Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Or indeed why they should not use their bargaining power to the very best of their own advantage.

With the depression thats in the post,think you,ll find its going to be a buyers market.

Edited by kingdong
  • Thanks 1
Posted
3 hours ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

What is “it” that proves that? To my knowledge (I may be wrong) the UK hasn’t negotiated many (any?) own trade deals so far but mostly (only?) rolled over existing EU trade deals. That’s the sensible thing to do (as I wrote before) but it’s hardly proof for how long it takes to negotiate a trade deal when someone else negotiated it for you and it isn’t tailored to your economy. 


 

 
 

 

 

Don't disagree with the sensible idea of rolling over existing EU deals where possible.

 

But, did you miss that the EU and UK have just negotiated the biggest and most complicated trade deal in decades? And it took how many years?

 

Barnier, Frost and their teams have shown what very hard work can achieve. Hard work and long hours. Barnier in particular because he has had to contend with changes in UK PM's, with very different views, and changes in UK negotiating team; plus pressure from his own President. Hats off to them all, him in particular!

  • Like 1
Posted
16 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

But, did you miss that the EU and UK have just negotiated the biggest and most complicated trade deal in decades? And it took how many years?

I won’t disagree it’s an accomplishment for both sides. But let’s not forget that:

1. The deal hasn’t been fully scrutinized yet by lawyers and experts; 

2. Many issues are not covered or only on a high level, so the time of one year won’t be the effective time; and 

3. Both sides weren’t exactly starting from scratch given the past years of EU membership, so it’s not fully comparable. 
 

 

16 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

Barnier, Frost and their teams have shown what very hard work can achieve. Hard work and long hours.

Fully agree. 

 

  • Like 2
Posted
35 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

You need to read the 2,000 pages to understand the detail. As do we all.

 

Fishing is emotive, and a political hot potato. Economically unimportant in the scheme of things.

 

To be fair, fishermen have to finance boats and equipment which needs time. The period in which the reduced catches are allowed has been significantly reduced and then will revert to Britain to decide. The fish caught in the waters in question is sold mainly to mainland Europe, by British and EU fishermen. British fishermen will still have access to this market. Ironically, the different tastes in types of fish mean not much of these are sold into the UK.

 

To get a balanced view, the whole document needs reading, But on this thorny issue I would congratulate Barnier and Frost and their teams on coming up with a workable compromise. 

 

You won't get a balanced view from many MSM sources. Certainly not the BBC and most definitely not politicians like the SNP. TVF isn't likely to be better. So at some point, everyone interested has to read the detail and small print.  Happy New Year.

Reading the deal and understanding the deal are not the same thing.

 

I’m not sure many people have the necessary legal knowledge to understand it, and I fully expect it’s implications to reveal themselves over months, if not years.

 

Your habitual nonsense re MSN and the BBC is notes.

  • Like 2
Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, Laughing Gravy said:

Read the Lisbon Treaty and its effects.

 

https://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2011/june/tradoc_147977.pdf

 

All trade agreements must be approved by  Parliament to be ratified.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Lisbon

 

And the Treaty of Rome.

 

https://www.oecd.org/economy/growth/1886277.pdf

 

https://www.robert-schuman.eu/en/european-issues/0502-the-eu-s-trade-policy-and-new-challenges

 

So you could not trade outside the EU without the EU's permission. One of the major reasons and benefits for Brexit, so the UK can trade with other countries without asking for the EU's parliaments permission

 

Ok, thanks for Rule of Law, not going to wade through the T&Cs. By way of clarification did HMGs trade deal with PRC in 2015 require ratification from the EU; I never read about such a matter being reported. e.g. no mention of EU oversight. It seems to me the deal, in reality, was a sovereign government decision.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/oct/24/britains-deals-with-china-billions-what-do-they-mean

Edited by simple1
  • Like 1
Posted
6 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

What the Government publishes on its ‘announcement web page’ is by definition ‘Propaganda.

 

But thank fully you’re here to demonstrate how it works on some folk.

It was posted to neuter the idiots that had sought to weaponize the situation several pages ago & with no indication whatsoever as to my own view of that particular aspect of B-B-Brexit.

  • Like 1
Posted
24 minutes ago, Hi from France said:

Are you really unable to cut and paste? 

Unable to cut and paste due to size and forum rules on number of lines

  • Haha 1
Posted
2 hours ago, Baerboxer said:

 

You need to read the 2,000 pages to understand the detail. As do we all.

 

Fishing is emotive, and a political hot potato. Economically unimportant in the scheme of things.

 

To be fair, fishermen have to finance boats and equipment which needs time. The period in which the reduced catches are allowed has been significantly reduced and then will revert to Britain to decide. The fish caught in the waters in question is sold mainly to mainland Europe, by British and EU fishermen. British fishermen will still have access to this market. Ironically, the different tastes in types of fish mean not much of these are sold into the UK.

 

To get a balanced view, the whole document needs reading, But on this thorny issue I would congratulate Barnier and Frost and their teams on coming up with a workable compromise. 

 

You won't get a balanced view from many MSM sources. Certainly not the BBC and most definitely not politicians like the SNP. TVF isn't likely to be better. So at some point, everyone interested has to read the detail and small print.  Happy New Year.

"Fishing is emotive, and a political hot potato."

That only applies to part of the industry. In Scotland there is about twice as many employed in the onshore fishing sector as the offshore, but onshore fishing is viewed as political collateral damage. Under WTO terms many rural communities on the west coast of Scotland would be decimated as the bulk of the onshore production is exported to Europe and tariffs would kill that stone dead.

If the SNP do not speak up for the communities involved in onshore fishing, who will?

  • Like 2
Posted
11 minutes ago, Surelynot said:

Point 3......EU students net contribution to the UK economy is estimated to be £450 million a year....that has now been lost.

 

Pulling out of Erasmus was a childish...'we are no longer part of the EU' jab...pathetic.

Do you have any idea on current and future cost of Erasmus + and which country in the EU benefits the most

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

Do you have any idea on current and future cost of Erasmus + and which country in the EU benefits the most

Is this the bit where you try to define the cost of education by counting the money spent?

  • Like 2
  • Sad 1
Posted
2 hours ago, nauseus said:

 

I can't link to this. It's a secret.

 

Sounds better than :

 

I can't link to this. It's a lie.

 

 

  • Thanks 1
Posted
Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

Is this the bit where you try to define the cost of education by counting the money spent?

Touchy I asked Do you have any idea on current and future cost of Erasmus + and which country in the EU benefits the most

Is that information EU secret and not for our eyes only

 

  • Like 1
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...