Brexit Trade Bill? Look at this huge squirrel instead!
Today we’ll learn what the Eurosceptic Tory MPs and their lawyers have found out about the pitfalls and treacheries contained in BJ’s ‘treaty’. There are more voices raised against the Bill, even in some of our broadsheets, voices which aren’t precisely jubilant. And just as the bible says about the poor who will always be with us, there’s covid … set to be with us always.
Let’s first look at Brexit and the curate’s egg that is the treaty. If I were given to betting, I’m sure I’d rake it in had I placed a sum on how many MPs will have read the whole thing by the time they’ll vote for it tomorrow. As we all know, the devil, especially the EU devil, is in the detail and there’s too much detail in those 1,000+ pages.
While Sir John Redwood was cautiously supportive because there’s a ‘get-out’ clause – see his Diary entry yesterday here – I’m inclined to agree with the analysis by our friends a facts4eu who warn that this bill will pass with the majority of MPs not having read it (link).
This is an astounding lack of responsibility by our peacocks. Also sunk below the current horizon is the fact that the 27 EU member states have given a provisional agreement to the whole thing – and don’t tell me they’ve all read it! Clearly, given the ‘provision’ in the fishery sell-out, there are going to be more negotiations. So we can say that, just as the poor and covid, Brexit will still be with us.
I’ve pointed out in yesterday’s column (here) that the majority of MPs of all rosette colours will vote by proxy and that the ‘debate’ will again be held under covid restrictions, i.e. ‘talking heads’ will appear on those giant screens installed in the HoC Chamber. I am somewhat surprised that this fact hasn’t raised any eyebrows.
I accept that many readers have spent their time delving into the text – but given that this Bill will pass anyway, given that our democratic customs of scrutiny, debate, the possibility of amendments and later votes are trampled and have been trampled ever since the covidians have taken on the role of dictators, it surely is astonishing that nobody is the slightest bit concerned about this.
Meanwhile I wait for the statement of the ERG members, the Tory MPs who’ve been looking at the treaty, helped by lawyers. I will say however that, regardless of their analysis, we’re being treated to a Brexit theatre production. The various actors wave the ‘sovereignty’ banner in front of our eyes while our actual sovereignty, that of us the people, is being trampled underfoot by the same actors who’ve been doing so ’because: covid’ for the last eleven months. Yes, it’s the giant squirrel in action again!
And so to covid. Now it’s not ‘we must have more tests’, it’s ‘we must have more vaccinations’ – or else. The ‘or else’ is again the demand by SAGEs and NHS doctors that “we” must have another lockdown in January. Gove is twiddling with opening or not opening schools next month – at the moment it’s years 11 and over and all primary schools to be opened – but that surely will change once the SAGEs have come back from their Christmas break:
“Ministers are increasingly alarmed by the spread of a new strain of coronavirus. The Sage group of scientists told ministers shortly before Christmas that a third national lockdown, including the closure of primary and secondary schools, could be required. Even those measures might not be enough to slow the spread and stop hospitals from being overwhelmed, they said.” (link, paywalled).
Indeed these measures won’t be enough, especially not when ‘ministers’ are being given the results of the latest ‘modelling’ exercise. Modellers at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine have come up with a new model which demands more lockdowns. One couldn’t wish for a better example of ivory-tower thinking than this:
“Vaccines will have to be delivered at a rate of two million a week – double the current target – to avoid a devastating third Covid wave, ministers have been warned. The projection has been made by the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (LSHTM) in a new paper shared with the Government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage), which is understood to be circulating in Whitehall.” (paywalled link)
Do these modellers not know that it takes two doses and at least four weeks, depending on the vaccine, before there’s ‘immunity’ – if this can actually be achieved? We remember that, according to the submissions by the vaccine producers, their vaccine will only keep the worst effects of covid at bay and that they cannot say if it provides permanent immunity.
But never mind that – “we” must still be kept in perpetual fear and anxiety, our whole economy must be geared to providing vaccination to all above anything else – and meanwhile “we” must all stay in lockdown. Just as with the demand for more tests, regardless, it’s now ‘moar vaccine’. It’s not just more people needed for more tests, its now also more people to ‘vaccinate’ the millions. Clearly, our economy must become a covid economy where all work for covid.
Moreover, we’re told that the 200,000 people being vaccinated per week is not sufficient to ‘avoid a third wave of coronavirus more deadly than the first.’ (paywalled link). What evidence is there for such a ‘more deadly’ wave? Don’t expect an answer! Here’s the reason for that LSHTM demand:
“The most stringent intervention scenario with Tier 4 England-wide and schools closed during January and two million individuals vaccinated per week is the only scenario we considered which reduces peak ICU burden below the levels seen during the first wave.” (paywalled link)
Please do not ask these modellers if it’s not a fact that during winter more people, especially the elderly, die of a host of causes! This year and from next week onwards, all who die only die ‘of covid’ because any death is now a covid death thanks to the fiddling with ‘cases’, ‘causes’ and statistics the government has surreptitiously introduced.
The annual howls by doctors, that hospitals are ‘bursting at the seams’, has now been refined. They now have ‘wall-to-wall covid patients’. Not one ‘reporter’ asks why that is when so many areas were in tier 4 even before Christmas. Not one ‘reporter’ delves into the archives and checks out that we’ve had the same old wail year after year after year during December – without covid. The skill of connecting dots seems to have vanished ever since covid. Next, look at this:
“[…] the deputy chief executive of NHS Providers said that some trusts were reporting up to three times as many Covid-19 patients as at the peak of the first wave, although those figures for individual trusts are not published. “This means that hospitals and also ambulance services in Tier 4 areas and beyond are incredibly busy, compounded by increasing staff absences due to illness and the need to self-isolate,” she said.” (link, paywalled)
So they have no numbers – but cry wolf anyway. No one asks why so many ‘need to self isolate’ – perhaps it’s because we know that anyone who’s been ‘traced’ by the T & T industry is told to do so, regardless of having tested -ve. Meanwhile the Nightingale hospitals are being dismantled because of ‘lack of staff’. There’s a lovely photo accompanying that report in LockdownSceptics (here). Do read the whole thing. Finally, NHS doctors beg us not to celebrate New Year’s Eve, to ‘Save Our Holy Cow’ – and here I thought we’re all hiding indoors anyway!
It surely must now dawn on even the most frightened covid-rabbit that this whole covid ‘Palace of Fear’ is built on assumptions, suppositions and models, not on real events. Why does no one asks if all those being taken to hospital right now might conceivably have other illnesses? What, for example, is happening to all the cancer patients who’ve been left untreated since the 1st Lockdown? Have they been miraculously cured? Is nobody suffering from heart attacks needing urgent hospital treatment any longer?
I leave you with another ‘be afraid’ event: snow! The Met office is warning of snow before New Year’s Day, predicting that we’ll be buried under ‘up to six inches’ of snow. Six inches! The horror! But be warned: the covid police will be out to make sure our kiddies keep their social distance when tobogganing down whatever slopes they can find.
As for us who’re made to hide at home thanks to tier 4: be afraid, don’t go out, don’t do anything to imperil our poor ‘Sacred Cow’ and dress up warm. Remember: even the common cold is now covid!
KBO!
Part 2
JR says these clauses “appear” to allow “any UK Government with `political will`(????) to legislate as UK voters wish and to govern the UK as an Independent country”
I`m sorry but these sound like weasel words to me.
Does he mean that we are not an independant country yet and this treaty will not make us an independent country and it will take somebody with political will and the backing of the people/peasants/grassroots (another referendum to approve?? fat chance of that with present parties i/C..
There is another thought. How does the trade agreemnt tie up with the Withdrawal Agreement? are there terms in the WA which refer to the Trade Agreement and even overule it or are terms on their own that mean we are not independent anyway and are there similar get out clauses there (I`ll bet there are not)
Oh and her they are all blithely off to sign a supposed independence agreement and not a word has been said about independent defence and control of our own foreign policy and other things too numerous to mention
I think Ralph Protheroe said the terms of the Withdrawal Agreement still stand, unless the WA is revoked by us? I’ll delve back and refresh my memory.
Part 1
In another thread on another day referring to the newly signed agreement and from the various early comments I said I thought the many un-finalised agreed items and probably some of those fully agreed left “hostages to fortune” – to much dubiety as to their control.
Having now had a look at John Redwood`s slightly deeper dig I don`t think I am any more enthusiastic, in fact the chap on Duran gave the package a C+ of approval whereas he should have rejected them.
Redwood`s points for approval (slight? are that there are `get outs` built in.
a) “On the crucial issue of sovereignty it appears to reinforce Clause 38 of the withdrawal act which I supported. That rightly asserted
that the UK can legislate as it wishes for the UK notwithstanding any agreement with the EU.
(I`m not qualified to comment other than to say “wait till the EU lawyers say they see no such clause or it`s just airy fairy
b) “The proposed agreement clearly rules out any future jurisdiction or control by the ECJ over the UK under this agreement it states
“For greater certainty an interpretation of this agreement…….given by the courts of either party shall not be binding on the other
Party.
( A bit like Mandy Rice- David “they would say that anyway” but it doesn`t really amount to a heap of halfpennies)
c) ” It also seeks to limit litigious activities under the agreement by stating that “anything in this agreement…….shall be confirmed as
conferring rights or imposing obligations on persons other than those created between the parties under public International
law, nor as permitting this agreement……. to be directly invoked in the domestic legal system of the parties”
d) “as it is important to protect our sovereignty from any future attempted infringements by the EU, acting under this agreement,
it is also crucial that there is an easy exit clause. This was something I lobbied for strongly. Financial Provision 8 headed
“Termination” gives a simple clean exit in the form of this statement
(I don`t think the word `easy` translates into the EU vocabulary and `Termination` I don`t think is possible even in EU railway
terminology ` they`d fight it to the last drop of our blood )
e) “Either party may terminate the Agreement by written notification through diplomatic channels. This Agreement and any
Supplementing Agreement shall cease to be in force on the first day of the 12th month following the date of notification”
(that`s alright then it takes a year before they even have to acknowledge – just as a week is a long time in politics, the
egregious bird will have flown well before the year is up – and what if they just apologise and say won`t do it again –
Nicola expects that to be all that`s necessary, and can you imagine any of the present lot girding their loins and notifying?)
What is to be done? Latest from Rodney Atkinson.
http://freenations.net/britain-signs-its-treaty-of-versailles-consumers-can-fight-back/
“… with only the Conservative Party now redeeming itself with Brexit…”
Hm.
Viv. You are quite right to have criticised the whole Testing Industry.
Surely WE HAVE NEVER DONE IT BEFORE. So far as I recall the only time anyone has been subjected to any type of testing is when that person has said ‘help I feel ill, what is wrong with me’.
Why is it different now? Will people ever wake up?
Yep. Winter has arrived. Perhaps that’s your fault, reminding us of the Winter Solstice! (L.O.L.)
I have a copy of the Surrender Treaty.
When I get the original ‘address’, I’ll post it Netscape (!) willing. (See Page 321).
Addmittedly, only spent five mins or so but . . . as far as the arrest warrent is concerned, it is still firmly in place (see appropriate section Surrender (yes!).
Biscotte EAW I never ever expected anything other than this outcome. Presumably it has to be re -drafted into British statutes. so we may now have a chance to challenge how this is done, and try to remedy the abomination of the EAW which is that we can be extradited without prima facie evidence of our wrongdoing? Although we probably won’t succeed since I’m sure the present abominably unjust situation is just what our rotten Government wants.
Having said this I’m still trying to get my head round some of the the ramifications of the text. Yes as expected the EAW still in place but is not the UK Govt fully responsible for ensuring that accused are not prima facie evidence of guilt. Does this not hang upon how UK Govt drafts it into UK statutes?
Can we, how can we ensure that the abomination of people extradited on no evidence, doesnt happen again ?
Correction “accused are not extradited withoutprima facie evidence of guilt”.
Comment from John Redwood’s Diary sounds just about spot on.
JR, it is not free Trade Deal by any stretch of the imagination. Services notmeven discussed. The U.K. is in a subservient “partnership” agreement far beyond trade. UK agrees to follow the EU in a host of areas. I am not sure what the U.K. gains from this that it could not from WTO and have All its freedoms.
Your third paragraph clearly untrue. Gibralta and N.Ireland? Gibralta was not allowed by EU to be included! Does that sound like equals where the territory is ours?
ECJ does apply across a swathe of areas including EU citizens who live anywhere in our country. Name a country in the world where immigrants have the right to redress from the law of their country of origin?
ECJ also applies to payments demanded by the EU at a time and amount of its choosing.
EU inspectors stationed in our country to examine UK goods and have access to all U.K. data bases. Does this sound like taking back control?
Could you explain EU sovereignty and direct effect in WA and NIP into U.K. Law. Martin Howe QC article 20/09/2020. EU acquis applies N.Ireland per Gove in parliament whether there is a deal or not. Could he or you clarify.
UK is not in control of its waters, either within 12 miles or outer limit, if it was the U.K. would decide from 01/01/2021 what boats and fish could be caught and by whom. It cannot and it never recovers full control as it stands.
At best your view is theoretical because if the U.K. diverges from EU control it puts the deal in whole or part in jeopardy. Your S.38 clause could be withdrawn by further remain parliaments/govts could it not? This would allow U.K. to incrementally become totally tied to EU orbit without a voice rather than partially as the partnership agreement at the moment.
I looked up the meaning of” curates egg” as I had not heard it before. Original meaning, all bad but described as in some part good out of politeness. Other meaning part bad part good.
So I take it the first meaning applies. Apart from the “get out” clause which probably doesn’t exist in reality, I have no doubt at all that its all bad. Will be having a look now for myself, at least the bits re criminal law which particularly interests me. .
The new treaty I mean trade deal Fathead has signed us up to is unreadable by normal people. If it does have a get out clause so future Governments cannot be held to it then that’ll have to do for the moment as it is bound to sail through as is.
A light covering of snow here so far. The only grit in CovidWorld will be on the roads this winter.
‘we must have more vaccinations’
But how many? The Diamond Princess was a perfect if inadvertent test tube to ascertain innate immunity or resistance. 700 out of 3700 passengers and crew fell ill and 14 died. You could hardly ask for a better environment to study the virus – a multinational mix of people, closely confined in enclosed spaces where ventilation systems seem to aid the spread of infectious disease if norovirus outbreaks on cruise ships are any guide. 80% of the people on board failed to fall ill after nearly a month. Question: why were those immune lab rats able to resist the disease? Previous exposure to a related coronavirus? T cell immunity? Does the Diamond Princess indicate that only twenty percent are at risk? So are we vaccinating 100% of people and making only 20% difference?
If we are then vaccination will have a much smaller effect on R values than expected. Cue new panic messages about hugely powerful resistant and super-spreader varieties of CV19 because nothing else could explain the failure of the silver bullet from Pfizer. Well, nothing except an examination of the facts. Is there any way to give the vaccinations only to those who are susceptible, i.e. those who actually need it.
“we” must still be kept in perpetual fear and anxiety”
Otherwise we might check the data and realise that we are being governed by clowns.
“Finally, NHS doctors beg us not to celebrate New Year’s Eve”
Which is why the kryptonite-resistant varieties are being hyped. It’s the nudge unit trying to change our behaviour without actually having to explain or even give us the data, because, I suspect, the man behind the curtain is a fat blond opportunist with a Stan Laurel lookalike sidekick who is unable to admit that this whole affair is a load of old hancocks.
JF
Nicely summarized!
A vax- sceptic doctor has raised the possibility that; even if the jab may not cause immediate side effects in many guinea pigs, it may be a time bomb: it can later on make people succumb to viruses etc far more seriously than they would have done. Then the side effects can be blamed on whatever new “rmutation” of covid comes along later, not on the jab. . And our enemies will then claim there is a need for yet another jab for the new more lethal ” mutation”.
Bottom line; our enemies are very cunning and have doubtless planned it so that when guineapigs get ill from the jab they will not realise tha jab’s to blame. They won’t even then wake up to the fact that they’ve been fooled.
Was it not Ken Clarke who boasted about the Maastricht Treaty saying that he had not read it. There will be dozens of the same ilk this time.
And he was a QC I.e. One who would be expected to understand the thing and discover the hidden nuances
Some of the present mob will be similarly qualified and some more of them will be qualified in other fields but capable of reading such a document and understanding it ( I was going to say make sense of it, but realised that’s assuming the document is capable of such a quality)
Anyway, I would anticipate the bulk of them have’nt got a brain between them and whether they read it or not would not contribute any reliability to the quality of the outcome of the treaty at all.
I’ll take a bet Boris doesn’t read it all through, not because he wouldn’t understand it, but primarily because he might understand it too well.
I believe he is the master of self deception and hypocracy.
Actually it was Douglas Hird who was Foreign Secretary at the time of Maastricht.
Obviously not of the common “herd”
I suspect hundreds, probably the majority, including my MP. They disgust me.