Britain nears abandoning Brexit trade deal hope - The Telegraph

[JonnyF]

43 minutes ago, vogie said:

Michel Barnier says it is unacceptable that the UK wants to take back control of its own waters, how stupid can one man be with only one head. Bye bye EU, you have only yourself to blame.

It's incredible isn't it. He really believes that the EU owns the UK. It still hasn't sunk into his head what's happening. That's why I prefer No Deal. It's beyond their comprehension to imagine that the UK will be an independent sovereign state so where just going to have to let them see it for a couple of years. They might "get it" then.

[tomacht8]

32 minutes ago, vogie said:

Michel Barnier says it is unacceptable that the UK wants to take back control of its own waters, how stupid can one man be with only one head. Bye bye EU, you have only yourself to blame.

 

 

 

That's ridiculous. The UK government and UK fishermen have sold their quotas to other EU fishermen who work more efficiently. And now the UK is trying to use that as a lever in the negotiations. The fishing issue is only politicized, but of absolutely subordinate economic importance. 

Less than 1% of UK GDP. If I were Brexiter, I would be more worried about UK service and UK finance sector. That will really hurt.

 

https://unearthed.greenpeace.org/2019/03/07/fishing-brexit-uk-fleetwood/

 

Here you can read some Details about the UK fishery situation.

 

UK_sea_fisheries_statistics_2018 (1).pdf

[Logosone]

10 minutes ago, tomacht8 said:

 

That's ridiculous. The UK government and UK fishermen have sold their quotas to other EU fishermen who work more efficiently. And now the UK is trying to use that as a lever in the negotiations. The fishing issue is only politicized, but of absolutely subordinate economic importance. 

Less than 1% of UK GDP. If I were Brexiter, I would be more worried about UK service and UK finance sector. That will really hurt.

 

https://unearthed.greenpeace.org/2019/03/07/fishing-brexit-uk-fleetwood/

 

Here you can read some Details about the UK fishery situation.

 

UK_sea_fisheries_statistics_2018 (1).pdf 19.29 MB · 3 downloads

Yah it is a bit ludicrous for the UK to focus on fisheries. Given that the financial services sector will face new regulations in the EU with a no-Brexit deal. Probably they don't even want to think about that.

[JonnyF]

8 minutes ago, tomacht8 said:

That's ridiculous. The UK government and UK fishermen have sold their quotas to other EU fishermen who work more efficiently.

Any access to UK waters was leased, not sold.

 

Same as renting a house, when the contract is up you either negotiate a new contract or you get out. If they won't offer a trade deal without ridiculous clauses attached then they can get out. How do you think these fishing communities will feel when they lose their livelihoods because of EU spite? You think Barnier can just tell them it' a low % of GDP and they'll just say "Oh that's OK then"? If you thought the Gilet Jaunes got nasty you haven't seen anything yet.

[tomacht8]

1 minute ago, JonnyF said:

Any access to UK waters was leased, not sold.

 

Same as renting a house, when the contract is up you either negotiate a new contract or you get out. If they won't offer a trade deal without ridiculous clauses attached then they can get out. How do you think these fishing communities will feel when they lose their livelihoods because of EU spite? You think Barnier can just tell them it' a low % of GDP and they'll just say "Oh that's OK then"? If you thought the Gilet Jaunes got nasty you haven't seen anything yet.

The rights were sold not leased under an existing legal framework. Brexit is now trying to change the legal framework. The sales contracts, on the other hand, are valid as long as no time limits are clearly defined. A legal wave of lawsuits will follow, because Brexit wants to break individual contracts here.

[bannork]

15 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Any access to UK waters was leased, not sold.

 

Same as renting a house, when the contract is up you either negotiate a new contract or you get out. If they won't offer a trade deal without ridiculous clauses attached then they can get out. How do you think these fishing communities will feel when they lose their livelihoods because of EU spite? You think Barnier can just tell them it' a low % of GDP and they'll just say "Oh that's OK then"? If you thought the Gilet Jaunes got nasty you haven't seen anything yet.

The communities might feel it's UK spite, after all it's the UK that wants to change the existing deals, not the EU.

[luckyluke]

20 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

If you thought the Gilet Jaunes got nasty you haven't seen anything yet.

This can indeed be a problem for everything which is related to the U. K. in France.

They will blame Brexit, and thus the U.K..

[JonnyF]

8 minutes ago, bannork said:

The communities might feel it's UK spite, after all it's the UK that wants to change the existing deals, not the EU.

The UK will lay their cards on the table for everyone to see if we leave No Deal.

 

They'll say this is what we proposed (something along the lines of a mutually beneficial Canada style deal with fishing access included and reviewed annually) and the EU rejected it. 

 

There is no way the EU can continue with this unreasonable approach and try and blame the UK. The truth always prevails in the end.

 

I suspect we will end up with a bare bones deal with some fishing access included. But Barnier needs to drop his ridiculous ECJ, level playing field nonsense pretty sharpish so we can move onto serious discussions.

[melvinmelvin]

19 minutes ago, tomacht8 said:

The rights were sold not leased under an existing legal framework. Brexit is now trying to change the legal framework. The sales contracts, on the other hand, are valid as long as no time limits are clearly defined. A legal wave of lawsuits will follow, because Brexit wants to break individual contracts here.

???rights sold???

right is more of a legal construct, not a thing you can sell

 

referring to quotas are you?

 

anyway,

will be difficult for UK to avoid entering into arrangements that do not exclude EU vessels from UK waters

[paddypower]

On 7/22/2020 at 6:39 AM, nausea said:

It's all bluff, of course you pretend you're going for no deal, basic negotiating strategy stuff.

and then you find out that the UK negotiators think they're playing 'snap' - whereas the other guys are used to playing poker.

[JonnyF]

4 minutes ago, paddypower said:

and then you find out that the UK negotiators think they're playing 'snap' - whereas the other guys are used to playing poker.

Since Treasonous May left the EU negotiators have looked pretty impotent. 

[bannork]

33 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

The UK will lay their cards on the table for everyone to see if we leave No Deal.

 

They'll say this is what we proposed (something along the lines of a mutually beneficial Canada style deal with fishing access included and reviewed annually) and the EU rejected it. 

 

There is no way the EU can continue with this unreasonable approach and try and blame the UK. The truth always prevails in the end.

 

I suspect we will end up with a bare bones deal with some fishing access included. But Barnier needs to drop his ridiculous ECJ, level playing field nonsense pretty sharpish so we can move onto serious discussions.

As the EU have pointed out, the UK is a lot nearer to Europe than Canada. No way can they offer a similar deal.

[paddypower]

13 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

The UK will lay their cards on the table for everyone to see if we leave No Deal.

 

They'll say this is what we proposed (something along the lines of a mutually beneficial Canada style deal with fishing access included and reviewed annually) and the EU rejected it. 

 

There is no way the EU can continue with this unreasonable approach and try and blame the UK. The truth always prevails in the end.

 

I suspect we will end up with a bare bones deal with some fishing access included. But Barnier needs to drop his ridiculous ECJ, level playing field nonsense pretty sharpish so we can move onto serious discussions.

now there you go again! the level playing field terms were co-signed by both parties - UK and EU. Now, the UK is saying 'oh, that's nonsense, we've changed our minds'.

[paddypower]

26 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Since Treasonous May left the EU negotiators have looked pretty impotent. 

I will see your bid - Barnier and raise you failing Grayling.

[tomacht8]

Here a little bit more about the fish.

 

Dr Emma Cardwell, from the University of Glasgow, told the BBC that an enforced change in ownership would be "legally tricky" for the government.

 

Many parts of the quota were sold by English fishermen in the 1990s when fishing rights were cut dramatically. Cod fishing, for instance, was almost entirely stopped for several years.

 

Foreign companies then bought it up as a long-term investment, and experts say the quota market has been allowed to develop in an unregulated way ever since.

 

"There's a lack of clarity on the legal status of fishing rights," Dr Cardwell said, "meaning the government is very vulnerable to litigation if it tries to reallocate quota.

 

"Any foreign fishing companies that purchased UK quota in good faith would be very likely to sue if this was now taken away from them."

https://www.bbc.com/news/52420116

[RuamRudy]

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

If you thought the Gilet Jaunes got nasty you haven't seen anything yet.

Is that a threat?

[JonnyF]

1 hour ago, RuamRudy said:

Is that a threat?

If that's a serious question I think you don't know how threats work.

[JonnyF]

1 hour ago, paddypower said:

now there you go again! the level playing field terms were co-signed by both parties - UK and EU. Now, the UK is saying 'oh, that's nonsense, we've changed our minds'.

Well, the British electorate never really decided to join what is now the EU, it was thrust upon us so it's difficult to say that we changed our minds. 

 

You're correct that we voted to leave the EU though. So when we leave, we don't abide by the rules of the club any more. Kind of obvious I would have thought.

[7by7]

18 hours ago, Andrew65 said:

Quite a long time ago MG Rover almost went bust & was bought out by the Chinese. When a British politician was asked why the government wasn't helping, he replied that:

"It was against EU rules on state aid".

 Really?

 

What politician was that?

 

Couldn't have been Thatcher; between 1979 and 1988 her government ploughed £2.9billion of taxpayers money into what was British Leyland.

 

Couldn't have been Blair either; in April 2005 his government gave MG Rover a £6.5million loan to keep it afloat with an offer of a further £100million if SAIC bought the company. 

 

 

As we all know, this could not save the company: 5,000 jobs go in Rover collapse.

 

But who was really to blame for the company's collapse? 

 

MG Rover directors banned from running companies after collapse

Quote

'Phoenix Four' disqualified from directorships after paying (themselves) £42m in bonuses while running car firm into the ground

 

But the 'Phoenix Four' blame Gordon Brown. MG Rover directors claim Brown vetoed £120m loan

Quote

Tony Blair wanted to save Longbridge with a £120million Government loan but was thwarted at the eleventh hour by then Chancellor Gordon Brown, claim the Phoenix Four

 

[bannork]

I've finally found an upside to Brexit: The Irish can watch a British famine.

[evadgib]

3 minutes ago, bannork said:

I've finally found an upside to Brexit: The Irish can watch a British famine.

Hardly. UK announced an 18 million aid package to Somalia yesterday. I can't see them doing that if the gloom and doom you seem to have manufactured had any chance of materialising.

[RayC]

3 hours ago, JonnyF said:

The UK will lay their cards on the table for everyone to see if we leave No Deal.

 

They'll say this is what we proposed (something along the lines of a mutually beneficial Canada style deal with fishing access included and reviewed annually) and the EU rejected it. 

 

There is no way the EU can continue with this unreasonable approach and try and blame the UK. The truth always prevails in the end.

 

I suspect we will end up with a bare bones deal with some fishing access included. But Barnier needs to drop his ridiculous ECJ, level playing field nonsense pretty sharpish so we can move onto serious discussions.

Indeed, very unreasonable of the EU not to accept the UK's demands which amount to: 

 

We want unrestricted access to your markets.

 

We reserve the right to offer financial assistance to our companies operating in those markets, so that we can undercut local competition.

 

We reserve the right not to apply the minimum standards by which local competition operates.

 

We do not accept that any disputes should be judged by the relevant judiciary overseeing the EU market

 

We require that any changes adopted by our national parliament in future, which do not comply with your regulations, do not adversely affect the ability of our companies to do business in your markets.

 

 

[paddypower]

2 hours ago, tomacht8 said:

Here a little bit more about the fish.

 

Dr Emma Cardwell, from the University of Glasgow, told the BBC that an enforced change in ownership would be "legally tricky" for the government.

 

Many parts of the quota were sold by English fishermen in the 1990s when fishing rights were cut dramatically. Cod fishing, for instance, was almost entirely stopped for several years.

 

Foreign companies then bought it up as a long-term investment, and experts say the quota market has been allowed to develop in an unregulated way ever since.

 

"There's a lack of clarity on the legal status of fishing rights," Dr Cardwell said, "meaning the government is very vulnerable to litigation if it tries to reallocate quota.

 

"Any foreign fishing companies that purchased UK quota in good faith would be very likely to sue if this was now taken away from them''

https://www.bbc.com/news/52420116

what a sad history of mismanagement by the British government. thse arguing for a ''return of our fisheries'' are either ignorant of history or have conveniently short memories. The same goes for ''Take back control'' and the fools who believed in an idealistic call to past glories. I pity you Brexiteers.

 

[nauseus]

30 minutes ago, paddypower said:

what a sad history of mismanagement by the British government. thse arguing for a ''return of our fisheries'' are either ignorant of history or have conveniently short memories. The same goes for ''Take back control'' and the fools who believed in an idealistic call to past glories. I pity you Brexiteers.

 

So what is the history lesson here? 

[nauseus]

35 minutes ago, RayC said:

Indeed, very unreasonable of the EU not to accept the UK's demands which amount to: 

 

We want unrestricted access to your markets.

 

We reserve the right to offer financial assistance to our companies operating in those markets, so that we can undercut local competition.

 

We reserve the right not to apply the minimum standards by which local competition operates.

 

We do not accept that any disputes should be judged by the relevant judiciary overseeing the EU market

 

We require that any changes adopted by our national parliament in future, which do not comply with your regulations, do not adversely affect the ability of our companies to do business in your markets.

 

 

Got a link to the official list? Not that I don't believe you or anything, just for my records.

[7by7]

8 hours ago, nauseus said:

Perhaps then, the EU has broken international law in the first instance?

How so?

[3NUMBAS]

1 hour ago, bannork said:

I've finally found an upside to Brexit: The Irish can watch a British famine.

and the brits wont have to support the new lame duck members from eastern europe and the balkans that are about to join before the whole edifice comes tumbling down .

as the EU will in the not to distant future..its like a giant ponzi scheme

 

[AndrewMciver]

8 hours ago, englishoak said:

 My life and many others has already changed for the better simply by showing on this island the will of the people and democracy still matters.

 

You might not understand the enormity of that statement but I assure you the vast majority of thinking voters do no matter if they voted remain or leave, so does our political system ( such as it is ) and the politicians. Its importance cannot be understated. 

 

I will not answer that circle jerk question again. 

 

 

 

 

The suffrogettes campained for democracy because they wanted someone to represent women, and the struggles and rites women wanted. 

 

Black people in South Africa camapaigned against aparthied because they wanted black representation to represent the struggle they were going through.

 

Wanting brexit and claiming it is a win for democracy as the sole victory is utterly silly. What do you get out of it? Surely your first point of contention with life is vote for your council, then your MP, then shout your aggreivances at the government in power. Other than bendy bananas, making tv's go off after 4 hours on standby, lowering noise pollution from hoovers, what has the EU done that has really effected you? 

 

And as we're in all a Thai forum, and love travelling to Thailand, it can't have escaped you how much the pound has been destroyed by Brexit, and will only hurt more if we can't get a basic deal. 

 

I've accepted the result. How do you imagine we could make a success? Even if we got our waters back, latest forecasts suggest fishing would only make up 0.1% of our GDP. Bizarre. 

 

I'm still intrigued about this 'singapore of the Thames idea'. etc 

[AndrewMciver]

If people could rationalise explain the benefits of Brexit without going to a racist/xenophobic over drive then i'd be more comfortable. Like i say, i've accepted the result, i just would be interested in the area we are going. We seem to have <deleted> of China, USA no trade deal on the horizon, India have said they want more rites for their students in the UK and easier freedom of movement (which will replace eastern Europeans with Indians). So where do we go ?

 

I honestly want this to be a success, but no one can explain the plan. 

[Chelseafan]

13 hours ago, englishoak said:

 My life and many others has already changed for the better simply by showing on this island the will of the people and democracy still matters.

 

You might not understand the enormity of that statement but I assure you the vast majority of thinking voters do no matter if they voted remain or leave, so does our political system ( such as it is ) and the politicians. Its importance cannot be understated. 

 

I will not answer that circle jerk question again. 

 

 

 

 

 

I have no problem with democracy and acknowledge the result but If the vote was just to stick two fingers up to the EU in order to make ourselves feel all nationalistic and nostalgic for pre-70's then thats a very sad state of affairs.

 

As much as the EU isn't perfect, it's done a helluva lot to harmonise standards/communications and regulations in order to make our lifes better.