BREXIT - Is This Really Still Rumbling On? 😴
Comments
-
They could concede in giving your house to the french if that would make you and happy. I am all for you leading from the front in prioritising others interests. Is that what you think good governance is.tailwindhome said:
If fishing and subsidies are only 'somehow deal breakers' that the EU are 'hiding behind' then the UK could easily concede on them, no?john80 said:If your only argument is that Boris is bad because he signed an agreement 9 months ago that stated that both sides had to work in good faith about a future trade agreement. Then you are blind to the fact that the EU have not really moved things along whilst hiding behind fishing and subsidies as somehow deal breakers then I can't help you. The EU is happy to bang on about the costs of leaving the EU for the UK but seems to think that they should retain generous fishing rights. It would seem that the average man in the street can see the obfuscation clearer than a lot on this forum.
0 -
What are you talking about?john80 said:
They could concede in giving your house to the french if that would make you and happy. I am all for you leading from the front in prioritising others interests. Is that what you think good governance is.tailwindhome said:
If fishing and subsidies are only 'somehow deal breakers' that the EU are 'hiding behind' then the UK could easily concede on them, no?john80 said:If your only argument is that Boris is bad because he signed an agreement 9 months ago that stated that both sides had to work in good faith about a future trade agreement. Then you are blind to the fact that the EU have not really moved things along whilst hiding behind fishing and subsidies as somehow deal breakers then I can't help you. The EU is happy to bang on about the costs of leaving the EU for the UK but seems to think that they should retain generous fishing rights. It would seem that the average man in the street can see the obfuscation clearer than a lot on this forum.
“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
I think they are saying that they did that last year.john80 said:
They could concede in giving your house to the french if that would make you and happy. I am all for you leading from the front in prioritising others interests. Is that what you think good governance is.tailwindhome said:
If fishing and subsidies are only 'somehow deal breakers' that the EU are 'hiding behind' then the UK could easily concede on them, no?john80 said:If your only argument is that Boris is bad because he signed an agreement 9 months ago that stated that both sides had to work in good faith about a future trade agreement. Then you are blind to the fact that the EU have not really moved things along whilst hiding behind fishing and subsidies as somehow deal breakers then I can't help you. The EU is happy to bang on about the costs of leaving the EU for the UK but seems to think that they should retain generous fishing rights. It would seem that the average man in the street can see the obfuscation clearer than a lot on this forum.
0 -
This was well known and discussed on here at the time.kingstongraham said:
The argument is that Boris signed an agreement which contained provisions for what would happen if there is not a free trade agreement. Now he has read it, and doesn't like what it says.john80 said:If your only argument is that Boris is bad because he signed an agreement 9 months ago that stated that both sides had to work in good faith about a future trade agreement. Then you are blind to the fact that the EU have not really moved things along whilst hiding behind fishing and subsidies as somehow deal breakers then I can't help you. The EU is happy to bang on about the costs of leaving the EU for the UK but seems to think that they should retain generous fishing rights. It would seem that the average man in the street can see the obfuscation clearer than a lot on this forum.
He lied to you about what it meant, basically.
It's quite separate from the fact the EU is an annoyingly intransigent negotiating partner who will use their size and rules to push things to the limit.
The counter argument was always 5th largest, German car makers, they need us more than them
0 -
Surely a man of principle such as yourself would take one for the team and give up your assets to move negotiation along. After all that is what you are asking and entire industry such as fishing to do. Lead from the front or are you more of a wheel sucker.tailwindhome said:
What are you talking about?john80 said:
They could concede in giving your house to the french if that would make you and happy. I am all for you leading from the front in prioritising others interests. Is that what you think good governance is.tailwindhome said:
If fishing and subsidies are only 'somehow deal breakers' that the EU are 'hiding behind' then the UK could easily concede on them, no?john80 said:If your only argument is that Boris is bad because he signed an agreement 9 months ago that stated that both sides had to work in good faith about a future trade agreement. Then you are blind to the fact that the EU have not really moved things along whilst hiding behind fishing and subsidies as somehow deal breakers then I can't help you. The EU is happy to bang on about the costs of leaving the EU for the UK but seems to think that they should retain generous fishing rights. It would seem that the average man in the street can see the obfuscation clearer than a lot on this forum.
I will let you ponder on what amazing concessions the UK will get after you roll over to their leverage and arbitrary timetable.0 -
Stevo_666 said:
Business with the UK is very important for EU businesses and countries. The EU as a whole runs a huge trade surplus in goods with the UK so they have a lot to lose in that respect by not doing a deal. To think they can just ignore that is unrealistic.
Just having a bit of fun, looking back a few centuries.0 -
One of the many reasons that a lot of us have for voting remain is that we knew then, like we know now, that there will be no amazing concessions. Your ridiculous "argument" here does not change that.john80 said:
Surely a man of principle such as yourself would take one for the team and give up your assets to move negotiation along. After all that is what you are asking and entire industry such as fishing to do. Lead from the front or are you more of a wheel sucker.tailwindhome said:
What are you talking about?john80 said:
They could concede in giving your house to the french if that would make you and happy. I am all for you leading from the front in prioritising others interests. Is that what you think good governance is.tailwindhome said:
If fishing and subsidies are only 'somehow deal breakers' that the EU are 'hiding behind' then the UK could easily concede on them, no?john80 said:If your only argument is that Boris is bad because he signed an agreement 9 months ago that stated that both sides had to work in good faith about a future trade agreement. Then you are blind to the fact that the EU have not really moved things along whilst hiding behind fishing and subsidies as somehow deal breakers then I can't help you. The EU is happy to bang on about the costs of leaving the EU for the UK but seems to think that they should retain generous fishing rights. It would seem that the average man in the street can see the obfuscation clearer than a lot on this forum.
I will let you ponder on what amazing concessions the UK will get after you roll over to their leverage and arbitrary timetable.
0 -
Maybe fishing and subsidies are important issues after all and not just 'somehow deal breakers' that the EU are 'hiding behind'?john80 said:
Surely a man of principle such as yourself would take one for the team and give up your assets to move negotiation along. After all that is what you are asking and entire industry such as fishing to do. Lead from the front or are you more of a wheel sucker.tailwindhome said:
What are you talking about?john80 said:
They could concede in giving your house to the french if that would make you and happy. I am all for you leading from the front in prioritising others interests. Is that what you think good governance is.tailwindhome said:
If fishing and subsidies are only 'somehow deal breakers' that the EU are 'hiding behind' then the UK could easily concede on them, no?john80 said:If your only argument is that Boris is bad because he signed an agreement 9 months ago that stated that both sides had to work in good faith about a future trade agreement. Then you are blind to the fact that the EU have not really moved things along whilst hiding behind fishing and subsidies as somehow deal breakers then I can't help you. The EU is happy to bang on about the costs of leaving the EU for the UK but seems to think that they should retain generous fishing rights. It would seem that the average man in the street can see the obfuscation clearer than a lot on this forum.
I will let you ponder on what amazing concessions the UK will get after you roll over to their leverage and arbitrary timetable.
“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
It is not any more rediculous than throwing fishing under the bus for sweet FA in return. It is maybe time to pivot your arguments to the reality of the now than when things were greener when we were part of the EU.bompington said:
One of the many reasons that a lot of us have for voting remain is that we knew then, like we know now, that there will be no amazing concessions. Your ridiculous "argument" here does not change that.john80 said:
Surely a man of principle such as yourself would take one for the team and give up your assets to move negotiation along. After all that is what you are asking and entire industry such as fishing to do. Lead from the front or are you more of a wheel sucker.tailwindhome said:
What are you talking about?john80 said:
They could concede in giving your house to the french if that would make you and happy. I am all for you leading from the front in prioritising others interests. Is that what you think good governance is.tailwindhome said:
If fishing and subsidies are only 'somehow deal breakers' that the EU are 'hiding behind' then the UK could easily concede on them, no?john80 said:If your only argument is that Boris is bad because he signed an agreement 9 months ago that stated that both sides had to work in good faith about a future trade agreement. Then you are blind to the fact that the EU have not really moved things along whilst hiding behind fishing and subsidies as somehow deal breakers then I can't help you. The EU is happy to bang on about the costs of leaving the EU for the UK but seems to think that they should retain generous fishing rights. It would seem that the average man in the street can see the obfuscation clearer than a lot on this forum.
I will let you ponder on what amazing concessions the UK will get after you roll over to their leverage and arbitrary timetable.0 -
that is a very well written article, summing up the key issues and how we got there, presumably for a well educated readership interested in foreign affairs.tailwindhome said:Tom McTague on Brexit
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2020/09/britain-brexit-humbling/616343/
All of this marks a fitting finale to Britain’s catastrophic mismanagement of the Brexit process, which started with the resignation of the prime minister who called the referendum without any plan for what would happen if he lost it (David Cameron); continued with his successor triggering a two-year countdown to Britain’s final withdrawal without any plan for what future relationship she wanted to negotiate (Theresa May); and was followed by her successor signing an international treaty without any guarantee of a future trade deal, only then to rip up this agreement when its consequences began to reveal themselves (Johnson). Regardless of the merits of Brexit, it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that Britain’s leaders dealt themselves one bad hand after another—and proceeded to play them badly.
I had not considered that the EU may get less than their potential optimum outcome by overplaying the strength of their position0 -
A minister has confirmed that they are assured that the EU is acting in good faith. Not sure how that fits with statements from the same government to the contrary.TheBigBean said:
Because the EU is supposed to act in good faith such that the above isn't possible.rick_chasey said:It is very hard to escape from the 'why did you sign it?' argument though.
Buyer's remorse isn't really a good excuse really ,is it?1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
As someone else pointed out, this is what it feels like to be an independent third country.briantrumpet said:
That's kinda how all trade negotiations work, after all. Complaining about it is as pointless as complaining about gravity.kingstongraham said:
It's quite separate from the fact the EU is an annoyingly intransigent negotiating partner who will use their size and rules to push things to the limit.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
"We don't like how the EU works, we're leaving!"
...
"We don't like how the EU works"- Genesis Croix de Fer
- Dolan Tuono0 -
if I may borrow your analogy then if we assume that TWH's house is worth £1m we could trade it for £100m of benefit from the EU and bung him £2m for his troubles. This does assume that he does not exploit the strength of his position and try and get £50m+john80 said:
Surely a man of principle such as yourself would take one for the team and give up your assets to move negotiation along. After all that is what you are asking and entire industry such as fishing to do. Lead from the front or are you more of a wheel sucker.tailwindhome said:
What are you talking about?john80 said:
They could concede in giving your house to the french if that would make you and happy. I am all for you leading from the front in prioritising others interests. Is that what you think good governance is.tailwindhome said:
If fishing and subsidies are only 'somehow deal breakers' that the EU are 'hiding behind' then the UK could easily concede on them, no?john80 said:If your only argument is that Boris is bad because he signed an agreement 9 months ago that stated that both sides had to work in good faith about a future trade agreement. Then you are blind to the fact that the EU have not really moved things along whilst hiding behind fishing and subsidies as somehow deal breakers then I can't help you. The EU is happy to bang on about the costs of leaving the EU for the UK but seems to think that they should retain generous fishing rights. It would seem that the average man in the street can see the obfuscation clearer than a lot on this forum.
I will let you ponder on what amazing concessions the UK will get after you roll over to their leverage and arbitrary timetable.0 -
In your analogy is the government going to give the fishermen the money or pay them not to fish as they dont have any quota. Sometimes in a country when something is so manifestly unfair then the cost benefit does not work out as it is hard to explain. Even the Lib Dems might bebright enough to figure this out.surrey_commuter said:
if I may borrow your analogy then if we assume that TWH's house is worth £1m we could trade it for £100m of benefit from the EU and bung him £2m for his troubles. This does assume that he does not exploit the strength of his position and try and get £50m+john80 said:
Surely a man of principle such as yourself would take one for the team and give up your assets to move negotiation along. After all that is what you are asking and entire industry such as fishing to do. Lead from the front or are you more of a wheel sucker.tailwindhome said:
What are you talking about?john80 said:
They could concede in giving your house to the french if that would make you and happy. I am all for you leading from the front in prioritising others interests. Is that what you think good governance is.tailwindhome said:
If fishing and subsidies are only 'somehow deal breakers' that the EU are 'hiding behind' then the UK could easily concede on them, no?john80 said:If your only argument is that Boris is bad because he signed an agreement 9 months ago that stated that both sides had to work in good faith about a future trade agreement. Then you are blind to the fact that the EU have not really moved things along whilst hiding behind fishing and subsidies as somehow deal breakers then I can't help you. The EU is happy to bang on about the costs of leaving the EU for the UK but seems to think that they should retain generous fishing rights. It would seem that the average man in the street can see the obfuscation clearer than a lot on this forum.
I will let you ponder on what amazing concessions the UK will get after you roll over to their leverage and arbitrary timetable.0 -
Love daily mash
https://www.thedailymash.co.uk/politics/politics-headlines/uk-law-now-opt-in-20200915200483BRITISH law now only applies to you if you ticked the box when you were filling in the form, it has emerged.
Following the passing of the UK’s law-breaking Internal Market Bill in the Commons last night, the country’s laws have switched from automatically applying to all citizens to only being valid if you deliberately opted in.
Justice secretary Robert Buckland QC said: “Laws aren’t for everyone. We in the Conservative party, unlike our unimaginative and dogmatic opponents, recognise that.0 -
“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0
-
“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
Weird how that's the headline:tailwindhome said:
"UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson had "made a mistake" in agreeing to what Mr Henkel termed a "de-facto border between Northern Ireland and the rest of Britain".
Mr Henkel added: "Without that commitment there would have been no agreement with EU and possibly 'troubles' in Ireland.
Now, he has made a complete U-turn and accepts a border between NI and Ireland to avoid one between NI and the rest of Britain.
"Both Britain and the EU should have known that you cannot have your cake and eat it."
Mr Henkel concluded: "If I had a magic wand, I would vote for stopping Brexit altogether."0 -
It is one thing stamping your foot and storming out of the EU but being forced out by the conniving old foe is going to leave a sour tastekingstongraham said:
Weird how that's the headline:tailwindhome said:
"UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson had "made a mistake" in agreeing to what Mr Henkel termed a "de-facto border between Northern Ireland and the rest of Britain".
Mr Henkel added: "Without that commitment there would have been no agreement with EU and possibly 'troubles' in Ireland.
Now, he has made a complete U-turn and accepts a border between NI and Ireland to avoid one between NI and the rest of Britain.
"Both Britain and the EU should have known that you cannot have your cake and eat it."
Mr Henkel concluded: "If I had a magic wand, I would vote for stopping Brexit altogether."0 -
There was an article I saw the other day, which pointed out that Brexit probably wasn't even top 5 of things to worry about for Merkel or Macron. I think the most likely scenario is the transition period ending without a deal and the UK spending the next decade trying to rebuild the some sort of useful relationship.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
I read the same article. It was about Merkel. China, Russia, Trump, Turkey and one other were more important. That's fair enough, but I didn't agree with the conclusion that the best way to counter these is to show EU unity by not giving an inch in the discussions with the UK. It seemed a better way might be to find common ground with another country that is also troubled by the same things.rjsterry said:There was an article I saw the other day, which pointed out that Brexit probably wasn't even top 5 of things to worry about for Merkel or Macron. I think the most likely scenario is the transition period ending without a deal and the UK spending the next decade trying to rebuild the some sort of useful relationship.
0 -
i thought the original backstop was quite a compromise on the EU's part, fwiw.TheBigBean said:
I read the same article. It was about Merkel. China, Russia, Trump, Turkey and one other were more important. That's fair enough, but I didn't agree with the conclusion that the best way to counter these is to show EU unity by not giving an inch in the discussions with the UK. It seemed a better way might be to find common ground with another country that is also troubled by the same things.rjsterry said:There was an article I saw the other day, which pointed out that Brexit probably wasn't even top 5 of things to worry about for Merkel or Macron. I think the most likely scenario is the transition period ending without a deal and the UK spending the next decade trying to rebuild the some sort of useful relationship.
0 -
Remind me, hasn't it been argued on here that one of the main reasons for being pro-brexit, or at least one of the opportunities, is for the UK to be able to make more UK friendly, bespoke trade deals with the rest of the world?
In which case, surely this behaviour is damaging that opportunity?0 -
Have you seen comment from any other country? What's your view of the Japan / Korea trade ware? Should it have affected the UK / Japan trade deal?rick_chasey said:Remind me, hasn't it been argued on here that one of the main reasons for being pro-brexit, or at least one of the opportunities, is for the UK to be able to make more UK friendly, bespoke trade deals with the rest of the world?
In which case, surely this behaviour is damaging that opportunity?0 -
rick_chasey said:
i thought the original backstop was quite a compromise on the EU's part, fwiw.
It was.
However it's undeniably true that it had 2 1/4 flaws from a UK perspective
1 The UK would be a rule taker
2 There was no exit mechanism
1/4 There was nothing binding GB to NI
“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
The way I see it, the UK is on the cusp of not being able to strike a trade deal with the biggest market in the world, and in so doing, is risking scuppering the chances for a trade deal with the second biggest market in the world.TheBigBean said:
Have you seen comment from any other country? What's your view of the Japan / Korea trade ware? Should it have affected the UK / Japan trade deal?rick_chasey said:Remind me, hasn't it been argued on here that one of the main reasons for being pro-brexit, or at least one of the opportunities, is for the UK to be able to make more UK friendly, bespoke trade deals with the rest of the world?
In which case, surely this behaviour is damaging that opportunity?
It's great the UK rolled over the existing EU-Japan trade deal with a few sensible tweaks. Different countries have different tolerances.
0 -
I would call the hypocrites out and tell them to sort out their own problems on their door step rather than trying to meddle in something that is nothing to do with them.rick_chasey said:Remind me, hasn't it been argued on here that one of the main reasons for being pro-brexit, or at least one of the opportunities, is for the UK to be able to make more UK friendly, bespoke trade deals with the rest of the world?
In which case, surely this behaviour is damaging that opportunity?
They should go and ask their voters if they want to be under the politics of the EU and law dictated by the ECJ. That would put them back in their boxes.
0 -
How does a US UK trade deal have nothing to do with the US?coopster_the_1st said:
I would call the hypocrites out and tell them to sort out their own problems on their door step rather than trying to meddle in something that is nothing to do with them.rick_chasey said:Remind me, hasn't it been argued on here that one of the main reasons for being pro-brexit, or at least one of the opportunities, is for the UK to be able to make more UK friendly, bespoke trade deals with the rest of the world?
In which case, surely this behaviour is damaging that opportunity?
They should go and ask their voters if they want to be under the politics of the EU and law dictated by the ECJ. That would put them back in their boxes.“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
As I have said before, it is not the route I think the UK should take, but it is almost amusing the US criticising the UK for breaking agreements. Just from recent memory the US has welched on the Paris Agreement, Iran nuclear deal, NAFTA, Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, Trans Pacific Partnership and the WTO. Plus plenty of others.rick_chasey said:
The way I see it, the UK is on the cusp of not being able to strike a trade deal with the biggest market in the world, and in so doing, is risking scuppering the chances for a trade deal with the second biggest market in the world.TheBigBean said:
Have you seen comment from any other country? What's your view of the Japan / Korea trade ware? Should it have affected the UK / Japan trade deal?rick_chasey said:Remind me, hasn't it been argued on here that one of the main reasons for being pro-brexit, or at least one of the opportunities, is for the UK to be able to make more UK friendly, bespoke trade deals with the rest of the world?
In which case, surely this behaviour is damaging that opportunity?
It's great the UK rolled over the existing EU-Japan trade deal with a few sensible tweaks. Different countries have different tolerances.
0
