BREXIT - Is This Really Still Rumbling On? 😴
Comments
-
Here's one:surrey_commuter said:spatt77 said:Tusk offered a Canada style deal in October 2018!
Do you have a source?
I was not aware that it was his to offer and I thought they refused to discuss trade until the WA was agreed. Agreeing this was our biggest mistake.
https://metro.co.uk/2018/10/05/the-eu-offers-an-alternative-brexit-but-what-is-canada-8009257/"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0
-
Stevo_666 said:
The EU's rather extreme interpretation of the protocol has also been reported on other website. No smoke without fire Brian. I know you cant believe that the angelic EU would stoop to anything like that to try and get their way...briantrumpet said:That's weird. Stevo's quoting of the Telegraph piece by Ambose Evans Pritchard seems to have suffered a glitch, and didn't include this, which was in the original:
"If it is true that Michel Barnier “explicitly” threatened to obstruct exports and food supplies from Great Britain to Ulster by means of an extreme and malicious interpretation of the Protocol – as the Prime Minister asserts – it is the EU that is playing fast and loose with international law, and arguably crossing a line into geopolitical vandalism.
If it is not true, this country needs a new government immediately. The facts will out."
Be careful of accusing RC of selective quotation, if you're going to do the same (I note you don't counter AEP's assertion)... and "no smoke without fire" is the stuff of conspiracy theories... "some people say" will be next...
Of course the EU is trying to get their way, that's what trade negotiations are all about... but I thought we held all the cards... was I mistaken?0 -
Blame the top team the uk sent to negotiate, after all we held all the cards....briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
The EU's rather extreme interpretation of the protocol has also been reported on other website. No smoke without fire Brian. I know you cant believe that the angelic EU would stoop to anything like that to try and get their way...briantrumpet said:That's weird. Stevo's quoting of the Telegraph piece by Ambose Evans Pritchard seems to have suffered a glitch, and didn't include this, which was in the original:
"If it is true that Michel Barnier “explicitly” threatened to obstruct exports and food supplies from Great Britain to Ulster by means of an extreme and malicious interpretation of the Protocol – as the Prime Minister asserts – it is the EU that is playing fast and loose with international law, and arguably crossing a line into geopolitical vandalism.
If it is not true, this country needs a new government immediately. The facts will out."
Be careful of accusing RC of selective quotation, if you're going to do the same (I note you don't counter AEP's assertion)... and "no smoke without fire" is the stuff of conspiracy theories... "some people say" will be next...
Of course the EU is trying to get their way, that's what trade negotiations are all about... but I thought we held all the cards... was I mistaken?0 -
Frost confirmed that the EU made this threat - as you can read the Torygraph, here's the link. More than just smoke, wouldn't you say?briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
The EU's rather extreme interpretation of the protocol has also been reported on other website. No smoke without fire Brian. I know you cant believe that the angelic EU would stoop to anything like that to try and get their way...briantrumpet said:That's weird. Stevo's quoting of the Telegraph piece by Ambose Evans Pritchard seems to have suffered a glitch, and didn't include this, which was in the original:
"If it is true that Michel Barnier “explicitly” threatened to obstruct exports and food supplies from Great Britain to Ulster by means of an extreme and malicious interpretation of the Protocol – as the Prime Minister asserts – it is the EU that is playing fast and loose with international law, and arguably crossing a line into geopolitical vandalism.
If it is not true, this country needs a new government immediately. The facts will out."
Be careful of accusing RC of selective quotation, if you're going to do the same (I note you don't counter AEP's assertion)... and "no smoke without fire" is the stuff of conspiracy theories... "some people say" will be next...
Of course the EU is trying to get their way, that's what trade negotiations are all about... but I thought we held all the cards... was I mistaken?
https://telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/09/13/bad-faith-eu-furious-uk-now-has-backstop/
Quote:
"The Europeans have refused to negotiate in good faith, and failed to meet their commitments. As David Frost, Britain’s chief negotiator, has said, they have threatened to refuse to list Britain as a country from which they can accept food imports. This is despite Britain, as a departing member state, already complying with all relevant European laws, and despite Britain’s promise to notify the EU of any future changes in its regulation, in common with other countries approved for food imports by the EU.
Refusing to list Britain would mean, in effect, a food blockade between Northern Ireland and the rest of the United Kingdom, which would be a clear breach of the EU’s commitments in the Withdrawal Agreement. Yet Frost yesterday confirmed that EU negotiators made their threat to blockade Northern Ireland to him “explicitly”."
But your trust of nice cuddly EU is very touching.
Where have I said we hold all the cards? But then again, neither does the EU or we'd have caved in by now, surely?"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
tailwindhome said:
I wonder what Geoffrey Cox makes of this?
“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
Stevo_666 said:
Can you quote the bit in the signed contract that confirms as being on offer? No??
https://www.ashurst.com/en/news-and-insights/legal-updates/interpretation-of-contracts-under-english-law/
"Can the court look beyond the written contract when construing the meaning of a contract? While the court must examine the full background to the contract, it cannot look at prior negotiations or the parties' "declarations of subjective intent". This means that the court cannot look at extrinsic evidence such as antecedent agreements, oral negotiations, exchanges of letters, etc., preceding the contract."
tl;dr Don't sign a contract unless you're sure what it says and what's on offer.
There are no other interpretations, however much smoke you blow around: that Johnson signed a contract he didn't understand, or he did understand it and thought it was fine and dandy, or he did understand it and intended to break it if it suited him.0 -
Do you read the articles you link to?Stevo_666 said:0 -
Stevo_666 said:
Frost confirmed that the EU made this threat - as you can read the Torygraph, here's the link. More than just smoke, wouldn't you say?briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
The EU's rather extreme interpretation of the protocol has also been reported on other website. No smoke without fire Brian. I know you cant believe that the angelic EU would stoop to anything like that to try and get their way...briantrumpet said:That's weird. Stevo's quoting of the Telegraph piece by Ambose Evans Pritchard seems to have suffered a glitch, and didn't include this, which was in the original:
"If it is true that Michel Barnier “explicitly” threatened to obstruct exports and food supplies from Great Britain to Ulster by means of an extreme and malicious interpretation of the Protocol – as the Prime Minister asserts – it is the EU that is playing fast and loose with international law, and arguably crossing a line into geopolitical vandalism.
If it is not true, this country needs a new government immediately. The facts will out."
Be careful of accusing RC of selective quotation, if you're going to do the same (I note you don't counter AEP's assertion)... and "no smoke without fire" is the stuff of conspiracy theories... "some people say" will be next...
Of course the EU is trying to get their way, that's what trade negotiations are all about... but I thought we held all the cards... was I mistaken?
https://telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/09/13/bad-faith-eu-furious-uk-now-has-backstop/
Quote:
"The Europeans have refused to negotiate in good faith, and failed to meet their commitments. As David Frost, Britain’s chief negotiator, has said, they have threatened to refuse to list Britain as a country from which they can accept food imports. This is despite Britain, as a departing member state, already complying with all relevant European laws, and despite Britain’s promise to notify the EU of any future changes in its regulation, in common with other countries approved for food imports by the EU.
Refusing to list Britain would mean, in effect, a food blockade between Northern Ireland and the rest of the United Kingdom, which would be a clear breach of the EU’s commitments in the Withdrawal Agreement. Yet Frost yesterday confirmed that EU negotiators made their threat to blockade Northern Ireland to him “explicitly”."
But your trust of nice cuddly EU is very touching.
Where have I said we hold all the cards? But then again, neither does the EU or we'd have caved in by now, surely?
Can you point to the place where I said I explicitly trust the EU and call them cuddly? And explain what difference that makes to AEP's point about Johnson? Or why I should place my trust in Frost, who's very job is to follow Johnson's potentially law-breaking instructions?
As Churchill might have said to Johnson: we know you're a liar, now we're just haggling over the price.
Your touching inability to find any fault whatsoever with Johnson, even when criticism is voiced in The Telegraph, is baffling. The increasingly elaborate gymnastics to avoid criticism are, however, quite entertaining.0 -
Were you not suggesting he should drink bleach amnesia boy.rick_chasey said:It’s the tactic the nazis used most often when trying to get into power and how they brushed over their erosion of the democratic powers of the Weimar Republic.
Whenever they’d break a democratic norm or rule, they’d point to the socialists and the bourgeoise liberals and say “look it’s winding them up it must be right”.
Honestly, I do worry where this ends up.
If you see how far Brexit has shifted from what it was supposed to be, from the people like Hannan, you can see what other attitudes will shift.
We’ve already had Coopster call me vermin because I am a foreigner “interfering” in politics. I seem to remember that getting ‘likes’ too.0 -
tailwindhome said:tailwindhome said:
I wonder what Geoffrey Cox makes of this?
Cox has even suggested to Johnson a way of wriggling out of the law-breaking Act.
"Cox QC wants the Government to trigger the dispute resolution mechanism in the Withdrawal Agreement. Then, as an interim measure, HMG can act unilaterally and legislate to override the WA - but it will be done lawfully, he argues."
Johnson's reportedly refusing to take it.0 -
I'm surprised we havnt seen a quote from Rees mogg, or mark Francois. Both have been very quiet lately.0
-
If Rees Mogg turns out to be the Westminster rapist then my gast will be well and truly flabbereddarkhairedlord said:I'm surprised we havnt seen a quote from Rees mogg, or mark Francois. Both have been very quiet lately.
0 -
Is that wriggling?briantrumpet said:tailwindhome said:tailwindhome said:I wonder what Geoffrey Cox makes of this?
Cox has even suggested to Johnson a way of wriggling out of the law-breaking Act.
"Cox QC wants the Government to trigger the dispute resolution mechanism in the Withdrawal Agreement. Then, as an interim measure, HMG can act unilaterally and legislate to override the WA - but it will be done lawfully, he argues."
Johnson's reportedly refusing to take it.0 -
Here's the first couple of paragraphs.Stevo_666 said:
Paywalled, can't read it.rjsterry said:Well this can't be right, Stevo was sure that there was no ceding of sovereignty in the Japan UK trade deal and yet here I'm reading that the state aid rules in that very treaty are more onerous than those the UK is offering the EU.
https://amp.ft.com/content/edb7d155-56b4-4065-9f83-31b2247fa178?desktop=true&segmentId=d8d3e364-5197-20eb-17cf-2437841d178a&__twitter_impression=trueThe UK’s new trade deal with Japan commits it to tougher restrictions on state aid than the ones it is currently offering the EU in the Brexit talks, potentially undermining its negotiating position with Brussels.
In the bilateral UK-Japan agreement announced in principle on Friday, London and Tokyo have agreed to replicate the restrictions on subsidies in the EU-Japan deal that went into effect last year. That agreement prohibits the governments from indefinitely guaranteeing the debts of struggling companies or providing an open-ended bailout without a clear restructuring plan in place.
By contrast, the UK has repeatedly told the European Union that it must have total freedom over state aid after the end of the Brexit transition period with complete autonomy over future subsidy decisions, subject to WTO rules.
Here's an alternative link
https://www.forexlive.com/news/!/uks-new-trade-deal-with-japan-commits-it-to-tougher-restrictions-on-state-aid-202009131985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
Why should we give the EU the same trade agreement framework as we are giving to others?rjsterry said:
Here's the first couple of paragraphs.Stevo_666 said:
Paywalled, can't read it.rjsterry said:Well this can't be right, Stevo was sure that there was no ceding of sovereignty in the Japan UK trade deal and yet here I'm reading that the state aid rules in that very treaty are more onerous than those the UK is offering the EU.
https://amp.ft.com/content/edb7d155-56b4-4065-9f83-31b2247fa178?desktop=true&segmentId=d8d3e364-5197-20eb-17cf-2437841d178a&__twitter_impression=true
The UK’s new trade deal with Japan commits it to tougher restrictions on state aid than the ones it is currently offering the EU in the Brexit talks, potentially undermining its negotiating position with Brussels.
In the bilateral UK-Japan agreement announced in principle on Friday, London and Tokyo have agreed to replicate the restrictions on subsidies in the EU-Japan deal that went into effect last year. That agreement prohibits the governments from indefinitely guaranteeing the debts of struggling companies or providing an open-ended bailout without a clear restructuring plan in place.
By contrast, the UK has repeatedly told the European Union that it must have total freedom over state aid after the end of the Brexit transition period with complete autonomy over future subsidy decisions, subject to WTO rules.
This is in our gift to not do this.
Why are remoaners upset that we are playing by the same rules that they are defending the EU of using?
More hypocrisy from remoaners0 -
😄 Not upset at all. Pleased to see we are quite happy to trade some sovereignty for economic gain.coopster_the_1st said:
Why should we give the EU the same trade agreement framework as we are giving to others?rjsterry said:
Here's the first couple of paragraphs.Stevo_666 said:
Paywalled, can't read it.rjsterry said:Well this can't be right, Stevo was sure that there was no ceding of sovereignty in the Japan UK trade deal and yet here I'm reading that the state aid rules in that very treaty are more onerous than those the UK is offering the EU.
https://amp.ft.com/content/edb7d155-56b4-4065-9f83-31b2247fa178?desktop=true&segmentId=d8d3e364-5197-20eb-17cf-2437841d178a&__twitter_impression=true
The UK’s new trade deal with Japan commits it to tougher restrictions on state aid than the ones it is currently offering the EU in the Brexit talks, potentially undermining its negotiating position with Brussels.
In the bilateral UK-Japan agreement announced in principle on Friday, London and Tokyo have agreed to replicate the restrictions on subsidies in the EU-Japan deal that went into effect last year. That agreement prohibits the governments from indefinitely guaranteeing the debts of struggling companies or providing an open-ended bailout without a clear restructuring plan in place.
By contrast, the UK has repeatedly told the European Union that it must have total freedom over state aid after the end of the Brexit transition period with complete autonomy over future subsidy decisions, subject to WTO rules.
This is in our gift to not do this.
Why are remoaners upset that we are playing by the same rules that they are defending the EU of using?
More hypocrisy from remoaners1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
Thanks for posting this up as this could be a game changerrjsterry said:
Here's the first couple of paragraphs.Stevo_666 said:
Paywalled, can't read it.rjsterry said:Well this can't be right, Stevo was sure that there was no ceding of sovereignty in the Japan UK trade deal and yet here I'm reading that the state aid rules in that very treaty are more onerous than those the UK is offering the EU.
https://amp.ft.com/content/edb7d155-56b4-4065-9f83-31b2247fa178?desktop=true&segmentId=d8d3e364-5197-20eb-17cf-2437841d178a&__twitter_impression=trueThe UK’s new trade deal with Japan commits it to tougher restrictions on state aid than the ones it is currently offering the EU in the Brexit talks, potentially undermining its negotiating position with Brussels.
In the bilateral UK-Japan agreement announced in principle on Friday, London and Tokyo have agreed to replicate the restrictions on subsidies in the EU-Japan deal that went into effect last year. That agreement prohibits the governments from indefinitely guaranteeing the debts of struggling companies or providing an open-ended bailout without a clear restructuring plan in place.
By contrast, the UK has repeatedly told the European Union that it must have total freedom over state aid after the end of the Brexit transition period with complete autonomy over future subsidy decisions, subject to WTO rules.
Here's an alternative link
https://www.forexlive.com/news/!/uks-new-trade-deal-with-japan-commits-it-to-tougher-restrictions-on-state-aid-20200913
First option is that Liz Truss gets fired
Second option is that we realise Canada Deal involves trading sovereignty and we speed up our walk.
Third option is that it is now cost free to agree the same arrangement with the EU.
0 -
Fairly sure the UK has offered the same to the EU.surrey_commuter said:
Thanks for posting this up as this could be a game changerrjsterry said:
Here's the first couple of paragraphs.Stevo_666 said:
Paywalled, can't read it.rjsterry said:Well this can't be right, Stevo was sure that there was no ceding of sovereignty in the Japan UK trade deal and yet here I'm reading that the state aid rules in that very treaty are more onerous than those the UK is offering the EU.
https://amp.ft.com/content/edb7d155-56b4-4065-9f83-31b2247fa178?desktop=true&segmentId=d8d3e364-5197-20eb-17cf-2437841d178a&__twitter_impression=trueThe UK’s new trade deal with Japan commits it to tougher restrictions on state aid than the ones it is currently offering the EU in the Brexit talks, potentially undermining its negotiating position with Brussels.
In the bilateral UK-Japan agreement announced in principle on Friday, London and Tokyo have agreed to replicate the restrictions on subsidies in the EU-Japan deal that went into effect last year. That agreement prohibits the governments from indefinitely guaranteeing the debts of struggling companies or providing an open-ended bailout without a clear restructuring plan in place.
By contrast, the UK has repeatedly told the European Union that it must have total freedom over state aid after the end of the Brexit transition period with complete autonomy over future subsidy decisions, subject to WTO rules.
Here's an alternative link
https://www.forexlive.com/news/!/uks-new-trade-deal-with-japan-commits-it-to-tougher-restrictions-on-state-aid-20200913
First option is that Liz Truss gets fired
Second option is that we realise Canada Deal involves trading sovereignty and we speed up our walk.
Third option is that it is now cost free to agree the same arrangement with the EU.0 -
If Geoffrey Cox says that they can achieve the same result they claim to want in a way that is within the WA, why wouldn't they do that?
Bearing in mind Geoffrey Cox' advice has obviously not been 100% reliable in the recent past.0 -
It does seem a better route. I think it would only deal with some bits though e.g. it wouldn't cover state aid. In other words, the UK may be using a legitimate grievance to circumvent illegitimate ones.kingstongraham said:If Geoffrey Cox says that they can achieve the same result they claim to want in a way that is within the WA, why wouldn't they do that?
Bearing in mind Geoffrey Cox' advice has obviously not been 100% reliable in the recent past.0 -
What do you think are the biggest mistakes made by the EU and also Ireland?tailwindhome said:The UKs 3 biggest mistakes, aside from the original sin of Brexit, were
-triggering art50 without a plan
-unnecessarily defining Brexit as 'controlling money, laws and borders'
-accepting the principle that there couldn't be any change at the Irish Border0 -
That agreement prohibits the governments from indefinitely guaranteeing the debts of struggling companies or providing an open-ended bailout without a clear restructuring plan in place.rjsterry said:
😄 Not upset at all. Pleased to see we are quite happy to trade some sovereignty for economic gain.coopster_the_1st said:
Why should we give the EU the same trade agreement framework as we are giving to others?rjsterry said:
Here's the first couple of paragraphs.Stevo_666 said:
Paywalled, can't read it.rjsterry said:Well this can't be right, Stevo was sure that there was no ceding of sovereignty in the Japan UK trade deal and yet here I'm reading that the state aid rules in that very treaty are more onerous than those the UK is offering the EU.
https://amp.ft.com/content/edb7d155-56b4-4065-9f83-31b2247fa178?desktop=true&segmentId=d8d3e364-5197-20eb-17cf-2437841d178a&__twitter_impression=true
The UK’s new trade deal with Japan commits it to tougher restrictions on state aid than the ones it is currently offering the EU in the Brexit talks, potentially undermining its negotiating position with Brussels.
In the bilateral UK-Japan agreement announced in principle on Friday, London and Tokyo have agreed to replicate the restrictions on subsidies in the EU-Japan deal that went into effect last year. That agreement prohibits the governments from indefinitely guaranteeing the debts of struggling companies or providing an open-ended bailout without a clear restructuring plan in place.
By contrast, the UK has repeatedly told the European Union that it must have total freedom over state aid after the end of the Brexit transition period with complete autonomy over future subsidy decisions, subject to WTO rules.
This is in our gift to not do this.
Why are remoaners upset that we are playing by the same rules that they are defending the EU of using?
More hypocrisy from remoaners
I am more than happy for these quoted rules to be in place. Based on their natural views this actually binds future Labour governments more than Conservative ones.
You are trying to make out this is something to be concerned about when it is not and you have just torpedoed your own argument.0 -
You're not really paying attention, are you?coopster_the_1st said:
That agreement prohibits the governments from indefinitely guaranteeing the debts of struggling companies or providing an open-ended bailout without a clear restructuring plan in place.rjsterry said:
😄 Not upset at all. Pleased to see we are quite happy to trade some sovereignty for economic gain.coopster_the_1st said:
Why should we give the EU the same trade agreement framework as we are giving to others?rjsterry said:
Here's the first couple of paragraphs.Stevo_666 said:
Paywalled, can't read it.rjsterry said:Well this can't be right, Stevo was sure that there was no ceding of sovereignty in the Japan UK trade deal and yet here I'm reading that the state aid rules in that very treaty are more onerous than those the UK is offering the EU.
https://amp.ft.com/content/edb7d155-56b4-4065-9f83-31b2247fa178?desktop=true&segmentId=d8d3e364-5197-20eb-17cf-2437841d178a&__twitter_impression=true
The UK’s new trade deal with Japan commits it to tougher restrictions on state aid than the ones it is currently offering the EU in the Brexit talks, potentially undermining its negotiating position with Brussels.
In the bilateral UK-Japan agreement announced in principle on Friday, London and Tokyo have agreed to replicate the restrictions on subsidies in the EU-Japan deal that went into effect last year. That agreement prohibits the governments from indefinitely guaranteeing the debts of struggling companies or providing an open-ended bailout without a clear restructuring plan in place.
By contrast, the UK has repeatedly told the European Union that it must have total freedom over state aid after the end of the Brexit transition period with complete autonomy over future subsidy decisions, subject to WTO rules.
This is in our gift to not do this.
Why are remoaners upset that we are playing by the same rules that they are defending the EU of using?
More hypocrisy from remoaners
I am more than happy for these quoted rules to be in place. Based on their natural views this actually binds future Labour governments more than Conservative ones.
You are trying to make out this is something to be concerned about when it is not and you have just torpedoed your own argument.0 -
This is a good question and I'll give it some proper thought later.TheBigBean said:
What do you think are the biggest mistakes made by the EU and also Ireland?tailwindhome said:The UKs 3 biggest mistakes, aside from the original sin of Brexit, were
-triggering art50 without a plan
-unnecessarily defining Brexit as 'controlling money, laws and borders'
-accepting the principle that there couldn't be any change at the Irish Border
First 'off the cuff' answer was not including an exit mechanism for the backstop.....though I'm not sure how this could have worked.....had Cox come back from Brussels with something to enable him to change his advice things may have been different.
“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
not throwing Cameron a bonetailwindhome said:
This is a good question and I'll give it some proper thought later.TheBigBean said:
What do you think are the biggest mistakes made by the EU and also Ireland?tailwindhome said:The UKs 3 biggest mistakes, aside from the original sin of Brexit, were
-triggering art50 without a plan
-unnecessarily defining Brexit as 'controlling money, laws and borders'
-accepting the principle that there couldn't be any change at the Irish Border
First 'off the cuff' answer was not including an exit mechanism for the backstop.....though I'm not sure how this could have worked.....had Cox come back from Brussels with something to enable him to change his advice things may have been different.0 -
The entire point of the article is that it hasn't, but they could be mistaken. The UK Japan agreement copies and pastes the state aid rules from the EU Japan deal as I understand it.TheBigBean said:
Fairly sure the UK has offered the same to the EU.surrey_commuter said:
Thanks for posting this up as this could be a game changerrjsterry said:
Here's the first couple of paragraphs.Stevo_666 said:
Paywalled, can't read it.rjsterry said:Well this can't be right, Stevo was sure that there was no ceding of sovereignty in the Japan UK trade deal and yet here I'm reading that the state aid rules in that very treaty are more onerous than those the UK is offering the EU.
https://amp.ft.com/content/edb7d155-56b4-4065-9f83-31b2247fa178?desktop=true&segmentId=d8d3e364-5197-20eb-17cf-2437841d178a&__twitter_impression=trueThe UK’s new trade deal with Japan commits it to tougher restrictions on state aid than the ones it is currently offering the EU in the Brexit talks, potentially undermining its negotiating position with Brussels.
In the bilateral UK-Japan agreement announced in principle on Friday, London and Tokyo have agreed to replicate the restrictions on subsidies in the EU-Japan deal that went into effect last year. That agreement prohibits the governments from indefinitely guaranteeing the debts of struggling companies or providing an open-ended bailout without a clear restructuring plan in place.
By contrast, the UK has repeatedly told the European Union that it must have total freedom over state aid after the end of the Brexit transition period with complete autonomy over future subsidy decisions, subject to WTO rules.
Here's an alternative link
https://www.forexlive.com/news/!/uks-new-trade-deal-with-japan-commits-it-to-tougher-restrictions-on-state-aid-20200913
First option is that Liz Truss gets fired
Second option is that we realise Canada Deal involves trading sovereignty and we speed up our walk.
Third option is that it is now cost free to agree the same arrangement with the EU.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
i think the emotive use of the word "blockade" tells you all you need to know.kingstongraham said:If Geoffrey Cox says that they can achieve the same result they claim to want in a way that is within the WA, why wouldn't they do that?
Bearing in mind Geoffrey Cox' advice has obviously not been 100% reliable in the recent past.
I think we will keep ratcheting up the rhetoric to stiffen the resolve of the believers and ideally force the EU to walk away, if not then collapse the talks whilst blaming the EU and proclaiming victory0 -
Good. Glad you agree. I'm not concerned about us signing up to this either. Seems entirely sensible as propping up unprofitable businesses is not generally something governments should be doing. Just wondering why it is so objectionable to be similarly bound in an FTA with the EU. Especially seeing as we can only really run one state aid framework at a time.coopster_the_1st said:
That agreement prohibits the governments from indefinitely guaranteeing the debts of struggling companies or providing an open-ended bailout without a clear restructuring plan in place.rjsterry said:
😄 Not upset at all. Pleased to see we are quite happy to trade some sovereignty for economic gain.coopster_the_1st said:
Why should we give the EU the same trade agreement framework as we are giving to others?rjsterry said:
Here's the first couple of paragraphs.Stevo_666 said:
Paywalled, can't read it.rjsterry said:Well this can't be right, Stevo was sure that there was no ceding of sovereignty in the Japan UK trade deal and yet here I'm reading that the state aid rules in that very treaty are more onerous than those the UK is offering the EU.
https://amp.ft.com/content/edb7d155-56b4-4065-9f83-31b2247fa178?desktop=true&segmentId=d8d3e364-5197-20eb-17cf-2437841d178a&__twitter_impression=true
The UK’s new trade deal with Japan commits it to tougher restrictions on state aid than the ones it is currently offering the EU in the Brexit talks, potentially undermining its negotiating position with Brussels.
In the bilateral UK-Japan agreement announced in principle on Friday, London and Tokyo have agreed to replicate the restrictions on subsidies in the EU-Japan deal that went into effect last year. That agreement prohibits the governments from indefinitely guaranteeing the debts of struggling companies or providing an open-ended bailout without a clear restructuring plan in place.
By contrast, the UK has repeatedly told the European Union that it must have total freedom over state aid after the end of the Brexit transition period with complete autonomy over future subsidy decisions, subject to WTO rules.
This is in our gift to not do this.
Why are remoaners upset that we are playing by the same rules that they are defending the EU of using?
More hypocrisy from remoaners
I am more than happy for these quoted rules to be in place. Based on their natural views this actually binds future Labour governments more than Conservative ones.
You are trying to make out this is something to be concerned about when it is not and you have just torpedoed your own argument.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
Seems the lawyers have looked at the IMB and concluded it does nothing to stop any restrictions on food imports to NI should the UK not have 3rd party country status.
“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0
