BREXIT - Is This Really Still Rumbling On? 😴
Comments
-
It's a Cuntastrophucpangolin said:0 -
“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0
-
Scheiße Sturm0
-
It doesn't matter how clever the twitterati think they are. It's not them doing the deal, or, it's not them not doing the deal.tailwindhome said:0 -
There is a solution e.g. for state aid, UK ends CAP -> arbitration -> tariffs on EU food. That's not how the EU works though.tailwindhome said:
It's the same as the fishing solution. The UK has left and so has its fishing territory. Continued access therefore needs to be bought, if the UK is willing to sell.0 -
Lol who are U.K. fishermen selling to?TheBigBean said:
There is a solution e.g. for state aid, UK ends CAP -> arbitration -> tariffs on EU food. That's not how the EU works though.tailwindhome said:
It's the same as the fishing solution. The UK has left and so has its fishing territory. Continued access therefore needs to be bought, if the UK is willing to sell.0 -
If the EU thinks it needs tariffs on fish, then that is fine, but the UK will expect to retaliate with tariffs on something else e.g. Champagne. That has little to do with who owns which fishing territory based on an international treaty the EU signed.rick_chasey said:
Lol who are U.K. fishermen selling to?TheBigBean said:
There is a solution e.g. for state aid, UK ends CAP -> arbitration -> tariffs on EU food. That's not how the EU works though.tailwindhome said:
It's the same as the fishing solution. The UK has left and so has its fishing territory. Continued access therefore needs to be bought, if the UK is willing to sell.0 -
Ah the threat of trade wars.TheBigBean said:
If the EU thinks it needs tariffs on fish, then that is fine, but the UK will expect to retaliate with tariffs on something else e.g. Champagne. That has little to do with who owns which fishing territory based on an international treaty the EU signed.rick_chasey said:
Lol who are U.K. fishermen selling to?TheBigBean said:
There is a solution e.g. for state aid, UK ends CAP -> arbitration -> tariffs on EU food. That's not how the EU works though.tailwindhome said:
It's the same as the fishing solution. The UK has left and so has its fishing territory. Continued access therefore needs to be bought, if the UK is willing to sell.
Spoken like a true Brexiter.0 -
The irony is that the because of the EU rules on product names, we could tariff Champagne, but not fizzy wines and thus target tariffs directly against the EUTheBigBean said:
If the EU thinks it needs tariffs on fish, then that is fine, but the UK will expect to retaliate with tariffs on something else e.g. Champagne. That has little to do with who owns which fishing territory based on an international treaty the EU signed.rick_chasey said:
Lol who are U.K. fishermen selling to?TheBigBean said:
There is a solution e.g. for state aid, UK ends CAP -> arbitration -> tariffs on EU food. That's not how the EU works though.tailwindhome said:
It's the same as the fishing solution. The UK has left and so has its fishing territory. Continued access therefore needs to be bought, if the UK is willing to sell.
1 -
So, here we are. 4-1/2 years in, 3 weeks to go, and we still don't know what our trading status will be on 01/01/2021. Doesn't surprise me in the slightest.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
I would hate to think the EU wants to break international law. After all, we've been told that is a very very bad thing to do.TheBigBean said:
If the EU thinks it needs tariffs on fish, then that is fine, but the UK will expect to retaliate with tariffs on something else e.g. Champagne. That has little to do with who owns which fishing territory based on an international treaty the EU signed.rick_chasey said:
Lol who are U.K. fishermen selling to?TheBigBean said:
There is a solution e.g. for state aid, UK ends CAP -> arbitration -> tariffs on EU food. That's not how the EU works though.tailwindhome said:
It's the same as the fishing solution. The UK has left and so has its fishing territory. Continued access therefore needs to be bought, if the UK is willing to sell."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Brexiteers celebrating a no deal Brexit paying more for their champagne due to tarriffs
As metaphors go, it's a bit on the nose.
“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
Try to understand the issue. You don't seem to.rick_chasey said:
Ah the threat of trade wars.TheBigBean said:
If the EU thinks it needs tariffs on fish, then that is fine, but the UK will expect to retaliate with tariffs on something else e.g. Champagne. That has little to do with who owns which fishing territory based on an international treaty the EU signed.rick_chasey said:
Lol who are U.K. fishermen selling to?TheBigBean said:
There is a solution e.g. for state aid, UK ends CAP -> arbitration -> tariffs on EU food. That's not how the EU works though.tailwindhome said:
It's the same as the fishing solution. The UK has left and so has its fishing territory. Continued access therefore needs to be bought, if the UK is willing to sell.
Spoken like a true Brexiter.0 -
Well Macron has said in the last 48 hours that he (France) has access to UK waters and he isn't giving that up. However he seems to fail to understand that with no deal, he has to give that up or France is in breach of international regulations.rick_chasey said:
Lol who are U.K. fishermen selling to?TheBigBean said:
There is a solution e.g. for state aid, UK ends CAP -> arbitration -> tariffs on EU food. That's not how the EU works though.tailwindhome said:
It's the same as the fishing solution. The UK has left and so has its fishing territory. Continued access therefore needs to be bought, if the UK is willing to sell.
It's pretty simpe Rick, if France, Spain or any other UK nation want access to fish in UK waters under a no deal, they have to pay for it.
Just as the EU would expect us to pay to access their market.
Which bit of that don't you get?
Or is it that the EU only gets to apply international rules that suit them and ignore those that don't?
I guess Brian the Trumpet wants us to pay the fuel to the French for their boats, and any landing fees and other costs they incur to come and fish in our waters.
And before you jump to wrong conclusions, non of that is pro or anti Brexit, it's international law.1 -
English sparklingvwine is ok. NZ, Australia and USA make some good sparkling wines too. They might even put the ingredients on the label and not grow the grapes in a rubbish tip.tailwindhome said:Brexiteers celebrating a no deal Brexit paying more for their champagne due to tarriffs
As metaphors go, it's a bit on the nose.0 -
Really???? FFS do you two really not get tariff schedules and favoured nation status?Stevo_666 said:
I would hate to think the EU wants to break international law. After all, we've been told that is a very very bad thing to do.TheBigBean said:
If the EU thinks it needs tariffs on fish, then that is fine, but the UK will expect to retaliate with tariffs on something else e.g. Champagne. That has little to do with who owns which fishing territory based on an international treaty the EU signed.rick_chasey said:
Lol who are U.K. fishermen selling to?TheBigBean said:
There is a solution e.g. for state aid, UK ends CAP -> arbitration -> tariffs on EU food. That's not how the EU works though.tailwindhome said:
It's the same as the fishing solution. The UK has left and so has its fishing territory. Continued access therefore needs to be bought, if the UK is willing to sell.0 -
It will be fun seeing Macron come to get his fishing boats that have been impounded for fishing in another countries waters. Maybe that will get him reelected after his game of bluff has backfired.1
-
surrey_commuter said:
Really???? FFS do you two really not get tariff schedules and favoured nation status?Stevo_666 said:
I would hate to think the EU wants to break international law. After all, we've been told that is a very very bad thing to do.TheBigBean said:
If the EU thinks it needs tariffs on fish, then that is fine, but the UK will expect to retaliate with tariffs on something else e.g. Champagne. That has little to do with who owns which fishing territory based on an international treaty the EU signed.rick_chasey said:
Lol who are U.K. fishermen selling to?TheBigBean said:
There is a solution e.g. for state aid, UK ends CAP -> arbitration -> tariffs on EU food. That's not how the EU works though.tailwindhome said:
It's the same as the fishing solution. The UK has left and so has its fishing territory. Continued access therefore needs to be bought, if the UK is willing to sell.surrey_commuter said:
Really???? FFS do you two really not get tariff schedules and favoured nation status?Stevo_666 said:
I would hate to think the EU wants to break international law. After all, we've been told that is a very very bad thing to do.TheBigBean said:
If the EU thinks it needs tariffs on fish, then that is fine, but the UK will expect to retaliate with tariffs on something else e.g. Champagne. That has little to do with who owns which fishing territory based on an international treaty the EU signed.rick_chasey said:
Lol who are U.K. fishermen selling to?TheBigBean said:
There is a solution e.g. for state aid, UK ends CAP -> arbitration -> tariffs on EU food. That's not how the EU works though.tailwindhome said:
It's the same as the fishing solution. The UK has left and so has its fishing territory. Continued access therefore needs to be bought, if the UK is willing to sell.
I understand the issue. I suspect you don't understand the point I made.1 -
Fantastic freudian slip. We will certainly be paying for it.Dorset_Boy said:
Well Macron has said in the last 48 hours that he (France) has access to UK waters and he isn't giving that up. However he seems to fail to understand that with no deal, he has to give that up or France is in breach of international regulations.rick_chasey said:
Lol who are U.K. fishermen selling to?TheBigBean said:
There is a solution e.g. for state aid, UK ends CAP -> arbitration -> tariffs on EU food. That's not how the EU works though.tailwindhome said:
It's the same as the fishing solution. The UK has left and so has its fishing territory. Continued access therefore needs to be bought, if the UK is willing to sell.
It's pretty simpe Rick, if France, Spain or any other UK nation want access to fish in UK waters under a no deal, they have to pay for it.
Just as the EU would expect us to pay to access their market.
Which bit of that don't you get?
Or is it that the EU only gets to apply international rules that suit them and ignore those that don't?
I guess Brian the Trumpet wants us to pay the fuel to the French for their boats, and any landing fees and other costs they incur to come and fish in our waters.
And before you jump to wrong conclusions, non of that is pro or anti Brexit, it's international law.- Genesis Croix de Fer
- Dolan Tuono0 -
In the event of no deal Macron is not giving it up it is being taken off him.Dorset_Boy said:
Well Macron has said in the last 48 hours that he (France) has access to UK waters and he isn't giving that up. However he seems to fail to understand that with no deal, he has to give that up or France is in breach of international regulations.rick_chasey said:
Lol who are U.K. fishermen selling to?TheBigBean said:
There is a solution e.g. for state aid, UK ends CAP -> arbitration -> tariffs on EU food. That's not how the EU works though.tailwindhome said:
It's the same as the fishing solution. The UK has left and so has its fishing territory. Continued access therefore needs to be bought, if the UK is willing to sell.
It's pretty simpe Rick, if France, Spain or any other UK nation want access to fish in UK waters under a no deal, they have to pay for it.
Just as the EU would expect us to pay to access their market.
Which bit of that don't you get?
Or is it that the EU only gets to apply international rules that suit them and ignore those that don't?
I guess Brian the Trumpet wants us to pay the fuel to the French for their boats, and any landing fees and other costs they incur to come and fish in our waters.
And before you jump to wrong conclusions, non of that is pro or anti Brexit, it's international law.
I really don’t think we will go down a pay to play route on fishing.
Rick’s comment is that the fish in our waters are not bought by Brits but are landed and sold in the EU. It really is the ultimate lose lose. Two bald men fighting over a comb.0 -
So are you saying that no French or Spanish boats fish in UK waters?surrey_commuter said:
In the event of no deal Macron is not giving it up it is being taken off him.Dorset_Boy said:
Well Macron has said in the last 48 hours that he (France) has access to UK waters and he isn't giving that up. However he seems to fail to understand that with no deal, he has to give that up or France is in breach of international regulations.rick_chasey said:
Lol who are U.K. fishermen selling to?TheBigBean said:
There is a solution e.g. for state aid, UK ends CAP -> arbitration -> tariffs on EU food. That's not how the EU works though.tailwindhome said:
It's the same as the fishing solution. The UK has left and so has its fishing territory. Continued access therefore needs to be bought, if the UK is willing to sell.
It's pretty simpe Rick, if France, Spain or any other UK nation want access to fish in UK waters under a no deal, they have to pay for it.
Just as the EU would expect us to pay to access their market.
Which bit of that don't you get?
Or is it that the EU only gets to apply international rules that suit them and ignore those that don't?
I guess Brian the Trumpet wants us to pay the fuel to the French for their boats, and any landing fees and other costs they incur to come and fish in our waters.
And before you jump to wrong conclusions, non of that is pro or anti Brexit, it's international law.
I really don’t think we will go down a pay to play route on fishing.
Rick’s comment is that the fish in our waters are not bought by Brits but are landed and sold in the EU. It really is the ultimate lose lose. Two bald men fighting over a comb.
Under international law, they are British own waters / fish. Where they are landed is not relevant as far as pulling them out of the water.
So we will lose a small amount of export, and the French & Spanish big boats won't be able to make their catches either, unless they pay for it.
I agree it is a lose for the EU, but if the UK charge enough it might be more profitable for the UK. It is however an example of the grand project being more important than individual specifics.0 -
This is about access to British waters.surrey_commuter said:
Really???? FFS do you two really not get tariff schedules and favoured nation status?Stevo_666 said:
I would hate to think the EU wants to break international law. After all, we've been told that is a very very bad thing to do.TheBigBean said:
If the EU thinks it needs tariffs on fish, then that is fine, but the UK will expect to retaliate with tariffs on something else e.g. Champagne. That has little to do with who owns which fishing territory based on an international treaty the EU signed.rick_chasey said:
Lol who are U.K. fishermen selling to?TheBigBean said:
There is a solution e.g. for state aid, UK ends CAP -> arbitration -> tariffs on EU food. That's not how the EU works though.tailwindhome said:
It's the same as the fishing solution. The UK has left and so has its fishing territory. Continued access therefore needs to be bought, if the UK is willing to sell."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
I'll try one last time. Wine made in France is French. Oranges picked in Spain are Spanish. Fish caught in UK waters are British. These countries can get together and sign an FTA and trade their produce. If they want to be a bit protectionist, the FTA doesn't have to cover all items, so they can argue for some exclusions. What isn't releveant is the UK wanting to pick Spanish oranges directly or demanding an annual delivery of free French wine.surrey_commuter said:
In the event of no deal Macron is not giving it up it is being taken off him.Dorset_Boy said:
Well Macron has said in the last 48 hours that he (France) has access to UK waters and he isn't giving that up. However he seems to fail to understand that with no deal, he has to give that up or France is in breach of international regulations.rick_chasey said:
Lol who are U.K. fishermen selling to?TheBigBean said:
There is a solution e.g. for state aid, UK ends CAP -> arbitration -> tariffs on EU food. That's not how the EU works though.tailwindhome said:
It's the same as the fishing solution. The UK has left and so has its fishing territory. Continued access therefore needs to be bought, if the UK is willing to sell.
It's pretty simpe Rick, if France, Spain or any other UK nation want access to fish in UK waters under a no deal, they have to pay for it.
Just as the EU would expect us to pay to access their market.
Which bit of that don't you get?
Or is it that the EU only gets to apply international rules that suit them and ignore those that don't?
I guess Brian the Trumpet wants us to pay the fuel to the French for their boats, and any landing fees and other costs they incur to come and fish in our waters.
And before you jump to wrong conclusions, non of that is pro or anti Brexit, it's international law.
I really don’t think we will go down a pay to play route on fishing.
Rick’s comment is that the fish in our waters are not bought by Brits but are landed and sold in the EU. It really is the ultimate lose lose. Two bald men fighting over a comb.
0 -
I guess if there is no deal, then we can say to Macron 'So long, and thanks for all the fish' "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0
-
I look forward to Johnson performing some herring related photo-opp. I think Macron probably has same ability to control the French fishing fleet as we do of our football fans.Stevo_666 said:I guess if there is no deal, then we can say to Macron 'So long, and thanks for all the fish'
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
I'm sure the Royal Navy can control themrjsterry said:
I look forward to Johnson performing some herring related photo-opp. I think Macron probably has same ability to control the French fishing fleet as we do of our football fans.Stevo_666 said:I guess if there is no deal, then we can say to Macron 'So long, and thanks for all the fish'
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Project Fear from well known remoaner Christopher Hope of the Telegraph
“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
SC is correct in explaining what my point was. That was it.Dorset_Boy said:
So are you saying that no French or Spanish boats fish in UK waters?surrey_commuter said:
In the event of no deal Macron is not giving it up it is being taken off him.Dorset_Boy said:
Well Macron has said in the last 48 hours that he (France) has access to UK waters and he isn't giving that up. However he seems to fail to understand that with no deal, he has to give that up or France is in breach of international regulations.rick_chasey said:
Lol who are U.K. fishermen selling to?TheBigBean said:
There is a solution e.g. for state aid, UK ends CAP -> arbitration -> tariffs on EU food. That's not how the EU works though.tailwindhome said:
It's the same as the fishing solution. The UK has left and so has its fishing territory. Continued access therefore needs to be bought, if the UK is willing to sell.
It's pretty simpe Rick, if France, Spain or any other UK nation want access to fish in UK waters under a no deal, they have to pay for it.
Just as the EU would expect us to pay to access their market.
Which bit of that don't you get?
Or is it that the EU only gets to apply international rules that suit them and ignore those that don't?
I guess Brian the Trumpet wants us to pay the fuel to the French for their boats, and any landing fees and other costs they incur to come and fish in our waters.
And before you jump to wrong conclusions, non of that is pro or anti Brexit, it's international law.
I really don’t think we will go down a pay to play route on fishing.
Rick’s comment is that the fish in our waters are not bought by Brits but are landed and sold in the EU. It really is the ultimate lose lose. Two bald men fighting over a comb.
Under international law, they are British own waters / fish. Where they are landed is not relevant as far as pulling them out of the water.
So we will lose a small amount of export, and the French & Spanish big boats won't be able to make their catches either, unless they pay for it.
I agree it is a lose for the EU, but if the UK charge enough it might be more profitable for the UK. It is however an example of the grand project being more important than individual specifics.
I have to say I give very few sh!ts about fishing. Warhammer is a bigger deal and more valuable.
I honestly don’t care what flag the ship is flying when it catches the fish. Could not care less.
It’s another remarkable sleight of hand that everyone is fighting like ferrets in a sack over this when services is just ignored0 -
Cod wars here we come - except it's not us...
https://telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/12/12/france-gears-war-european-neighbours-locked-british-waters-no/"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0
