citybiker

Why was that "final"? It was advisory at best. Let the people decide.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

Losing, of course.

For example:
 
Hard exit under Johnson
Soft exit under May
Soft exit under Corbyn
WTO rules because time ran out
An extension period of nn months
2nd referendum with an exit result
2nd referendum with a remain result

 
I have no problem with UK desiring to leave the EU. Wanting control over legislation and immigration.
Fine with me. Easy to understand.
 
However,
I do take issue when people refer to EU as corrupt and as unelected dickheads.
In my view, they are not.
 
I can not think of any political system in the world that is more open to the public than the EU.
It is so easy to influence the development of regulations that you can't believe it.
 
 

PM May has 'emphasised' many things... and most if not all of them (red lines) were scrubbed out... The fact of the matter is she spends all of her time not trying to give her opponents in her own party something to discuss / argue / etc... that she has been unable to come to the table with something that is 'doable'.   So if you are relying on her keeping her word -- I think you might be a little delusional.  Interesting times is not always the best of times.

Ok, i'll leave you to your ramblings & enjoy the thread.

Sent from my SM-A500FU using Tapatalk

Rather elegantly put I thought. The Economist didn't say "morons" once [emoji4]

That just makes it sound like you want to be part of EFTA [emoji50]

It’s been occasionally mentioned that the EU doesn’t have to negotiate with the U.K.

Unfortunately, it’s yet another flawed part of the bigger argument because the U.K. choose to leave, ie: article 8 of the Lisbon Treaty.
The Telegraph’s take on it.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/08/05/brussels-will-break-laws-refuses-compromise-brexit/

&

http://www.lisbon-treaty.org/wcm/the-lisbon-treaty/treaty-on-european-union-and-comments/title-1-common-provisions/6-article-8.html


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

The Economist, as always, is spot on!
 
https://www.economist.com/leaders/2018/08/02/no-deal-is-often-better-than-a-bad-deal-not-with-brexit

I agree that if the EU had been a little more forthcoming then Cameron could have sold the deal to the British people.  Instead we end up with a knee jerk response by the people with the intention being "that will teach them!"  Boy has that backfired with us now scratching around for concessions.  Our only weapon now appears to be the threat of a no deal even though May and the other negotiators admit this would be bad  for Britain and the EU as well.  Apparently though, that would be OK as long as the EU suffers as well as the Brits.

 

All going swimmingly well then.

It's just the WA terms to thrash out now, if it was easy then everyone would do it.

Sent from my SM-A500FU using Tapatalk

Bogus argument. There were no reforms requested by the UK of the EU which prompted Brexit. And nor were there any demanded by the Brexiteers. Not then, not now.

You perhaps need to bear in mind that the EU didn't ask the UK to leave so what is there to negotiate?

As for shortages please let's hear why you think this WON'T happen.....

The EU may not have asked the UK to leave, unwilling to self reform made Brexit a reality. Never mind, If Brussels has taken reform seriously it could all have been so different.

Sent from my SM-A500FU using Tapatalk

Good point. If I could just add to it slightly. The stitch up against Brexit includes the three main political parties, the BBC and Sky, the Civil Service, the CBI and IOD, the Government and of course the European Commission.
 
The whole issue has now become a battle between the establishment and the will of the people.
Imo this is a dangerous place to be.
 
 
 

 

 
 

 

Yes that tells us that the EU are sticking to what they said from day one while the Brits have got themselves in a terrible mess by setting red lines that were never attainable.   How many times does this need to be said!  Nothing has changes with the EU's position, it is up to the UK to decide if they make concessions or go for the no deal option.
 
Every day now one minister or another refers to the no deal option.  Jeremy Hunt and now today Fox says that "no deal is odds on as the EU won't agree to our Britain's plan".  He rates it as 60/40.  Clearly all this is to try to get the EU to soften their position but what it really does is push the government into more of a corner. 

Here you can read more details about WTO after Brexit.
 
https://briefingsforbrexit.com/can-the-uk-rejoin-world-trade-organization-a-response-from-wto/

The EU are amazingly unified in their response so far to Brexit. Attempts by the UK to divide the governments of the EU27 have failed.
 
The amount of benefit countries get from the EU also depends on themselves. The problems Greece has are largely of their own making, yet they do not want to leave the EU (knowing it would make things worse).
 
For Hungary and Poland, if they cannot share the values of the EU maybe they should reconsider their membership (but once again, they probably won't because of economic reasons).
 
OK self destruct might be exaggeration but we might agree on significant damage.
 
Sorry, but I think your anti-EU tabloid press is quite unique to the UK. Is there any other EU country where you can get away with calling judges "enemies of the people"?
Also I think that the divisions in the Tories and Labour parties about Brexit are incomparable to any splits in opinion (on such an important topic) seen within major parties in the EU27. At least I cannot think of any.

One day it will sink in, the UK is not operating under any WTO criteria, it is operating under EU WTO criteria, big difference.
 
The Open Skies agreement is to do with overflying and not related to landing rights or EASA. UK aviation is tied up in 35 EU legislative agreements, so there has to be an overall deal or a multitude of deals.

Yeah, it is a little bit like the trick with the red bus. 

Am I correct in thinking that infact your elections are direct elections whereas the EU is indirect elections.

Credit Suisse apparently chooses Frankfurt as a post-Brexit location.
As reported by the Financial Times on Thursday, the bank has already shifted millions of dollars in assets to support the new location.
The CS is one of the last major banks, with the plans for the time after a UK exit from the EU stood, says the report on.

So, what will be the difference between, for example, an Emirates flight from Dubai to Heathrow, over flying EU airspace and a British Airways flight from Heathrow to Dubai, over flying EU airspace? 
 
Unless of course Brussels will forbid the British Airways flight, to damage the UK! 

no deal will only lead to an EU implosion so its not all bad in the long run..french and german car factories will take a hit// so bring it on barmier

Dutch & Dublin are are looking to employ more customs staff, the FT in the city is ramping up its no deal planning & Mark Carney is saying no deal increasing by the day.

Some very uncomfortable ministers, Brussels beuracrats and Mr Hunt has made it clear to Barnier the UK will not blink.

We'll see how many appointments by March 2019.

Sent from my SM-A500FU using Tapatalk

The trouble with your expectations is that many of the Labour M.P s are remainers, who think that they can rely on the traditional Labour supporters to follow them loyally and blindly. But times are a changing. Thankfully some Labour 
M.P’s do support their electorate.
 
 

There is no WTO option for many issues, aviation for example, that means a deal with the EU and ECJ jurisdiction, back to the drawing board.