Opinion: Mzee continues to be hostile to any voice, but himself!

I have come here,(Buddu FM) mainly to undo the lies peddled by unscrupulous people on radio stations” (…) I have been polite, but when time comes I will get hard at people who spread lies about the government” (…) “The reason why am here is to detoxicate because many people having been poisoning the public with false information” – Yoweri Kaguta Museveni on Radio Buddu (09.09.2017).

President Museveni had yet another radio show explaining his plans with the Land Amendments and Constitutional Change. As his party and his henchmen has blocked Besigye to do the same. Therefore, National Resistance Movement (NRM) is clearing the air for the President. So when he does that, he should spring some enlightenment, instead he is attack the opposition and the other radio stations.

President Museveni could have told why he and his cronies were blocking Besigye from different radio stations, while he was on his own. Also, why Museveni at the same time stopped an on-air talk-show. Instead, days after he is grasping for air and assaulting them. Mzee, never liked opposition or visions who is not his own. Museveni and NRM have never really been about Multi-Party Democracy or visions for governance.

I am not surprised that Museveni is attacking the opposition and other media for questioning his vision. That has always been lies, since he is the truth-teller who has never told a little lie. He was supposed to step-down twice, he said once Presidents was not supposed to overstay in power. There are countless of lies in the over 30 years in charge. So when he says other people’s lies, he is throwing stones in a glass-house.

Also, when he warns media of having other voices than his. He proves his megalomaniac and controlling sense. Museveni and NRM are the only one for him. Mzee wanted to crush the opposition after the General Election of 2016. The President will really silence the media for his sake, therefore the Amendment cannot be that great if he has to warn the media.

That is automatically lies, since he has to use time for a Radio Campaign to muster support. Mzee is really on thin-ice dancing with the stars, when he has to muster threats instead of policy. When he has to silence and shuffle his deceptions to the airwaves. He spoke afterwards of that, but who cares when he goes all anti-mode and all in to win. It doesn’t matter what sorts of words he says, since he has already put distrust to any voice other than his.

I don’t believe a single word Museveni says, but that is because of decades of deceptions and play the facade. You are naive if you believe this man. President Museveni has used all tricks in the book. The Constitutional Amendment are only out for one thing: Make it easier for the government to take titles and land. So this is to sell-off land to investors and cronies, so they can short-change the public. That is the story the President will not tell. Therefore, what I am writing is a lie and also whatever “what-his-face” is saying on the radio whose not the President. Peace.

Opinion: NRM are cowards for blocking Besigye’s radio campaign!

Just as the President Yoweri Kaguta Museveni stopped his national radio trip for traveling abroad for a conference of some kind. The Opposition leader and the People’s President Dr. Kizza Besigye was planning of having his own radio campaign to counter the peddling lies of the President concerning the Land Amendment.

Because the Forum for Democratic Change (FDC) are questioning the motives of the Constitutional Amendment and the possible land-grab. That will hurt to be listening to in the villages. That is why the Amuru land-grab has hurt the plans of the government and their sugar factory agreement with the foreign investors. Clearly, Besigye speaking ill of it will bend the lies and mask of the government. This is something the National Resistance Movement (NRM) and Museveni cannot deflect. Therefore, even as Besigye had paid Voice of Kigezi or 89.5 FM – The Trumpet, we’re paid 1,000,000 million shillings for participating in a talk-show on the radio. This one time payment was paid on 8th September , as the show was scheduled yesterday. But the Radio was blocked by the government to air it. The same radio station that hosted the President on the 4th September. But when Besigye tries on the 8th September its blocked. What childish play by the government!

You know your speeches and arguments are weak tea, when you cannot be disowned or having other organizations question your actions. Your know your attempt of change of laws is disgusting, when the opposition cannot question it on air. Another radio station Besigye was blocked from was the Kabale Radio station, 94.7 FM Freedom Radio. To this radio station Besigye paid 500,000 shillings. So half million shillings for the time, that he couldn’t use. So Besigye has paid two radio station 1,5 millions shillings, but we’re blocked by both. The Mbarara and Kabale based stations.

That Museveni and NRM are cowards, that he has to continue with foul-play is just proving his belittling of fellow citizens. It’s just like NRM can have rallies and demonstrations for the Article 102 Amendment in Arua, but if the FDC would have a counter demonstration, they would be arrested, detained and blocked for doing so. The Police would use the Public Order Management Act, even as the Opposition had informed and notice as by law. Still, the Police would interfere and shut it down. But the NRM and NRM Youth can walk the street with banners and demonstrate for the cause.

The same is now shown with radio campaign of Museveni, but when Besigye tries to do the same. He is blocked. Its cowardice and show how little margin of error there is for others, but Museveni is the royal king who can do as he wants. Museveni can put shackles on anyone, but he can do as he pleases. No boundaries for the misuse of power, as he uses it by any means. Peace.

Yet another Future Partnership report on Brexit: The UK Gov. wants similar research collaboration as of today!

The newest report on Research Collaboration between United Kingdom and the European Union, as the withdrawal from the EU will lead to chances in science and research in the United Kingdom. The Tories Government are still within the wishful thinking. Their paradigm is clearly the softest of the soft Brexits. So soft, that butter isn’t soft enough.

Brexit appeal must really be dwindling since most of the Future Partnership Papers has been softball and easy road into withdrawal. The EU will clearly make this harder and more expensive. United Kingdom government wants clearly more of the same. It is expected to be dialogue and negotiations between the partners. Here is some parts of the Reports!

It is the UK’s ambition to build on its uniquely close relationship with the EU, so that collaboration on science and innovation is not only maintained, but strengthened. Therefore, as part of the new, deep and special partnership, the UK will seek an ambitious science and innovation agreement with the EU that will support and promote science and innovation across Europe both now and in the future” (HM Government, P: 7, 2017).

EU programmes have helped foster European scientific collaboration and the UK has been a key contributor to their success. The UK remains a full member of the EU and will be subject to all rights and obligations set out in the Treaties and under EU law, including the principle of sincere cooperation, until it leaves the EU. In that context, and looking ahead to a strong future relationship, both the UK and the European Commission have been clear that they expect the fair treatment of UK researchers and firms. The UK and EU should also work together to provide continuity of collaborative relationships” (HM Government, P: 9, 2017).

The Commission is planning a European Defence Research Programme in the next Multiannual Financial Framework, which is expected to invest €500 million per year in industry and academia from participating countries. To prepare for this, a three-year Action was launched in 2017 and the UK has been instrumental in defining its work programme. The UK would welcome dialogue with the EU and its Member States on the future of this programme and terms for non-EU involvement, noting that Norway will have third-party association in this preparatory phase” (HM Government, P: 13, 2017).

The UK wants to continue playing a major role in creating a brighter future for all European citizens by strengthening collaboration with European partners in science and innovation” (…) “To this end, the UK will seek to agree a far-reaching science and innovation agreement with the EU that establishes a framework for future collaboration. There are a range of existing precedents for collaboration that the UK and the EU can build on, but our uniquely close relationship means there may be merit in designing a more ambitious agreement. The UK hopes to have a full and open discussion with the EU about all of these options as part of the negotiations on our future partnership” (HM Government, P: 16, 2017).

I am not surprised by this Future Partnership Report, it is one of many now. The ones dropped in August was similar, but different topics. United Kingdom wants all of the options on the table and still want close relationship, but the UK will be a non-Member-State. They are focusing on the special bond between the Norwegian and the EU, but that means the UK must work hard to get that relationship. Since the EU will clearly not just give way to UK. Though, the Future Papers are lots of dreams.

So another daydream is done, Brexit Minister David Davis and others in the Tories Government, surely needs help and also should know that EU will not trade-off anything easy. Brexit will not be easy and their papers prove it. As they are having extra-terrestrial and alien belief about their negotiations and their deal-making with the EU. Peace.

Reference:

HM Government – ‘Collaboration on science and innovation – A FUTURE PARTNERSHIP PAPER’ (06.09.2017)

Opinion: President Museveni Defense of the Land Amendment is to be calling out the ones against it – ENEMIES!

The man who wants to sensitize and usually talk about the Republic as one, the Ugandan Republic. President Yoweri Kaguta Museveni on this Radio Campaign to defend and promote the Constitutional Amendment on Land Reform. The first interview has no showed his true character, since he is calling the ones who disagree enemies. He cannot manage to come with sufficient arguments to defend it. Like the issues inside Uganda will not be solved this. This here is not made for development of infrastructure or industrialization. The ability to grab land and without the issues they have today with the titles.

That is why the land titles and deeds are so important. The Republic should make it hard to take land, since this can be conned away from the villagers and citizens in general. Because the state made arrangements with investors and plantation owners. That is what most likely will happen. Because that is what President Museveni has done and tried to do as long his been the Executive of Uganda.

Just read the quotes from radio interview yesterday.

Favorable quotes from the Radio Show on Voice of Kigezi FM:

We are the only country in the region and may be in the world, who legislated to give land to the people; otherwise elsewhere, land belongs to government” (…) “The challenge that the government has is land owners who reject government compensation and run to court thereby making government projects stall. I even wonder what these liars mean by “government grabbing people’s land” and Ugandans must know these liars as their enemies and enemies of Uganda because they are against the development of the country” (…) “They are the same people who talk of unemployment amongst the youth but go on to frustrate government projects such as those in the energy and transport sectors that provide incentives for investment. They even frustrate investors directly as you are aware of the Amuru sugar project that has stalled for 6 years due to the same people” (…) “We need mass industrialisation to develop our country but these saboteurs continue to frustrate investors. I call upon all Ugandans to rise up against these people who are enemies of Uganda” (…) “We even risk denting our country’s image internationally and being isolated because of the character of these people. We have to expose and shun them; otherwise the rest of the world will misunderstand us” (Museveni, 2017).

The President, the government and his cronies will clearly find ways to spoil it. The National Resistance Movement (NRM) and the President will use the Land Amendment to make sure the projects and developments benefiting them will appear. President Museveni have to call the ones who stand against him “enemies”. He must surely dislike Mama Mabira, but she has switched to his team, so “no”.

This amendment will not create industrialization, the land issue will be more dire. Since this gives more power to the state. The state will overpower the citizens, the land can be taken away from them. President Museveni has no issue pushing this, because the earnings of profits and taking the land from the citizens will benefit the President and the NRM. This will not be for the greater good, it will be used as pawns for the citizens, that is why the ones who stand against it is enemies. They are not opposition, but enemies, because he fears the ones who oppose it.

The President should discuss it with manners, but he doesn’t, President Museveni has to address the ones who are disagreeing with him, as enemies. That is just proving his lack of thinking of democratic ideas and spirit, but he wanted to get rid of opposition parties after the recent elections. It fits with his modus operandi.

But that the ones standing in his way, are ENEMIES. Set worrying signs, they are not fellow peers, they are not of another opinion, but enemies. The warfare and bush-war spirit is still alive, because he has rig and cheat to win elections. He wouldn’t win in a fair fight. That is something the President knows. President Museveni should discuss the Constitutional Amendment with just words, not like this. However, the old man doesn’t know better or cannot change his character. Peace.

Reference:

Yoweri Kaguta Museveni – ‘President Museveni explains his radio land campaign’ (05.09.2017) link: https://www.yowerikmuseveni.com/president-museveni-explains-his-radio-land-campaign

President Museveni on Radio-Tour to explain either [Land Amendment] or (Land Grab) 101!

In the coming days near you, if you listen to the radio-channels of Voice of Kigezi, Radio West, Voice of Tooro ,Spice FM, Point FM and Radio Buddu. From today at 19:00 Uganda Time, the radio will filled with reasoning of Mr. President, His Excellency President Yoweri Kaguta Museveni. Who for the moment are still trying to figure out a way of spoiling his own age and birthday, but that is for another day.

Right now he is on a quest to prove the validity and reasoning behind the Land Amendment in the 10th Parliament. The reason for the government sudden need to take more power and have the capacity to take land away from the current landowners and titles from the locals. That without following the current provisions and compensations for land. Because that is hassle, the state needs it for cheap. That is why the President will go on tour explaining, the brilliant legal scholar of Kahinda Otafiire and his minions. So that the people who listens will understand, that the reasonable theft of their livelihood is for the common good and that is just to follow the Don, follow the President no matter what. Here is the amendment in question!

“Amendment of Article 26:

“(3) Where the owner of property or any person having any interest in or right over property objects to the compensation awarded under a law made under clause (2Xb), the Government or local government shall deposit with court for the property owner or any person having any interest in or right over the property, the compensation awarded for the property, and the Government or local government shall take possession of the property pending determination by the court of any dispute relating to the compensation” (Otafiire, 2017).

“(4) The owner of property or person having any interest in or right over the property shall have a right to access the compensation deposited with the court referred to in clause (3),at any time during the determination of the dispute” (Otafiire, 2017).

“(5) Parliament shall, by law, prescribe the time within which any dispute referred to in clause (3) shall be determined” (Otafiire, 2017).

This provision of the law is not to make it better, by law it makes the state more powerful and the frugal mind can possess the land and develop on it. They will take the laws in their hands and make sure the developers get easier access, without having to make sure the facilitation or the boundaries are kept, in this spirit this quick transition is made for less transparent system and for more land grabbing in the hands of cronyism and of the state. This will only benefit the elite and the ones who wants to build sugar factories and plantations, without having to care for the locals, who has been living on the land for generations.

The speeches and his words, better be stellar, his lies better be sufficient and his stamina, better be top notch. Since, the way he will explain this otherwise, will be disastrous, since in the grand scheme of things. This is taking the hand that feeds districts and beating them with a stick. He better, come with some sort of play and some sort of argument that makes cow shit, look like chocolate. Because that what he needed be. Nothing else, just which, he needs to sprinkle the cow-shit and call it hot-fudge sundae. There is nothing else to do. Peace.

 

Reference:

Otafiire, Kahinda – ‘Constitutional Amendment Bill of 2017’ – 08.06.2017 – Uganda Gazette No. 33, Volume CX, Bill Supplement No. 7

Uganda Police Force – Press Release: “We refute claims by a local daily of using sex workers as spies” (25.08.2017)

Malawi: Banned entry of Malema and Chishimba, because the DPP fears the TA Conference!

That the Transformation Alliance are planning to become a Political Party seems to stressful for the Republic of Malawi. This can be said, since the Ministry of Home Affairs and Internal Security, Hon. Grace Obama Chiumia ordered that two foreign speakers to a TA Conference we’re banned from the Republic. This is the Zambian politician Saviour Chishimba and the South African politician Julius Malema. TA must really upset the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and the President Peter Mutharika, who is struggling in with the Cash-Gate and the Maize-Scandal, that has run the Republic.

The Malawian ruling party and President Mutharika must fear the possible TA becoming a single political party instead of a political pressure group. Since the pressure group has enough power to get two foreign high-level politicians to its conference. They would question the corruption and the problematic institutions lacking procedures to secure food storage. Just take a look!

BLANTYRE – Transformation Alliance (TA), a political pressure group, has announced that it has invited South African and Economic Freedom Fighters leader Julius Malema, and controversial Zambian politician Saviour Chishimba, to its first national conference end of August ahead of the 2019 elections” (…) “Chishimba is a darling to Malawians for being a whistle blower of the controversial maize deal between state grain trader, Agricultural Development and Marketing Corporation (Admarc), Zambia Cooperative Federation (ZCF), a government agency, and private company Kaloswe Commuter and Courier Ltd” (Kamanga, 2017).

Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) have threatened to take action to force the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) pay back the money it received from councils and parastatals during the blue night fundraising dinner held at Kamuzu Palace. According to reports, DPP solicited money from Blantyre City Council (BCC), Mzuzu City Council (MCC) and Lilongwe Water Board (LWB) totalling K13.5 million. Gift Trapence: The reports sparked anger among CSOs who demanded that DPP must pay back the money it got from the institutions” (…) “As Civil Society Organizations we are not going to allow having that impunity and we are warning the ruling party it will return that money come rain come sunshine,” said Trapence. He further urged President Peter Mutharika not to allow party members to be “insulting” the citizenry when they demand answers on issues of national interest” (Bisani, 2017).

Chakwera will join Julius Malema a well -known politician in South Africa, a firebrand agitator who is revered and disliked in equal measure as another speaker will be Zambia’s leader of United Party (UP), Saviour Chishimba and that he has already confirmed his attendance. TA spokesman, Leonard Chimbanga could not confirm or deny about Chakwera attending the conference late alone making a keynote address, but confirmed that the leader of opposition has been invited to attend the conference. “He has been invited since we share similar views on matters of national interests,” he said. Meanwhile, some officials within the alliance have told Nyasa Times that the pressure group is working on turning into a political party ahead of 2019 elections apart from working underground to forge an alliance with other political groupings including Malawi Congress Party (MCP) and Peoples Party (PP)” (Malawi Voice Reporter, 2017).

Clearly, the Malawian government are afraid of the TA. They fear what the opposition pressure group TA can gain from this conference. That is why they have banned the Zambian politician UP Chishimba and South African EFF Malema is barred from entering the country. This proves the problems Malawi government has with it’s opposition. Peace.

Reference:

Bisani, Luke – ‘CSOs threaten demos over blue night donations’ (16.08.2017) link: https://malawi24.com/2017/08/16/csos-threaten-demos-blue-night-donations/

Kamanga, Penelope Paliani – ‘Malawi’s pressure group invites Malema and Zambia’s Chishimba’ (14.08.2017) link: https://southernafrican.news/2017/08/14/malawis-pressure-group-invites-malema-and-zambias-chishimba/

Malawi Voice Reporter – ‘Kunkuyu’s Transformation Alliance Party Teams-Up With MCP Ahead Of 2019 Polls’ (16.08.2017) link: http://www.malawivoice.com/kunkuyus-transformation-alliance-party-teams-up-with-mcp-ahead-of-2019-polls/

Brexit: Another future exit report with wishful thinking considering the role of CJEU post-Brexit!

The Tories-DUP Government released today yet another report, this report was on enforcement and disputes arising between the Her Majesties Government (HM Government) and the European Union (EU). As of when the United Kingdom abandon it’s membership status to become a non-member of the EU. The Brexit Minister David Davis clearly has lack of vision or trying to take the easy way out. Since the UK government has delivered nothing else, than wishful, we want it as today. So when I went into reading this, it was as expected. It is like the Tories doesn’t care about it or wanting to define what they want as they are going out of the EU. Here some of favorite quotes from today’s report.

As we exit the EU, the UK wants to agree an orderly withdrawal and establish a new, deep and special partnership with the EU. The UK has also made clear that in order to avoid any cliff-edge as we move from our current relationship to our future partnership, people and businesses in both the UK and the EU would benefit from an interim period, where this is necessary for the smooth and orderly implementation of new arrangements” (…) “The success of the future partnership will depend on mutual respect. We will be starting from a strong position: our shared commitment to upholding the rule of law and to meeting our international obligations, and our intention to comply with the agreements reached between us, are not in doubt” (HM Government, P: 3, 2017).

In agreements between the EU and third countries, where cooperation is facilitated through replicating language which is identical in substance to EU law, these agreements can specify that account is to be taken of CJEU decisions when interpreting those concepts. This is relevant where both parties agree that divergence in interpretation would be undesirable, for example, for operational reasons such as continued close cooperation with EU agencies” (…) “The value of such arrangements lie where there is a shared interest in reducing or eliminating divergence in how specific aspects of an agreement with the EU are implemented in the EU and the third country respectively. The extent to which this approach may be valuable depends on the extent to which there is agreement that divergence should be avoided in specific areas” (HM Government, P: 9, 2017).

In international agreements, final remedies are principally retaliatory in nature and implemented unilaterally by the parties. This includes the ability to take safeguard measures to mitigate any negative effects from the other party’s noncompliance as well as the option to suspend all or part of the agreement (or several linked agreements), or, ultimately, withdraw from the agreement (or several linked agreements). The ability of the European Commission and the CJEU within the EU legal system to impose sanctions, such as fines for non-compliance with EU rules, is exceptional” (…) “The agreements governing the UK’s withdrawal from, and future partnership with, the EU will cover a broad range of areas of cooperation. Those agreements should set out clear means by which the terms of the agreements should be implemented and enforced within the UK and the EU. They should also establish a mechanism for the resolution of disputes concerning those agreements” (HM Government, P: 11-12, 2017).

The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and the United Kingdom, this relationship will get into another position after the withdrawal from the EU. Since the legal disputes will be different between UK and EU, as the membership are now ceased. The UK might have some legal framework between them and the EU.

That EU and UK wants a mutual respect, they both want that. This paper actually states: In agreements between the EU and third countries, where cooperation is facilitated through replicating language which is identical in substance to EU law, these agreements can specify that account is to be taken of CJEU decisions when interpreting those concepts. This is relevant where both parties agree that divergence in interpretation would be undesirable, for example, for operational reasons such as continued close cooperation with EU agencies” (HM Government, 2017).

This specific passage says in essence, that the UK wants to be facilitated and replicating the legal language of the EU, so they can cooperate with EU law, even after leaving. So that it will in general stay much as the same. The concepts and the parties will agree, so they also will function directly with the EU agencies. So the UK want an agreement that fits directly to EU law. This is countering the independence and the mindset of a “hard” Brexit, more like smoothing their system to the EU. The Remains must be jolly, that yet another paper, the HM Government are working for more of the same. Not really changing the status, but wishing for a similar system of today. That means dispute and laws would work in sync with agencies and the CJEU. Which is impressive!

Clearly, the UK want a special mechanism to be sufficient between them, as their new cooperative spirit starts after the withdrawal, but the EU will have a new agreement and a new non Member State who wants to trade, follow procedure and the jurisdiction. This means the UK and the EU needs a new function to fix disputes and legal remedies between the non-members and the EU. The UK are afraid of the EU possible sanctions, as the powers of CJEU are powerful towards to third countries, which means the UK could be sanctioned in a way that haven’t in the past. That is why the UK want to consider a legal language in sync with the EU, so they will follow the EU, even when they are outside the EU. That means a pretty soft, compared to what the Brexit wanted to be. Peace.

Reference:

HM Government – ‘Enforcement and dispute resolution – A FUTURE PARTNERSHIP PAPER’ (23.08.2017)

Brexit: Tories position papers released today on ‘Confidentiality papers’ and ‘Availability of Goods’: Dreams of having the same of today!

It is inspiring to read the documents from the HM Government/Tories-DUP Government on the Withdrawal from the European Union (EU), the Conservative Party and their cabinet should have had a long time working on the prospects of the leaving the Union. The Tories government clearly have had the time to work on it. Still, by this time and with the proper work on it, they have not delivered a clear policy or protocol for important questions. It is sad to see political framework and policies being built on dreams, they will most likely turn into nightmares. Since, the UK will not be in the place and within the same reach of Brussels as before. Even if most of their ideals in their papers. Are put in ways, where they want the future to be like yesterday.

How the day went on yesterday, how the paperwork between the states will change, as the membership are cut-off. Yesterday, movement of goods went within the legislation and procedures put by duplicated acts of the Members States, something UK has done in their time of membership. It has to be different, and it will be, unless the EU will treat UK as different third-party state. Most likely not, but you cannot fail the Tories for having dreams.

Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union David Davis said:

These papers will help give businesses and consumers certainty and confidence in the UK’s status as an economic powerhouse after we have left the EU” (UK Gov, 2017).

Confidentiality:

At present, members of the institutions of the Union, the members of committees, and the officials and other servants of the Union are obliged not to disclose certain information obtained in the course of their duties. This obligation is presently set out in Article 339 Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and Article 37 of Protocol 4 to the Treaties” (…) “The UK considers that individuals (of any nationality) who are bound by Article 339, prior to the UK’s withdrawal, should continue, after the UK’s withdrawal, to respect their obligations in respect of information obtained through this work, and that information pertaining to UK individuals and interests should continue to be afforded the same protection” (…) “Classified information exchanged in the interests of the EU is currently governed by an Agreement of 4 May 2011, between the Member States of the European Union meeting within the Council. The UK considers that there is a mutual interest in ensuring that information covered by this agreement, and in the possession of the relevant party prior to the UK’s withdrawal from the EU, continues to enjoy an equivalent level of protection after exit” (HM Government, P 1-2 – Confidentiality, 2017).

That the Tories government continues and want to continue like it is, even if the state of affairs changes when their membership to Union ceases. This should be easy to understand, but the UK Government thinks the procedures will follow the same level and with same cooperation, even if they are a third-party state outside the European Union. It is impressive that this is the issue again, on yet another paper doddle down by Minister and his peers. Now let

On availability of goods for the EU and the UK:

It will also be important that business and consumers are confident that goods placed on the market and in use across the UK and the EU comply with relevant product legislation. Moreover, market surveillance and enforcement authorities should have access to information about unsafe products, such as medicines and food, and mechanisms to take action with respect to non-compliant goods” (…) “The UK believes that the views of business and consumers must be at the heart of this discussion. The UK will continue to engage with businesses and consumer organisations to understand more about their concerns, and notes that there are issues in relation to services as well as in relation to goods. The UK is keen to use the current discussions to ensure that all the relevant issues are resolved – whether in the separation discussions related to goods or elsewhere – in a way that is consistent with the UK’s ambition for our future relationship” (…) “First, to ensure the continued availability of products on EU and UK markets at the date of withdrawal, goods placed on the Single Market before exit should continue to circulate freely in the UK and the EU, without additional requirements or restrictions” (…) “The Withdrawal Agreement should recognise the validity of this compliance activity where it has taken place prior to exit. This should be recognised for both the UK and EU markets regardless of where the activity took place, and it should be recognised for the full time period or type of products intended when the compliance activity was undertaken. Any further compliance activity required after withdrawal as a result of the prior compliance activity should be conducted as originally intended. This would avoid business and authorities in both the EU and the UK needing to undertake significant duplicative compliance activity after exit, for example to re-inspect approved manufacturing plants or collect and submit data again” (…) “The UK wants to ensure that any approvals, registrations, certificates and authorisations issued by a third party (whether a private entity or a public agency) prior to exit should continue to be recognised as valid by both markets after the UK’s withdrawal. These assessments will have been conducted and the data will have been provided in accordance with legislative requirements by a body recognised as competent. Therefore, it would avoid disruption and provide legal certainty if the results of these activities were recognised in both markets. These approvals should be valid for the intended time period or product life-cycle as when they were granted to avoid the need for retesting of products” (…) “Once a product is placed on the UK and the EU markets, it is essential that both parties can trace products through the supply chain and market surveillance authorities can ensure action is taken with respect to non-compliant goods” (…) “These key principles are aimed at providing legal certainty, while avoiding disruption to business and consumers in regard to the availability of goods. They represent a starting point for enabling a smooth and orderly withdrawal, and moving to a deep and special future partnership, which enables our close trading relationship to continue to flourish” (HM Government, P: 2-3, 6-7 – Availability, 2017).

That the UK and Tories government wants the non-compliant goods to work as it does today. The Tories specifically wants a discussion resolved to fit the businesses as of today. Even if so, it will be hard to have it that way, because the UK believes the EU wants to keep the same ways transactions between EU producers and UK producers of goods. That the UK wants it to be like today and also have the same sort of system for goods. However, the EU will always have different systems for third-party states.

That both parties has to surveillance of goods and make sure services are followed between the states. Which is naturally, as the states has to able to follow the supply chain of the goods. It is inevitable and the EU will already have legislation that marks and control the market. So that products are safe and safeguard consumers.

That the Tories wish a smooth and easy access seems again, the Tories wants it simple and as of today, with both confidential documents and goods on the market. The Tories want to be part of the Common-Trading Market. They want to have the Schengen laws for goods, but distance themselves from the open-boarders when coming to people.

It is weird that the Tories think their produce, their products and the services can move like today to the European Union. That the Tories wish so is wishful thinking. It is easy for them to try to get this, but as a non-Member State they will have obstacles when concerning the status of United Kingdom.

Therefore, the whole papers released today from the Tories are more of wanting what they already have in their arrangements with the European Union. The EU will most likely not make it this easy, they have dozens of Member States and also procedure to think off. They cannot trade-off easily because of previous engagements. Than, the value of the EU Membership will be worthless. Since the UK outside get the same benefits as member-states within. Peace.

Reference:

HM Government – ‘Confidentiality and access to documents – Position Paper’ (21.08.2017)

HM Government – ‘Continuity in the availability of goods for the EU and the UK’ (21.08.2017)

UK Gov – ‘Position papers published ahead of third round of negotiations’ (21.08.2017) link: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/position-papers-published-ahead-of-round-three-negotiations

Brexit: Tories Government – “Future Costums Arrangements” paper are made of “dreams” and not reality!

On 15th August 2017, the United Kingdom or the Her Majesties Government laid out there paper on the Costums Union with the European Union. You would imagine that this one would be a paper drawing the lines in the sand and putting things in order. They are apparently not so, not surprising that people have called the Brexit Minister David Davis lazy, the reasons for doing. Is by looking at the paperwork and the white papers who are initially spelling out the policies for the break-up. These are supposed standards of acts and of understanding from one part to the other. Therefore, the quotes and the basic framework says a lot. That is why it is intriguing how little dep’t there are in the “Future customs arrangements – A FUTURE PARTNERSHIP PAPER”, it is insane how little it says at this point.

Let’s be brief about the quotes worth mentioning from this “paper”:

“As a first step, we will seek continuity in our existing trade and investment relationships, including those covered by EU Free Trade Agreements or other EU preferential arrangements. Our exit from the EU will provide considerable additional opportunities for UK business through ambitious new trade arrangements and comprehensive trade deals that play to the strengths of the UK economy of today and the future, including in areas such as services and digital trade, as well as trade in goods. As a services-based economy, services account for around 80 per cent of UK GDP6 and the UK is the second largest exporter of services worldwide.7 Services exports accounted for £246 billion in 2016.8 The share of services in total UK exports has increased from around 27 per cent in 1990 to 45 per cent in 20169 – the largest share of any of the G7 economies.10 To capitalise fully on those opportunities, the UK will need an independent trade policy, with the freedom to set for ourselves the terms of our trade with the world” (HM Government, P: 4, 15.08.2017).

So again, the Conservative Party and the Democratic Unionist Party Government comes with statements that underline the possible positives about the break-up without considering the real implications of the act. They are playing safe and promising excellent opportunities, without underlining the doubts of trade and border issues, granted the exit. It is like the doors open and they are coming directly into Narnia and not upon a new unknown quest.

Therefore the next statements saying this: “In assessing the options for the UK’s future outside the EU Customs Union, the Government will be guided by what delivers the greatest economic advantage to the UK, and by three strategic objectives:

  • ● ensuring UK-EU trade is as frictionless as possible;
  • ● avoiding a ‘hard border’ between Ireland and Northern Ireland; and
  • ● establishing an independent international trade policy” (HM Government, P: 6, 15.08.2017).

It is like the UK Government and their negotiation team is dreaming that the EU will grant them all of their wishes and make the world a peaceful and lovable space, where anyone living wants to have a house in Nothing Hill or in Yorkshire. But, alas that is not case. That the UK-EU trade will not be frictionless, if it was so, the massive amount trade-agreements would be settled, also the businesses would start to move to European cities for security of future transactions, like to Dublin or Frankfurt. Therefore, the Tories frictionless is near impossible and will implode on them at one point!

The border question on Ireland is another subject, which will be hustled and bustled, where nothing is certain. What that it will be, is an advantage standpoint for Unionists, but not for the Irish or the European Union, which would like similar rules for all their Member States. The last one is something the UK has to work upon and find-out as the directives and the legislation for trade from Brussels will cease, but that also makes it hard to be very independent if the EU are their major trading-partner.

One potential approach the UK intends to explore further with the EU would involve the UK acting in partnership with the EU to operate a regime for imports that aligns precisely with the EU’s external customs border, for goods that will be consumed in the EU market, even if they are part of a supply chain in the UK first. The UK would need to apply the same tariffs as the EU, and provide the same treatment for rules of origin for those goods arriving in the UK and destined for the EU” (…) “By mirroring the EU’s customs approach at its external border, we could ensure that all goods entering the EU via the UK have paid the correct EU duties. This would remove the need for the UK and the EU to introduce customs processes between us, so that goods moving between the UK and the EU would be treated as they are now for customs purposes. The UK would also be able to apply its own tariffs and trade policy to UK exports and imports from other countries destined for the UK market, in line with our aspiration for an independent trade policy. We would need to explore with the EU how such an approach would fit with the other elements of our deep and special partnership” (HM Government, P: 10, 15.08.2017).

This here proves that UK Government thinks the EU will accept free-trade and movement of goods, without taking one of their pillars, the movement of people. Like the borders was made for cows, Iphone’s and automobiles, but not made for securing people trespassing from one garden to the next. The fences and guidelines of crossings, will be within concern of the status of the UK deal with the EU, as a non-EU State. Meaning, the Third Party state, has to reissue boundaries and extended efforts on trade, to justify itself concerning the ones that are Member States already. This should be obvious to the UK Government and the Tories, but their paper is disregarding this mere facts.

It is amazing how this is the sort of framework and due diligence, the government operates within. That they are not thinking in the prospects of not their dream-world, but the reality of the ones they are negotiating with. It is as if they think only on their own behalf, and not of the reactions from the Union, they are leaving. Instead of being concern with by-laws and regulations that are already on “third-nations” and “non-Member-States”, the United Kingdom government should operate like that and not as it is today. The dreams has to stop and the shattered glass has to appear. The broken screens and the trouble of scrolling has to happen. Peace.