprised experts by ruling that on key areas – including financial services and transport – the European Union does not need to seek ratification of a trade deal by the EU’s 38 national and local parliaments.
Trade experts said the ECJ ruling could substantially reduce the risk of any future EU-UK free trade agreement getting bogged down in the EU national parliaments, opening the way for an FTA to be agreed by a qualified majority vote of EU member states.
“The Court of justice says all services – even transport – can be ratified by a qualified majority vote, which is potentially quite a big opening for the UK,” said Steve Peers, professor of EU law at Essex University. “It could certainly make things easier.”
Never, ever, take the BBC’s word for anything.
Just leave, none of the various flavours of Brexit, out out out.
If you leave/divorce someone you don’t still live and sleep with them.
No payments to them, no customs, no single market, no courts, nothing.
Same with Brexit, just free us.
Cleggy was on the daily politics today still saying people didn’t know what they were voting for. Words fail me.
The only thing the remoaners ever come up with is where is the 350 million every week promised to the NHS on the bus.
How many times must they be told, we are 1. Still in the eu and paying them and 2. The slogan said some of the money paid to the eu COULD be given to the NHS.
And us leavers are supposed to be the ones who are stupid!
The bus thing was no lie .
£350 a week could go into the NHS
Or £340 a week into it with £ 10 million elsewhere , or £330 million with £20 million elsewhere , or £320 million ..
Or £350 million a week for the NHS in one week but next week £350 spent on something else and then £350 million spent on the NHS the week after that then £350 spent on something else then £340 on the NHS and £10 million on something else for that week , then £ 333 million on the NHS and £17 on something else then £ 342.56 million on the HHS and the other figure on something else ..
Then nothing for a couple of months on the NHS and everything on flowers then …
FFS what do the remainders want ?
Yeah but as Cloggy sed on Brillo today, it wasn’t writ in the Leave makneefesto, woz it.
Cloggy is a dangerous, deluded, lying fuckwit….in spades!
I do tire so much when the BBC and people on QT keep going on about the Brexit bus.
It wasn’t a lie.
It was just an example that you could spend money on A, if you weren’t spending it on B.
No different from saying to a gambler or an alcoholic ‘if you didn’t waste all that cash on the dogs or the bottle, you could take your kids on holiday or buy that car’. The thing that upset the Remainers is that the emotive ‘thing’ that was suggested you COULD spend the money on was the NHS, the ultimate emotional trump card.
They always used to say that history is rewritten by the victors but in the referendum it seems to be the losers that are framing the narrative for their loss – Leavers were stupid, racist, easily swayed moths dazzled by the bright lights of Farage, Johnson and Gove.
No mention of the umpteen lies and portents of doom that failed to materialise when we voted to Leave, just a single minded pursuit that one slogan on one bus subverted an entire nation.
“The Court of justice says all services – even transport – can be ratified by a qualified majority vote, which is potentially quite a big opening for the UK,” said Steve Peers, professor of EU law at Essex University. “It could certainly make things easier.”
Trade and Transport are EU ‘competences’ i.e. areas subject to qualified majority voting so nothing new there.
Also as long as we remain in the EU all of Labour’s nationalisation plans would be on hold too, assuming Jeremy becomes PM. The BBC is a bit light on that comment too.
“Never, ever, take the BBC’s word for anything
Preaching to the converted on here!
Time for reminder about the “Is that true. Or did you hear it on the BBC?” badges / car stickers available from the Bonny Badge Co. (no financial connection)
Newsnight last night:
Part of last nights programme was spent following a group of students being shown around a Scottish building/ancient tower. You will split your sides with this bit.
All of the students were very young, pretty, keen remainers EXCEPT ONE – who just so happened to be a very nervous kind of chap (its as if the TV producers had searched the whole university for and found a male student who became nervous near women! If I remember rightly, the other students were female and very attractive with long sexy hair) Boy! The poor chap could hardly compose himself while trying to explain his reason why he voted to leave! That female scottish presenter presented the show!