If you'd do the homework, you may eventually be able to figure stuff out and maybe not appear to be such a drongo to boot. Lookin' out for ya, buddy!
Permission to write a long, detailed reply, Sir......... I’m not going to but wish I had time. There are elements of your statement / concerns that I agree with, but, the UK currently sits outside some of those concerns. Schengen is now embodied in EU Law. (It was a separate treaty for ease of trade & work travel by those member signatories at conception) BUT The EU embodied it, including in the (Amsterdam?) Treaty, announcing it “a recognition of one identity” or words to this effect and shaped policy / goals around it. (It is elements such as this I disagree with as Europe does extremely well for trade and peace off the arrangements it has at the moment - there appears little purpose for further integration between member states to my mind). BUT Britain sits outside Schengen. As does Ireland. I cannot see Britain ever opting for further alignment with the EU.
But for Article 50 being in play, I would agree with you. We would not see the UK within Schengen within our lifetime, most probably. But Art50 is in play. I offer two slightly unlikely, but within the range of possibility, scenarios: 1. The MayBot somehow gets her deal approved by Parliament, in it's current form or possibly watered down (and in turn is accepted by the EU). (This is hopefully unlikely but if it happens, what follows is almost inevitable.) The UK is locked into a transitional arrangement on terms less favourable than Remain, paying for the privilege and without any voice in the EU Politburo. How long is this tenable? Slow death by a thousand procedural, legislative and economic cuts. Alternatively, the Backstop trap is sprung, causing inconceivable mayhem upon the UK political system, possible instability in Eire/NI and creating a situation where no UK government can survive without promising the electorate that it will get the country out of the backstop at all costs. 2. Clean Brexit, WTO rules but for some reason, this leads to financial disaster - possibly as a result of a country-crashing attack by globalist economic powers (shorting the currency, trashing the credit rating, etc). I consider the likelihood of this 2nd scenario occurring very remote but theoretically possible. In both cases where the worst possible outcome happens, the UK is pretty much forced to go back, tail between legs, to the EU. Option No 1 taking place means begging the EU to take us back is a near certainty. In either scenario, if we do try to return to the EU fold, we will pay for it, in ways that will make your eyes water. Schengen may well be the least of those horrors. If you consider this to be fantasy, I am certain you will wish to prove that and will have no objection to emigrating to Greece. I hear it's nice there.
This is why I think a withdrawal of Article 50 must be on the cards and will be the Gov’s biggest lifeline (if possible to unilaterally withdraw after 10th December) Withdraw (find out what Britain wants and how, find an agreement NI / RofI about N.I else otherwise leaving at all is deadlocked anyway) and have another go at Art. 50 in years to come when Britain has planned and sorted its house out. Former National Security Risk, Dr Liam Fox MP should have wet ink on “40 trade deal” drafts by now which would’ve eased the burden. The wank doesn’t have a single one lined up else he’d shout them from the rooftops and use it as a bartering chip.
I’m just waiting for May to tell us how she’s really sorry, dispite all her hard work it’s just not possible to leave the EU.
She’s been wanting to do that for a long time but can’t because it would destroy her party. She would have to tell 70% of her constituencies they were offered an impossible pup by her party leader in 2016.
It’ll be a speech like no other. Telling us how hard she’s worked etc etc. Very convincing. Then what ?
Who knows? Either that, or possibly she (someone) goes back to Europe and puts a gun to her head (the UK’s and her party’s head) and says “if you don’t offer me a deal that sorts NI before Britain leaves (whenever that is - art. 50 extension, whatever), I’ll blow my own country’s brain out.” And if she successfully manages that then her advisors & civil service deserves a medal.
WE are not eu but your approach is very eu, every single vote of an individual country that involves the eu and one that it does not like, it seeks to overturn, Holland, Ireland and France are well known examples. This leaving of the U.K. could have been done with more recognition of the U.K.'s contribution to the eu (not just monetary). but they seek to over turn a nations democratic vote or try to destroy the U.K. whilst attempting it you suggest this This is why I think a withdrawal of Article 50 must be on the cards and will be the Gov’s biggest lifeline (if possible to unilaterally withdraw after 10th December) but why? Everything we have done is within the rules and has taken democracy in it's heart in order to deliver on our nations biggest democratic vote The eu on the other hand likes to paint itself as democratic and in regards to the negotiations, the rules are the rules. enshrined in eu law as you point out but then you again post direct from the eu website, the eu are dropping Shengen (it says for a temporary time), which is enshrined in eu law, as one of it's core rules and standards. https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/w...sas/schengen/reintroduction-border-control_en It highlights that the eu are little more than a cvnt in a expensive tax payer funded suit with a good pr company that can pick and drop it's own laws enshrined in their very centre
You need to understand this - Within the Schengen agreement there are provisions for its temporary suspension under certain events. Possible terror threats and mass aylum are but two of those events. The Basis upon which states have agreed to Schengen includes for those temporary suspension measures. The parties to the agreement would have envisaged times of emergency and insisted upon it. And so, in times of emergency, under certain conditions allowed for in the agreement, member states can apply to temporarily suspend the agreement. Hence the hyperlink. Take a good look at it. Member states would have been crazy to have signed up to absolute no border checks 100% of the time. As with every union or treaty, it is the parties that decide what they sign up to. What they sign up to can only be amended between. It is not up to the EU. So, because the Schengen agreement is legally binding, members can only act in accordance with it. To do weatherwise breaches each members obligations to each other. If the agreement contained no suspensive measures, then no state could ever close it’s border. Therefore the there must be provision within the agreement to suspend since certain member states have closed their borders. Therefore to allow temporary suspension is entirely compliant with EU law. In the event that the member state wishes to join the union, the EU has now enshrined in law that any future member state must abide by Shengen. I.e. much of the EU has Schengen and so if you wish to join you must to. (And when you join, you will be allowed To close the border in times of emergency That meet the criteria - i.e security threat. Because such measures are included in the treaty. As with any treaty it is done with complete agreement of the parties.
Because Britain can’t leave the EU without breaking the Good Friday Agreement - A treaty. You went on and on and on and on and on, for reasons that utterly escape me, about how the EU wasn’t a party to the GFA. Having hopefully establish that it wasn’t, after me having to repeatedly pointing out why it wasn’t and you misunderstand that, hopefully you will now understand that Britain’s problem with the Good Friday agreement and leaving the EU has nothing to do with the EU and everything to do with the Agreement of the parties to the EU. To ask the EU (remember the EU is merely the collective of 27 other states) bound by treaty, to make exception for Britain would be asking it to break its agreement with itself and every other nation outside of the EU with which it has a trading relationship. And in any event, the only way in which Britain can ask it to do that and preserve the Good Friday Agreement, is to enter into a customs union - the rules of which will not allow GB to trade with any other state. For if it did, it would breach every other member states agreement to the customs union and also breach any other trading agreement that the EU holds with other trading nations outside of the EU.
I understand the gobbbleegook you have just placed and the get out clauses they have used. It won't escape many that they have sought to remove unrest over the christmas period or the actions of Merkel importing millions over into a core country knowing there was no way of keeping them in just one country in a shengen based system. But if you click for the full country list within that link, they have been invoking this since 2006 and most of the (temporary but often repeated) are the northern european states so whilst claiming to be a core function, they themselves have been ignoring for the last 12 years https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/s...ons_-_reintroduction_of_border_control_en.pdf
