mitsho
Deity
I'd vote for a Scortie.
And since we are on topic: https://www.the-postillon.com/2017/02/scotland-switzerland.html
And since we are on topic: https://www.the-postillon.com/2017/02/scotland-switzerland.html
https://m.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entr...brexit-trade-deal_uk_5c5b26c6e4b00187b5579f64
A selection of submissions of US lobbyists of what they would like in a US UK trade deal.
Essentially they want US standards.
It highlights some of the differences between EU and US standards and approaches.
13) Allow foreign businesses to sue the British state
A separate investor-state dispute settlement scheme has also been suggested for a US-UK trade deal.
This one, suggested by the powerful Security Industry and Financial Markets Association, would allow multinational companies to sue the Britain over regulations or interventions the state makes in the country’s or citizens’ interests.
A crucial difference of this scheme would mean cases would not be heard in the British courts but in arbitration courts which are not subject to domestic law.
In a recent case in a similar scheme, the Australian government was sued under a similar mechanism for trying to remove branding from cigarettes, for example.
The Association told the consultation: “The most effective dispute settlement mechanism for investors is investor-state arbitration. A UK-US agreement should include such a mechanism and ensure it extends to financial services to enable investors to bring their claims on a depoliticised basis and seek damages for breaches of the obligations.”
I got all the way to the bottom, but it didn't get any less nauseating. Pretty much "You should throw out all your [higher] quality/safety standards, and adopt all of our [lower] standards instead" — right across the board.I saw that linked on Twitter this morning. The first half was so terrifying that I was desensitised merely halfway down the page.
You should read your own posts in your head before hitting the button.
“Following the decision of Seaborne Freight’s backer, Arklow Shipping, to step back from the deal, it became clear Seaborne would not reach its contractual requirements with the government. We have therefore decided to terminate our agreement.
“The government is already in advanced talks with a number of companies to secure additional freight capacity – including through the port of Ramsgate – in the event of a no-deal Brexit.”
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...ncels-brexit-ferry-contract-with-no-ship-firm
https://m.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entr...brexit-trade-deal_uk_5c5b26c6e4b00187b5579f64
A selection of submissions of US lobbyists of what they would like in a US UK trade deal.
Essentially they want US standards.
It highlights some of the differences between EU and US standards and approaches.
MPs may not be given a vote on a revised version of Theresa May's Brexit deal this month, a minister has said.
[...]
She will ask MPs for more time to get changes to the deal in talks with Brussels - but Labour has accused her of "cynically" running down the clock.
[...]
But Labour's shadow Brexit secretary, Sir Keir Starmer, says he believes the prime minister is "pretending to make progress" on this issue.
He says what she actually intends to do is return to Parliament after the 21/22 March European Council summit the week before Brexit and offer MPs a "binary choice" - her deal or no deal.
I read somewhere that a binding, immediate second referendum was being seriously considered.So it looks like May is going to punt yet again:
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-47187491
It looks like the "meaningful vote" is going to be as meaningful as expected: Not at all.