UK voters should make final Brexit decision if talks with EU collapse: poll

[aright]

On ‎9‎/‎27‎/‎2018 at 11:06 AM, aright said:

 

"the younger generation get theirs from online sources which tend to be more balanced overall"

 

Can you name the balanced sources you claim young people read? I am happy to agree with you if you can provide sources of balanced opinion which I can form an opinion about. Your statement has no value without sources.

Are you seriously suggesting young people read the FT?

 

14 hours ago, tebee said:

Hey - I have other things to do sometimes, keep your hair on !

 

The aggregators for a start

 

Apple news

Google news

 

Then the ones where you select your preferences yourself, but you still get a varied selection 

Rss feeds - readers like Newsblur 

Twitter

Facebook

reddit

 

Then the sites that generate their own content 

 

Huff post

Medium

The Conversation

 

The MSM sites 

 

BBC news 

Al Jazeera 

PBS

NYT

France 24

Bloomberg

Sky news 

All the UK paper sites

 

You can also check the veracity of what you read yourself

 

Google search of course

Snoops

Quora 

 

Like I said before, it's not one specific site, but the overall breath of the what you can read in less time than it takes to read a physical paper or watch the news on television a few times a day 

 

Can you tell me how your reply relates to my specific question or are you saying all your so called unbiased sights are read by young people? I haven't visited all those sights but the ones I have I certainly wouldn't regard as unbiased. BBC news, Sky news Murdoch tool)  and France 24 (State owned) I visit regularly and I see good and bad bias in all three but that may well be as a result of my own bias Can you reinforce your claim by telling me the least three unbiased sites iyo so I can check them out.

 

 

 

 

 

 

On ‎9‎/‎23‎/‎2018 at 7:32 AM, aright said:

 

 

 

If economics are so important why hasn't the EU done something about unemployment, especially youth unemployment and immigration which has profound effects on overall economics and voter push back and failing banks. Can I suggest they have done nothing because they are unelected and unaccountable and the overall project is more important than uncomfortable details.

 

You refer to working together to help weaker members, where is the evidence? On two of my recent posts I asked these two questions, I am still waiting for answers :-

 

"It will be good to get away from a Union which seems to have no answer to record unemployment, bank bailing out, extreme right wing political parties and dealing with millions of third world migrants. If any Remainers can point me to a link showing the Commissions plans to deal with these problems I would be grateful."

 

"I would ask the commission  why a border in some far flung province of the EU where only 0.1% of all EU trade crosses borders was of such theological economic and political importance?" 

 

 

 

Keep your hair on! I'm still waiting for the red question above to be answered.

 

Edited September 28, 2018 by aright

[mommysboy]

'Another Tory MP, George Freeman, a former policy adviser to the prime minister, said the party must reconnect with under 45-year-olds or risk becoming a "rump party of nostalgic nationalists". '

 

I think he's been on Thai Visa.

[mommysboy]

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1023651/Brexit-news-BBC-UK-EU-Theresa-May-European-Union-Yanis-Varoufakis

 

Not a rag for us reds. But it comes up with the odd interesting article.

 

I agree.  These are the only 2 negotiable options. Anything else is pie in the sky.

Edited September 28, 2018 by mommysboy

[tebee]

2 hours ago, aright said:

 

 

Can you tell me how your reply relates to my specific question or are you saying all your so called unbiased sights are read by young people? I haven't visited all those sights but the ones I have I certainly wouldn't regard as unbiased. BBC news, Sky news Murdoch tool)  and France 24 (State owned) I visit regularly and I see good and bad bias in all three but that may well be as a result of my own bias Can you reinforce your claim by telling me the least three unbiased sites iyo so I can check them out.

 

 

 

 

 

I'm not saying that any specific site is unbiased, I'm saying that by looking at a number of sites you can get a good balanced view.

 

I need to be up a 5:30 am to take my son to play tennis 70km away so I haven't got time to answer you red question, will try do at some point though! 

[sandyf]

16 hours ago, JAG said:

I was not making a judgement, by anybody's standards. I was making a comment on what you said. If the vote had been as close the other way, what would have been your position vis-a-vis a rerun? I doubt if you would have argued for one.

Of course you were. I did not agree with the referendum in the first place so why would I want a rerun. I do not agree with this talk of a further referendum. A narrow margin was always going to be contentious and divisive and that can never be in anyone's best interest.

Whether you like it or not the UK is a parliamentary democracy and it is that that should be respected. This referendum has left the integrity of parliament in tatters and it will take a long time to clean up the mess.

Leaving the EU is all that was on the ballot paper and any insistence on leaving the SM is nothing more than brexiteers pouring petrol on the fire.

[sandyf]

15 hours ago, BwindiBoy said:

 

 

""...and it is almost certain there will never be another one."" ..... Yet, YOU appear to want another one. ???? ????

Now show me where I have ever said that.

It is against the rules to deliberately post out of context.

[aright]

2 hours ago, sandyf said:

Of course you were. I did not agree with the referendum in the first place so why would I want a rerun. I do not agree with this talk of a further referendum. A narrow margin was always going to be contentious and divisive and that can never be in anyone's best interest.

Whether you like it or not the UK is a parliamentary democracy and it is that that should be respected. This referendum has left the integrity of parliament in tatters and it will take a long time to clean up the mess.

Leaving the EU is all that was on the ballot paper and any insistence on leaving the SM is nothing more than brexiteers pouring petrol on the fire.

Yes we are a Parliamentary Democracy and Parliament voted by 461 votes to 89 to trigger Article 50...…..Is that democratic enough for you? The referendum hasn't left the "British Parliament" in tatters it's left the two main parties in tatters and I for one wouldn't expect any different with a decision of this magnitude.

[aright]

13 hours ago, tebee said:

I'm not saying that any specific site is unbiased, I'm saying that by looking at a number of sites you can get a good balanced view.

I need to be up a 5:30 am to take my son to play tennis 70km away so I haven't got time to answer you red question, will try do at some point though! 

Of course you can, governed by your own bias and that's the whole point isn't it. I would still like to see your three sites which iyo give  more balance for young people …..it might help me understand you better.

[nauseus]

4 minutes ago, aright said:

Yes we are a Parliamentary Democracy and Parliament voted by 461 votes to 89 to trigger Article 50...…..Is that democratic enough for you? The referendum hasn't left the "British Parliament" in tatters it's left the two main parties in tatters and I for one wouldn't expect any different with a decision of this magnitude.

 

And what is, I think, even more relevant, is that the European Union Referendum Act of 2015 was passed in  Parliament with a huge 544-43 majority. So if people like Sandy want to respect Parliamentary democracy, they might start with that. 

[My Thai Life]

7 hours ago, sandyf said:

Leaving the EU is all that was on the ballot paper and any insistence on leaving the SM is nothing more than brexiteers pouring petrol on the fire.

Can you recommend how we can leave the EU without leaving the SM?

[tebee]

6 minutes ago, My Thai Life said:

Can you recommend how we can leave the EU without leaving the SM?

 

EEA?

[My Thai Life]

 

6 minutes ago, tebee said:

EEA?

 

"The European Economic Area (EEA) is the area in which the Agreement on the EEA provides for the free movement of persons, goods, services and capital within the European Single Market, including the freedom to choose residence in any country within this area. The EEA was established on 1 January 1994 upon entry into force of the EEA Agreement. The contracting parties are the European Union, its members states, and the member states of the European Free Trade Association."

 

Wikipedia

[tebee]

1 minute ago, My Thai Life said:

 

 

"The European Economic Area (EEA) is the area in which the Agreement on the EEA provides for the free movement of persons, goods, services and capital within the European Single Market, including the freedom to choose residence in any country within this area. The EEA was established on 1 January 1994 upon entry into force of the EEA Agreement. The contracting parties are the European Union, its members states, and the member states of the European Free Trade Association."

 

Wikipedia

 

So if we leave the EU  and become a member of EFTA we are still in the single market, but not in the EU?

[My Thai Life]

2 minutes ago, tebee said:

So if we leave the EU  and become a member of EFTA we are still in the single market, but not in the EU?

And you think the British electorate voted to stay in the Single Market?

[tebee]

1 minute ago, My Thai Life said:

And you think the British electorate voted to stay in the Single Market?

Probably not, but it's the only compromise that make sense

 

And you original question was :-

 

 

25 minutes ago, My Thai Life said:

Can you recommend how we can leave the EU without leaving the SM?

 

 Which is perfectly possible.

[My Thai Life]

Tebee, you have to see my original comment in the context of my reply to the previous poster. See my quote below from europa.eu. People didn't vote to stay in the SM, and whatever the strict legal relationship of the EU to the SM, remaining with the SM is not delivering on the result of the referendum. Those who suggest it does (I'm not thinking of you) are indulging in sophistry and disingenuousness.

 

"The EU has achieved a lot. For example, it has built a single market based on 'four freedoms', with people, goods, services and capital moving freely between all Member States. The single market means that over 500 million EU citizens are free to move and settle where they wish in the Union."

[melvinmelvin]

1 hour ago, My Thai Life said:

 

 

"The European Economic Area (EEA) is the area in which the Agreement on the EEA provides for the free movement of persons, goods, services and capital within the European Single Market, including the freedom to choose residence in any country within this area. The EEA was established on 1 January 1994 upon entry into force of the EEA Agreement. The contracting parties are the European Union, its members states, and the member states of the European Free Trade Association."

 

Wikipedia

 

less Switzerland

 

[tebee]

1 hour ago, My Thai Life said:

Tebee, you have to see my original comment in the context of my reply to the previous poster. See my quote below from europa.eu. People didn't vote to stay in the SM, and whatever the strict legal relationship of the EU to the SM, remaining with the SM is not delivering on the result of the referendum. Those who suggest it does (I'm not thinking of you) are indulging in sophistry and disingenuousness.

 

"The EU has achieved a lot. For example, it has built a single market based on 'four freedoms', with people, goods, services and capital moving freely between all Member States. The single market means that over 500 million EU citizens are free to move and settle where they wish in the Union."

 

How do we know what people voted for? leave basically promised that we could have all the benefits of Eu membership without any of the responsibilities.

 

So why is it more valid to say they voted to not have the responsibilities  than to say they voted to keep the benefits ? 

[melvinmelvin]

18 minutes ago, tebee said:

 

How do we know what people voted for? leave basically promised that we could have all the benefits of Eu membership without any of the responsibilities.

 

So why is it more valid to say they voted to not have the responsibilities  than to say they voted to keep the benefits ? 

 

never mind what leavers said - try grasp reality

 

eu has made it very clear that access to sm does not come on a stand alone skewer,

in between onions and peppers there will be free float of finance - free float of people etc etc etc

the 4 freedoms are not for sale one by one

 

now, taking this on means for the uk;

 

no freedom from eu stipulations and regulations

no freedom from eu/efta courts

no freedom from eu legislators

no freedom from eu/eea legislation

no freedom from eu controlled influx of foreigners

no freedom from eu budgets

 

guess it is safe to say that uk voters did not vote for the no's above

 

[tebee]

1 minute ago, melvinmelvin said:

 

never mind what leavers said - try grasp reality

 

eu has made it very clear that access to sm does not come on a stand alone skewer,

in between onions and peppers there will be free float of finance - free float of people etc etc etc

the 4 freedoms are not for sale one by one

 

now, taking this on means for the uk;

 

no freedom from eu stipulations and regulations

no freedom from eu/efta courts

no freedom from eu legislators

no freedom from eu/eea legislation

no freedom from eu controlled influx of foreigners

no freedom from eu budgets

 

guess it is safe to say that uk voters did not vote for the no's above

 

But all the ref asked was should we leave the EU - as I've said above we can leave the EU and stay in the SM.

 

I'm sure at least some of the people who voted leave expected us to leave the SM, but I'm equally sure most of them did not vote to make themselves poorer by doing so.

 

Vote leave held up a vision of a leave future that let us remain prosperous by having the benefits of the Sm - many will have voted for that. 

 

If the only way of doing this is by remaining in  EEA/EFTA why is this not a valid outcome that respects the referendum result? 

 

It is a compromise - we loose EU oversight on many things, remainers are not happy, those leave people who see it as the first stage of the exit are happy, it gives businesses time to adjust; does it not respect the nearly 50/50 split on the referendum better than any other solution?

[melvinmelvin]

5 minutes ago, tebee said:

But all the ref asked was should we leave the EU - as I've said above we can leave the EU and stay in the SM.

 

I'm sure at least some of the people who voted leave expected us to leave the SM, but I'm equally sure most of them did not vote to make themselves poorer by doing so.

 

Vote leave held up a vision of a leave future that let us remain prosperous by having the benefits of the Sm - many will have voted for that. 

 

If the only way of doing this is by remaining in  EEA/EFTA why is this not a valid outcome that respects the referendum result? 

 

It is a compromise - we loose EU oversight on many things, remainers are not happy, those leave people who see it as the first stage of the exit are happy, it gives businesses time to adjust; does it not respect the nearly 50/50 split on the referendum better than any other solution?

 

well, I have done this a few times already, but I will have another go,

this is my take on what you talk about (after 20 years in the eu/ec/efta/eea business)

 

if you want this efta/eea approach, the procedure by the book is;

1) get out of eu

2) approach efta- seek membership

3) membership approved

4) approach eu AND efta - seek eea membership

5) assuming agreement ALL eu and efta/eea member states must ratify relevant hacks to the instruments

 

start trade in sm again

 

but;

now uk has also taken on all the no's I listed in previous entry

all the freedoms - they are not available 1 by 1 to efta countries either

 

now practicalities;

I know Barnier has aired this, so has some other EU heavy weights,

however, I assume the Commission would quite simply hate to see UK as a efta/eea member

 

will efta accept uk as a member?  not sure, I would argue strongly against - but I am retired

iceland? not sure but would probably say yes if eu pressed her - she wishes eu membership

norway? I would guess yes, mainly because norway and uk has very long standing close relations,

             would say yes somewhat reluctantly I would guess

liechtenstein?, in a case like this she would just follow Switzerland, or probably just empower

                      switzerland to act on her behalf

switzerland? I am doubtful, I can see many reasons for Switzerland to want UK on the outside of efta

 

on the other hand if 5 years went past after brexit and UK had built up a portfolio of misc trade agreements

she could bring into and share with efta - might be interesting for switzerland

 

UK:

would hate it is my assumption

they would pretty much be in the same legal situation as today but without any formal say

however, in efta/eea they would actually gain the possibility of saying simply no to a directive.

 

[mommysboy]

2 hours ago, My Thai Life said:

And you think the British electorate voted to stay in the Single Market?

 

I just don't know. The problem is you have to think about it, and the very fact that needs to be done suggests ambiguity. Certainly, the lure of a free trade deal was attached, and (as we know) that is synonymous with joining the single market.

 

As someone said: "Brexit means Brexit, but what does Brexit mean?"

 

Logically, I suppose leaving the EU must imply leaving the whole shooting match, ie, a no deal exit.  Yet, the Government has always maintained this is the last resort. So, if another option is to be considered then it must compromise the intention to just leave, perhaps by allowing free movement of people, therefore, you must deduce that EEA membership should also not be excluded.

 

I must admit, I just assumed it would mean soft Brexit Norway style.

 

 

[mommysboy]

6 minutes ago, melvinmelvin said:

 

well, I have done this a few times already, but I will have another go,

this is my take on what you talk about (after 20 years in the eu/ec/efta/eea business)

 

if you want this efta/eea approach, the procedure by the book is;

1) get out of eu

2) approach efta- seek membership

3) membership approved

4) approach eu AND efta - seek eea membership

5) assuming agreement ALL eu and efta/eea member states must ratify relevant hacks to the instruments

 

start trade in sm again

 

but;

now uk has also taken on all the no's I listed in previous entry

all the freedoms - they are not available 1 by 1 to efta countries either

 

now practicalities;

I know Barnier has aired this, so has some other EU heavy weights,

however, I assume the Commission would quite simply hate to see UK as a efta/eea member

 

will efta accept uk as a member?  not sure, I would argue strongly against - but I am retired

iceland? not sure but would probably say yes if eu pressed her - she wishes eu membership

norway? I would guess yes, mainly because norway and uk has very long standing close relations,

             would say yes somewhat reluctantly I would guess

liechtenstein?, in a case like this she would just follow Switzerland, or probably just empower

                      switzerland to act on her behalf

switzerland? I am doubtful, I can see many reasons for Switzerland to want UK on the outside of efta

 

on the other hand if 5 years went past after brexit and UK had built up a portfolio of misc trade agreements

she could bring into and share with efta - might be interesting for switzerland

 

UK:

would hate it is my assumption

they would pretty much be in the same legal situation as today but without any formal say

however, in efta/eea they would actually gain the possibility of saying simply no to a directive.

 

 

Sometimes one can be blinded by ones own knowledge- do you see sharp edges on butter?????

 

I believe it has been stated many times that a single market option is available, and moreover, that the EU does not want UK to leave.

Edited September 29, 2018 by mommysboy

[melvinmelvin]

35 minutes ago, tebee said:

But all the ref asked was should we leave the EU - as I've said above we can leave the EU and stay in the SM.

 

I'm sure at least some of the people who voted leave expected us to leave the SM, but I'm equally sure most of them did not vote to make themselves poorer by doing so.

 

Vote leave held up a vision of a leave future that let us remain prosperous by having the benefits of the Sm - many will have voted for that. 

 

If the only way of doing this is by remaining in  EEA/EFTA why is this not a valid outcome that respects the referendum result? 

 

It is a compromise - we loose EU oversight on many things, remainers are not happy, those leave people who see it as the first stage of the exit are happy, it gives businesses time to adjust; does it not respect the nearly 50/50 split on the referendum better than any other solution?

 

guess Switzerland's approach to EU would suit the UK much better

 

[melvinmelvin]

Just now, mommysboy said:

 

Sometimes one can be blinded by ones own knowledge- do you see sharp edges on butter?????

 

sure do,

but like I have said several times, treaties and international law is pretty soft stuff,

as long as the membership agrees you can do pretty much what you want

 

many ways to soften/fast track what I described above provided the agreement is there

 

[adammike]

5 hours ago, melvinmelvin said:

 

well, I have done this a few times already, but I will have another go,

this is my take on what you talk about (after 20 years in the eu/ec/efta/eea business)

 

if you want this efta/eea approach, the procedure by the book is;

1) get out of eu

2) approach efta- seek membership

3) membership approved

4) approach eu AND efta - seek eea membership

5) assuming agreement ALL eu and efta/eea member states must ratify relevant hacks to the instruments

 

start trade in sm again

 

but;

now uk has also taken on all the no's I listed in previous entry

all the freedoms - they are not available 1 by 1 to efta countries either

 

now practicalities;

I know Barnier has aired this, so has some other EU heavy weights,

however, I assume the Commission would quite simply hate to see UK as a efta/eea member

 

will efta accept uk as a member?  not sure, I would argue strongly against - but I am retired

iceland? not sure but would probably say yes if eu pressed her - she wishes eu membership

norway? I would guess yes, mainly because norway and uk has very long standing close relations,

             would say yes somewhat reluctantly I would guess

liechtenstein?, in a case like this she would just follow Switzerland, or probably just empower

                      switzerland to act on her behalf

switzerland? I am doubtful, I can see many reasons for Switzerland to want UK on the outside of efta

 

on the other hand if 5 years went past after brexit and UK had built up a portfolio of misc trade agreements

she could bring into and share with efta - might be interesting for switzerland

 

UK:

would hate it is my assumption

they would pretty much be in the same legal situation as today but without any formal say

however, in efta/eea they would actually gain the possibility of saying simply no to a directive.

 

The UK should do what Switzerland does and hold referendums to make and change their laws.they have loads of them every year.

[melvinmelvin]

7 hours ago, mommysboy said:

 

Sometimes one can be blinded by ones own knowledge- do you see sharp edges on butter?????

 

I believe it has been stated many times that a single market option is available, and moreover, that the EU does not want UK to leave.

 

first;

not sure why you say EU does not want UK to leave, that is what all this is about isn't it?

UK leaving the EU?

and for the SM yes, but along with all the freedoms and corresponding obligations, not SM alone

 

 

here follows another approach with all smooth butter,

this requires goodwill - coop - wish to success - limited supply of lawyers - limited supply of purists

a bit on the bold side but could work if the will is there

 

 

now the EFTA/EEA variant

seen from the chair of an EU summit and avoiding lawyer speak:

 

 

Please ladies and gentlemen, please. Be seated, I would like to resume the meeting. Please!

(EU heads of states/PMs are as unruly as all other meeting participants.)

Thank you. Now, if I may draw your attention to item 5A on the agenda I will go through that information point before we address item 5B, the substantive part.

As you may recall we agreed last year that in order to ensure a smooth transition from UKs EU membership to its EFTA/EEA membership while maintaining trading

that UK could establish contact with EFTA with a view to becoming state party to EFTA.

I have been informed by the UK as well as the EFTA secretariat that this process is now in its final stages and the required amendments to the relevant instruments are currently in the ratification stage. The ratification process is expected to be completed well before 29^th March. Should, however, delays occur we have already agreed earlier this year that the Union and EFTA will act as if ratification was completed.

Now to item 5 B, the modification of the EEA treaty with a view to the UK becoming a state party. A joint EFTA EU expert group has developed documents with the necessary modifications to the treaty. The documents were sent to all member states on xxth July with a view to seek unanimous agreement to the changes at this meeting.

I am now seeking your agreement to these treaty modifications, please.

Seeing no requests for the floor, I conclude that the Union has now agreed;

UK becoming a state party to the EEA treaty and the necessary modifications required for achieving this.

Thank you. This will now go to member states for ratification.

Time will not allow for these modifications to be ratified in time for Brexit.

Hence, I seek your reconfirmation of our earlier agreement that the Union will act as if the instruments were ratified and entered into force.

Seeing no requests for the floor I conclude that I have that agreement and we will proceed accordingly.

For your information both the relevant texts and the process has already been agreed by and among the relevant EFTA states. I see the EFTA observer is nodding in agreement, thank you sir.

Thank you ladies and gentlemen.

 

 

Edited September 29, 2018 by melvinmelvin

[My Thai Life]

11 hours ago, tebee said:

How do we know what people voted for? leave basically promised that we could have all the benefits of Eu membership without any of the responsibilities.

 

So why is it more valid to say they voted to not have the responsibilities  than to say they voted to keep the benefits ? 

People voted to leave the EU. Free movement of people was one of the main issues that drove the vote to leave, and free movement of people is part of the Single Market, which was created by the EU, and is one the EU policy areas. So, posters who suggest that the electorate voted to leave the EU but not the SM are just wrong, plain and simple.

 

Your first comment above is not true. Only Corbyn has said that Brexit should have the exact same benefits as EU membership - a completely crazy position to take because (i) no two deals are exactly the same and (ii) what would be the point of a referendum and two year of turmoil to replicate what we already had. And what's even crazier is that he says he's going to vote any deal down that doesn't deliver the exact same benefits. I am by no means a supporter of this Tory leadership, but Labour's leadership has gone into realms of madness never before seen in British politics – as we might expect from a lifelong backbencher who has spent most of his "career" trying to scupper his own party. It’s the only game he know how to play.

[My Thai Life]

10 hours ago, mommysboy said:

Certainly, the lure of a free trade deal was attached, and (as we know) that is synonymous with joining the single market.

 

A trade deal is not synonymous with joining the SM. The SM is much more than just a trade deal, free or otherwise. 

[mommysboy]

3 hours ago, melvinmelvin said:

 

first;

not sure why you say EU does not want UK to leave, that is what all this is about isn't it?

UK leaving the EU?

and for the SM yes, but along with all the freedoms and corresponding obligations, not SM alone

 

 

here follows another approach with all smooth butter,

this requires goodwill - coop - wish to success - limited supply of lawyers - limited supply of purists

a bit on the bold side but could work if the will is there

 

 

now the EFTA/EEA variant

seen from the chair of an EU summit and avoiding lawyer speak:

 

 

Please ladies and gentlemen, please. Be seated, I would like to resume the meeting. Please!

(EU heads of states/PMs are as unruly as all other meeting participants.)

Thank you. Now, if I may draw your attention to item 5A on the agenda I will go through that information point before we address item 5B, the substantive part.

As you may recall we agreed last year that in order to ensure a smooth transition from UKs EU membership to its EFTA/EEA membership while maintaining trading

that UK could establish contact with EFTA with a view to becoming state party to EFTA.

I have been informed by the UK as well as the EFTA secretariat that this process is now in its final stages and the required amendments to the relevant instruments are currently in the ratification stage. The ratification process is expected to be completed well before 29^th March. Should, however, delays occur we have already agreed earlier this year that the Union and EFTA will act as if ratification was completed.

Now to item 5 B, the modification of the EEA treaty with a view to the UK becoming a state party. A joint EFTA EU expert group has developed documents with the necessary modifications to the treaty. The documents were sent to all member states on xxth July with a view to seek unanimous agreement to the changes at this meeting.

I am now seeking your agreement to these treaty modifications, please.

Seeing no requests for the floor, I conclude that the Union has now agreed;

UK becoming a state party to the EEA treaty and the necessary modifications required for achieving this.

Thank you. This will now go to member states for ratification.

Time will not allow for these modifications to be ratified in time for Brexit.

Hence, I seek your reconfirmation of our earlier agreement that the Union will act as if the instruments were ratified and entered into force.

Seeing no requests for the floor I conclude that I have that agreement and we will proceed accordingly.

For your information both the relevant texts and the process has already been agreed by and among the relevant EFTA states. I see the EFTA observer is nodding in agreement, thank you sir.

Thank you ladies and gentlemen.

 

 

 

'not sure why you say EU does not want UK to leave, that is what all this is about isn't it?

UK leaving the EU?'

 

Yes, it's about the UK (half of it anyway, wanting to leave the EU.  It's not about the EU actively wanting the UK to leave.

 

The bit I've quoted doesn't read right. surely!