EU must change its negotiating terms for Brexit, says Britain's Barclay

[sandyf]

9 hours ago, Basil B said:

Brexit: EU 'refusing to negotiate', says Gove

Fact is both sides have conditions that they will not concede and are not acceptable to the otherside, no point in talking until there is something new on the table.

 

In reality the UK is just reshuffling the pack.

A former EU attache interviewed on BBC yesterday said the EU was perfectly aware of the damage a no deal would cause, everyone would be losers. What it came down to was should the EU compromise its responsibilities or live with the damage, the latter being what has been decided.

[sandyf]

14 hours ago, Joinaman said:

But they where not told the truth about the future , were they ?

Ted Heath later admitted we would, the public, would never have allowed entry into the E C if we were told the truth 

Just like now, lied, cheated, kept in the dark about the future of the EU, until its too late for us to stop it 

Ted Heath did not make the decision.

If you want to blame someone then it should be those that voted without telling their constituents what they were voting for.

 

"Just like now, lied, cheated, kept in the dark about the future of the EU" - take it you mean the brexit garbage.

[sandyf]

14 hours ago, Joinaman said:

But can you explain why the so called "Backstop" is such an issue ?

There are 2 major issues over the border.

The first is about regulation, compatible regulations must exist either side of the border for it to remain "open". The backstop is there to maintain the integrity of the single market until an alternative trading relationship is established. The EU do not trust the UK not to change things before any alternative arrangement is in place.

The second is a question of identity, the nationalists live in NI as Irish citizens and as though it was a single country. Any change to that perspective could be problematic, it is not the text of the GFA that is in question, more to do with the spirit of that agreement.

[superal]

13 hours ago, OneMoreFarang said:

Sure you could do that. And maybe this is what will happen.

But do you really think things will be better in the UK outside of the EU and possibly without a deal?

Leaving the EU and maybe joining it later again will be a huge amount of work and huge cost.

And it is unlikely the EU will accept the UK again in a few years with all the special conditions which they have now.

 

Recently we have lots of posts here on TV about people who moved to Thailand only to find out a year or two later that was a bad decision for them. So they moved back again. I am sure that was a lot of work for many of those people. And I am sure most of them thought that in the hindsight they should have thought more in detail if they should move to Thailand.

The principle is the same with the UK and the EU. Yes, you can make a decision and in a few years another decision. But why not think about the initial decision a little harder and in detail and think again if it is a good decision. That is in the long run a lot smarter than leaving and maybe joining again.

Highly unlikely to happen and why should it ?  The UK will be in an independent state and still able to trade with the EU without being tied to its bureaucracy . The stubborn EU is losing out to billions of Euros because it will not talk to the new UK PM  , quite astonishing that the EU is acting like a spoiled brat .  Existing trade will continue as the UK is a main importer of EU goods but under what terms remains to be seen . What is clear to forecast is that the EU will no longer be able to dictate to the UK who are actually in a trade deficit with the EU .   

[superal]

14 hours ago, OneMoreFarang said:

Let's pretend for a moment you are right. And let's look at the bright future of the UK outside of the EU.

What do you think will happen when the big US negotiates with the little UK? Or when the huge China negotiates with the tiny UK?

Do you think they will be "fair" and treat the UK like an equal partner? 555

Get real! And then maybe reconsider why it is a good idea to be part of a big strong union and not alone outside of it.

For sure there is comfort and safety when part of a clan but with that goes your personal democracy and freedom to express your talents . The UK leave vote new what they were doing , they wanted out , a clean cut from the EU who have outgrown their status and become a governing Euro parliament using their multi union to try to negotiate further global trade deals . The divorce brings new opportunities to enable the UK to strike global trade without the restraints of the EU . There are already new undeclared UK trade deals by way of letters of intent and thus is the reason for the confidence of the new cabinet and BJ . 

I see the EU looking at the UK in a jealous and angry way because the UK has the bottle to go it alone and probably disturb the foundations of the EU .  Only time will tell if the UK made the right decision . There will be some early failings for the UK as it breathes in new air but I am confident there will be a bright future . 

[Pumpuynarak]

1 minute ago, superal said:

For sure there is comfort and safety when part of a clan but with that goes your personal democracy and freedom to express your talents . The UK leave vote new what they were doing , they wanted out , a clean cut from the EU who have outgrown their status and become a governing Euro parliament using their multi union to try to negotiate further global trade deals . The divorce brings new opportunities to enable the UK to strike global trade without the restraints of the EU . There are already new undeclared UK trade deals by way of letters of intent and thus is the reason for the confidence of the new cabinet and BJ . 

I see the EU looking at the UK in a jealous and angry way because the UK has the bottle to go it alone and probably disturb the foundations of the EU .  Only time will tell if the UK made the right decision . There will be some early failings for the UK as it breathes in new air but I am confident there will be a bright future . 

BINGO

[bannork]

4 minutes ago, superal said:

For sure there is comfort and safety when part of a clan but with that goes your personal democracy and freedom to express your talents . The UK leave vote new what they were doing , they wanted out , a clean cut from the EU who have outgrown their status and become a governing Euro parliament using their multi union to try to negotiate further global trade deals . The divorce brings new opportunities to enable the UK to strike global trade without the restraints of the EU . There are already new undeclared UK trade deals by way of letters of intent and thus is the reason for the confidence of the new cabinet and BJ . 

I see the EU looking at the UK in a jealous and angry way because the UK has the bottle to go it alone and probably disturb the foundations of the EU .  Only time will tell if the UK made the right decision . There will be some early failings for the UK as it breathes in new air but I am confident there will be a bright future . 

Undeclared trade deals by ways of letter of intent you say. Could you elaborate please, or must they remain undeclared?

 

[nauseus]

8 hours ago, candide said:

It seems you read the Sun.....As far as I understand, up to 12 miles fishing rights are subject to national regulation only. After that limit, it's subject to the common fisheries law.

When foreign fleets operate inside the 12 miles limit, it's either because they legally bought fishing rights according to the domestic regulation, or because of bilateral agreements such as between France and UK. The EU only defines fishing quotas for various species. Actually fishermen from both countries argue about Brexit for their advantage but it is without any legal ground, such as in the case of the scallop war.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/aug/29/france-britain-scallop-war-brexit-channel-clashes-environment

I don't read the Sun. No need for the fishing lesson, thanks.

[nauseus]

1 hour ago, sandyf said:

Ted Heath did not make the decision.

If you want to blame someone then it should be those that voted without telling their constituents what they were voting for.

 

"Just like now, lied, cheated, kept in the dark about the future of the EU" - take it you mean the brexit garbage.

There was no referendum vote prior to the UK actually joining the EEC. The immediate bad effects of EEC membership were caused by the CFP but the fishermen only had a small voice and few took much notice. Even by the time of the 1975 referendum, everyone still thought it was just the "Common Market".  

 

In 1972/3 Heath was responsible for signing us into the EEC. He had lied and even admitted as much later. We've been through all this before. Heath was PM and pushed through the European Communities Act, which had been introduced by his offsider, Rippon. The act only passed by 301-284 after a third reading (51.5% ayes, how about that?). 

[Basil B]

2 hours ago, sandyf said:

A former EU attache interviewed on BBC yesterday said the EU was perfectly aware of the damage a no deal would cause, everyone would be losers. What it came down to was should the EU compromise its responsibilities or live with the damage, the latter being what has been decided.

Really just a big game of bluff...

[superal]

1 hour ago, bannork said:

Undeclared trade deals by ways of letter of intent you say. Could you elaborate please, or must they remain undeclared?

 

Do you know how to use Google search ?  I am not on this forum for more than 1 hour a day and have other recreations ,  have fun ,     back in 6 hours .   Gone fishing  

[welovesundaysatspace]

3 hours ago, superal said:

The UK will be in an independent state and still able to trade with the EU without being tied to its bureaucracy .

Everyone is trading with the EU, so congrats for that achievement! 

 

3 hours ago, superal said:

The stubborn EU is losing out to billions of Euros because it will not talk to the new UK PM  , quite astonishing that the EU is acting like a spoiled brat .

I assume you conveniently didn’t include in your calculation what will be earned through import duties etc.? Same as you conveniently ignored the billions the UK is losing? (Not to mention that it was the UK PM who said he will not talk to anyone.)

 

3 hours ago, superal said:

  Existing trade will continue as the UK is a main importer of EU goods but under what terms remains to be seen .

UK reliance on the EU market: 50% of trade 

EU reliance on the UK market: 7% of trade 

Nuff said. 

 

[bannork]

1 hour ago, superal said:

Do you know how to use Google search ?  I am not on this forum for more than 1 hour a day and have other recreations ,  have fun ,     back in 6 hours .   Gone fishing  

I thought so, nothing.

[billd766]

50 minutes ago, bannork said:

I thought so, nothing.

You don't know that at all.

 

Why don't you take his advice and do some research yourself? Who knows, you may even learn something.

[MRToMRT]

I have a question, a genuine question. I will prequalify it by stating that I am an ardent remainer (because I do not have access to the right to vote nor the NHS having lived away for so long so the only thing that I have PERSONALLY , and want to keep, is the right to freedom of movement in Europe for myself). 

 

My question is ......

 

If the deal negotiated by May has been rejected by Parliament 3 times already WHY will the EU not accept to renegotiate?

 

Surely there is NO other option to renegotiation other than for the EU and IRE to be playing a game to cause the fall of a member states government and that should be illegal IMHO.

 

I cannot get my head around why the EU nor IRE will not accept that renegotiation is required?

 

 

[sandyf]

2 hours ago, nauseus said:

There was no referendum vote prior to the UK actually joining the EEC. The immediate bad effects of EEC membership were caused by the CFP but the fishermen only had a small voice and few took much notice. Even by the time of the 1975 referendum, everyone still thought it was just the "Common Market".  

 

In 1972/3 Heath was responsible for signing us into the EEC. He had lied and even admitted as much later. We've been through all this before. Heath was PM and pushed through the European Communities Act, which had been introduced by his offsider, Rippon. The act only passed by 301-284 after a third reading (51.5% ayes, how about that?). 

I never mentioned any referendum prior to joining, never sure if you deliberately make things up or have difficulty understanding.

Parliament voted, not Ted Heath, 356 to 244 to join the EC and I say again if you want to blame anyone, blame the MPs that voted without telling people all about it, after all it had been in print for 2 years.

 

[sandyf]

2 hours ago, Basil B said:

Really just a big game of bluff...

It may be a game to you but serious loss of income to many, a loss that gets greater every time Johnson opens his mouth.

[nauseus]

9 minutes ago, sandyf said:

I never mentioned any referendum prior to joining, never sure if you deliberately make things up or have difficulty understanding.

Parliament voted, not Ted Heath, 356 to 244 to join the EC and I say again if you want to blame anyone, blame the MPs that voted without telling people all about it, after all it had been in print for 2 years.

 

I mentioned that there was no referendum prior to joining because this is entirely relevant as if there had been a referendum, then it is unlikely that we would have joined and Heath knew that. Of course Parliament voted but Ted Heath deceived elements of Parliament and the country and signed us in. The Commons vote was not 356 to 244 but 301 - 284 as I said. Heath is to primarily to blame. 

[bannork]

47 minutes ago, billd766 said:

You don't know that at all.

 

Why don't you take his advice and do some research yourself? Who knows, you may even learn something.

He is the one claiming there are deals in the pipeline so the onus is on him to provide the evidence 

[sandyf]

5 hours ago, superal said:

  The UK will be in an independent state and still able to trade with the EU without being tied to its bureaucracy .   

Is that a deliberate fake statement or do you not realise that the UK will not be able to export to the EU unless they meet all EU regulations.

In a no deal situation manufacturers that need to prove conformity will be required to use one system for sale in the UK and the EU system for sale in the EU.

Double bureaucracy, but it was all going to be so easy.

[sandyf]

9 minutes ago, nauseus said:

I mentioned that there was no referendum prior to joining because this is entirely relevant as if there had been a referendum, then it is unlikely that we would have joined and Heath knew that. Of course Parliament voted but Ted Heath deceived elements of Parliament and the country and signed us in. The Commons vote was not 356 to 244 but 301 - 284 as I said. Heath is to primarily to blame. 

"Of course Parliament voted but Ted Heath deceived elements of Parliament and the country and signed us in."

Parliament voted in the full knowledge a paper had been published in Dec 1969, Ted heath did not make the decision, other than in your mind.

 

The House divided: Ayes 356, Noes 244

https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/commons/1971/oct/28/european-communities

[nauseus]

1 hour ago, sandyf said:

"Of course Parliament voted but Ted Heath deceived elements of Parliament and the country and signed us in."

Parliament voted in the full knowledge a paper had been published in Dec 1969, Ted heath did not make the decision, other than in your mind.

 

The House divided: Ayes 356, Noes 244

https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/commons/1971/oct/28/european-communities

Easy to find now with the internet and digital records. But how easy was access to this 50 years ago?

 

Some of the debate is enlightening and interesting but your date is incorrect. The debate was in 1971, when Heath was already Prime Minister, so it would have been difficult to publish in 1969.

 

Heath's decision was to get the UK into the EEC by any means, up to and including deception.

 

 

 

 

[billd766]

3 hours ago, sandyf said:

Is that a deliberate fake statement or do you not realise that the UK will not be able to export to the EU unless they meet all EU regulations.

In a no deal situation manufacturers that need to prove conformity will be required to use one system for sale in the UK and the EU system for sale in the EU.

Double bureaucracy, but it was all going to be so easy.

At this point in time they are all up to date and already conforming to the EU standards and if the manufacturers keep to that there should be no problem.

 

Unless of course the EU makes a problem of it.

 

Before Brexit the widget is OK. After Brexit the widget is still made the same way so there really should be no problem.

[nauseus]

2 hours ago, sandyf said:

"Of course Parliament voted but Ted Heath deceived elements of Parliament and the country and signed us in."

Parliament voted in the full knowledge a paper had been published in Dec 1969, Ted heath did not make the decision, other than in your mind.

 

The House divided: Ayes 356, Noes 244

https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/commons/1971/oct/28/european-communities

Here's one snip from what Sir Derek Walker-Smith had to say. Very insightful:

 

"We would suffer this surrender of sovereignty, unique and irrevocable. But, heavy as it is, it could be but the first instalment. At present, the Community is an economic community, not concerned with defence and foreign policy. But if there is to be any question of increased power—that is the bait dangled before us to make the loss of sovereignty less clearly unacceptable—the Community would have to proceed to a political unity capable of unified decision on defence and foreign policy."

 

 

[billd766]

41 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Easy to find now with the internet and digital records. But how easy was access to this 50 years ago?

 

Some of the debate is enlightening and interesting but your date is incorrect. The debate was in 1971, when Heath was already Prime Minister, so it would have been difficult to publish in 1969.

 

Heath's decision was to get the UK into the EEC by any means, up to and including deception.

 

 

 

 

Back then there were few if any personal computers, no internet to access details worldwide at a click or two.

 

There was no mass media, social media etc.

 

News came by radio and tv, newspapers and magazines.

 

Something that nowadays can be found on the internet in a minute or so would take weeks or months of tracking down.

[nauseus]

43 minutes ago, billd766 said:

Back then there were few if any personal computers, no internet to access details worldwide at a click or two.

 

There was no mass media, social media etc.

 

News came by radio and tv, newspapers and magazines.

 

Something that nowadays can be found on the internet in a minute or so would take weeks or months of tracking down.

Yes. And here is the 3rd and last reading from 1972:

https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/commons/1972/jul/13/european-communities-bill 

 

Interesting here that any talk of a referendum (Peter Shore) was quickly squashed The House divided: Ayes 301, Noes 284. Close eh?  51.5% - funny old world!

 

 

 

[kingdong]

23 hours ago, candide said:

This is a complex issue but they likely contribute more as they pay taxes like the others and are usually younger on average than UK citizen.

https://fullfact.org/europe/eu-immigration-and-pressure-nhs/

"but they likely".says it all 

[Loiner]

"but they likely".says it all 

“Very bloody unlikely to absolutely untrue” is closer to the mark.
Apart from working expats in Thailand, who goes to work in a foreign country to pay more tax than the locals?

[billd766]

28 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Yes. And here is the 3rd and last reading from 1972:

https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/commons/1972/jul/13/european-communities-bill 

 

Interesting here that any talk of a referendum (Peter Shore) was quickly squashed The House divided: Ayes 301, Noes 284. Close eh?  51.5% - funny old world!

 

 

 

Back in 1972 how would anybody have managed to get to see a copy of Hansard? Common oiks like the majority of the public would probably never heard of Hansard and would have little idea of what was going on in parliament. So it would be quite easy for any government to pass legislation on anything and get it on the statute books.

[kingdong]

23 hours ago, OneMoreFarang said:

I saw all that information in the news. And a lot of that was from UK government and civil service what they expect will happen. Did you miss all of this? Or did you just somehow think that if you just ignore it and think positive all will be fine?

"what they expect to happen" didn,t give the winner at the 3.30 at aydock park tomorrow as well did they?.the government and the civil service,are just a bunch of mugs,never predicted the crash in 2008,said we,re all doomed if we don,t go in the euro,should let turkey into the eu,and tookus into the erm,remember that?and the depression that followed.