Brexit brinkmanship: Johnson says prepare for no-deal, cancels trade talks

[Rookiescot]

1 minute ago, nauseus said:

Look at the topic - it's on the top of every page. Asinine back. Now we're even.

I always know when you are stuck for a reasoned argument because you descend into nonsensical one liners just because you feel you have to reply with something.

[nauseus]

1 minute ago, Rookiescot said:

My point still stands. Nauseus was claiming they were promised one thing but something else was delivered.

You are very mao tonight. I am almost jealous.

[nauseus]

6 minutes ago, Rookiescot said:

But you want a border with Scotland when it becomes independent.

Hypocrisy much?

I don't - show me where I said that.

[david555]

7 minutes ago, nauseus said:

 

UK doesn't want a border either - only the EU.

One day unification solve that ....after they in N irland expiriance the difference after Brexit ....and looking to the other Irland ...same people you know ....

[Rookiescot]

4 minutes ago, nauseus said:

You are very mao tonight. I am almost jealous.

Asinine.

[nauseus]

1 minute ago, david555 said:

One day unification solve that ....after they in N irland expiriance the difference after Brexit ....and looking to the other Irland ...same people you know ....

Maybe. Hopefully with a united Ireland out of the EU.

[Rookiescot]

3 minutes ago, nauseus said:

I don't - show me where I said that.

So you dont want a border between Scotland and England upon independence?

Are you sure about that?

What about all those immigrants flooding across?

[nauseus]

1 minute ago, Rookiescot said:

Asinine.

Read all these back in the morning and you might see who is being asinine here. Maybe. 

[nauseus]

Just now, Rookiescot said:

So you dont want a border between Scotland and England upon independence?

Are you sure about that?

What about all those immigrants flooding across?

You can't answer my question as usual. Hopeless. Bye. 

[Rookiescot]

1 minute ago, nauseus said:

You can't answer my question as usual. Hopeless. Bye. 

You are doing it again.

[david555]

1 minute ago, nauseus said:

Maybe. Hopefully with a united Ireland out of the EU.

That could be a fair choice ....what you think about a referendum on that ....? ????

Or you go try to block that too like the Scots request ...????

[nauseus]

1 minute ago, david555 said:

That could be a fair choice ....what you think about a referendum on that ....? ????

Or you go try to block that too like the Scots request ...????

Northern Ireland has an opportunity in 2024 I think. But there probably won't be an opportunity for both of them to leave the EU as soon as that - Eire is stuck with the Euro. The Irish don't seem to mind having referendums, though. 

 

The Scots had a referendum only 6 years ago. If they get another one they get it - not my decision either way! Personally I think that Scotland leaving the UK in favour of the EU would be a huge mistake for the Scots. But just IMOHO, of course.

[RayC]

9 hours ago, vogie said:

Now Mr Macron is threatening an embargo on the UKs energy supplies to the EU if he doesn't get total control of British waters. So does it come as any surprise when Brexiteers say that France and Germany have total say in what goes on in these talks. And why are the Euros so surprised when we say that he EU are not negotiating in good faith, it seems to me that Mr Barnier has no imput to these talks what-so-ever. "Charlatons" is an understatement, gangsters would be more appropiate.

 

https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1349210/Brexit-news-Emmanuel-Macron-France-fisheries-energy-blockade-threat-EU-punishment-vn

 

 

Usually I'd take anything that appears in The Express with a truckload of salt, but the article quotes Tony Connelly -who imo is an excellent, well-informed journalist - so there is probably something in this story.

 

Imo just as Johnson needs to move on state aid, so does Macron on fishing. Hopefully, Merkel might still be able to make both see sense?

 

In any event, this highlights what might happen if there is 'No deal' as so many Brexiters wish.

 

Never mind though: We 'hold all the cards', and 'they need us more than we need them'.

[Scott]

Baiting post removed.  Please stay on topic and keep it civil. 

 

[CG1 Blue]

2 hours ago, Rookiescot said:

I'm glad you said "yet".

Means Brexiteers are finally coming to terms with the break up of the UK they helped facilitate.

You continue to flatter yourself. For the 100th time, most Brexiteers don't give a stuff if Brexit causes Scottish independence! 

I favour the union, but if you think we'd even consider re-joining the EU just to keep Scots Indys happy you must be on the Famous Grouse ????‍♂️

[Hi from France]

4 hours ago, CG1 Blue said:

Show me proof that the EU is willing to let the UK have a Canada style FTA. Proof means someone significant saying it, like Barnier or Ursula.

please scroll back to one my first messages here

 

you have the words of a negociator and a link to a Guardian article. I consider the Guardian is a reliable source as well as other major newspapers... Now I'm sure you can find many tabloids, as well as some british politician to repeat ad nauseam the UE is some kind of Star Wars-like evil empire. But it's a bit more complicated than that.

 

 

Now, I think you need to analyse by yourself and make up your mind, for me I gave sources explaining what is a Canada deal and what the brits should do if they really want one

 

In reality, I think the brits cannot negociate a Canade deal and they know it 

 

Britain would need two things for a Canada deal

1/ time : This sector-by sector process is very long. 4 years is not absurd, though I guess it's possible to speed thing up if you have...

... 2/ expertise and manpower : the brits used to have the best diplomacy in the world (which was indeed very very very impressive).

 

Now the british experts either

1. are Ok with earning little money and work for the country and the civil service (like Sir Ivan Rogers or Kim Darroch, "Baron Darroch of Kew"). But Boris Johnson or event Theresa May sacked them. They are as British as can be but, plainly said how disastrous brexit is. So all these guys and a lot of top british civil servants have left. Dominic Cummings hates these civil servant  (you know of David Lidington).
2. prefer to be consultants and earn much more. You know the british civil service is now "downsized" and "lean" and needs a lots of consultants. So to get the expertise it need, the UK goverment is paying huge bills

Quote

Brexit drives government consultancy fees to £450m in three years

beside the hefty cost, consultants will tell you what you want to hear and maximise their fees; It's their business, it's normal to expect that.

 

 

So if common sense drives you to recognize a Canada deal will not appear out of thin are, you can also admit that whatever british politicians tell in public, they know perfectly well Britain cannot afford a Canada deal; It will not go on paying EU membership fees four more years and it cannot gather the expertise needed.

 

 

note that the EU can negociate a Canada deal: it has the expertise, the money, and by the way it already negociated CETA (it took 9 years, not counting raticafication by all EU members). I concede the UE is not very enthusiast about that either though, hence what Barnier said.

 

worse than that, CETA took 9 years, but it was easier because Canada is very far away and trade is very limited compared to UK-EU trade... Britain has some very competitive sectors, like the Pharmaceutical industry : it is world-class and the UE would certainly like to protect its own interests... this process is now ongoing since the EU "Agence européenne des médicaments", the European Medicines Agency left London for Amsterdam (whatever Gove says not leading the UE on Medicines anymore is a huge loss for Britain). 

 

 

 

I have no more time, but on the topic of expertise comparing Michel Barnier and David Frost is very cruel, and explains a lots of the things we see know... 

Edited October 20, 2020 by Hi from France

[polpott]

6 hours ago, vinny41 said:

 

 

The still advertised as the common market was referring to the 1975 United Kingdom European Communities membership referendum

I am not aware of any Scottish independence referendum that took place in 1975 but if there was one maybe you could provide a link

Common Market, which morphed into EU.

[sandyf]

18 hours ago, Tofer said:

I presume you're referring to Scotland - they already had one! In case you don't remember, they voted to remain in the UK. Or do you want to keep having them until you get the result that satisfies you. 555

Like many others, you can delude yourself that nothing has changed since 2014. 

Time to face reality.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/nicola-sturgeon-scottish-independence-indyref2-brexit-snp-b1182018.html

[sandyf]

16 hours ago, CG1 Blue said:

You need to stop bending the truth on the Canada subject. In 2017 the EU said a Canada style deal is on offer (in the so called 'Barnier slides') . In Feb 2020 Barnier told us that a Canada style deal is not available. (The EU are allowed to make u-turns? ????)

And Barnier didn't say a Canada deal is not available because the UK hasn't given them enough time. He said it's not available because the UK would be too much of a threat as a competitor (paraphrasing). 

It is you that is bending the truth. In 2017 CETA was provisional, and is still not fully ratified, there was only a suggestion of something similar.

The problems that arose in 2018 brought about a different perspective.

 

While Canada has fulfilled the legal steps required for CETA to come into force, the EU has not. That’s because some free-trade agreements need to be approved by the EU and its member states. More specifically, under EU law, the EU needs to validate all chapters of CETA, while the member states only need to validate Chapter 8 pertaining to investment protection and the establishment of the ICS.

Approval by the EU member states requires yes votes from their parliaments at the national and sometimes regional level, which has not yet been completed.

https://theconversation.com/the-uncertain-future-of-the-canadian-european-trade-deal-100228

[sandyf]

7 hours ago, Hi from France said:

note that the EU can negociate a Canada deal: it has the expertise, the money, and by the way it already negociated CETA (it took 9 years, not counting raticafication by all EU members). I concede the UE is not very enthusiast about that either though, hence what Barnier said.

One of the major problems with CETA was dispute resolution and I doubt the EU would want to down that road again.

Of course Bojo would be quite happy to agree to a new court system, and then refuse to abide by it.

 

One of the provisions of the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement between Canada and the European Union, known as CETA, was a mechanism to handle disputes between governments and investors. The International Court System (ICS), a new EU-Canadian permanent court, was created to help resolve such disputes.

https://theconversation.com/the-uncertain-future-of-the-canadian-european-trade-deal-100228

[JonnyF]

48 minutes ago, sandyf said:

It is you that is bending the truth. In 2017 CETA was provisional, and is still not fully ratified, there was only a suggestion of something similar.

The problems that arose in 2018 brought about a different perspective.

 

While Canada has fulfilled the legal steps required for CETA to come into force, the EU has not. That’s because some free-trade agreements need to be approved by the EU and its member states. More specifically, under EU law, the EU needs to validate all chapters of CETA, while the member states only need to validate Chapter 8 pertaining to investment protection and the establishment of the ICS.

Approval by the EU member states requires yes votes from their parliaments at the national and sometimes regional level, which has not yet been completed.

https://theconversation.com/the-uncertain-future-of-the-canadian-european-trade-deal-100228

Just highlights what a difficult organization the EU is, and why it takes them years and sometimes decades to get anything done.

 

After 4.5 years and tens of billions of pounds the UK is still no closer to a deal with them. So lets just move on and go WTO. Leave them to squabble amongst themselves. We'll remain open to a fair, mutually beneficial FTA and as soon as the EU gets their house in order (my guess would be 2025) we can sign it. Until then, WFO with WTO.

[transam]

16 hours ago, luckyluke said:

It is obvious we are different.

 

But now you know that the use of some emoticons just for the purpose of being disagreeable, annoys me.

Folk from over the channel who continually stick their nose into UK affairs here annoy me, but that has to be expected on an open forum. ????

 

PS. I have a couple of emijon stalkers, but I am flattered....  ????

[transam]

11 hours ago, Rookiescot said:

You take the blinkers off. Compare what Vote Leave was telling us and where we are now.

Brexit would never have been voted for if people had known then what they know now.

Vote leave lied. Where is our easiest trade deal in history which keeps us in the single market?

Eeeeeeeer, then can you explain the recent Boris landslide GE victory.....? 

[polpott]

Just now, transam said:

Eeeeeeeer, then can you explain the recent Boris landslide GE victory.....? 

It wasn't a landslide Tory victory, it was a landslide Corbyn loss.

[Rookiescot]

21 minutes ago, transam said:

Eeeeeeeer, then can you explain the recent Boris landslide GE victory.....? 

Because the turkeys ate up the oven ready deal lie.

[evadgib]

15 minutes ago, Rookiescot said:

Because the turkeys ate up the oven ready deal lie.

I'll assume that's a 'no!' ????

[Tofer]

12 hours ago, Rookiescot said:

I'm glad you said "yet".

Means Brexiteers are finally coming to terms with the break up of the UK they helped facilitate.

I wish you all the luck in the world, you'll certainly need it, because the EU don't want you. Who will you approach then with your begging bowl?

 

Anyway, it's already been said, this is not the subject post.

[Tofer]

12 hours ago, Rookiescot said:

The reason it ran on so long is because the Conservative party could not agree on which version of Brexit they wanted.

 

Nonsense, unless you've been walking around with your eyes closed for the last almost 5 years, you will be well aware the WA was voted down in the HOC, and predominantly because Mrs. May was colluding with the EU on a watered down version of Brexit.

[Tofer]

12 hours ago, Rookiescot said:

Scotland voted to remain. Did you miss that memo or something?

The Scottish people voted in a UK wide referendum, and their votes were counted. Until they become an independent nation, their voting will be represented in the UK sphere.

[JonnyF]

36 minutes ago, Rookiescot said:

Because the turkeys ate up the oven ready deal lie.

It was because the majority of the electorate rejected the anti-democratic approach of Labour and the Liberal Democrats who either wanted us to vote again until they got the 'correct' answer or simply ignore the vote altogether.

 

Democracy won big, the Tories won big. The vocal minority, the anti-democratic losers are still crying into their Glenfiddich but frankly, who cares.