Brexit consequences

Tony.Williams
Posts: 1174
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2016 8:05 am
Location: Still somewhere in England
Contact:

Re: Brexit consequences

Post by Tony.Williams »

Yet another unintended consequence.

Johnson might end up spending a fortune on his favoured Scotland to Northern Ireland Bridge only to find it is connecting two independent EU countries.

On the subject of Spain and Gibraltar, I do think the Spanish have a nerve pressing for the "decolonisation" of Gibraltar while insisting that their own African enclaves of Ceuta and Melilla are completely different. In fact, the UK has a stronger claim to Gib than Spain has to C&M as we occupy Gib in accordance with an international treaty, signed by Spain. As I understand it, Spain's occupation of C&M has no such legal backing.

chaggle
Posts: 2586
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 10:01 am

Re: Brexit consequences

Post by chaggle »

What they say about Ceuta and Melilla (and few other lesser but similar possessions) is that they were Spanish before Morocco even existed.

I don't know if it's true, nor if it makes any difference to the legalities.
Don't blame me - I voted remain :con

Tony.Williams
Posts: 1174
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2016 8:05 am
Location: Still somewhere in England
Contact:

Re: Brexit consequences

Post by Tony.Williams »

https://www.theweek.co.uk/94326/ceuta-a ... -in-africa
History
The port town of Ceuta and its larger sister city Melilla sit around 250 miles apart on the Mediterranean coast of Africa, and their Spanish past traces back more than 400 years.

For centuries, Ceuta and Melilla were vital port cities, offering protection for Spanish ships and acting as trading posts between Europe and Africa. In the 1930s, Spanish troops garrisoned in the two cities played a major role in future dictator Francisco Franco’s uprising against their government.

When Morocco gained independence in 1956, following more than four decades of rule by Spain and France, Spain refused to include Ceuta and Melilla in the handover.

Sovereignty issues
Madrid asserts that both territories are integral parts of Spain and have the same status as the semi-autonomous districts on its mainland, such as the Basque and Catalan regions.

However, Morocco has made numerous claims to the territories since gaining independence. In 2002, the dispute turned violent after a small group of Moroccan soldiers set up camp on the Spanish-controlled Parsley Island, 200 metres off the coast of mainland Morocco. They were forcefully removed by the Spanish navy, in a clash that heightened tensions between the two countries.

Spanish King Juan Carlos angered Moroccans by visiting Melilla in 2007. The infuriated then-Moroccan prime minister Abbas El Fassi said: “We would like to remind everyone that the two cities form an integral part of Moroccan soil and their return to their homeland will be sought through direct negotiations with our neighbour Spain.”

Morocco’s King Mohammad VI even briefly recalled his ambassador to Madrid in protest over the Spanish king’s visit to the “occupied territories”, the Daily Express adds.
The main point seems to be the significance (or otherwise) of geography vs history. Geographically, C&M are obviously African, although occupied by Spain for centuries by force, rather than by treaty. Similarly, Gib is geographically attached to Spain, although occupied by the UK for over 300 years by treaty (and by force). In addition, Gib residents vote in favour of UK rather than Spain by about 98%. So the rights of the Gibs are an additional factor - self-determination vs national claims. Ironically, I suspect that the UK would instantly transfer Gib to Spain if the residents voted in favour, just as they would transfer the Falklands to Argentina in the same circumstances. I can't see Spain doing the same over C&M...

Matt
Posts: 977
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2015 7:50 pm

Re: Brexit consequences

Post by Matt »

Shaping up to be an entertaining Rock Opera.
Didn't Gibraltar vote something like 97% remain?

Tony.Williams
Posts: 1174
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2016 8:05 am
Location: Still somewhere in England
Contact:

Re: Brexit consequences

Post by Tony.Williams »

A nice cheerful (not) article examining the impact of Brexit on trade: http://speri.dept.shef.ac.uk/2020/02/27 ... l-suicide/
The former ‘party of business’ is deliberately shooting the country in the feet. It is unique in actively negotiating less favourable market access with its major trading partner: a gigantic economy and genuine regulatory superpower. This historic strategic error will erect huge barriers between British firms and their European markets, decisively undermining the country’s prosperity.

User avatar
bindeweede
Site Admin
Posts: 3774
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2015 3:45 pm
Location: Hertfordshire, UK

Re: Brexit consequences

Post by bindeweede »

"£4.4 billion pounds preparing for Brexit."
The hypocrisy of the Government’s spending on Brexit has been laid bare in a new report by the National Audit Office (NAO) that reveals a withdrawal process drowning in red tape, departments wasting hundreds of millions of pounds on experts, and having to divert funds away from existing departmental budgets.

The Chair of the Committee of Public Accounts has also slammed the Treasury for its lack of transparency after the NAO revealed the Government has spent at least £4.4 billion pounds preparing for Brexit.
https://bylinetimes.com/2020/03/06/gove ... -red-tape/

User avatar
bindeweede
Site Admin
Posts: 3774
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2015 3:45 pm
Location: Hertfordshire, UK

Re: Brexit consequences

Post by bindeweede »

Will those who voted to leave the EU be surprised?

"EU moves to limit exports of medical equipment outside the bloc."
Brussels on Sunday imposed an EU-wide export ban for some medical protective equipment in a bid to keep sufficient supplies within the bloc, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen announced.

On Monday, the Commission will also launch joint public procurement with member countries for testing kits and respiratory ventilators and present guidelines to national governments on border measures, she said. The Commission is already in the process of jointly procuring face masks for 20 countries.
https://www.politico.eu/article/coronav ... equipment/

Tony.Williams
Posts: 1174
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2016 8:05 am
Location: Still somewhere in England
Contact:

Re: Brexit consequences

Post by Tony.Williams »

Yep, one effect of coronavirus is to highlight the disadvantages of Brexit, although so far Johnson has refused to acknowledge that it might be a good idea to extend the transition period.

User avatar
bindeweede
Site Admin
Posts: 3774
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2015 3:45 pm
Location: Hertfordshire, UK

Re: Brexit consequences

Post by bindeweede »

Extending the transition period: Johnson’s chance to lead.

More perceptive analysis from Chris Grey.
More than anything, his biggest challenge now, which will likely define his political legacy, is to gain public trust and to repay it. Whilst he is remembered as the man who repeatedly fronted the £350M Brexit bus lie, despite the corrections of the UK Statistics Authority, his pronouncements about “sending the virus packing in twelve weeks” come across as more dodgy sloganeering and appeals to “follow the science” ring hollow. But if he were to tell the truth about the need for an extension, he might finally move beyond being the Brexit campaign leader to being the ‘nation in crisis’ leader he clearly craves to be seen as.
https://chrisgreybrexitblog.blogspot.co ... nsons.html

Tony.Williams
Posts: 1174
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2016 8:05 am
Location: Still somewhere in England
Contact:

Re: Brexit consequences

Post by Tony.Williams »

I read a nice joke today, set in a post-apocalyptic world: "Every year the British Leader visits Europe in order to make the traditional appeal to extend the Brexit deadline, although no-one can remember what that was about".

Post Reply