Put your cards on the table, EU makes last Brexit call to Britain

[Chomper Higgot]

1 minute ago, The Renegade said:

I would not get too excited about yesterday's fantastic deal.

 

From the BBC

 

However, Barnier has ruled out any deal that ends the Jurisdiction of the ECJ

 

I don't see this deal going anywhere.

 

 

To be correct:

 

 

There’s no evidence of Brexit going anywhere and plenty of evidence of the UK backpedaling.

[nauseus]

20 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

It’s interesting and informative that the hardline Brexiteers in the Cabinet have buckled on their demands and signed off on a ‘Soft Brexit’ negotiating position (a position that if carried forward will inevitably result in the UK making further concessions resulting in an even softer Brexit).

 

The hardliners either have other plans to force the ‘hard Brexit’ they continually speak of or they’ve sold out their hardline Brexit supporters.

 

Time will tell, but for now the hardline Brexiteers have backed off from the chance they had to establish a ‘hard Brexit’ negotiating position.

 

That they’ve done so when they tell us ‘the will of the people’ is to get out of the EU at any cost and when faced with a PM in such a weak position both in Parliament and within the Tory Party suggests the hardliners have been bluffing all along.

Or maybe they are confident enough that the EU will reject it anyway and then they are absolved, politically, within the party?

[Chomper Higgot]

3 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Or maybe they are confident enough that the EU will reject it anyway and then they are absolved, politically, within the party?

You may of course be correct, hardline Brexiteers might indeed be pinning their hopes on the EU. 

 

(Irony lives and thrives).

 

Nevertheless the negotiating position coming out of Chequers is a clear step away from hard Brexit.

[nauseus]

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

You may of course be correct, hardline Brexiteers might indeed be pinning their hopes on the EU. 

 

(Irony lives and thrives).

 

Nevertheless the negotiating position coming out of Chequers is a clear step away from hard Brexit.

True. The position is. But I bet barnier wants to do the two-step. He loves to tango too.

[Grouse]

2 hours ago, vogie said:

Are you familar with forum rule number 9, or are you trying to get another topic closed by your bickering.

 

9) You will not post inflammatory messages on the forum, or attempt to disrupt discussions to upset its participants, or trolling. Trolling can be defined as the act of purposefully antagonizing other people on the internet by posting controversial, inflammatory, irrelevant or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking other users into an emotional response or to generally disrupt normal on-topic discussion.

Yes. I express my personal opinions and truly regret that some people are upset by these. I have, as you are aware, tried hard to moderate my tone.

Edited July 7, 2018 by Grouse

[Chomper Higgot]

7 minutes ago, nauseus said:

True. The position is. But I bet barnier wants to do the two-step. He loves to tango too.

Well as the actress said to the bishop.

 

‘When you start off by coming in soft, it doesn’t get any harder’.

 

 

——

[Pre-emptive anti-pedant defence: I’m not actually claiming a real actress ever said such a thing to a real bishop].

[tebee]

This is what WTO rules are like

https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/economics-and-finance/would-british-trade-thrive-on-wto-terms-absolutely-not

 

[Ron19]

Some bickering, of topic and flame posts as well as answers to them have been removed.

[Grouse]

22 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

You may of course be correct, hardline Brexiteers might indeed be pinning their hopes on the EU. 

 

(Irony lives and thrives).

 

Nevertheless the negotiating position coming out of Chequers is a clear step away from hard Brexit.

Yes, maybe we should be grateful for small mercies? 

[The Renegade]

26 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Or maybe they are confident enough that the EU will reject it anyway and then they are absolved, politically, within the party?

From the BBC

 

Quote

• The jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice will end but the UK will pay regard to its decisions in areas where common rules were in force.

Where as Barnier has stated

 

Quote

The EU’s chief Brexit negotiator, Michel Barnier, today warned the U.K. that it must accept the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice in order to achieve a successful withdrawal treaty and transition period when leaving the EU.

https://www.politico.eu/article/barnier-tells-uk-to-accept-ecj-jurisdiction/

 

It would be folly to think that the PM and Government Ministers are not aware of this.

 

So it really calls into question this so called '' Deal '' Unless of course, it was deliberate and gives the UK a get out clause to satisfy remainers. '' It is not our fault, it is the EU's fault '' as it is not acceptable to them.

[Chomper Higgot]

11 minutes ago, The Renegade said:

From the BBC

 

Where as Barnier has stated

 

https://www.politico.eu/article/barnier-tells-uk-to-accept-ecj-jurisdiction/

 

It would be folly to think that the PM and Government Ministers are not aware of this.

 

So it really calls into question this so called '' Deal '' Unless of course, it was deliberate and gives the UK a get out clause to satisfy remainers. '' It is not our fault, it is the EU's fault '' as it is not acceptable to them.

You’ve got your argument upside down.

 

This is an unquestionable blow to the hopes of Brexiteers.

 

Remain supporters can sit back and watch Brexit crumbling.

[aright]

3 hours ago, bristolboy said:

Here's what I wrote followed by what you wrote. How can you possibly claim you weren't responding to my comment about supply chains? Your claim is ludicrous.

 

 

Can you underline the words where I bring up Volks with regard to LRJ. If you can't an apology would be nice.

Comprehension is not your strong point. I'm still waiting for an answer and all you are giving me is fudge and fumble.   

 

[aright]

It was shameful that Mrs May went to Germany to explain her Brexit plan before Cabinet had seen it.

It was telling that she went to Berlin to explain it to Mrs Merkel, not to Brussels.

[nauseus]

13 minutes ago, aright said:

It was shameful that Mrs May went to Germany to explain her Brexit plan before Cabinet had seen it.

It was telling that she went to Berlin to explain it to Mrs Merkel, not to Brussels.

Wonder if she took her ironing with her?

[dick dasterdly]

2 hours ago, Grouse said:

Yes. I express my personal opinions and truly regret that some people are upset by these. I have, as you are aware, tried hard to moderate my tone.

You've done nothing of the sort, and how you get away with it is beyond me....

[stephenterry]

24 minutes ago, aright said:

It was shameful that Mrs May went to Germany to explain her Brexit plan before Cabinet had seen it.

It was telling that she went to Berlin to explain it to Mrs Merkel, not to Brussels.

That's the world of politics, old boy. Same as the fudged cabinet agreement  (or part of it disclosed by media) on a negotiating position that is as clear as mud in that it can be interpreted in different ways - and probably will.

 

Nevertheless, now there is 'a negotiating position', albeit it took two years to reach this consensual cabinet point, the cards are on the table for the EU to dismantle - which is probably more likely than not. However, I understand from reports, Barnier is more likely to compromise if it is interpreted that May has diffused her redlines.

 

And it now puts Theresa May in a position to say to any cabinet rebels on either side, if you don't like what you've agreed to, resign, because I've got a long list of young hungry Tory MPs willing and able to replace you. If she was a Buddhist, she'd be taking the middle path - and for posters on here, that path for Brexit would be the most workable/palatable in the medium term, before the next election in 2022 or before. 

 

 

 

[Grouse]

3 hours ago, The Renegade said:

From the BBC

 

Where as Barnier has stated

 

https://www.politico.eu/article/barnier-tells-uk-to-accept-ecj-jurisdiction/

 

It would be folly to think that the PM and Government Ministers are not aware of this.

 

So it really calls into question this so called '' Deal '' Unless of course, it was deliberate and gives the UK a get out clause to satisfy remainers. '' It is not our fault, it is the EU's fault '' as it is not acceptable to them.

Indeed. Blaming everything on EU intransigence is likely I fear. However, I think actual negotiation can now begin, hopefully between Angela and Theresa. I read somewhere that Merkel has adopted an English accent! 

[sandyf]

2 hours ago, tebee said:

This is what WTO rules are like

https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/economics-and-finance/would-british-trade-thrive-on-wto-terms-absolutely-not

 

Quite. The UK has no WTO tariff profile, it was deleted when the EU became a WTO member , UK uses the EU profile.

 

Britain is already a member of the WTO. However, when negotiating trade deals and the like it operates through the EU. To become a fully independent member, Britain would need to have its own “schedules”, WTO-speak for the list of tariffs and quotas that it would apply to other countries.

https://www.economist.com/the-economist-explains/2017/01/09/why-the-wto-option-for-brexit-will-prove-tricky

 

Of course the UK does not need to negotiate a new profile, it can copy the EU.

 

The most likely course is that Britain keeps its “schedules” precisely as they were under the EU, including maintaining the EU’s “common external tariff”, which is applied uniformly by member states to imports from third countries. This avoids diplomatic wranglings; but a post-Brexit government will surely be embarrassed that it is using EU-approved commitments.

https://www.economist.com/the-economist-explains/2017/01/09/why-the-wto-option-for-brexit-will-prove-tricky

 

Not that straightforward.

 

Current WTO trade agreements assume that the 28-member EU is a coherent economic bloc. Trade between member states is mostly free. Multinationals move parts back and forth frequently between different member states. If Britain broke free from the EU, but kept the common external tariff in place, then a company moving parts between the EU and Britain could potentially face a tariff charge every time a border was crossed.

https://www.economist.com/the-economist-explains/2017/01/09/why-the-wto-option-for-brexit-will-prove-tricky

 

And then there is the quotas to deal with, NZ and Australia are already up in arms.

It is like the leave campaign all over again, WTO terms are as easy as leaving the EU.

[stephenterry]

One snippet paraphrased from Theresa May's comments that the UK could make new ambitious treaties with the USA, Australia and New Zealand  while overlooking that the UK carries out more trade with the Netherlands than the whole British commonwealth combined. And while Trump might desire to push forward on a trade agreement, and quickly agree it, it could still take up to 3 years to implement it, if it follows similar trade implementation time frames with other countries.    

 

This kind of 'talk the talk' rhetoric is purely political speak, and while consuming front-page news is a spin-objective, in reality it is a lot harder for the government to walk the walk.

[Grouse]

37 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

You've done nothing of the sort, and how you get away with it is beyond me....

I really have no wish to bicker with you. I'm sorry that you have not noticed my moderated  tone.

 

What is your opinion of May's new proposals. You certainly used to be famous for taking the middle position!

[tebee]

European Court of Justice

3 hours ago, The Renegade said:

From the BBC

The jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice will end but the UK will pay regard to its decisions in areas where common rules were in force.

 

So now as well as brexit in name only, we have end of  ECJ jurisdiction in name only...

[sandyf]

16 minutes ago, stephenterry said:

One snippet paraphrased from Theresa May's comments that the UK could make new ambitious treaties with the USA, Australia and New Zealand  while overlooking that the UK carries out more trade with the Netherlands than the whole British commonwealth combined. And while Trump might desire to push forward on a trade agreement, and quickly agree it, it could still take up to 3 years to implement it, if it follows similar trade implementation time frames with other countries.    

 

This kind of 'talk the talk' rhetoric is purely political speak, and while consuming front-page news is a spin-objective, in reality it is a lot harder for the government to walk the walk.

The only reason Trump wants to talk about a trade deal is to try and increase exports to the UK. With a population of about 5 times the UK , the 'bully boy' mentality creeps in with the intention of screwing the UK into the ground. 

The sad fact is he will probably get away with it, the post brexit government will capitulate in order to prove a point, irrespective of the cost.

We can all look forward to the shops being full of american made Cornish pasties and Stilton, not that it will matter, local concerns will have already shut up shop.

 

You only have to look at what is going between the US and the EU/China. This is a man that would have quite happily shut down the Bombardier factory in Belfast. Only the delusional would see any chance of a good deal for the UK.

[nauseus]

36 minutes ago, stephenterry said:

One snippet paraphrased from Theresa May's comments that the UK could make new ambitious treaties with the USA, Australia and New Zealand  while overlooking that the UK carries out more trade with the Netherlands than the whole British commonwealth combined. And while Trump might desire to push forward on a trade agreement, and quickly agree it, it could still take up to 3 years to implement it, if it follows similar trade implementation time frames with other countries.    

 

This kind of 'talk the talk' rhetoric is purely political speak, and while consuming front-page news is a spin-objective, in reality it is a lot harder for the government to walk the walk.

The CU shackles may have something to do with the limited trade with our Commonwealth friends, eh? 

[stephenterry]

8 minutes ago, nauseus said:

The CU shackles may have something to do with the limited trade with our Commonwealth friends, eh? 

Or this: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/may/22/eu-trade-talks-australia-new-zealand-brexit-commonwealth

[sandyf]

16 minutes ago, nauseus said:

The CU shackles may have something to do with the limited trade with our Commonwealth friends, eh? 

Certainly not with SME's ,but as usual the stock response is to blame everything on the EU.

 

Lack of specialised staff and financial constraints were listed as the 2 main barriers to trade by companies that had not exported.

Companies that had exported reported language skills and administrative procedures as the main barriers to trade.

https://www.cdp.it/ImagePub.aspx?id=1893039

 

UK companies do trade in far away places but many choose not to do so for a variety of reasons. Bit strange that some seem to think that post brexit these companies will change their mind and rush off to do business on the other side of the world.

[nauseus]

19 minutes ago, stephenterry said:

Or this: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/may/22/eu-trade-talks-australia-new-zealand-brexit-commonwealth

You completely missed my point but no surprise there. 

[nauseus]

3 minutes ago, sandyf said:

Certainly not with SME's ,but as usual the stock response is to blame everything on the EU.

 

Lack of specialised staff and financial constraints were listed as the 2 main barriers to trade by companies that had not exported.

Companies that had exported reported language skills and administrative procedures as the main barriers to trade.

https://www.cdp.it/ImagePub.aspx?id=1893039

 

UK companies do trade in far away places but many choose not to do so for a variety of reasons. Bit strange that some seem to think that post brexit these companies will change their mind and rush off to do business on the other side of the world.

There was no blame attached to anything. Your stock response is to claim such and its boring.

[nontabury]

6 hours ago, bristolboy said:

4 hours ago, nauseus said:

Only Economic History. For my tertiary study I chose something worthwhile. But as you mention it, economics is not the primary reason for the leave vote. Economics is a word applied to too many things, IMHO. The word economics is often used with other words like crisis. Strictly, the 2008 crisis should have been only termed financialcrisis, brought about by poor financial, legal and economic policies. During the last crisis, being a member of the EU did not help avoid the effects of the recession. But as I am such an ameteur, can you tell me, if reasoning supposed to be an element of economics? 

You noted that being in the EU didn't help the UK avoid the effects of  the recession. Why exactly would that be laid at the EU's door? It was the greed and negligence of British banks  and other financial institutions that was responsible for that. Do you expect the EU to mop up the UK's messes?

So it was Only the negligence of British banks that caused the 2008 recession, and there was me,thinking the major player was the USA financial institutions, along with the British and Europeon financial institutions, and not forgetting all of the governments.

 

 

[nontabury]

5 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

To be correct:

 

 

There’s no evidence of Brexit going anywhere and plenty of evidence of the UK backpedaling.

The U.K ( politicians )may backpedal. But the British people will not. They know what they voted for,and anything less will be forever rejected.

[stephenterry]

23 minutes ago, nauseus said:

You completely missed my point but no surprise there. 

Glad you finally got the message that I have zero interest or regard for your comments.