UK's Hammond regrets calling EU 'the enemy' over Brexit

[stephenterry]

6 minutes ago, robertson468 said:

Instead of trying to annoy people with unqualified comments, it's time that you started qualifying them.  There are other trade agreements available out there and yes they may take some time to negotiate, but the EU is not the be all and end all of life, in fact not long ago they were on quite a shaky wicket with the possibility of French and Greece opposition Governments contemplating leaving.  Also Saint Angela Merkel is no longer on such a sound base, as we have seen with the latest German elections.

Rubbish. Wake up and smell the coffee. The UK cannot try and negotiate any trade agreement with other countries until it leaves the EU. That is more likely to take years rather than months because the UK has zero economic advantages to offer except financial acumen.  

Edited October 14, 2017 by stephenterry
addition to text.

[taipeir]

The EU was always a lot stronger than portrayed in the tabloid media in the UK.

 

The UK is in for a really hard time if it crashes out of the EU.

 

Donald Trump and places like India are going to want their pound of flesh for any so called trade deals.

 

Remember as part of the EU the UK already has trade deals with many non European nations, there's very little rational to thinking the UK will magically get a better deal outside of the EU!

 

The UK has a very advantageous position in the EU with many opt outs including its own currency and passporting rights from Euro trading. The UK could even had instituted limits on European movemebt but chose not to.

 

Thrown it all away.....

 

There's still time to put a brake on the Tories disastrous internal power plays...but it looks like many of them want to rush over the cliff headlong and blame Johnny foreigner for the shitshow.

 

No idea, no plan , just huff and guff.

 

 

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk

 

 

 

 

 

 

[gamini]

3 hours ago, BuaBS said:

Shouldn't regret it , he was right.

He was pathetic

[stephenterry]

To recap how Brexit commenced back in 2016. The referendum result did not commit the UK government to any action. That is implicit (albeit not to give attention to the outcome would have been undemocratic (IMO)). But for May to decide she must follow the 'will of the people' is blatantly political and not statistically factual if viewed  overall.

 

These are the rounded figures, some in % terms. The total electoral role: 46,500,000. 

Total turnout 33,500,000 (72%)

 

Leavers          17,400,000 (37%)

Remainers     16,100,000 (35%)

Non-voters     13,000,000 (28%)

 

Total                46,500,000 (100%)

 

IMO, 37% of the total electoral role is not a majority or a blueprint for the Government to announce it is the 'will of the people' that we must enforce Brexit, because that is statistically incorrect. It is the will of those that voted to leave, but not the majority of the electorate. 

 

No wonder politicians are at loggerheads causing blame scenarios every day, and Hammond's interjection is merely a drop in the ocean, and similar events must be expected until the day when the UK leaves the EU.

[dick dasterdly]

4 hours ago, BuaBS said:

Shouldn't regret it , he was right.

Sadly, in view of the dictatorial EU elite version of 'negotiating' (which is dictating as to how even negotiating will proceed) - I too agree that the EU elite/negotiators have to be considered as 'enemies' by the UK .

[dick dasterdly]

1 hour ago, stephenterry said:

Rubbish. Wake up and smell the coffee. The UK cannot try and negotiate any trade agreement with other countries until it leaves the EU. That is more likely to take years rather than months because the UK has zero economic advantages to offer except financial acumen.  

"Rubbish. Wake up and smell the coffee. The UK cannot try and negotiate any trade agreement with other countries until it leaves the EU."

 

You have to be beyond naive to believe this....

[stephenterry]

5 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

Sadly, in view of the dictatorial EU elite version of 'negotiating' (which is dictating as to how even negotiating will proceed) - I too agree that the EU elite/negotiators have to be considered as 'enemies' by the UK .

The fact is, if the UK want to leave the EU with any reasonable deal, they have no choice but to accept the EU terms, because the EU can stonewall right to when article 50 is enacted in March 2019. Which means the UK has to start from scratch, a situation that could be ruinous to the economy. Not that I would wish or want a 'no deal' and for the government to belatedly plan for this is an indication that the Tories are incapable of obtaining what is 'best for Britain' - as May continues to spout.

[stephenterry]

13 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

"Rubbish. Wake up and smell the coffee. The UK cannot try and negotiate any trade agreement with other countries until it leaves the EU."

 

You have to be beyond naive to believe this....

It's part of the legal agreement with the EU. Any member country cannot enter in to an independent trade agreement with any country outside the EU until they leave.

 

I suppose they could tout for business with Japan and the US but can never reach agreement while in the EU. And that could take years after the UK is ousted. 

Edited October 14, 2017 by stephenterry
addition to text.

[dick dasterdly]

3 hours ago, Grouse said:

It's quite obvious that no sane politician actually thinks Brexit is a good idea. They are just trying to think of a way to explain it to the great unwashed without losing their seats. Amusing frankly ?

And we all trust politicians to put what is 'best' for the ordinary populace above their own, personal interests.

 

And it's impossible to even think that their own, personal interests are closely intertwined with large businesses and the wealthy's interests...

Edited October 14, 2017 by dick dasterdly

[taipeir]

"Rubbish. Wake up and smell the coffee. The UK cannot try and negotiate any trade agreement with other countries until it leaves the EU."

 

You have to be beyond naive to believe this....

So tell me how does the UK negotiate a trade deal with third parties when

 

A> It doesn't know what trade relationship it will have with the EU yet

 

B> It hasn't even started negotiating a trade deal with the EU yet.

 

C> The UK already has a deficit of negotiators

 

D> The UK as a member of the EU is prohibited from making independent trade deals

 

Trade deals can take years even decades to finalise. They can start making some noises or media opps but absolutely nothing of substance will happen for YEARS.

 

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk

 

 

 

[stephenterry]

4 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

And we all trust politicians to put what is 'best' for the ordinary populace above their own, personal interests.

 

And it's impossible to even think that their own, personal interests are intertwined with large businesses and the wealthy's interests...

I'm sure that in several cases it is true, however the gravy train would continue to bring benefit to them being in the EU, not out of it as some big businesses fear.

[rockingrobin]

5 minutes ago, stephenterry said:

The fact is, if the UK want to leave the EU with any reasonable deal, they have no choice but to accept the EU terms, because the EU can stonewall right to when article 50 is enacted in March 2019. Which means the UK has to start from scratch, a situation that could be ruinous to the economy. Not that I would wish or want a 'no deal' and for the government to belatedly plan for this is an indication that the Tories are incapable of obtaining what is 'best for Britain' - as May continues to spout.

The public's and government perception of a No Deal may differ.

However the UK walking away without any agreements is not plausible. If the treasury statement of funding for such an outcome is correct. 

As any business knows , if the finance department is not willing to fund a project , it is not going to happen

[vogie]

6 minutes ago, stephenterry said:

The fact is, if the UK want to leave the EU with any reasonable deal, they have no choice but to accept the EU terms, because the EU can stonewall right to when article 50 is enacted in March 2019. Which means the UK has to start from scratch, a situation that could be ruinous to the economy. Not that I would wish or want a 'no deal' and for the government to belatedly plan for this is an indication that the Tories are incapable of obtaining what is 'best for Britain' - as May continues to spout.

Other than the Tories, who do you think would get the "best for Britain"

 

[dick dasterdly]

6 minutes ago, stephenterry said:

The fact is, if the UK want to leave the EU with any reasonable deal, they have no choice but to accept the EU terms, because the EU can stonewall right to when article 50 is enacted in March 2019. Which means the UK has to start from scratch, a situation that could be ruinous to the economy. Not that I would wish or want a 'no deal' and for the government to belatedly plan for this is an indication that the Tories are incapable of obtaining what is 'best for Britain' - as May continues to spout.

Which is precisely why (IMO) the Brit. govt. should announce that as it's been made v clear that the EU has no intention of negotiating, only dictating - the UK is leaving at the end of the 2 year period.

 

Far from ideal for either side, but at least it provides some clarity/reduces uncertainty and gives businesses time to plan for the future - on the assumption that WTO rules will apply.

[stephenterry]

3 minutes ago, vogie said:

Other than the Tories, who do you think would get the "best for Britain"

 

IMO, it would be best if the Tories pull out and revoke Article 50, which is legally possible if the 'EU court of justice' ? agrees. They could use the EU's intransigence to reach agreement as a placebo for the masses. I wouldn't be surprised if the Tory grandees are considering ousting May and installing a 'safe pair of hands' to enact this, thus saving face all round. 

 

And the issue I have with Labour is that they could easily bankrupt the UK if they regain power and remain in the EU, although of course, it would take longer than the fall out after a Tory Brexit.  

[SheungWan]

The UK side of the negotiations has been a shambles for months now. Cannot even agree a strategy, so lash out at the procedures for which they are signed up for but don't like. It all whiffs a bit of some old colonial culture which would like to dictate the rules as it sees fit. Hammond is supposed to be the anchor for a negotiated settlement. Not very clever and yes, how embarrassing.

[Baerboxer]

4 hours ago, taipeir said:

Friendly?

 

What's friendly got to do with it pay the monies owed and sort other fundamental issues related to Brexit. Get negotiating.

 

Stop waffling and the soundbites for domestic consumption.

 

Clock is ticking. Tick tock.

 

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk

 

 

 

 

The issue is the EU don't want, or can't, provide details of the "monies owed". And their figure seems to grow every time it's mentioned.

 

There stance is negative. Simply say "non" and demand you come back with more. It seems their objective is either to screw the UK ruthlessly and regardless of actual factual reality and/or to make the UK leave on very bad terms.

 

And that, showing the others how much of a "benefit" it is to remain and tow the EU line is their only objective.

[stephenterry]

12 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

Which is precisely why (IMO) the Brit. govt. should announce that as it's been made v clear that the EU has no intention of negotiating, only dictating - the UK is leaving at the end of the 2 year period.

 

Far from ideal for either side, but at least it provides some clarity/reduces uncertainty and gives businesses time to plan for the future - on the assumption that WTO rules will apply.

I get where you're coming from, however the practicalities of actually upping sticks and leaving would be just as much as a minefield as it is now - i.e. the UK stating it is going to leave. No change there.   

[SheungWan]

4 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

The issue is the EU don't want, or can't, provide details of the "monies owed". And their figure seems to grow every time it's mentioned.

 

There stance is negative. Simply say "non" and demand you come back with more. It seems their objective is either to screw the UK ruthlessly and regardless of actual factual reality and/or to make the UK leave on very bad terms.

 

And that, showing the others how much of a "benefit" it is to remain and tow the EU line is their only objective.

Try to do a little bit of homework before blasting off. https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainers/eu-divorce-bill

 

[rockingrobin]

4 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

The issue is the EU don't want, or can't, provide details of the "monies owed". And their figure seems to grow every time it's mentioned.

 

There stance is negative. Simply say "non" and demand you come back with more. It seems their objective is either to screw the UK ruthlessly and regardless of actual factual reality and/or to make the UK leave on very bad terms.

 

And that, showing the others how much of a "benefit" it is to remain and tow the EU line is their only objective.

With reference to the financial commitments

The UK have agreed to honour commitments undertaken, but are unwilling to actually state what these are

[rockingrobin]

25 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

Which is precisely why (IMO) the Brit. govt. should announce that as it's been made v clear that the EU has no intention of negotiating, only dictating - the UK is leaving at the end of the 2 year period.

 

Far from ideal for either side, but at least it provides some clarity/reduces uncertainty and gives businesses time to plan for the future - on the assumption that WTO rules will apply.

Relying on WTO is a non starter

Tarrifs don't stop trade , it is the application of non tariff barriers, such as regulatory conformity

 With no agreement for mutual recogniton of standards, then containers are stopped at ports whilst the goods are proven to conform to required standards.

[stephenterry]

8 minutes ago, rockingrobin said:

With reference to the financial commitments

The UK have agreed to honour commitments undertaken, but are unwilling to actually state what these are

I'm probably over-simplifying, but shouldn't the UK be paying what they're currently committed to, and receiving what they're currently owed with an agreed cut-off point depending on the time frame of the various projects? Subject to an independent audit affirmation, of course.

[vogie]

20 minutes ago, stephenterry said:

IMO, it would be best if the Tories pull out and revoke Article 50, which is legally possible if the 'EU court of justice' ? agrees. They could use the EU's intransigence to reach agreement as a placebo for the masses. I wouldn't be surprised if the Tory grandees are considering ousting May and installing a 'safe pair of hands' to enact this, thus saving face all round. 

 

And the issue I have with Labour is that they could easily bankrupt the UK if they regain power and remain in the EU, although of course, it would take longer than the fall out after a Tory Brexit.  

I think we all have to agree that we are leaving the EU, whether you or anyone else likes it or not. How can there be a "safe pair if hands" when Barnier and co are being childish, they are being totally intransigent and as far as I can see we, the British are bending over backwards to accomodate them. If this carries on there can only be one outcome, and make no mistake, the EU (Germany and France) will be big losers in all of this, it's time to start acting like adults!

[SheungWan]

10 minutes ago, vogie said:

I think we all have to agree that we are leaving the EU, whether you or anyone else likes it or not. How can there be a "safe pair if hands" when Barnier and co are being childish, they are being totally intransigent and as far as I can see we, the British are bending over backwards to accomodate them. If this carries on there can only be one outcome, and make no mistake, the EU (Germany and France) will be big losers in all of this, it's time to start acting like adults!

And your argument isn't it. Doesn't even try to be.

Edited October 14, 2017 by SheungWan

[SheungWan]

9 minutes ago, stephenterry said:

I'm probably over-simplifying, but shouldn't the UK be paying what they're currently committed to, and receiving what they're currently owed with an agreed cut-off point depending on the time frame of the various projects? Subject to an independent audit affirmation, of course.

Yes there should be a divorce settlement according to the rules, but the UK government apparently spending most of its time on internal squabbling.

[stephenterry]

4 minutes ago, vogie said:

I think we all have to agree that we are leaving the EU, whether you or anyone else likes it or not. How can there be a "safe pair if hands" when Barnier and co are being childish, they are being totally intransigent and as far as I can see we, the British are bending over backwards to accomodate them. If this carries on there can only be one outcome, and make no mistake, the EU (Germany and France) will be big losers in all of this, it's time to start acting like adults!

What I'm suggesting is that there is (legally) no need to leave if the UK revokes Article 50 - that is for the International Court of Justice to decide - and that gives the UK a breathing space while it works out the cost/benefits of staying/ leaving. For that to happen, though, May must be removed and a safe pair of hands (not Johnson) put in place to enact the revocation. As to who the losers are, it is conjecture to state other than the UK would be the greatest casualty if 'no deal' is pushed through parliament.

[vogie]

1 minute ago, SheungWan said:

Yes there should be a divorce settlement according to the rules, but the UK government apparently spending most of its time on internal squabbling.

Whilst the EU negotiators are just wonderful. Just recently you have been the voice of reason, whats gone wrong?

[dunroaming]

I think Hammond meant to say that his colleagues were the enemy, at least some of them.  Anyway Hammond isn't conducting the negotiations, he is just trying to make sure Britain survives Brexit as best as it can.  At the moment the country is split in two, the government are split in two and the cabinet is split in two.  And TV posters are split in two.  It appears everyone on all sides are pushing for what they perceive as being the best for the UK and that is at least one positive.

 

The EU are doing their best to make everything as difficult as they can which is understandable and if the boot was the other foot Britain would do the same.  However it really is time to knuckle down and make some progress.  Davis and Barnier are both following instructions.  They are the faces of the Brexit negotiations but both are taking orders and are therefore limited in what they can actually commit to. 

[SheungWan]

26 minutes ago, vogie said:

Whilst the EU negotiators are just wonderful. Just recently you have been the voice of reason, whats gone wrong?

Its my day off.

[Khun Han]

"Well done Phil. That should throw the brexiters off your trail for a while."