dsr wrote: ↑Sun Aug 09, 2020 1:05 am
As for the question about how a railway line can operate between two countries, that's the sort of thing they ought to have worked out before they started operations. Are you saying that the drivers have been running under two separate sets of laws for all these years and they have never considered the issue of driver qualifications and so on? The law was never changed to make the law of England and the law of France the same. Drivers have always had different but mutually recognised qualifications.
I covered this in my post.
Currently it operates under one set of regulations agreed between the two countrys and it will continue to do with the agreement and this is not the problem
At the moment both country's have to adhere to the standards of EU law and look to the ECJ as a final arbitrator as we are both part of it. Soon the UK wont be tied to EU standards however this still should not be a problem as the current operating codes, regs and standards aren't disputed and is not contentious and something the UK wants to move away from.
It is possible in the future one side could do something that the other side thinks breaks the agreement and we could get a legal dispute. Contracts are complex things and at this kind of level if one govt wants to do something they will look for all sorts of grey areas and loopholes to try and legally win their case.
Again in reality this is pretty much a nothing issue because there is nothing contentious that is ever likely to see a dispute of this nature but it needs to be covered and so it needs to be agreed what international court will have the final say and act as the arbitrator
This is where it gets complicated. Technically a dispute could result in a legal decision that goes against EU law. As I mentioned EU case law dictates that they cant let this happen and in this case would need the ECJ to have the final ruling. (remember this will unlikely never be needed but this is current EU law)
Now if Brussels were really this undemocratic all powerful group of Bureaucrats they could simply just make an exception and ignore the EU law as in reality there is no threat in this scenario. As the EU is a democratic institution then to make some kind of legal exception for the channel tunnels it would need new legislation and all 27 member states would need to be consulted
The alternative and obvious answer to this is to just agree to have the ECJ have the role as arbitrator. As ive laboured there is nothing contentious about the operation of the channel tunnel so this is just the easiest and most practical decision to just replicate the current agreement and keep the things moving with no disruption or impact from us leaving the EU (isnt this what we want and what Brexiteers have kept telling us will be able to make happen - hint: on this subject this brexit view holds true)
The problem is that the govt and the hard Brexiteers often put ideology over whats best for us when it comes to the EU and in this case that ideology is under no circumstance should the ECJ be able to rule over us even in something as non contentious and straight forward as the Channel Tunnel
So in summary:
- Rolling over the current operating regs into a new legal agreement is no problem.
- Future relationship on this matter between us and France is no problem.
- Now we are not both in the EU a legal dispute arbitrator but this should never really be need to be used but legally is just something that is needed
- EU case law states the ECJ must be the arbitrator (for the reasons Ive described) and to change this would need the EU to draft new legislation and get agreement from all member states. The time, cost and effort to do this is not practical and in the timelines we have would cause disruption
- The UK has the decision to accept the ECJ as the arbitrator and in reality continue as we are or make an ideological stand and suddenly the Channel Tunnel becomes a standoff and potentially another Brexit battleground
Finally this is just my interpretation and I accept (and hope) that as my knowledge and expertise in this area is relatively zero to those involved in the discussion there might well be a workable compromise to get around this without going against our ideology or the EU's case law