UK asks EU for Brexit grace period extension to 2023, BBC reports

[Bluespunk]

7 hours ago, vogie said:

Where do borders go, there is only one place for a border to go and that is between two foreign countries and a border will not break the GFA, only a militarized border would do this.

Ah huh...

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/uk-northern-ireland-46988529

Edited February 9, 2021 by Bluespunk

[tebee]

4 hours ago, vogie said:

You need to show some evidence where it states the border must be invisible. 

Infact the GFA is very sketchy, but it only says that the borders must be demiliterized, I have better information that I can lay my hands on tomorrow, but just to keep you interested here is another. 

 

"What does the Good Friday Agreement say about a hard border?

A lot less than you might think. The only place in which it alludes to infrastructure at the border is in the section on security.

During the Troubles there were heavily fortified army barracks, police stations and watchtowers along the border. They were frequently attacked by Republican paramilitaries.

Part of the peace deal involved the UK government agreeing to a process of removing those installations in what became known as "demilitarisation"."

The agreement states that "the development of a peaceful environment... can and should mean a normalisation of security arrangements and practices."

The government committed to "as early a return as possible to normal security arrangements in Northern Ireland, consistent with the level of threat".

That included "the removal of security installations". That is as far as the text goes."

 

So it is obvious to anyone other than a fervent remainer that the present arrangement is of no use to man nor beast especially when the EU can use art16 to suit themselves as shown. 

Ah, I see you have read and are quoting from this !

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-46988529

 

It needs to be invisible to keep the peace in Northern Ireland.

 

As soon as anyone put infrastructure there  it will become a terrorist target.  Soon that infrastructure will need to be fortified and guarded by troops.

 

And there is the cost and sheer impracticability of doing it. There are more crossing points on the one Irish border than all the other EU external borders combined.   

 

Pre-GFA many crossings where blocked, but it was always an arms race between British troops and locals who would open them up again or build diversions around them. Blocking them again would make many locals upset and increase support for reunification. 

 

 

[vogie]

1 hour ago, tebee said:

Ah, I see you have read and are quoting from this !

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-46988529

 

It needs to be invisible to keep the peace in Northern Ireland.

 

As soon as anyone put infrastructure there  it will become a terrorist target.  Soon that infrastructure will need to be fortified and guarded by troops.

 

And there is the cost and sheer impracticability of doing it. There are more crossing points on the one Irish border than all the other EU external borders combined.   

 

Pre-GFA many crossings where blocked, but it was always an arms race between British troops and locals who would open them up again or build diversions around them. Blocking them again would make many locals upset and increase support for reunification. 

 

 

So are we in agreement that no-where does it say "invisible"? 

[Tofer]

On 2/7/2021 at 8:47 PM, vogie said:

remember Ursula von der Leyens Gerald Ratner moment, we are a speedboat and the EU is a rusty old tanker being left behind in the sea fret.

 

More like the Titanic, heading for the bottom....

[Tofer]

10 hours ago, david555 said:

And then it shall be cheered as a welcome action by all those who now attacking UvdL ..... just wait and see ....but only allowed if it is a Boris action ...

 

I think you seriously need to redirect your moral compass.

 

The consideration of the UK to invoke A16 is to keep necessary shipments of food into NI unhindered, whereas UvdL's intention was the prevention of the passage of vaccines into the UK, from companies honouring their contractual agreements.

[welovesundaysatspace]

 

Quote

 

The consideration of the UK to invoke A16 is to keep necessary shipments of food into NI unhindered, whereas UvdL's intention was the prevention of the passage of vaccines into the UK, from companies honouring their contractual agreements.

The intention was to prevent companies from not honoring their contractual obligations, in order to ensure necessary vaccines needed for the European people. If you think that food shipments into NI is a valid reason for invoking Article 16, then the EU would have much more valid reason to do so. Though I think none of the reasons justifies it. 
 

 

 

Edited February 10, 2021 by welovesundaysatspace

[david555]

1 hour ago, Tofer said:

 

I think you seriously need to redirect your moral compass.

 

The consideration of the UK to invoke A16 is to keep necessary shipments of food into NI unhindered, whereas UvdL's intention was the prevention of the passage of vaccines into the UK, from companies honouring their contractual agreements.

Of course all coming from brexiteers is always holy ...including Boris treathning tearing up A16...repeatatly.....

 

About your thinking about my moral compas ....well that is luckely under MY  control and not under your very dark blue morality ????

 

For me all can aswell become terminated as Boris managed  U.K shall continue to try get all as same as a member whitout being a paid member with no obligations ...keep dreaming ...????

[david555]

25 minutes ago, stevenl said:

7by7 and many others here have said that that decision from UvdL was wrong. Very quickly it was realised it was a wrong decision and therefore it was retracted. Still many brexiteers keep on moaning about it. 

Trying to use it as leverage to get their wishes as all 4 years already ...they never get it in their heads they are independent and to find their way on their own....the wide World is waiting ......to deal with them ????

 

[CG1 Blue]

22 hours ago, 7by7 said:

 

I accept that you believe the EU has a higher profile than the UK.

 

After all, Brexit has made that true.

By turning to baiting, I assume you've accepted the comparison between Simon Case and Ursula VdL was a ridiculous one then. Well done, but you should learn to accept when you're wrong rather than argue that black is white. 

[Bluespunk]

Deleted 

Edited February 10, 2021 by Bluespunk

[7by7]

22 hours ago, vogie said:

<snip>

So it is obvious to anyone other than a fervent remainer that the present arrangement is of no use to man nor beast especially when the EU can use art16 to suit themselves as shown. 

 

Your uncredited quote from the BBC, and my earlier linked to one from Fact Check NI saying the same thing, do not make that obvious at all.

 

Except to a fervent Brexiteer who ignores the fact that Boris Johnson threatened to trigger Article 16 over two weeks before the EU commission did!

 

You are also ignoring the fact that Arlene Foster and Ian Paisley Jnr have requested it be triggered. Paisley well before both Johnson and the EU on the 7th January! Johnson has promised them that he would do so if he felt it necessary.

 

You believe it is wrong for the EU to threaten to use Article 16 if they feel it necessary Do you also believe it is wrong for Johnson to make exactly the same threat?

 

Personally, I think both are wrong. The article, which is actually a temporary measure, is only supposed to be triggered in the face of “serious” problems, but there is no definition of what “serious” entails.

 

Whatever it's purpose, it was definitely not intended to be used as a football in some pathetic game of tit for tat between Johnson and von der Leyen!

 

 

 

 

 

Edited February 10, 2021 by 7by7
typo

[7by7]

5 hours ago, CG1 Blue said:

By turning to baiting, I assume you've accepted the comparison between Simon Case and Ursula VdL was a ridiculous one then. Well done, but you should learn to accept when you're wrong rather than argue that black is white. 

 

Baiting? 

 

It was you who said von der Leyen, and therefore the EU, had a higher profile than Case, and therefore the UK; not I.

 

I simply said that I accepted your view.

 

How is accepting your view baiting?

 

As both are the heads of their respective bureaucracies, then no, I do not accept that the comparison is ridiculous.

Edited February 10, 2021 by 7by7

[CG1 Blue]

39 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

It was you who said von der Leyen, and therefore the EU, had a higher profile than Case, and therefore the UK; not I.

I didn't say the EU has a higher profile that the UK. Stop trying to put words in my mouth with your twisted logic ????‍♂️

[david555]

U.K. forgetting they voted that law themself.....apliable to ANY  third country ....now pleading & complaining...????

You see the E.U. realize you left ....as brexiteers always claim we E.U. dont realize  that...????

 

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1396044/brexit-news-shellfish-ban-eu-fishing-molluscs-george-eustice-boris-johnson-spt

 

Brexit blunder as UK agreed to law behind 'shellfish ban' in 2008

 

BORIS JOHNSON refused to rule out a trade war with Brussels if it didn't back down on its live shellfish ban - but it appears Britain voted for the law behind these restrictions in 2008.

By Martina Bet

14:27, Wed, Feb 10, 2021 | UPDATED: 14:35, Wed, Feb 10, 2021

 

more...

Edited February 10, 2021 by david555

[Bluespunk]

14 minutes ago, david555 said:

U.K. forgetting they voted that law themself.....apliable to ANY  third country ....now pleading & complaining...????

You see the E.U. realize you left ....as brexiteers always claim we E.U. dont realize  that...????

 

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1396044/brexit-news-shellfish-ban-eu-fishing-molluscs-george-eustice-boris-johnson-spt

 

Brexit blunder as UK agreed to law behind 'shellfish ban' in 2008

 

BORIS JOHNSON refused to rule out a trade war with Brussels if it didn't back down on its live shellfish ban - but it appears Britain voted for the law behind these restrictions in 2008.

By Martina Bet

14:27, Wed, Feb 10, 2021 | UPDATED: 14:35, Wed, Feb 10, 2021

 

more...

Oops

[welovesundaysatspace]

13 minutes ago, david555 said:

U.K. forgetting they voted that law themself.....apliable to ANY  third country ....

Doesn’t even matter who voted for that law. They wanted to be a third country, now be a third country. I’m sure they can tell their shellfish farmers romantic stories about happy British shellfish that is enjoying its sufferinity bwahaha. 
 

All that “Project Fear” biting those amateurs in the ass. Love it. 

 

[david555]

18 minutes ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

Doesn’t even matter who voted for that law. They wanted to be a third country, now be a third country. I’m sure they can tell their shellfish farmers romantic stories about happy British shellfish that is enjoying its sufferinity bwahaha. 
 

All that “Project Fear” biting those amateurs in the ass. Love it. 

 

Even the fishermans organisations blame their own U.K. gov. that they did not organised the sanitazion facility's for as that is what is needed for those catch from contaminated waters ( as seems to be the reason...) to be allowed on E.U. markets 

[welovesundaysatspace]

27 minutes ago, david555 said:

Even the fishermans organisations blame their own U.K. gov. that they did not organised the sanitazion facility's for as that is what is needed for those catch from contaminated waters ( as seems to be the reason...) to be allowed on E.U. markets 

That’s what happens when you replace competent politicians with a clown car of populists. You get a pile of poo in a Union Jack ribbon and a “Sufferinity” sticker and Johnny Brexiteer says “bravo Boris!” 

[7by7]

3 hours ago, CG1 Blue said:

I didn't say the EU has a higher profile that the UK. Stop trying to put words in my mouth with your twisted logic ????‍♂️

 

I said that the President of the EU commission and the Head of the UK Civil Service were equivalent positions. Equivalent, not identical!

 

You challenged this by saying

On 2/9/2021 at 10:21 AM, CG1 Blue said:

<snip>

The presidency of the European Commission is a higher profile role than the Cabinet Secretary for the UK or any other country.

 

If the head of the EU's bureaucracy has a higher profile than the head of the UK's bureaucracy, what is the reason if it is not because the EU has a higher profile than the UK?

 

The President of the USA is a head of state, as is the President of Nauru. In that respect they are equivalent and both accorded the respect and honour due a head of state by other nations and international organisations. But as the POTUS has the higher profile they are hardly identical in significance on the world stage!

 

I suggest that you look up the difference between 'equivalent' and 'identical' when used as adjectives as you obviously think they mean the same; they don't.

[7by7]

1 hour ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

<snip>

All that “Project Fear” biting those amateurs in the ass. Love it.

 

With their index linked MP and MEP pensions and, often in the EU, investment funds; they wont be the ones who suffer.

 

It's we ordinary British without access to any of that who will do so; or those of us who live here in the UK at least.

[david555]

All i googled....found   the U.K. is not denying it is E.U. rule .....BUT seems hoping on a "premium*** third country status"  as a non member ....so expect some more maneuvers a kind ... to end up same as they where as a member ....but then as a freeloader's brexit  ????

 

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/feb/02/eu-rules-on-some-types-of-shellfish-leave-uk-fishermen-devastated

In the 7 th chapter  read it there 

"Fishers could try to comply with the regulations by taking on further processing of the molluscs, to gain the health certification necessary for exports, but this can be costly and time-consuming. Many had hoped that the Brexit agreement would allow for their exports to continue. The EU is the main market for many such specialist fishers."

Edited February 10, 2021 by david555

[david555]

And another cry.....But but ...hey... they got all the fish ...???? as that was the main fighting for topic always ....????

 

https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1396153/Brexit-news-bank-of-england-governor-Andrew-Bailey-london-city-eu-uk-financial-services

 

Bank of England Governor lashes out at EU after demanding too much from UK in finance feud

THE EU has been sent a stern warning by Bank of England Governor Andrew Bailey who said now is not the time to pick a fight with the UK on finance.

By Laura O'Callaghan

 

17:33, Wed, Feb 10, 2021 | UPDATED: 18:19, Wed, Feb 10, 2021

 

Mr Bailey urged Brussels to back away from a spat with Britain concerning trade in financial services after Brexit. He accused the bloc of levelling greater demands against London than other partners. He said that the EU has granted long-term market access for securities clearing houses from the US but not for their UK counterparts even though they comply with the same rules.

Edited February 10, 2021 by david555

[candide]

52 minutes ago, david555 said:

And another cry.....But but ...hey... they got all the fish ...???? as that was the main fighting for topic always ....????

 

https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1396153/Brexit-news-bank-of-england-governor-Andrew-Bailey-london-city-eu-uk-financial-services

 

Bank of England Governor lashes out at EU after demanding too much from UK in finance feud

THE EU has been sent a stern warning by Bank of England Governor Andrew Bailey who said now is not the time to pick a fight with the UK on finance.

By Laura O'Callaghan

 

17:33, Wed, Feb 10, 2021 | UPDATED: 18:19, Wed, Feb 10, 2021

 

Mr Bailey urged Brussels to back away from a spat with Britain concerning trade in financial services after Brexit. He accused the bloc of levelling greater demands against London than other partners. He said that the EU has granted long-term market access for securities clearing houses from the US but not for their UK counterparts even though they comply with the same rules.

The problem is that the EU doesn't which regulation will prevail after "taking back control". Economists backing Brexit are advocating for a deregulation of the financial sector, Singapore upon Thames, etc...

[Hi from France]

Quote

Lord Frost said the UK wanted "friendly cooperation between sovereign equals as our vision of the future",

 

 

Quote

but said: "I don't think it has been quite the experience of the last few weeks, if we are honest about it."

 

video

https://www.bbc.com/news/av-embeds/56002176/vpid/p096hjd2

 

article

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-56002176

[Hi from France]

4 hours ago, candide said:

The problem is that the EU doesn't which regulation will prevail after "taking back control". Economists backing Brexit are advocating for a deregulation of the financial sector, Singapore upon Thames, etc...

as a consequence, millions of households could face higher finance costs

Quote

Bank of England Governor Andrew Bailey has warned that the European Union is poised to lock Britain out of its vast banking market, in a move that would push up the cost of finance for millions of consumers on both sides of the Channel.

 

Mr Bailey said that Brussels would be making a mistake if it refuses to grant access for the City - with serious repercussions for ordinary people.

 

The decision could drive mortgage interest rates higher, land businesses which trade internationally with more expensive currency deals, and hit households with steeper insurance premiums as everyday financial products depend on activity in big international markets.

 https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2021/02/10/dont-cut-city-bailey-warns-brussels/

[vogie]

12 hours ago, 7by7 said:

 

Your uncredited quote from the BBC, and my earlier linked to one from Fact Check NI saying the same thing, do not make that obvious at all.

 

Except to a fervent Brexiteer who ignores the fact that Boris Johnson threatened to trigger Article 16 over two weeks before the EU commission did!

 

You are also ignoring the fact that Arlene Foster and Ian Paisley Jnr have requested it be triggered. Paisley well before both Johnson and the EU on the 7th January! Johnson has promised them that he would do so if he felt it necessary.

 

You believe it is wrong for the EU to threaten to use Article 16 if they feel it necessary Do you also believe it is wrong for Johnson to make exactly the same threat?

 

Personally, I think both are wrong. The article, which is actually a temporary measure, is only supposed to be triggered in the face of “serious” problems, but there is no definition of what “serious” entails.

 

Whatever it's purpose, it was definitely not intended to be used as a football in some pathetic game of tit for tat between Johnson and von der Leyen!

 

 

 

 

 

I am afraid your mastery of spin will not come to your rescue this time, even you must realise that threatening to invoke art 16 and actually invoking art 16 are about as far apart as Brisbane and Perth, stop with this nonsense please all you are doing is making your hole deeper.

 

"You are also ignoring the fact that Arlene Foster and Ian Paisley Jnr have requested it be triggered. Paisley well before both Johnson and the EU on the 7th January! Johnson has promised them that he would do so if he felt it necessary."

All of a sudden now you have complete faith in Boris Johnson, after all this time calling one of our all time greatest PMs in peace time Britain a liar, how convenient is your selective trust in Boris.

[bannork]

2 hours ago, Hi from France said:

 

 

 

video

https://www.bbc.com/news/av-embeds/56002176/vpid/p096hjd2

 

article

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-56002176

They're not sovereign equals. The UK GDP is over 2.6 trillion dollars whilst the EU GDP is over 18 trillion dollars . 

Frost is suffering from delusions of grandeur 

[Kwasaki]

EU for Brexit grace period extension to 2023 has it been given yet.?

Or is this just another handbag at 3 paces fight thread. ????

[welovesundaysatspace]

16 minutes ago, Kwasaki said:

EU for Brexit grace period extension to 2023 has it been given yet.?

Or is this just another handbag at 3 paces fight thread. ????

Still waiting for what the UK can offer for this and for the shellfishes. Maybe free movement of people and adopting burgundy passports. 

[david555]

6 minutes ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

Still waiting for what the UK can offer for this and for the shellfishes. Maybe free movement of people and adopting burgundy passports. 

seems up to 2023 is out of the offer , more 3 to 6 month's "maybe " ..... by latest rumors 

Edited February 11, 2021 by david555