UK PM Johnson could lose his seat and majority at next election - poll

[vinny41]

6 minutes ago, robblok said:

If they are lucky they get all the rights, but that was not what was promised. But i know you don't believe what fishermen say unless you have spoken to them. They consider it a sell out. They are Brits (i know you like to disqualify non Brits from having an opinion). 

 

The UK Fisherman had unrealistic demands so they were never going to be happy

They wanted access to the EU markets for their fish without surrendering fishing rights

so lets see how that we work in UK_EU negotiation

UK we want access to the EU markets for selling our FIsh

EU okay what are you offering in return

UK nothing

EU thanks but no thanks

 

Barry Deas wanted

Control over access to fish within the EEZ

Access negotiated as part of annual fisheries agreements

12-mile exclusive limit

Quota shares that reflect the resources in UK waters

Access to market without surrendering fishing rights

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1376153/brexit-news-fishing-uk-eu-boris-johnson-michel-barnier-trade-deal-fisheries

 

[vinny41]

It seems the Irish are not happy bunnies about the fishing deal and are demanding 

Irish fishermen plan to seek transfer of mackerel quota from other EU states as form of compensation

 

We won’t accept this. Moreover, we fully expect the Irish Government to deliver the requisite compensation in the form of transfer of mackerel quota from the other EU coastal states which pro rata, have seen a much less severe impact on their respective mackerel fisheries,” he concluded.

https://thefishingdaily.com/latest-news/brexit-deal-fails-irish-fishermen-killybegs-fishermens-organisation/

[transam]

23 hours ago, robblok said:

If they are lucky they get all the rights, but that was not what was promised. But i know you don't believe what fishermen say unless you have spoken to them. They consider it a sell out. They are Brits. 

 

So you are indeed posting info that is false.

 

After the transition period the UK does what it wants with it's waters....FACT.

 

What are you going to come up with next, I wonder....????

 

"What was promised"...........Very funny.....

You still don't seem to understand the complexity of the UK exit negotiations, the UK was never going to get a perfect deal, and it has turned out neither has the EU.

To actually get a deal that helps trade between the UK and the EU was a milestone that the UK negotiation team cracked, albeit the UK sovereign territory's fishing waters needing a transition period. Now I am not a fisherman, but the EU fishermen, in my opinion did need a transition period to focus on their new future fishing grounds or UK arrangements.....????

 

[vinny41]

Nissan plans more European cuts, report says

Nissan plans to further reduce its presence in Europe, including outsourcing sales of its cars to alliance partner Renault, according to a Japanese newspaper.

https://europe.autonews.com/automakers/nissan-plans-more-european-cuts-report-says

[robblok]

2 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

The UK Fisherman had unrealistic demands so they were never going to be happy

They wanted access to the EU markets for their fish without surrendering fishing rights

so lets see how that we work in UK_EU negotiation

UK we want access to the EU markets for selling our FIsh

EU okay what are you offering in return

UK nothing

EU thanks but no thanks

 

Barry Deas wanted

Control over access to fish within the EEZ

Access negotiated as part of annual fisheries agreements

12-mile exclusive limit

Quota shares that reflect the resources in UK waters

Access to market without surrendering fishing rights

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1376153/brexit-news-fishing-uk-eu-boris-johnson-michel-barnier-trade-deal-fisheries

 

I know what they wanted but that was indeed unrealistic. But what they are saying is that the promise that was made was not kept. That is a sellout. If BJ had told them from the start that he would not be able to deliver it would not have been a sell out.

 

In both articles they are talking about the breach of promises. He should have been honest from the start. But the Brexiteer camp lied all the time about how favorable everything would be and now they are reminded of their promises and they have not kept them.

 

I totally agree that the demands were not realistic. I always said that the EU was the stronger side but it was waved away by the Brexiteers on this forum. For me this is a predicable result. Also for me the fishing rights did not matter much as its just a small part of the deal. More important was the fair level playing field where the EU also won. 

[robblok]

44 minutes ago, transam said:

So you are indeed posting info that is false.

 

After the transition period the UK does what it wants with it's waters....FACT.

 

What are you going to come up with next, I wonder....????

 

"What was promised"...........Very funny.....

You still don't seem to understand the complexity of the UK exit negotiations, the UK was never going to get a perfect deal, and it has turned out neither has the EU.

To actually get a deal that helps trade between the UK and the EU was a milestone that the UK negotiation team cracked, albeit the UK sovereign territory's fishing waters needing a transition period. Now I am not a fisherman, but the EU fishermen, in my opinion did need a transition period to focus on their new future fishing grounds or UK arrangements.....????

 

BJ promised stuff to the fishermen and did not keep his promise. Can you tell me where he said they had to wait 5.5 years to get it all ?

Edited January 5, 2021 by Rimmer
Flame removed

[vinny41]

4 minutes ago, robblok said:

I know what they wanted but that was indeed unrealistic. But what they are saying is that the promise that was made was not kept. That is a sellout. If BJ had told them from the start that he would not be able to deliver it would not have been a sell out.

 

In both articles they are talking about the breach of promises. He should have been honest from the start. But the Brexiteer camp lied all the time about how favorable everything would be and now they are reminded of their promises and they have not kept them.

 

I totally agree that the demands were not realistic. I always said that the EU was the stronger side but it was waved away by the Brexiteers on this forum. For me this is a predicable result. Also for me the fishing rights did not matter much as its just a small part of the deal. More important was the fair level playing field where the EU also won. 

The issue is they don't know or choose not to know the difference between a promise and an aspiration

Its virtually impossible for any side to enter a negotiation and knowing the outcome before the negotiation had started

Some of the EU fisherman were promised that fishing access would be status quo and the EU starting position when the entered the negotiations was status quo and to achieve a deal they had to move away from that position

[transam]

The negotiating team didn't know about a transition period length until the eleventh hour, neither did anyone...

Did Boris promise a time period, I don't think so, he said we will get our waters back, and we will in 5 years time. 

 

It looks rather silly that you keep going on about a promise when in fact a deal was made with no real heartache, plus you will still be able to get your favourite Garner's Pickle Onions sent across the channel....

 

 

[RuamRudy]

16 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

The UK Fisherman had unrealistic demands so they were never going to be happy

They wanted access to the EU markets for their fish without surrendering fishing rights

so lets see how that we work in UK_EU negotiation

UK we want access to the EU markets for selling our FIsh

EU okay what are you offering in return

UK nothing

EU thanks but no thanks

 

Barry Deas wanted

Control over access to fish within the EEZ

Access negotiated as part of annual fisheries agreements

12-mile exclusive limit

Quota shares that reflect the resources in UK waters

Access to market without surrendering fishing rights

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1376153/brexit-news-fishing-uk-eu-boris-johnson-michel-barnier-trade-deal-fisheries

 

 

What a difference a week makes. It seems so recent that our politicians were standing up for our fishing communities and control of our waters; now we are calling them spoilt and unrealistic. 

[Chomper Higgot]

3 hours ago, Patong2021 said:

Companies outside of EU have been managing to comply for a long time. If India, Canada, USA can be EU compliant, I think UK can be too. UK has an advantage because its regulations/procedures were already  EU compliant.  In any case, all drugs have to be certified  through clinical trial according to local country laws. There are no consistent clinical trial regulations in the EU. If you want to  bring drug to Germany, there must be an acceptable clinical trial done for German standard. Same for Belgium, Netherlands, France etc. Each country requires its own clinical trial.

It’s not simply the clinical trials, there is also the matter of ‘validation’.

 

If ever you get caught up in pharmaceutical validation you’ll understand the extent to which ‘paperwork’ becomes a problem.

 

 

[robblok]

24 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

The issue is they don't know or choose not to know the difference between a promise and an aspiration

Its virtually impossible for any side to enter a negotiation and knowing the outcome before the negotiation had started

Some of the EU fisherman were promised that fishing access would be status quo and the EU starting position when the entered the negotiations was status quo and to achieve a deal they had to move away from that position

I think it was BJ lying to them but that is my opinion. I am sure he sold it as a promise like so many things he promised that were lies.  If your going to leave a block based on false promises that is a bad thing. Anyway I choose to believe the fishermen over BJ. He has not exactly a track record for honesty. 

[transam]

29 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

 

What a difference a week makes. It seems so recent that our politicians were standing up for our fishing communities and control of our waters; now we are calling them spoilt and unrealistic. 

Are you saying they will not get their waters back after the transition period....?

[vinny41]

1 minute ago, robblok said:

I think it was BJ lying to them but that is my opinion. I am sure he sold it as a promise like so many things he promised that were lies.  If your going to leave a block based on false promises that is a bad thing. Anyway I choose to believe the fishermen over BJ. He has not exactly a track record for honesty. 

I disagree no-one would enter a negotiation where the opposite side  knows what you have promised because the opposite side would extract everything they wanted knowing that on what you promised your negotiation stance is stuffed

2 days after the referendum some people were interviewed on TV where they were upset and annoyed because the UK hadn't left the EU, for them leaving was just simply sending a text or fax saying we are leaving and we give the EU 24 hours notice

 

[RuamRudy]

6 minutes ago, transam said:

Are you saying they will not get their waters back after the transition period....?

 

 

When did this transition period first get raised? Only a month ago we were assured our leaders were fighting to take back control of our waters. That was the promise. Nobody mentioned that this would only come in 5 years' time.

 

Certainly the fishermen, who were at the forefront of all Johnson's bluff and bluster for the past few years, are not happy that he has folded like a cheap card table and lost out to the EU. 

[vinny41]

It would appear that the UK  trade deficit with the EU will be reduced this year

 

EU firms refuse UK deliveries over Brexit tax changes

VAT is now being collected at the point of sale rather than at the point of importation.

This essentially means that overseas retailers sending goods to the UK are expected to register for UK VAT and account for it to HMRC if the sale value is less than €150 (£135).

A government spokesperson said: "The new VAT model ensures goods from EU and non-EU countries are treated in the same way and that UK businesses are not disadvantaged by competition from VAT-free imports.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-55530721

 

In the past there has some traders that would undercut a UK supplier by selling for less and then doing a disappearance act when Vat payments were due

 

[robblok]

11 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

It would appear that the UK  trade deficit with the EU will be reduced this year

 

EU firms refuse UK deliveries over Brexit tax changes

VAT is now being collected at the point of sale rather than at the point of importation.

This essentially means that overseas retailers sending goods to the UK are expected to register for UK VAT and account for it to HMRC if the sale value is less than €150 (£135).

A government spokesperson said: "The new VAT model ensures goods from EU and non-EU countries are treated in the same way and that UK businesses are not disadvantaged by competition from VAT-free imports.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-55530721

 

In the past there has some traders that would undercut a UK supplier by selling for less and then doing a disappearance act when Vat payments were due

 

Its sad if you read the article that all those barriers that were once gone are back. Consumers and companies pay the price. Bad for both sides. But that is what happens when you leave a trading block.

[adammike]

9 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

It would appear that the UK  trade deficit with the EU will be reduced this year

 

EU firms refuse UK deliveries over Brexit tax changes

VAT is now being collected at the point of sale rather than at the point of importation.

This essentially means that overseas retailers sending goods to the UK are expected to register for UK VAT and account for it to HMRC if the sale value is less than €150 (£135).

A government spokesperson said: "The new VAT model ensures goods from EU and non-EU countries are treated in the same way and that UK businesses are not disadvantaged by competition from VAT-free imports.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-55530721

 

In the past there has some traders that would undercut a UK supplier by selling for less and then doing a disappearance act when Vat payments were due

 

I have ordered a jacket from Universal works UK, for delivery to the Netherlands,they removed the VAT and informed me that I was responsible for any taxes in the Netherlands.They were very clear about this and gave me 24 hours to cancel the order so no problem there.I have no idea what will happen when it arrives here,I assume it will be the normal 20% vat.How I pay and actually get the jacket is unknown to me.I hope it's a simple online transaction,or it better be or it will not be good for trade.More likely the money and brains that were behind Brexit will have their grubby fingers in the pie.

[robblok]

22 minutes ago, adammike said:

I have ordered a jacket from Universal works UK, for delivery to the Netherlands,they removed the VAT and informed me that I was responsible for any taxes in the Netherlands.They were very clear about this and gave me 24 hours to cancel the order so no problem there.I have no idea what will happen when it arrives here,I assume it will be the normal 20% vat.How I pay and actually get the jacket is unknown to me.I hope it's a simple online transaction,or it better be or it will not be good for trade.More likely the money and brains that were behind Brexit will have their grubby fingers in the pie.

21% and probably nothing else if its UK produced

[luckyluke]

54 minutes ago, transam said:

Are you saying they will not get their waters back after the transition period....?

 

Maybe some do, but I don't believe anything politicians are promising, certainly if it has to take place in X+ years.

 

Politicians don't think about the future, but about the now, problems which may occur in the future, is a far away something, which will be treated in due time,

mostly by other politicians.

 

The gross of the base swallow the politicians promises, when it suit them.

 

Later they will claim : we have at the time been betrayed by... 

 

 

[transam]

1 hour ago, RuamRudy said:

 

 

When did this transition period first get raised? Only a month ago we were assured our leaders were fighting to take back control of our waters. That was the promise. Nobody mentioned that this would only come in 5 years' time.

 

Certainly the fishermen, who were at the forefront of all Johnson's bluff and bluster for the past few years, are not happy that he has folded like a cheap card table and lost out to the EU. 

You haven't answered my question, but it's OK, we all know the answer you dodged ...????

[transam]

29 minutes ago, luckyluke said:

 

Maybe some do, but I don't believe anything politicians are promising, certainly if it has to take place in X+ years.

 

Politicians don't think about the future, but about the now, problems which may occur in the future, is a far away something, which will be treated in due time,

mostly by other politicians.

 

The gross of the base swallow the politicians promises, when it suit them.

 

Later they will claim : we have at the time been betrayed by... 

 

 

It is written in the final negotiation agreement that the UK gets it's waters back after a 5 years transition period..

[luckyluke]

11 minutes ago, transam said:

It is written in the final negotiation agreement that the UK gets it's waters back after a 5 years transition period..

 

I believe it is written.

[Eloquent pilgrim]

The fact that neither side are completely satisfied with the agreement, particularly regarding the fishing issue, would indicate that it is probably a fairly balanced deal in the end, with hard fought compromise conceded by both parties.

 

Throughout December the UK government came under heavy criticism for making a stand on fishing. Critics from both the UK and EU, continually urged them to concede some ground and compromise, claiming that it was a relatively minor issue. It is not without irony, that many of those critics are now lambasting them for doing exactly what they were urging them to do, compromise.

 

If the UK fishermen are not happy, the French fishermen must be incandescent, seeing as Macron, I believe, promised them that he would veto any Brexit deal that would compromise their present status quo regarding fishing rights.

 

However, there are several anti-British posters on this forum, and unfortunately, some even appear to be UK citizens, who seem to think that when the EU made compromises, it demonstrated their superior negotiating skills, but when the UK PM made compromises, it demonstrated deceit. Unfortunately, with these posters, their dislike of the UK seems to be  indelibly etched on their DNA ………… plus ça change

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[Chomper Higgot]

19 hours ago, Eloquent pilgrim said:

The fact that neither side are completely satisfied with the agreement, particularly regarding the fishing issue, would indicate that it is probably a fairly balanced deal in the end, with hard fought compromise conceded by both parties.

 

Throughout December the UK government came under heavy criticism for making a stand on fishing. Critics from both the UK and EU, continually urged them to concede some ground and compromise, claiming that it was a relatively minor issue. It is not without irony, that many of those critics are now lambasting them for doing exactly what they were urging them to do, compromise.

 

If the UK fishermen are not happy, the French fishermen must be incandescent, seeing as Macron, I believe, promised them that he would veto any Brexit deal that would compromise their present status quo regarding fishing rights.

 

However, there are several anti-British posters on this forum, and unfortunately, some even appear to be UK citizens, who seem to think that when the EU made compromises, it demonstrated their superior negotiating skills, but when the UK PM made compromises, it demonstrated deceit. Unfortunately, with these posters, their dislike of the UK seems to be  indelibly etched on their DNA ………… plus ça change

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

 

How about, some see this as a bad deal for the UK, better than the no deal many Brexiteers were baying for but nevertheless a bad deal?!

Edited January 6, 2021 by onthedarkside
trolling comment removed

[luckyluke]

15 hours ago, Eloquent pilgrim said:

The fact that neither side are completely satisfied with the agreement, particularly regarding the fishing issue, would indicate that it is probably a fairly balanced deal in the end, with hard fought compromise conceded by both parties.

 

Throughout December the UK government came under heavy criticism for making a stand on fishing. Critics from both the UK and EU, continually urged them to concede some ground and compromise, claiming that it was a relatively minor issue. It is not without irony, that many of those critics are now lambasting them for doing exactly what they were urging them to do, compromise.

 

If the UK fishermen are not happy, the French fishermen must be incandescent, seeing as Macron, I believe, promised them that he would veto any Brexit deal that would compromise their present status quo regarding fishing rights.

 

However, there are several anti-British posters on this forum, and unfortunately, some even appear to be UK citizens, who seem to think that when the EU made compromises, it demonstrated their superior negotiating skills, but when the UK PM made compromises, it demonstrated deceit. Unfortunately, with these posters, their dislike of the UK seems to be  indelibly etched on their DNA ………… plus ça change

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

Some may indeed consider anti - Brexit as anti-British, same as some may consider anti-E.U. as anti- European.

 

Perceptions are personal matters,  and usually not changeable,

no matter what, one see/believe  what one has already decide to see/believe.

 

There is also certainly a kind of national pride/chauvinism among some posters, sometimes even zealotry :

 

" all what we do is correct and fair, you are never to be trust ".

 

 

[NanLaew]

19 hours ago, robblok said:

I always said that the EU was the stronger side but it was waved away by the Brexiteers on this forum.

Oops...there's that "side" thing again.

 

If the EU was so strong why did they wait cap in hand for almost 4 years while the UK sorted out (most) of its internal political strife? I am sure they don't give a toss for the UK's ongoing existential angst but despite being the 'stronger side', they haven't said or done anything to suggest that the deal was a walkover.

Edited January 6, 2021 by NanLaew

[luckyluke]

3 minutes ago, NanLaew said:

Oops...there's that "side" thing again.

 

If the EU was so strong why did they wait cap in hand for almost 4 years while the UK sorted out (most) of its internal political strife? I am sure they don't give a toss for the UK's ongoing existential angst but despite being the 'stronger side', they haven't said anything to suggest that the deal was a walkover.

 

" cap in hand " is a perception.

 

Another one is :

 

The U.K. is so desperate for a deal, they always postpone their ultimatum".

 

Personally I am convinced that  these 2 perceptions of the event, are far of the mark.

[NanLaew]

Anyway, trying to refocus on the topic, I seriously doubt the minuscule British fishing industry alone is going to cost Boris Johnson his seat at the next election. There are bigger fish to fry here.

 

You see what I did there?

[2530Ubon]

If only the leader of the opposition could call a snap election -- perhaps we could get rid of this sh-tshow that is running ruining the UK. BoJo needs to go.

[transam]

2 minutes ago, 2530Ubon said:

If only the leader of the opposition could call a snap election -- perhaps we could get rid of this sh-tshow that is running ruining the UK. BoJo needs to go.

How is he ruining the UK....?