BREXIT - Is This Really Still Rumbling On? 😴

darkhairedlord

Stevo_666 said:

darkhairedlord said:

Stevo_666 said:

briantrumpet said:

kingstongraham said:

Trojan horse?

It's those devious furriners again, trying to outwit the plucky Brits. Though I don't remember the Trojans writing their horse plan in a contract...

Part of the art of negotiation is convincing the other side that they have lost: part is convincing them that they have won. Maybe the latter worked in this case?

Part of it is readinging the contact before signing. Do you sign work stuff, that is really important without reading it?

See my post two above this one.

Yep, the part about societal difficulties means the uk can act over NI without breaking the WA, so why the new law to override the WA ?

tailwindhome

Stevo_666 said:

Regardless of how we came into this situation

More bollocks.

rjsterry

Stevo_666 said:

Regardless of how we came into this situation, the issue still remains that there will be on-going EU influence over UK affairs and It needs to 've solved.

The WA was passed in parallel with a promise from the EU to conclude a swift and comprehensive free trade accord: “It is the clear intent of both parties to develop in good faith agreements giving effect to this relationship… such that they can come into force by the end of 2020”. The EU is refusing to reconsider, even though they themselves are clearly acting in bad faith after offering a Canada style deal and then withdrawing it on the basis the we are somehow now 'too close'.

The WA also contains the following clause: “If the application of this Protocol leads to serious economic, societal or environmental difficulties that are liable to persist, or to diversion of trade, the Union or the United Kingdom may unilaterally take appropriate safeguard measures.” The EU threat to carve up the UK down the Irish Sea clearly fits that bill in my view, so we have every right to take action.

Too late. It's not a threat by someone else to carve up the UK. It's something we have already willingly committed to doing.

Stevo_666

tailwindhome said:

Stevo_666 said:

Regardless of how we came into this situation

More bollocks.

Youre not quite there yet. Try addressing my points above maybe?

Stevo_666

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

Regardless of how we came into this situation, the issue still remains that there will be on-going EU influence over UK affairs and It needs to 've solved.

The WA was passed in parallel with a promise from the EU to conclude a swift and comprehensive free trade accord: “It is the clear intent of both parties to develop in good faith agreements giving effect to this relationship… such that they can come into force by the end of 2020”. The EU is refusing to reconsider, even though they themselves are clearly acting in bad faith after offering a Canada style deal and then withdrawing it on the basis the we are somehow now 'too close'.

The WA also contains the following clause: “If the application of this Protocol leads to serious economic, societal or environmental difficulties that are liable to persist, or to diversion of trade, the Union or the United Kingdom may unilaterally take appropriate safeguard measures.” The EU threat to carve up the UK down the Irish Sea clearly fits that bill in my view, so we have every right to take action.

Too late. It's not a threat by someone else to carve up the UK. It's something we have already willingly committed to doing.

The clause I referred to in the WA allows us to take action now that the implications have become apparent.

Sorting out a FTA would avoid this, but the EU withdrawal of the Canada option shows that they are negotiating in bad faith, as mentioned above.

Stevo_666

darkhairedlord said:

Stevo_666 said:

darkhairedlord said:

Stevo_666 said:

briantrumpet said:

kingstongraham said:

Trojan horse?

It's those devious furriners again, trying to outwit the plucky Brits. Though I don't remember the Trojans writing their horse plan in a contract...

Part of the art of negotiation is convincing the other side that they have lost: part is convincing them that they have won. Maybe the latter worked in this case?

Part of it is readinging the contact before signing. Do you sign work stuff, that is really important without reading it?

See my post two above this one.

Yep, the part about societal difficulties means the uk can act over NI without breaking the WA, so why the new law to override the WA ?

Not sure, but if it gets us to the same end effect then fsir enough.

rjsterry

Stevo_666 said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

Regardless of how we came into this situation, the issue still remains that there will be on-going EU influence over UK affairs and It needs to 've solved.

The WA was passed in parallel with a promise from the EU to conclude a swift and comprehensive free trade accord: “It is the clear intent of both parties to develop in good faith agreements giving effect to this relationship… such that they can come into force by the end of 2020”. The EU is refusing to reconsider, even though they themselves are clearly acting in bad faith after offering a Canada style deal and then withdrawing it on the basis the we are somehow now 'too close'.

The WA also contains the following clause: “If the application of this Protocol leads to serious economic, societal or environmental difficulties that are liable to persist, or to diversion of trade, the Union or the United Kingdom may unilaterally take appropriate safeguard measures.” The EU threat to carve up the UK down the Irish Sea clearly fits that bill in my view, so we have every right to take action.

Too late. It's not a threat by someone else to carve up the UK. It's something we have already willingly committed to doing.

The clause I referred to in the WA allows us to take action now that the implications have become apparent.

Sorting out a FTA would avoid this, but the EU withdrawal of the Canada option shows that they are negotiating in bad faith, as mentioned above.

The implications haven't 'now become apparent' they were negotiated, understood and agreed to. If you read that Tony Conelly article, you'll see it was there from the start. Nothing has changed.

An FTA at the moment is a laughable idea.

briantrumpet

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

Regardless of how we came into this situation, the issue still remains that there will be on-going EU influence over UK affairs and It needs to 've solved.

The WA was passed in parallel with a promise from the EU to conclude a swift and comprehensive free trade accord: “It is the clear intent of both parties to develop in good faith agreements giving effect to this relationship… such that they can come into force by the end of 2020”. The EU is refusing to reconsider, even though they themselves are clearly acting in bad faith after offering a Canada style deal and then withdrawing it on the basis the we are somehow now 'too close'.

The WA also contains the following clause: “If the application of this Protocol leads to serious economic, societal or environmental difficulties that are liable to persist, or to diversion of trade, the Union or the United Kingdom may unilaterally take appropriate safeguard measures.” The EU threat to carve up the UK down the Irish Sea clearly fits that bill in my view, so we have every right to take action.

Too late. It's not a threat by someone else to carve up the UK. It's something we have already willingly committed to doing.

The clause I referred to in the WA allows us to take action now that the implications have become apparent.

Sorting out a FTA would avoid this, but the EU withdrawal of the Canada option shows that they are negotiating in bad faith, as mentioned above.

The implications haven't 'now become apparent' they were negotiated, understood and agreed to. If you read that Tony Conelly article, you'll see it was there from the start. Nothing has changed.

An FTA at the moment is a laughable idea.

I think I shall try the "Regardless of how we got here" defence should I ever try to wriggle out of a contract I've signed, or have broken some law or other... the sidestep Johnson is trying to make is like ignoring the 'eating babies' bit of Swift's A Modest Proposal... just overlook the problems of that bit, and everything else becomes possible.

tailwindhome

Stevo_666 said:

tailwindhome said:

Stevo_666 said:

Regardless of how we came into this situation

More bollocks.

Youre not quite there yet. Try addressing my points above maybe?

Any point you think you have is fatally undermined by those 8 words.

Stevo_666

briantrumpet said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

Regardless of how we came into this situation, the issue still remains that there will be on-going EU influence over UK affairs and It needs to 've solved.

The WA was passed in parallel with a promise from the EU to conclude a swift and comprehensive free trade accord: “It is the clear intent of both parties to develop in good faith agreements giving effect to this relationship… such that they can come into force by the end of 2020”. The EU is refusing to reconsider, even though they themselves are clearly acting in bad faith after offering a Canada style deal and then withdrawing it on the basis the we are somehow now 'too close'.

The WA also contains the following clause: “If the application of this Protocol leads to serious economic, societal or environmental difficulties that are liable to persist, or to diversion of trade, the Union or the United Kingdom may unilaterally take appropriate safeguard measures.” The EU threat to carve up the UK down the Irish Sea clearly fits that bill in my view, so we have every right to take action.

Too late. It's not a threat by someone else to carve up the UK. It's something we have already willingly committed to doing.

The clause I referred to in the WA allows us to take action now that the implications have become apparent.

Sorting out a FTA would avoid this, but the EU withdrawal of the Canada option shows that they are negotiating in bad faith, as mentioned above.

The implications haven't 'now become apparent' they were negotiated, understood and agreed to. If you read that Tony Conelly article, you'll see it was there from the start. Nothing has changed.

An FTA at the moment is a laughable idea.

I think I shall try the "Regardless of how we got here" defence should I ever try to wriggle out of a contract I've signed, or have broken some law or other... the sidestep Johnson is trying to make is like ignoring the 'eating babies' bit of Swift's A Modest Proposal... just overlook the problems of that bit, and everything else becomes possible.

Look at the clause in the contract I mentioned above which allows us to take action.

Stevo_666

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

Regardless of how we came into this situation, the issue still remains that there will be on-going EU influence over UK affairs and It needs to 've solved.

The WA was passed in parallel with a promise from the EU to conclude a swift and comprehensive free trade accord: “It is the clear intent of both parties to develop in good faith agreements giving effect to this relationship… such that they can come into force by the end of 2020”. The EU is refusing to reconsider, even though they themselves are clearly acting in bad faith after offering a Canada style deal and then withdrawing it on the basis the we are somehow now 'too close'.

The WA also contains the following clause: “If the application of this Protocol leads to serious economic, societal or environmental difficulties that are liable to persist, or to diversion of trade, the Union or the United Kingdom may unilaterally take appropriate safeguard measures.” The EU threat to carve up the UK down the Irish Sea clearly fits that bill in my view, so we have every right to take action.

Too late. It's not a threat by someone else to carve up the UK. It's something we have already willingly committed to doing.

The clause I referred to in the WA allows us to take action now that the implications have become apparent.

Sorting out a FTA would avoid this, but the EU withdrawal of the Canada option shows that they are negotiating in bad faith, as mentioned above.

The implications haven't 'now become apparent' they were negotiated, understood and agreed to. If you read that Tony Conelly article, you'll see it was there from the start. Nothing has changed.

An FTA at the moment is a laughable idea.

Notwithstanding that, the clause allowing us to take action is valid.

If the EU want a FTA not to be a laughable idea, they should put a Canada type deal back on the table, as we are no further away from them than when it was on the table. We might also then be able to think that the EU negotiating in good faith is not laughable.

Stevo_666

It seems the realisation that this is far from being a 'black and white' issue and not simply the UK being wrong and/or the nasty Torwies being well, nasty has triggered quite a response

spatt77

surrey_commuter said:

I am amazed at the level of amazement at the position we now find ourselves.

There is only one driving force for Brexit and that is a dislike of foreigners whether that be them coming here or ruling us. The purer the Brexit the less foreigners come here and the less say they have over us.

Now with the above in mind ask yourself how much they care about breaking an intl. treaty? It is a treaty with foreigners and the only downside is being judged by foreigners.

I really am sick and tired of the portrayal of Brexiteers as racist/xenophobic, I've spent a good proportion of my life living in Europe, some of my best friends are not British. Your perception of leavers is your perception alone, it would be the equivalent for me to say all Remainers ( and some of my best friends are) are unpatriotic, lily livered and money orientated, which would be equally silly and not true. I think we really need to get away from this personal characterization of "if you didnt vote the same way as me then you are this"

tailwindhome

Stevo_666 said:

It seems the realisation that this is far from being a 'black and white' issue and not simply the UK being wrong and/or the nasty Torwies being well, nasty has triggered quite a response

Idiot.

rick_chasey

some of my best friends are not British.

Amazing

rjsterry

Stevo_666 said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

Regardless of how we came into this situation, the issue still remains that there will be on-going EU influence over UK affairs and It needs to 've solved.

The WA was passed in parallel with a promise from the EU to conclude a swift and comprehensive free trade accord: “It is the clear intent of both parties to develop in good faith agreements giving effect to this relationship… such that they can come into force by the end of 2020”. The EU is refusing to reconsider, even though they themselves are clearly acting in bad faith after offering a Canada style deal and then withdrawing it on the basis the we are somehow now 'too close'.

The WA also contains the following clause: “If the application of this Protocol leads to serious economic, societal or environmental difficulties that are liable to persist, or to diversion of trade, the Union or the United Kingdom may unilaterally take appropriate safeguard measures.” The EU threat to carve up the UK down the Irish Sea clearly fits that bill in my view, so we have every right to take action.

Too late. It's not a threat by someone else to carve up the UK. It's something we have already willingly committed to doing.

The clause I referred to in the WA allows us to take action now that the implications have become apparent.

Sorting out a FTA would avoid this, but the EU withdrawal of the Canada option shows that they are negotiating in bad faith, as mentioned above.

The implications haven't 'now become apparent' they were negotiated, understood and agreed to. If you read that Tony Conelly article, you'll see it was there from the start. Nothing has changed.

An FTA at the moment is a laughable idea.

Notwithstanding that, the clause allowing us to take action is valid.

If the EU want a FTA not to be a laughable idea, they should put a Canada type deal back on the table, as we are no further away from them than when it was on the table. We might also then be able to think that the EU negotiating in good faith is not laughable.

I think they're over it. Who would offer any kind of deal to someone who advertises that they won't stick to it. Your idea only works if there were new measures brought in by the EU and there are none. This is all as per the agreement.

rick_chasey

spatt77 said:

surrey_commuter said:

I am amazed at the level of amazement at the position we now find ourselves.

There is only one driving force for Brexit and that is a dislike of foreigners whether that be them coming here or ruling us. The purer the Brexit the less foreigners come here and the less say they have over us.

Now with the above in mind ask yourself how much they care about breaking an intl. treaty? It is a treaty with foreigners and the only downside is being judged by foreigners.

I really am sick and tired of the portrayal of Brexiteers as racist/xenophobic, I've spent a good proportion of my life living in Europe, some of my best friends are not British. Your perception of leavers is your perception alone, it would be the equivalent for me to say all Remainers ( and some of my best friends are) are unpatriotic, lily livered and money orientated, which would be equally silly and not true. I think we really need to get away from this personal characterization of "if you didnt vote the same way as me then you are this"

If it’s not about foreigners either coming to the U.K. to live or having some say over U.K. governance then what is it about?

briantrumpet

Stevo_666 said:

It seems the realisation that this is far from being a 'black and white' issue and not simply the UK being wrong and/or the nasty Torwies being well, nasty has triggered quite a response

Curious then that the government admitted it would break the law. I'm not sure how that admission can be taken as anything other than black and white.

briantrumpet

I guess that the Justine Minister is saying that there are acceptable ways to break the law. How did we get here?

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/sep/13/minister-threatens-to-resign-over-brexit-bill-if-law-is-broken-in-way-i-find-unacceptable

spatt77

rick_chasey said:

spatt77 said:

surrey_commuter said:

I am amazed at the level of amazement at the position we now find ourselves.

There is only one driving force for Brexit and that is a dislike of foreigners whether that be them coming here or ruling us. The purer the Brexit the less foreigners come here and the less say they have over us.

Now with the above in mind ask yourself how much they care about breaking an intl. treaty? It is a treaty with foreigners and the only downside is being judged by foreigners.

I really am sick and tired of the portrayal of Brexiteers as racist/xenophobic, I've spent a good proportion of my life living in Europe, some of my best friends are not British. Your perception of leavers is your perception alone, it would be the equivalent for me to say all Remainers ( and some of my best friends are) are unpatriotic, lily livered and money orientated, which would be equally silly and not true. I think we really need to get away from this personal characterization of "if you didnt vote the same way as me then you are this"

If it’s not about foreigners either coming to the U.K. to live or having some say over U.K. governance then what is it about?

Amazing

This is not a merry go round i wish to get on for the umpteenth time! But the sooner you accept you lost and stop whinging about it the better it will be all round. Lets just see how it all pans out and then we can start with the "I told you so" !

bompington

spatt77 said:

rick_chasey said:

spatt77 said:

surrey_commuter said:

I am amazed at the level of amazement at the position we now find ourselves.

There is only one driving force for Brexit and that is a dislike of foreigners whether that be them coming here or ruling us. The purer the Brexit the less foreigners come here and the less say they have over us.

Now with the above in mind ask yourself how much they care about breaking an intl. treaty? It is a treaty with foreigners and the only downside is being judged by foreigners.

I really am sick and tired of the portrayal of Brexiteers as racist/xenophobic, I've spent a good proportion of my life living in Europe, some of my best friends are not British. Your perception of leavers is your perception alone, it would be the equivalent for me to say all Remainers ( and some of my best friends are) are unpatriotic, lily livered and money orientated, which would be equally silly and not true. I think we really need to get away from this personal characterization of "if you didnt vote the same way as me then you are this"

If it’s not about foreigners either coming to the U.K. to live or having some say over U.K. governance then what is it about?

Amazing

This is not a merry go round i wish to get on for the umpteenth time! But the sooner you accept you lost and stop whinging about it the better it will be all round. Lets just see how it all pans out and then we can start with the "I told you so" !

I agree! After all it's all looking really, really promising so far...

briantrumpet

bompington said:

spatt77 said:

rick_chasey said:

spatt77 said:

surrey_commuter said:

I am amazed at the level of amazement at the position we now find ourselves.

There is only one driving force for Brexit and that is a dislike of foreigners whether that be them coming here or ruling us. The purer the Brexit the less foreigners come here and the less say they have over us.

Now with the above in mind ask yourself how much they care about breaking an intl. treaty? It is a treaty with foreigners and the only downside is being judged by foreigners.

I really am sick and tired of the portrayal of Brexiteers as racist/xenophobic, I've spent a good proportion of my life living in Europe, some of my best friends are not British. Your perception of leavers is your perception alone, it would be the equivalent for me to say all Remainers ( and some of my best friends are) are unpatriotic, lily livered and money orientated, which would be equally silly and not true. I think we really need to get away from this personal characterization of "if you didnt vote the same way as me then you are this"

If it’s not about foreigners either coming to the U.K. to live or having some say over U.K. governance then what is it about?

Amazing

This is not a merry go round i wish to get on for the umpteenth time! But the sooner you accept you lost and stop whinging about it the better it will be all round. Lets just see how it all pans out and then we can start with the "I told you so" !

I agree! After all it's all looking really, really promising so far...

This is the equivalent of a surgeon coming into your room just before an operation and saying "The operation we're going to do on you is illegal (but only in limited and specific ways), we've never tried it before, but let's just see how it pans out..."

rick_chasey

spatt77 said:

rick_chasey said:

spatt77 said:

surrey_commuter said:

I am amazed at the level of amazement at the position we now find ourselves.

There is only one driving force for Brexit and that is a dislike of foreigners whether that be them coming here or ruling us. The purer the Brexit the less foreigners come here and the less say they have over us.

Now with the above in mind ask yourself how much they care about breaking an intl. treaty? It is a treaty with foreigners and the only downside is being judged by foreigners.

I really am sick and tired of the portrayal of Brexiteers as racist/xenophobic, I've spent a good proportion of my life living in Europe, some of my best friends are not British. Your perception of leavers is your perception alone, it would be the equivalent for me to say all Remainers ( and some of my best friends are) are unpatriotic, lily livered and money orientated, which would be equally silly and not true. I think we really need to get away from this personal characterization of "if you didnt vote the same way as me then you are this"

If it’s not about foreigners either coming to the U.K. to live or having some say over U.K. governance then what is it about?

Amazing

This is not a merry go round i wish to get on for the umpteenth time! But the sooner you accept you lost and stop whinging about it the better it will be all round. Lets just see how it all pans out and then we can start with the "I told you so" !

I mean it quite sincerely.

coopster_the_1st

darkhairedlord said:

Stevo_666 said:

darkhairedlord said:

Stevo_666 said:

briantrumpet said:

kingstongraham said:

Trojan horse?

It's those devious furriners again, trying to outwit the plucky Brits. Though I don't remember the Trojans writing their horse plan in a contract...

Part of the art of negotiation is convincing the other side that they have lost: part is convincing them that they have won. Maybe the latter worked in this case?

Part of it is readinging the contact before signing. Do you sign work stuff, that is really important without reading it?

See my post two above this one.

Yep, the part about societal difficulties means the uk can act over NI without breaking the WA, so why the new law to override the WA ?

Parliament is sovereign. Remember the court case that Gina Miller made infamous

rick_chasey

https://twitter.com/pmdfoster/status/1305084116296228866?s=21

This is where we’re at and it’s the same on this thread.

If you are choosing to believe the lie because they’re “on your side” you are the mug here and you are the one helping enable poor governance.

You can be both pro Brexit and/or pro the Tory party and still be against being lied to and bad governance by the Party in the name of Brexit

tailwindhome

coopster_the_1st said:

darkhairedlord said:

Stevo_666 said:

darkhairedlord said:

Stevo_666 said:

briantrumpet said:

kingstongraham said:

Trojan horse?

It's those devious furriners again, trying to outwit the plucky Brits. Though I don't remember the Trojans writing their horse plan in a contract...

Part of the art of negotiation is convincing the other side that they have lost: part is convincing them that they have won. Maybe the latter worked in this case?

Part of it is readinging the contact before signing. Do you sign work stuff, that is really important without reading it?

See my post two above this one.

Yep, the part about societal difficulties means the uk can act over NI without breaking the WA, so why the new law to override the WA ?

Parliament is sovereign. Remember the court case that Gina Miller made infamous

What is it you think 'Parliament is sovereign' means here?

coopster_the_1st

Stevo_666 said:

It seems the realisation that this is far from being a 'black and white' issue and not simply the UK being wrong and/or the nasty Torwies being well, nasty has triggered quite a response

You can tell this is a positive and beneficial approach for the UK in the negotiations because those who are pro-EU are stamping their feet and wailing. That Major and Blair are against it shows this is a good think for Brexit.

The only way to improve this is if it comes out that this is Dominic Cummings idea. That will really send them over the edge

bompington

coopster_the_1st said:

Stevo_666 said:

It seems the realisation that this is far from being a 'black and white' issue and not simply the UK being wrong and/or the nasty Torwies being well, nasty has triggered quite a response

You can tell this is a positive and beneficial approach for the UK in the negotiations because those who are pro-EU are stamping their feet and wailing. That Major and Blair are against it shows this is a good think for Brexit.

The only way to improve this is if it comes out that this is Dominic Cummings idea. That will really send them over the edge

Proof, as if any were needed, that it's nothing to do with what's good for the country, and all about owning the libs

coopster_the_1st

bompington said:

coopster_the_1st said:

Stevo_666 said:

It seems the realisation that this is far from being a 'black and white' issue and not simply the UK being wrong and/or the nasty Torwies being well, nasty has triggered quite a response

You can tell this is a positive and beneficial approach for the UK in the negotiations because those who are pro-EU are stamping their feet and wailing. That Major and Blair are against it shows this is a good think for Brexit.

The only way to improve this is if it comes out that this is Dominic Cummings idea. That will really send them over the edge

Proof, as if any were needed, that it's nothing to do with what's good for the country, and all about owning the libs

Leave or Remain was decided democratically in 2016. Remoaners since then have done everything they can to make things worse for the UK.

Think on that before making false accusations.

pangolin

coopster_the_1st said:

Stevo_666 said:

It seems the realisation that this is far from being a 'black and white' issue and not simply the UK being wrong and/or the nasty Torwies being well, nasty has triggered quite a response

You can tell this is a positive and beneficial approach for the UK in the negotiations because those who are pro-EU are stamping their feet and wailing. That Major and Blair are against it shows this is a good think for Brexit.

The only way to improve this is if it comes out that this is Dominic Cummings idea. That will really send them over the edge

"At least we've wound them up!"

Well done lads.