BREXIT - Is This Really Still Rumbling On? 😴

rjsterry

Stevo_666 said:

Stevo_666 said:

rick_chasey said:

Stevo_666 said:

rick_chasey said:

The Uk hasn’t agreed to that if you look at the substance. They’re calling it Canada but it ain’t.

What are the main differences?

Rankin thread I posted above gives you an idea.

Not a good one. Can you clarify for us?

Nothing then...

So in reality a Canada deal should still be on the table if the EU were sticking to their word and previous public pronouncements.

CETA is not zero tariff/zero quota and so took a long time to negotiate which bits were in and out of the deal and on what timescale. We said we want it all done in a year so as I understand it, the zero/zero + LPF due to our size and proximity, is the next closest thing that could be done in the time. We've then said we don't want LPF so here we are.

Stevo_666

tailwindhome said:

Stevo_666 said:

tailwindhome said:

Stevo_666 said:

So in reality a Canada deal should still be on the table if the EU were sticking to their word and previous public pronouncements.

They are.
They even agreed it all in the Political Declaration.

Link please. It does not square with the EU public pronouncements on the availability of a Canada style deal during the negotiations as issued by Barnier and posted upthread by TBB.

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/publications/revised-political-declaration_en

Part II Economic Partnership
XIV
Para 77

This really is a stupid argument.

'Canada' is short hand for a free trade agreement.
Now they're negotiating what goes in it.
This will include the plus plus plus stuff.

I'm sure you're aware that the political declaration is not a binding legal document:
https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/CBP-8454

Quote: "The Political Declaration (PD) is not a binding legal document and it is unlikely that it will bind the parties to anything beyond a commitment to negotiate for a future relationship in good faith, which is set out in Article 184 of the Withdrawal Agreement."

So it has the same status as Barnier's publically made offer of a Canada style FTA.

The EU is backsliding. And on the back foot, it would appear.

Stevo_666

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

Stevo_666 said:

rick_chasey said:

Stevo_666 said:

rick_chasey said:

The Uk hasn’t agreed to that if you look at the substance. They’re calling it Canada but it ain’t.

What are the main differences?

Rankin thread I posted above gives you an idea.

Not a good one. Can you clarify for us?

Nothing then...

So in reality a Canada deal should still be on the table if the EU were sticking to their word and previous public pronouncements.

CETA is not zero tariff/zero quota and so took a long time to negotiate which bits were in and out of the deal and on what timescale. We said we want it all done in a year so as I understand it, the zero/zero + LPF due to our size and proximity, is the next closest thing that could be done in the time. We've then said we don't want LPF so here we are.

I didn't say it was a zero tariff agreement.

However the EUs bluff about want in us to sign up to all this alignment (which other trade partners are not obliged to do) needs to be called. And I am confident it will be, as it is a blatant attempt to tie our hands.

tailwindhome

Stevo_666 said:

tailwindhome said:

Stevo_666 said:

tailwindhome said:

Stevo_666 said:

So in reality a Canada deal should still be on the table if the EU were sticking to their word and previous public pronouncements.

They are.
They even agreed it all in the Political Declaration.

Link please. It does not square with the EU public pronouncements on the availability of a Canada style deal during the negotiations as issued by Barnier and posted upthread by TBB.

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/publications/revised-political-declaration_en

Part II Economic Partnership
XIV
Para 77

This really is a stupid argument.

'Canada' is short hand for a free trade agreement.
Now they're negotiating what goes in it.
This will include the plus plus plus stuff.

I'm sure you're aware that the political declaration is not a binding legal document:
https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/CBP-8454

Quote: "The Political Declaration (PD) is not a binding legal document and it is unlikely that it will bind the parties to anything beyond a commitment to negotiate for a future relationship in good faith, which is set out in Article 184 of the Withdrawal Agreement."

So it has the same status as Barnier's publically made offer of a Canada style FTA.

The EU is backsliding. And on the back foot, it would appear.

It has appeared to you that way before.

rjsterry

Stevo_666 said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

Stevo_666 said:

rick_chasey said:

Stevo_666 said:

rick_chasey said:

The Uk hasn’t agreed to that if you look at the substance. They’re calling it Canada but it ain’t.

What are the main differences?

Rankin thread I posted above gives you an idea.

Not a good one. Can you clarify for us?

Nothing then...

So in reality a Canada deal should still be on the table if the EU were sticking to their word and previous public pronouncements.

CETA is not zero tariff/zero quota and so took a long time to negotiate which bits were in and out of the deal and on what timescale. We said we want it all done in a year so as I understand it, the zero/zero + LPF due to our size and proximity, is the next closest thing that could be done in the time. We've then said we don't want LPF so here we are.

I didn't say it was a zero tariff agreement.

However the EUs bluff about want in us to sign up to all this alignment (which other trade partners are not obliged to do) needs to be called. And I am confident it will be, as it is a blatant attempt to tie our hands.

I know you didn't; I was summarising the Jennifer Rankin explanation of how we got from a Canada-style FTA to an offer of something that is more than that - Canada+++, i.e. what we said we wanted - but with more conditions (as you would expect). We seem to have changed our mind and will now settle for no deal at all. Or just possibly we are bluffing, too. The other point is that CETA does include measures to prevent either side from reducing standards below the levels at which they were when the agreement was made - pretty much the opposite of the divergence we say we want.

tailwindhome

Worth noting when getting excited about things not being legally binding, the notes to Barnier's steps slide

"This is only for presentational and information purposes. It is
naturally without prejudice to discussions on the framework of the
future relationship."

rjsterry

As pointed out earlier, this hoo-ha is messaging for a domestic market. And based on some of the posts above, it seems to have reached its intended audience.

Stevo_666

And of course, someone you are happy to believe that the EU is entirely blameless in all of this and it's just a Tory spin job with no basis...

Your faith is heartwarming. However it wont be easy getting a meaningful agreement with a party that shifts the goalposts like this.

Stevo_666

tailwindhome said:

Worth noting when getting excited about things not being legally binding, the notes to Barnier's steps slide

"This is only for presentational and information purposes. It is
naturally without prejudice to discussions on the framework of the
future relationship."

Effectively the same legal basis as the PD then. My point stands.

Stevo_666

Meanwhile the EU27 are busy squabbling over the negotiating guidelines. Appears that a group led by Macron (surprise surprise) are pressing for a harder line on the tactics to tie us in and stifle conpetition (aka the 'level playing field'), which if successful will likely collapse the negotiations as the UK would never agree to it.

surrey_commuter

Do we think Priti Patel’s 8 million is part of the overall Brexit strategy or whether she is just a loner talking rubbish? If the former then we are in serious trouble.

rick_chasey

Stevo_666 said:

Meanwhile the EU27 are busy squabbling over the negotiating guidelines. Appears that a group led by Macron (surprise surprise) are pressing for a harder line on the tactics to tie us in and stifle conpetition (aka the 'level playing field'), which if successful will likely collapse the negotiations as the UK would never agree to it.

I mean shock horror nations between them have different ideas of how to proceed.

Who knew.

Longshot

Stevo_666 said:

And of course, someone you are happy to believe that the EU is entirely blameless in all of this and it's just a Tory spin job with no basis...

Your faith is heartwarming. However it wont be easy getting a meaningful agreement with a party that shifts the goalposts like this.

Good work - get the groundwork in early.

elbowloh

I think the EU been pretty clear from the beginning about what they think the UK can and can't have in any future trading relationship. We (as by we, i mean the Tories) have changed constantly over the last 3 years or so.

bompington

rick_chasey said:

Stevo_666 said:

Meanwhile the EU27 are busy squabbling over the negotiating guidelines. Appears that a group led by Macron (surprise surprise) are pressing for a harder line on the tactics to tie us in and stifle conpetition (aka the 'level playing field'), which if successful will likely collapse the negotiations as the UK would never agree to it.

I mean shock horror nations between them have different ideas of how to proceed.

Who knew.

But surely the EU is a monolithic structure that gives no room for member nations to have a say?

rick_chasey

I wonder sometimes if the way the UK system works, which is designed to create governments with (within reason) carte blanche to do what they like for the period of the term, affects the way brits see other political institutions.

The UK system in its modern iteration isn't really designed to negotiate agreements; the party in charge rides roughshod over the other parties until another election comes around.

I wonder if people just assume that all systems are like that because, well, that's all they've really experienced.

I do wonder if in places where the system is designed to force compromise that that's what they assume politics will eventually conclude; a compromise where everyone is vaguely miffed.

tailwindhome

Stevo_666 said:

tailwindhome said:

Worth noting when getting excited about things not being legally binding, the notes to Barnier's steps slide

"This is only for presentational and information purposes. It is
naturally without prejudice to discussions on the framework of the
future relationship."

Effectively the same legal basis as the PD then. My point stands.

That wasn't a point, that was a pivot.

"We ain't signed nuffink"
(c) David Davis December 2017

rjsterry

Stevo_666 said:

And of course, someone you are happy to believe that the EU is entirely blameless in all of this and it's just a Tory spin job with no basis...

Your faith is heartwarming. However it wont be easy getting a meaningful agreement with a party that shifts the goalposts like this.

If you had read the thread you'd see that it agrees that the EU's position has evolved (which is also what I wrote) as has ours. Current messaging from the likes of Gove is different from what we agreed in the PD. Neither is anything to get alarmed about. Two parties putting on a bit of a show before they sit down to the real negotiations.

As for faith in sources and "Tory spin" , the story originated from a tweet from No. 10 Press Office. How much more Tory-spin-y does it get?

TheBigBean

Slidegate continues. It seems yesterday's bubbles (Barnier strikes back) were incorrectly sized - either misrepresentation or incompetence.

https://www.politico.eu/article/sliding-flaws-eu-publishes-misleading-brexit-chart/

rick_chasey

TheBigBean said:

Slidegate continues. It seems yesterday's bubbles (Barnier strikes back) were incorrectly sized - either misrepresentation or incompetence.

https://www.politico.eu/article/sliding-flaws-eu-publishes-misleading-brexit-chart/

The bubbles are proportional to the square of the trade volume.

They've probably just plugged in the trade numbers into the equation as the diameter and the graph has spat out the circles.

bompington

Never underestimate the ability of professional, intelligent people to stuff up Excel & Powerpoint.

TheBigBean

Proper work is never done in powerpoint

rick_chasey

I do like how what's obviously a presentation mistake has excited everyone on the right. "This shows how disingenuous they all are, the lying foreign bastards" etc etc

I mean, it's not super hard to see the mistake.

I suspect that this 'revelation' won't materially affect the negs as, plainly, the fact it was trying to present still remains.

mrfpb

rick_chasey said:

I do like how what's obviously a presentation mistake has excited everyone on the right. "This shows how disingenuous they all are, the lying foreign bastards" etc etc

I mean, it's not super hard to see the mistake.

I suspect that this 'revelation' won't materially affect the negs as, plainly, the fact it was trying to present still remains.

"The Commission insists it did not purposefully manipulate the chart to exaggerate the difference between the U.K. and the other countries. Asked about the apparent mismatch, the Commission spokesperson said there was "no mistake." "

And you continue to confuse being a leave supporter with "being on the right"

rick_chasey

I've not really come across any 21st Century left who is pro brexit. not a single one, in the press or in my own life.

mrfpb

So all those leave voters in the North East and North West labour heartlands weren't really left wingers? Or are you confessing to living in a liberal-left wing bubble?

Labour made the mistake of confusuing Leave with Right Wing to it's own cost.
The Lib Dems (c.2010) assumed that because they were pro-EU, their large support base would be, then they got drubbed by UKIP in the 2014 EU poll and deserted at the 2015 GE. They became a rallying point for Remainers post-referrendum, but in doing so became a single issue party - no-one trusts them on domestic issues anymore.

Large chunks of the southern political establishment still haven't learnt the lesson that Brexit was a broad-spectrum political issue for both Remain and Leave.

rjsterry

Umm,... A 5 second Google throws up this.
https://metro.co.uk/2019/02/11/im-a-millennial-left-wing-feminist-who-voted-leave-and-im-far-from-alone-8519507/amp/

rick_chasey

mrfpb said:

So all those leave voters in the North East and North West labour heartlands weren't really left wingers? Or are you confessing to living in a liberal-left wing bubble?

e.

No IU don't think those leave voters are actually left wing in any meaningful way; at least, not in the way I would define it now.

Your political alignment nowadays is less to do with where you are in the means of production and more your stance on cultural issues.

I think, broadly speaking, nationalism as opposed to internationalism is a feature of right wing politics and Brexit is a manifestation of exactly that.

Of course, if you broadly split a nation into two you'll find plenty of exceptions, but the mean distribution will be aligned to what I'm saying.

rick_chasey

To put it more plainly, despite what Corbyn et al think, I don't think he and the labour leadership share many views in common with working class leave voters, especially on cultural issues.

I think the modern split is the split you see in the culture wars, and you're being naive to suggest otherwise.

mrfpb

rick_chasey said:

mrfpb said:

So all those leave voters in the North East and North West labour heartlands weren't really left wingers? Or are you confessing to living in a liberal-left wing bubble?

e.

No IU don't think those leave voters are actually left wing in any meaningful way; at least, not in the way I would define it now.

Your political alignment nowadays is less to do with where you are in the means of production and more your stance on cultural issues.

I think, broadly speaking, nationalism as opposed to internationalism is a feature of right wing politics and Brexit is a manifestation of exactly that.

Of course, if you broadly split a nation into two you'll find plenty of exceptions, but the mean distribution will be aligned to what I'm saying.

So nationalist parties such as SNP, SinnFein and pretty much every Northern Irish party must be right wingers. You choose to interpret Left Wing to match a pretty narrow definition (possible based on your own socio-economic position), when Left and Right have always been broad coalitions.