I don't really understand that. Are you saying that it's BJ who makes the decision whether or not an alleged infringement of international law made by his own government (ie himself) is put before the appropriate court?
That does not compute to me.
It seems to have been an erroneous impression, perhaps simply by your objection to the use of a tactic, that may nullify what seems to have been an unreasonable attitude from the EU in the recent negotiations.It's not that important in the scheme of things, but why else did you identify me as a remainer?
I'm not sure who has initial jurisdiction for matters concerning international law (breaches, for the use of).
Er its called the FO and they can demand explanations, even if nothing satisfactory can be achieved at this stage, but lets not forget on teensy weensy little fact, from what we can glean, they released it, it's killed trade as we know it and it';s had a global effect.- Fundamentally that's considerably worse than the localised effect of a border war- oh and they have a vested interest in getting their way.
Well, Brandon Lewis seemed to think that international law would be broken. At least that what he told parliament. It seems that the government's most senior legal adviser shared that view and resigned.
I think that under those circumstances I'd say it's a fair bet that the courts may well become involved.
With respect, the only reason you think this article has a 'ring of truth' about it is that it panders to your vitriolic hatred of and prejudice against Boris Johnson. If he were to single-handedly come up with a cure for cancer, you would be desperately raking through the ether for a Tweet or an article saying he'd found the cure too late, and it's all a scam to kill immigrant cancer patients or something.This has a ring of truth about it.
A friend emailed me earlier this week in despair about the Prime Minister. ‘Boris reminds me of a hereditary king — Edward II or Henry VI — who is so staggeringly incompetent that he must be removed before doing too much damage,’ he wrote. ‘I felt the same way about May but Boris is worse.’ He...www.spectator.co.uk
That last bit of your post is the telling one. I too believe that Boris will bounce back once Covid stops filling so much political time - he has the ability to adapt and adjust. Unlike his predecessor who was so timid that she could not move forward at all and had absolutely no ability to adapt and change. Thank goodness she had been eased out prior to the Covid outbreak!With respect, the only reason you think this article has a 'ring of truth' about it is that it panders to your vitriolic hatred of and prejudice against Boris Johnson. If he were to single-handedly come up with a cure for cancer, you would be desperately raking through the ether for a Tweet or an article saying he'd found the cure too late, and it's all a scam to kill immigrant cancer patients or something.
I quite like Toby Young, in general his articles are well written, informative, amusing and I often agree with his conclusions. However in this case I don't; whilst the PM has quite evidently not been firing on all cylinders since his brush with COVID, I have confidence that he will rally, looking at what he's managed to do since becoming PM (stonking majority, Brexit enacted, and despite the relentless bad press, a pretty effective defence of the economy through lockdown).
I am a subscriber to the Spectator, and have been for some time. I find it an essential read which helps me peek beyond the political curtain, but I don't consider its articles to be irrefutable or writ on stone tablets. IMHO this is just the editorial pendulum swinging to one extreme. Over the coming months (dependent on events dear boy), "Boris is awful, and must go" articles in the Speccy will be replaced by "Boris has some redeeming qualities", and then culminate "The old Boris is back!" ,before tipping back toward "Grave weaknesses in Boris's leadership".
Plus ca change.
Governments would rather go to war against their own people with draconian sanctions than say a peep about the real culprits. Not just here but around the world (Donald Trump a notable exception)But funnily enough not many on the opposition benches about Boris holding China to account for the original source... very convenient
Governments would rather go to war against their own people with draconian sanctions than say a peep about the real culprits. Not just here but around the world (Donald Trump a notable exception
Excuse thread swerve.
China has a lot to answer for, has resisted any suggestion in a hugely aggressive manner, and Australia is presently paying a heavy economic penalty for having dared to do so.
Boris has taken steps, but has also acted diplomatically in this respect. As the economic rabid Gorilla in the room, China, regretfully has to be treated with extreme caution.
With regard to the EU only regarding the CJEU as the only arbiter, it a bit like the recent election of a Chinese Judge to the International Tribunal of the sea. A joke.
.Duan Jielong was elected to serve a nine-year term on the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea despite US argument that China disregarded international law.www.scmp.com
France, Germany and the United Kingdom recently made statements with regard to China’s claims of ‘historic rights’ over the South China Sea waters that they do not comply with international law and UNCLOS provisions and recall that the arbitral award in the Philippines V. China case dating to 12 July 2016 clearly confirms this point.
“France, Germany and the United Kingdom hold that all maritime claims in the South China Sea should be made and peacefully resolved in accordance with the principles and rules of UNCLOS and the means and procedures for the settlement of disputes provided for in the Convention.”
All three countries insist their position on the South China Sea is “without prejudice” and that they “take no position” on territorial disputes in the region.
With a Chinese judge now in place who knows what will happen.
We still trade lavishly with the likes of China (predominantly one way traffic) and Saudi Arabia (arms and technology),
Many old-established, formerly British businesses are now in the hands of Chinese concerns.
London is filled with properties owned by citizens and functionaries of Russia, China, Saudi Arabia and other politically undesirable Arab potentates.