Brexit - Post Match Reaction

[Jonnyboy]

Surely those who are truly poor can't afford a car?

 

I suppose you'd have our nurses doing home visits in thunderstorm on mopeds?

[benjii]

If you ask GM it is probably anybody who cannot afford a Range Rover.

 

His ancestors were gypos.

[badgerx16]

His ancestors were gypos.

I can't picture GM in a caravan, especially one being drawn by a Transit van.

( I apologise to anybody who might be offended by perceived ethnic stereotyping).

Edited 6 September, 2018 by badgerx16

[Guided Missile]

Great article in the Telegraph today, by Ambrose Evans-Pritchard:

The fall-back plan being resuscitated by some in Parliament is our old friend, the Norway model, a temporary but timeless safe haven in the European Economic Area (via EFTA). This would preserve passporting rights for the City and keep Britain outside the customs union.The idea among soft Brexiteers, soft Remainers, and Burkean rationalists, is that we could take our time to negotiate a Canada deal with the EU. We would be able do trade deals with the US, Japan, China, and the rest of the world, making it easier to break free later, or we could even stay in the EEA if it proves congenial.

There would be no direct application of EU law (it would be under the EFTA court) and there would be an emergency brake on migration. The ‘four freedoms’ would have a less absolutist legal character. We would in theory be out of fishing, farming, and the political areas of the EU project, and free from the Charter, that open door to ECJ mischief. There would be a veto of sorts.

Oxford professor George Yarrow says the UK could invoke its existing rights as a “contracting party” to the EEA as reassert control over its own choices. It would avert the cliff-edge at the end of the transition and head off the risk of no-deal chaos.

A report by George Trefgarne from Boscobel - ‘Norway then Canada’ - argues that a bungled Brexit would discredit the whole process. There is no parliament majority for a hardline policy and MPs have multiple ways to block a ‘no deal’. The EEA offers a way around this.

“Norway would restore what has been so foolishly discarded by Theresa May – negotiating leverage. The recovery in UK political and economic confidence could be dramatic,” he says. It would unleash a torrent of pent-up foreign investment (FDI) after a 90pc fall last year.

Nick Boles, a former Tory minister now an EEA champion, says the Government has been “disingenuous and bordering on negligent” in claiming that Britain’s membership has lapsed and such a course is not an option.

Now, where have a read about this great idea before? We could have saved two years of pain if May had been following this thread....

[Verbal]

Great article in the Telegraph today, by Ambrose Evans-Pritchard:

 

Now, where have a read about this great idea before? We could have saved two years of pain if May had been following this thread....

 

You've read it on this thread where I've advocated the Norway option (plus customs union). But it's all too late JJ. It's Chequers or bust - and there's no parliamentary majority for either.

 

No one can deliver anything. It's a complete stalemate, and the only way out, so the argument goes, is the mother of all fudges, in which May gets to kick the problem even further down the road.

 

But - guess what? There's no parliamentary majority for that either.

[shurlock]

Ambrose Evans Pritchard is a mess - it’s the Norway option now is it?

 

Let’s be clear for those on the simple side (hello JJ): the Norway model, for all intents and purposes, retains ECJ jurisdiction and freedom of movement as well as continuing to pay into the EU budget (see Barnier’s slide for the nth time). Members of the EEA still have to accept rules decided in Brussels with no real say in their formulation. They are still subject to the jurisdiction of an*international court, albeit it is a EFTA court rather than ECJ. Some argue that EFTA is subservient to the ECJ in interpreting and enforcing the single market rulebook; others maintain there is degree of dialogue between the EFTA court and the ECJ and that EFTA has managed to develop its own case law and principles within limits. Chequers, by comparison, has far more teeth to it.

 

Note EEA members are not part of the EU customs union or the EU value added tax zone. As such it still means tariffs on a number of exports and companies facing costly and time-consuming cross-border formalities (rules-of-origin requirements). And while they may enjoy an independent trade policy, that independence is constrained practically by the fact that EEA members cannot meaningfully depart from EU regulations (a bar to any deal with the US, as Trump recently pointed out). Also note that EEA members may find themselves caught in the crossfire of any trade war between the EU and US: thus Norway did not receive the temporary exemption from US tariffs on steel and aluminium that the EU did - presumably because it lacks the clout of the EU and it’s strength in numbers.

 

Finally the EU has signalled its intention to take back control of a number of financial functions currently provided by the City (e.g. euro trades and clearing) should the UK move to EEA status.

 

As for the emergency break, the circumstances in which it can be invoked are minimal: Norway has never used the temporary power because it would trigger a retaliatory response from the EU -and Norway has had higher immigration levels per capita than the UK.

 

But hey the Norway model is infinitely better than the shît show of a hard Brexit.

 

More pertinent the screams of betrayal from the jihadists would be defeaning. The next time that LD in his boorish swivel-eyed way bangs on about leave voters all meaning the same thing by Brexit, I’ll point him to this work of art.

 

Make your mind up lads. Absolutely pathetic

Edited 6 September, 2018 by shurlock

[Guided Missile]

I'm looking for the term Norway below, but can't seem to find it. I do see a proposal that an Oxford professor, George Yarrow is proposing, that is join EFTA, while we negotiate a free trade agreement with the EU....

 

Rejoin EFTA in the meantime, then. You should remember EFTA, Whitey. I still have the stamps. Here is the free trade agreements they have and none of it involves kowtowing to Brussels, only filling in an application form:

 

[shurlock]

I'm looking for the term Norway below, but can't seem to find it. I do see a proposal that an Oxford professor, George Yarrow is proposing, that is join EFTA, while we negotiate a free trade agreement with the EU....

 

You can call it EFTA or the Norway option, fill your boots, it’s more or less the same thing.

Edited 6 September, 2018 by shurlock

[buctootim]

How the Jihadists have fallen. They've moved from 'The EU will come begging mighty Britain' to claiming the Norway option, which is worse than staying in (90% of the obligations without any control) - is some kind of victory.

Edited 6 September, 2018 by buctootim

[Verbal]

Some interesting facts from those nice people at the Honda factory in Swindon:

 

Car components arrive less than an hour before they are used on the assembly line.

 

The plant receives 350 truck deliveries of EU-sourced parts every single working day.

 

The plant only has warehouse storage to stockpile half a day's worth of components.

 

The loss of free movement of goods within a customs union will mean the Swindon plant will cost Honda an extra £1m to run, every single day - over a third of a billion every year.

 

I wonder what the outcome of all that will be...?

[buctootim]

Some interesting facts from those nice people at the Honda factory in Swindon:

 

Car components arrive less than an hour before they are used on the assembly line.

 

The plant receives 350 truck deliveries of EU-sourced parts every single working day.

 

The plant only has warehouse storage to stockpile half a day's worth of components.

 

The loss of free movement of goods within a customs union will mean the Swindon plant will cost Honda an extra £1m to run, every single day - over a third of a billion every year.

 

I wonder what the outcome of all that will be...?

A friend of mine is a lean manufacturing consultant, formerly of Toyota. His company is awash new business - companies looking to cancel investment in Britain and instead develop their plants within the single market and CU.

[shurlock]

A friend of mine is a lean manufacturing consultant, formerly of Toyota. His company is awash new business - companies looking to cancel investment in Britain and instead develop their plants within the single market and CU.

 

He obviously hates the UK.

[buctootim]

He obviously hates the UK.

 

He actually voted for Brexit. We argued about it before the referendum. Now he just laughingly says "see I told you I'd be better off"

[Batman]

He actually voted for Brexit. We argued about it before the referendum. Now he just laughingly says "see I told you I'd be better off"

 

did you try to change his mind?

[Wes Tender]

How the Jihadists have fallen. They've moved from 'The EU will come begging mighty Britain' to claiming the Norway option, which is worse than staying in (90% of the obligations without any control) - is some kind of victory.

 

We won't be having the Norway option and the charity of your choice will be benefiting from the £50 bet you placed on it and lost.

[Verbal]

We won't be having the Norway option and the charity of your choice will be benefiting from the £50 bet you placed on it and lost.

 

Welcome back, our very own Saintsweb Schlemiel!

 

I'm a bit surprised though that you and the other Lounge Clowns for Brexit haven't challenged Honda on how to build cars. Any thoughts? Some expertise on abandoning just-in-time manufacturing altogether, perhaps?

 

And nothing at all to say on the Is-Jezza's-a-Jew-hater thread? Disappointing.

[Wes Tender]

Welcome back, our very own Saintsweb Schlemiel!

 

I'm a bit surprised though that you and the other Lounge Clowns for Brexit haven't challenged Honda on how to build cars. Any thoughts? Some expertise on abandoning just-in-time manufacturing altogether, perhaps?

 

And nothing at all to say on the Is-Jezza's-a-Jew-hater thread? Disappointing.

 

I only posted to remind Timmie of his bet. I didn't come on here to indulge in any sort of dialogue with blinkered arch remoaners like you, Verbal Diarrhoea, apart from this post, of course.

[shurlock]

I only posted to remind Timmie of his bet. I didn't come on here to indulge in any sort of dialogue with blinkered arch remoaners like you, Verbal Diarrhoea, apart from this post, of course.

 

Afternoon Les. How do you think Brexit is going? Honest question.

[saint1977]

Boris has really lost the plot with his latest article, sounds like his personal life has got to him and gone cuckoo. Disgusting analogy to make and sufficient for another Party and his sacking I should think. Probably being kind to him too, don’t think his mental health is up to frontline politics and it’s bad enough having a loony and despot in charge of the opposition. Got booed heavily at the Oval yesterday.

[whelk]

Afternoon Les. How do you think Brexit is going? Honest question.

 

What Danny says

[shurlock]

What Danny says

 

The headbangers can’t even agree among themselves.

 

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/eurosceptics-shelve-their-rival-brexit-blueprint-5rxnblpql

[whelk]

The headbangers can’t even agree among themselves.

 

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/eurosceptics-shelve-their-rival-brexit-blueprint-5rxnblpql

 

Is all beyond a joke. Has the govt done anything else in last 2 years? Although that may not be a bad thing, Shame the opposition aren’t fit as should be so easy to pick off this incompetent lot.

[Verbal]

The headbangers can’t even agree among themselves.

 

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/eurosceptics-shelve-their-rival-brexit-blueprint-5rxnblpql

 

I suspect the one thing the headbangers do agree on is that what worked in June 2016 should work again now. So never, ever lay out a plan. Always be the opposition to everything. Never give your opponent the opportunity to see what you really have in mind.

 

Not that any of the actual plan would have been controversial. Like sending an 'expeditionary force' to the Falklands (WTF?), building a union-jacked 'Star Wars' missile defence system (WTAF?), and giving such massive tax breaks to the rich that the only way to pay for it is basically to shut down the UK's welfare system (that one I get - it's always been the ultimate unstated aim of the financiers of Brexit).

[Guided Missile]

...giving such massive tax breaks to the rich that the only way to pay for it is basically to shut down the UK's welfare system (that one I get - it's always been the ultimate unstated aim of the financiers of Brexit).

What a steaming turd of a post. It was the biggest pledge of Vote Leave that more money would be spent on UK welfare instead of tax dodging Greeks.

 

 

The NHS is to get an extra £384 million a week after Brexit, Prime Minister Theresa May has said. In a major announcement to mark the 70th anniversary of the health service, the PM has said it will receive an additional £20 billion a year in real terms funding by 2024. It is expected that taxes and borrowing will rise to pay for the increase in funding, and resources will be redirected from the more than £9 billion a year the UK currently pays into the EU.

[Guided Missile]

The U.K. economy grew at the fastest pace in almost a year between May and July, as construction output rebounded and a heatwave boosted retail sales and the powerhouse services sector.

Gross domestic product increased 0.6 percent from the three months through April, the most since August last year, the Office for National Statistics said Monday. That’s more than economists forecast and up from 0.4 percent in the second quarter.

 

 

Pile in, lads. Surely this can't be right?

 

#economistsforecastswrongshocker

[shurlock]

Growth on a year ago - when that period has been relatively weak by historical and international standards. Breathless quarterly, monthly and in your case daily commentary is so tedious.

 

As for the Brexit dividend myth, trust the ever gullible JJ to swallow it hook, line and sinker. There is no dividend whether because the UK doesn’t send £350m pw net; has already agreed to maintain subsidies for the farm and fisheries sectors up to the 2020 and honour economic development and research contracts beyond that; has to pay a divorce bill in the neighborhood of~£40bn; and the OBR, the governments official fiscal watchdog, has explicitly said that Brexit is more likely to weaken than strengthen the public finance which is already shaping spending commitments.

 

Two years on and JJ’s probably still trying to work out what the Norway model is and why he’s munching on meat and two veg

Edited 10 September, 2018 by shurlock

[Verbal]

What a steaming turd of a post. It was the biggest pledge of Vote Leave that more money would be spent on UK welfare instead of tax dodging Greeks.

 

 

Wait. So you attack my argument about welfare cuts with an image about a (fake) promise about health?

 

You do realise welfare and health are different things entirely, right?

[Guided Missile]

You do realise welfare and health are different things entirely, right?

No, they're not different things and never have been:

Want, Ignorance, Idleness, Squalor and Disease. Of these five ‘Giant Evils’ identified by Beveridge the most important is the last one: disease. If you are sick or infirm the problems of the other four evils are amplified and become insurmountable. An effective welfare state puts health first, and for that reason the NHS is the most important part of our welfare state.

Like I said, a steaming turd of a post from our resident nutter....

[Guided Missile]

Growth on a year ago - when that period has been relatively weak by historical and international standards. Breathless quarterly, monthly and in your case daily commentary is so tedious.

 

Mate, you're the tedious troll averaging over 4 posts a day on this site, for the last 10 years. Scary...

 

As for the Brexit dividend myth, trust the ever gullible JJ to swallow it hook, line and sinker. There is no dividend whether because the UK doesn’t send £350m pw net; has already agreed to maintain subsidies for the farm and fisheries sectors up to the 2020 and honour economic development and research contracts beyond that; has to pay a divorce bill in the neighborhood of~£40bn; and the OBR, the governments official fiscal watchdog, has explicitly said that Brexit is more likely to weaken than strengthen the public finance which is already shaping spending commitments.

 

Feel free argue a position I haven't taken.

 

Two years on and JJ’s probably still trying to work out what the Norway model is.

 

You're still talking about Norway and I was talking about membership of EFTA. You do realise they are two different things? If they were the same thing, Switzerland, a member of EFTA, would allow freedom of movement, which they don't and unlike Norway they are not a member of the EEA. They have benefits of the single market via a number of bilateral trade treaties, an approach that I think is attractive to the rapidly growing UK economy. Norway model is the same as being a member of EFTA? Explain that one again, chump...

[shurlock]

 

You're still talking about Norway and I was talking about membership of EFTA. You do realise they are two different things? If they were the same thing, Switzerland, a member of EFTA, would allow freedom of movement, which they don't and unlike Norway they are not a member of the EEA. They have benefits of the single market via a number of bilateral trade treaties, an approach that I think is attractive to the rapidly growing UK economy. Norway model is the same as being a member of EFTA? Explain that one again, chump...

 

You were quoting DT articles referring to Norway. And yes for all intents and purposes Switzerland has freedom of movement. The only fillip to those who want to control immigration is a meek requirement that under certain conditions Swiss employers should notify local jobcentres of vacancies before recruiting outside Switzerland. Small fry that would never satisfy the jihadists.

[Guided Missile]

You were quoting DT articles referring to Norway.

An article I said was interesting. Over two years ago I posted my rationale behind the way I voted in the referendum:

Today, I made my mind up. It wasn't an anti-Cameron decision. It wasn't a defiance of the scare-mongering of the professional politicians and big-business leaders whose bleating, masks their self-serving reasons for staying in the EU. It certainly wasn't a love of Boris Johnson. No, it was the realisation that the only thing that ever attracted me to the European Economic Community, previously know as the Common Market, was the promise of economic barriers to mine and my companies progress were to be removed.

 

The politicians conned us. They slowly removed references to markets, to economy and replaced it with a European Union. An unequal union the creation of which we had no say in and for much of what affects our lives we have no vote today. Still, I thought, nothings perfect, better the devil you know, don't rock the boat, be careful what you wish for etc, etc. Then, today, I recalled the trade deals we had forged over many years. The commonwealth trade that came through Southampton docks and, more interestingly, EFTA. The British helped set up EFTA, the European Free Trade Association, with Austria, Denmark, Norway, Portugal, Sweden and Switzerland in 1960. Of the founders, only Norway and Switzerland remain in the trade organisation today.

 

What did this memory do to change my mind regarding the EU? It made me read an article in the Telegraph about EFTA, that has, for the first time, made we realise that we have an exciting future if we vote to leave, rather than uncertainties painted by the ruling elite. In other words, we will be in control of our own future. Here is the article. Read it and feel optimistic.

 

Dear Britain, there is life outside the EU

Iceland, Switzerland and Norway all enjoy the perks of the European market without the burden of the EU. So come on out - the water's lovely

By Thomas Aeschi and Guthlaugur Thor Thordarson

 

 

Is it possible to be part of a European market but not of a political union in Europe? Absolutely. Our countries are doing precisely that now. And you know something? It’s working pretty well.

We are Government MPs from the European countries who didn’t join the EU – those in the European Free Trade Area (EFTA). It’s been many years since any opinion poll showed a pro-EU majority in an EFTA nation. Iceland has formally withdrawn its application, and the Swiss pro-EU campaign has admitted defeat and closed down. As for Norway, the latest survey there showed 17.8 per cent in favour of joining, 70.5 per cent against.

Why do people prefer our deal to yours? Not because it’s perfect – nothing is perfect – but because it allows us to participate in the European market while retaining our self-government.

Of course, each of our states have struck slightly different deals with Brussels. Iceland is part of the European Economic Area, which brings it within some elements of EU jurisdiction, albeit almost entirely in economic fields; Switzerland relies instead on a series of bilateral treaties. Still, the broad picture is similar enough. We buy and sell freely within the European market. But we are outside the Common Agricultural Policy, the Common Fisheries Policy, the Common Foreign and Security Policy, the rules on common EU citizenship, the harmonisation of criminal justice and other non-economic matters. We pay a contribution to the EU budget – but less than a third, in per capita terms, of what Britain does.

Critically, we are also outside the Common External Tariff. In other words, as well as trading freely with the EU, we can also sign bilateral treaties with non-EU states – something that Britain, as an EU member, can’t do. This is a real advantage in a world where Europe is the only continent that isn’t growing. For example, both our countries signed free trade agreements with China last year. Britain isn’t allowed to do so.

It’s true that our exporters must meet EU standard when they sell into the EU, just as they must meet Japanese standards when they sell to Japan. But, in most cases, we don’t have to apply those standards to non-EU exports. This becomes a greater advantage with every passing month, as the EU’s share of world GDP shrinks. The clue is in the name: European Free Trade Association. Free trade and national sovereignty turn out to make a pretty good combination. Income per head in EFTA countries is, on average, 56 per cent higher than in the EU. And both our countries export more to the EU, in proportionate terms, than Britain does.

Britain was once the leading EFTA state. It could be again. Come on in: the water’s lovely.

 

 

Thomas Aeschi is a Swiss MP; Guthlaugur Thor Thordarson is an Icelandic MP

Still, I think you are a stranger to rational debate and reasoning, so the above will be wasted on you. You seem to be more fixated with male genitalia. Weird...

[Verbal]

No, they're not different things and never have been:

 

Like I said, a steaming turd of a post from our resident nutter....

 

I hate to break it to you but the welfare and health budgets are and always have been separate. It amazes me that you've reached beyond puberty (if so) without knowing this.

 

Here'a a breakdown of UK public spending so that you can catch up on your lost years.

 

https://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/uk_health_care_spending_10.html

[Guided Missile]

I hate to break it to you but the welfare and health budgets are and always have been separate. It amazes me that you've reached beyond puberty (if so) without knowing this.

Mate, you don't even read your own posts. You claimed that the Leave campaign were planning to cut taxes on the rich and would have to make cuts to the welfare system. Like I said, you are a total nut job and for that reason you are back on ignore...

[Verbal]

Mate, you don't even read your own posts. You claimed that the Leave campaign were planning to cut taxes on the rich and would have to make cuts to the welfare system. Like I said, you are a total nut job and for that reason you are back on ignore...

 

It's utterly baffling that you cannot accept a simple demonstrable fact. And your failure enrages you so much that you stomp off in a tantrum rather than admit you're wrong. The last time I saw someone behave in quite this way was in primary school.

[shurlock]

An article I said was interesting. Over two years ago I posted my rationale behind the way I voted in the referendum:

 

 

 

Still, I think you are a stranger to rational debate and reasoning, so the above will be wasted on you. You seem to be more fixated with male genitalia. Weird...

 

So you were blathering on about Norway in 2016 too. Either way Switzerland is the way to go now? A country that has to accept more or less unalloyed freedom of movement; has no passport for financial services that are central to the UK economy; is barely involved in just-in-time production networks, so can stomach cross-border frictions. For what? Perpetual disputes with the EU over the application of EU regulation? Getting screwed by larger countries like Chinese, as Swiss have done in the name of an independent trade policy? Perhaps I’m missing something?

[Verbal]

So you were blathering on about Norway in 2016 too. Either way Switzerland is the way to go now? A country that has to accept more or less unalloyed freedom of movement; has no passport for financial services that are central to the UK economy; is barely involved in just-in-time production networks, so can stomach cross-border frictions. For what? Perpetual disputes with the EU over the application of EU regulation? Getting screwed by larger countries like Chinese, as Swiss have done in the name of an independent trade policy? Perhaps I’m missing something?

 

Not to mention that the EU have sworn never to go down the Swiss route ever again, for very good reasons.

 

The upshot of all of this is that regardless of which side of the debate you're on, the UK has become a highly volatile country, where it's simply unsafe for many companies to make large investment commitments, and where it's safe to assume that many of those companies, especially those relying on JIT, will have to look ever more closely at relocating within the EU. Even Minford accepts, and even assumes, the rapid decline of British manufacturing post-Brexit. And that means, higher-paid, higher-skilled jobs will decline with it.

 

This instability has seen the cliff-fall of inward investment, which will work its way through the economy like woodworm. The erosion of the City, as a world-leading financial powerhouse, will also slash government tax receipts by billions.

 

Then again, there's no parliamentary majority for ANY of this.

[Jonnyboy]

Mate, you don't even read your own posts. You claimed that the Leave campaign were planning to cut taxes on the rich and would have to make cuts to the welfare system. Like I said, you are a total nut job and for that reason you are back on ignore...

 

[Verbal]

 

Another one who doesn't understand the distinction between health and welfare. Why is that even surprising?

[Jonnyboy]

Another one who doesn't understand the distinction between health and welfare. Why is that even surprising?

 

I was actually laughing at GM (as in its generally only nutjobs who bang on about who they have on ignore) but now I'm laughing at you too you dopey muppet.

[Sheaf Saint]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45586010

 

Donald Tusk: Theresa May's Brexit trade plan won't work

 

Theresa May's proposed new economic partnership with the EU "will not work", the head of the European Council has said.Donald Tusk said the plans risked undermining the EU's single market.

 

He was speaking at the end of an EU summit in Salzburg where leaders of the 27 remaining member states discussed Brexit.

 

So it's "no deal" then.

 

Anybody still think this is a good idea?

[trousers]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45586010

 

 

 

So it's "no deal" then.

 

Anybody still think this is a good idea?

It'll go to a new referendum.

 

Amost time for me to join the merry band of Saintsweb "told you so" merchants given I predicted this is what would happen two years ago

[the saint in winchester]

It'll go to a new referendum.

 

Amost time for me to join the merry band of Saintsweb "told you so" merchants given I predicted this is what would happen two years ago

 

Hope so. And it SHOULD.

 

GM's argument is correct. The first vote was based on deliberate or accidental misinformation. £350M has NOT been saved and spent on the NHS. Now tell us the truth and let the country vote again.

[Lord Duckhunter]

£350M has NOT been saved and spent on the NHS.

 

Dear god, we haven’t left yet.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[doddisalegend]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45586010

 

 

 

So it's "no deal" then.

Anybody still think this is a good idea?

 

looks increasingly likely...great

[whelk]

Wanted to remain but fck Macron and Merkel.

[Lord Duckhunter]

The conference is going to be a blood bath for May. ****ing useless trout needs to hang on a bit longer, so I’ll get my vote.

 

Unless this was a completely choreographed row, she’s toast. The line they’ve been using to sell chequers is its deliverable. It’s clearly not.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[doddisalegend]

Wanted to remain but fck Macron and Merkel.

 

that's one ****ed up threesome but what ever floats your boat...

[buctootim]

Wanted to remain but fck Macron and Merkel.

 

Why? because they're sticking to what they have always said? You're either in the single market and play by the rules or you're not. You cant have single market with one country wanting play by different rules and wanting a different court to decide disputes.

 

We can have a third country free trade agreement, we can be an associate ala Norway or we can be a member. All easy quickly deliverable options. Its just the f'kin deluded May Government and the Brexiteers that think we're somehow entitled to demand whatever we want no matter the implications for the other 27 and if they don't give in to us then they're being dictatorial.

[whelk]

Why? because they're sticking to what they have always said? You're either in the single market and play by the rules or you're not. You cant have single market with one country wanting play by different rules and wanting a different court to decide disputes.

 

We can have a third country free trade agreement, we can be an associate ala Norway or we can be a member. All easy quickly deliverable options. Its just the f'kin deluded May Government and the Brexiteers that think we're somehow entitled to demand whatever we want no matter the implications for the other 27 and if they don't give in to us then they're being dictatorial.

 

Tbh I haven’t studied it in detail but sounds like led her a merry dance. Why did Barnier seem to give it credence if it was always dead in water?

[buctootim]

Tbh I haven’t studied it in detail but sounds like led her a merry dance. Why did Barnier seem to give it credence if it was always dead in water?

 

He really didn't. He's said from day 1 as a package its unacceptable. A few warm words about parts of it being okay have been built up by May as some kind of chink of light, a negotiating gambit ahead of the 27 caving in to the one.

http://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2018/08/03/barnier-has-finally-killed-chequers-and-with-it-the-uk-gover