Brexit - Post Match Reaction

[Wes Tender]

Parliament under the May government accepted neither so we didn't really sign up to either of them. Now if that Gina Miller (or whatever she's called) hadn't meddled and obtained from the courts the right of parliament to agree or not agree, the May agreements might even be in function now.

 

Yes, we have to be eternally grateful to Miller for that.

[Wes Tender]

Frankly, who cares whether Gavyn frets about bad faith? I'm not losing a wink of sleep over it. The EU aren't exactly angels when it comes to bad faith on their part since June 2016 and indeed historically through much of our membership of the EEC/EU. The PD isn't legally binding, Boris got a large mandate to "get Brexit done" in the December election, and David Frost is doing a brilliant job of negotiating on our behalf.

[shurlock]

Frankly, who cares whether Gavyn frets about bad faith? I'm not losing a wink of sleep over it. The EU aren't exactly angels when it comes to bad faith on their part since June 2016 and indeed historically through much of our membership of the EEC/EU. The PD isn't legally binding, Boris got a large mandate to "get Brexit done" in the December election, and David Frost is doing a brilliant job of negotiating on our behalf.

 

The PD isn't legally binding -in the same way the EU is under no obligation to give the UK the same deal as Canada despite what angry, ruddy faced Brexiters say. At least the EU can point to a PD which shows the UK fully accepted that unlikelihood. I mentioned bad faith only because its been creeping in Frosty's language in recent days and the ramblings of Brexiters who think that there's a chance they'll be able to withhold paying the divorce bill.

Edited 19 May, 2020 by shurlock

[Danbert]

Has anybody contributing to this thread ever changed their mind about anything? What's the point? Do you all just come here for an argument?

[rallyboy]

Nothing has made me chuckle more today than reading the phrase, Liz Truss has played a blinder.

Thank-you for that, comedy gold.

Some may have different opinions, but the ability to make strangers laugh out loud is a precious gift that unites humanity.

[Weston Super Saint]

Keep running around in circles, telling yourself sweet nothings that convince nobody but bore everyone -all while demonstrating your complete inability to debate the substance. Unless you're willing to offer an argument (or response to) how Johnson was not acting in bad faith when he misrepresented to the British public the agreement he reached or 'made' (or whatever bloody shorthand you want to use) with the EU in October 2019 (and is being implemented today), then there's no point in indulging your little hard-on for me (I note it has been getting more and more bizarre in recent weeks). Otherwise you are free to derail these threads by yourself pal.

 

Why would I do that, I've already stated he was.

 

Pull your pants up, pal, you're still all over the place.

[Weston Super Saint]

Maybe I’m missing something, but I assumed everyone realises Boris signed a withdrawal agreement. It was ratified by Parliament in January

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Indeed.

 

The discussion started because it was stated that we had signed 'something', got in a strop because we signed it, changed our minds and then 'signed' something else. It was only the resident Narcissist that brought the WA into the discussion. Presumably he forgot that we've only signed the WA once.... He then decided to try and cover his tracks and claim some pony about bad faith, despite the fact that both the UK and EU are honouring the WA - which as he himself points out is the only legally binding document.

[Wes Tender]

The PD isn't legally binding -in the same way the EU is under no obligation to give the UK the same deal as Canada despite what angry, ruddy faced Brexiters say. At least the EU can point to a PD which shows the UK fully accepted that unlikelihood. I mentioned bad faith only because its been creeping in Frosty's language in recent days and the ramblings of Brexiters who think that there's a chance they'll be able to withhold paying the divorce bill.

 

As the PD isn't legally binding, then either side can change parts of it as they wish during negotiations. Granted that the EU are not obliged to offer us the same sort of FTA that they gave to Canada/S.Korea and Japan, but as far as I can see, there is no mention of Canada in the summary of the PD. Perhaps you can oblige me by posting the details, although it obviously wasn't deemed important enough to be included in the summary.

 

https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainers/brexit-deal-political-declaration

 

Naturally, if the EU aren't prepared to offer us a similar sort of deal as they offered those other third countries, then we are quite likely to tell them that is unacceptable and walk away from the talks.

 

So you seem a bit miffed that Frost has begun to accuse the EU of bad faith recently, but as far as I recall, you didn't appear to be critical of the numerous occasions when the EU acted badly. Tusk telling us that there a particular place in hell reserved for Brexiteers without a plan, or the Luxembourg PM attempting to humiliate Boris by empty chairing him during a meeting, or this catalogue of humiliation for the hapless May:https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jun/30/excluded-isolated-humiliated-history-theresa-may-visits-brussels

 

Personally, I am very happy that Frost appears to be a tough negotiator, able to play a strong hand to good effect. For the first time in all of these discussions with the EU since they began under May and Robbins, we are on the front foot, and it is the EU who will either be forced to compromise on our red lines, or risk us leaving under WTO terms. Regarding our paying the full divorce bill, then yes, there are probably grounds upon which we could at least reduce the payment legally in the event of a no deal exit.

[John B]

Remember the border down the Irish Sea that was Project Fear? Or the lack of people to pick our fruit and vegetables that was Project Fear? Or the lowering of food standards to get a US deal that was Project Fear?

 

Are you beginning to get the message?

[Wes Tender]

Remember the border down the Irish Sea that was Project Fear? Or the lack of people to pick our fruit and vegetables that was Project Fear? Or the lowering of food standards to get a US deal that was Project Fear?

 

Are you beginning to get the message?

 

Would the fruit and vegetable pickers have been able to come into the country during the Chinese virus restrictions? Have we finalised a deal with the USA yet? I appear to have missed it.

[benjii]

Has anybody contributing to this thread ever changed their mind about anything? What's the point? Do you all just come here for an argument?

 

I used to be indecisive but now I’m not so sure.

[Winnersaint]

I've changed my mind to 'I dont give a toss'. Road to Damascus moment was when I was able to apply for an Irish Passport. That was important as I have to be an EU citizen to buy property on the Pelion in Greece which may or may not be feasible in the future but is a medium term plan. It is designated as part of the EU border.

[buctootim]

I've changed my mind to 'I dont give a toss'. Road to Damascus moment was when I was able to apply for an Irish Passport. That was important as I have to be an EU citizen to buy property on the Pelion in Greece which may or may not be feasible in the future but is a medium term plan. It is designated as part of the EU border.

 

Me too. I have the option of an Irish passport as do my kids - so on a selfish level I don't care that much. Still a kin stupid idea though.

[whelk]

Has anybody contributing to this thread ever changed their mind about anything? What's the point? Do you all just come here for an argument?

 

See the faith thread. MLG is a hairs breath from a Christian conversion

[benjii]

I've chucked one up a couple of Irish birds. Can I get a passport?

[Tamesaint]

I've chucked one up a couple of Irish birds. Can I get a passport?

 

Hope so.

 

My plane once got diverted to Dublin and I drank some excellent Guinness. Am I eligible?

[Guided Missile]

I've changed my mind to 'I dont give a toss'. Road to Damascus moment was when I was able to apply for an Irish Passport. That was important as I have to be an EU citizen to buy property on the Pelion in Greece which may or may not be feasible in the future but is a medium term plan. It is designated as part of the EU border.

So...you wanted the UK to remain in the EU, so that you could move to Greece?

[badgerx16]

So...you wanted the UK to remain in the EU, so that you could move to Greece?

 

You wanted us to leave so you could peddle environmental poisons.

[Danbert]

I've changed my mind to 'I dont give a toss'. Road to Damascus moment was when I was able to apply for an Irish Passport. That was important as I have to be an EU citizen to buy property on the Pelion in Greece which may or may not be feasible in the future but is a medium term plan. It is designated as part of the EU border.

 

So you care about your personal freedoms, but couldn't give a toss about others'?

[Wes Tender]

Today is of course an auspicious day in the Country's history - the fourth anniversary of the referendum and the vote to leave the EU. A very good reason to celebrate with a bottle of fizz tonight.

[Winnersaint]

I'm done with having a laugh and a joke on this thread. Some of you will be aware from another thread which didn't make it across to the new site that I have more important things to deal with. To those of you who offered the very best of wishes to my wife, even those I have sparred with on here. A big thank you. Looking forward only to good news so wasting positivity on here isn't useful.

[Kingsland Codger]

On 6/23/2020 at 3:23 PM, Wes Tender said:

Today is of course an auspicious day in the Country's history - the fourth anniversary of the referendum and the vote to leave the EU. A very good reason to celebrate with a bottle of fizz tonight.

French fizz? Italian fizz? Oz fizz? ... English?

[trousers]

51 minutes ago, Kingsland Codger said:

French fizz? Italian fizz? Oz fizz? ... English?

https://www.bmmagazine.co.uk/news/english-sparkling-wine-sector-set-to-fizz-over-the-next-decade/

[buctootim]

7 hours ago, trousers said:

https://www.bmmagazine.co.uk/news/english-sparkling-wine-sector-set-to-fizz-over-the-next-decade/

I live a couple of miles from Nyetimber. The land around here is chalk - identical soil to the champagne region and the same climate as they had 40 years ago. Accordingly there are lots of vineyards being planted. 

English sparkling wine at the top end can be great, lots of room for growth but it will always be niche. The weather simply isnt good enough for most still whites let alone reds. And in the mass market it cant compete with Prosecco or Cava.        

Edited 24 June, 2020 by buctootim

[saint1977]

Encouraging report today in the FT on both sides shifting positions and comprising. Sensible given the article earlier in the week on how narrow and quick the Japan deal will be plus Trump pretty much being a lame duck, I don’t think trade deals will be Biden’s first priority. 

[hypochondriac]

9 minutes ago, saint1977 said:

Encouraging report today in the FT on both sides shifting positions and comprising. Sensible given the article earlier in the week on how narrow and quick the Japan deal will be plus Trump pretty much being a lame duck, I don’t think trade deals will be Biden’s first priority. 

Wasn't it really obvious that when it came to it both sides would come together and cobble some sort of deal together? 

[Wes Tender]

Bulldog Frost's tweets today don't appear to back up any wet dreams the FT might have over the UK doing much in the way of compromising our position in these talks.

https://twitter.com/davidghfrost?lang=en

[hypochondriac]

16 minutes ago, Wes Tender said:

Bulldog Frost's tweets today don't appear to back up any wet dreams the FT might have over the UK doing much in the way of compromising our position in these talks.

https://twitter.com/davidghfrost?lang=en

In your mind what do you think is more likely, that there's compromise on both sides that, leads to a deal or there's no deal? 

[saint1977]

6 hours ago, hypochondriac said:

Wasn't it really obvious that when it came to it both sides would come together and cobble some sort of deal together? 

I’d hoped they would, but circumstances have really meant it is a necessity.

Although judging by a visit by one of the most regular visitors to this thread, it appears negotiating propaganda is to be taken literally and more so than a clearly briefed FT. 
 

Wes should have popped into Trago Mills on the way back from a Cornwall holiday to see all of the anti EU flags they used to have flying. He’d have loved it. They may still be there but rumoured to be taken down after Brexit. Their adverts in newspapers (which the papers have stopped printing) were rather unorthodox too.....reduced fridge freezers and rants about various topics eg polygamy in the same space. 
 

[Johnny Bognor]

On 6/24/2020 at 5:04 PM, buctootim said:

I live a couple of miles from Nyetimber       

Just around the corner...

[buctootim]

Are we talking about the same Nyetimber? There is one next to Bognor and another in Mid Sussex, north of Worthing.  

[CB Fry]

The German car manufacturers have finally got to Merkel, and it seems now she is being forced to concede to everything the UK is asking for. Tough times for Angela.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/26/angela-merkel-uk-must-live-with-consequences-of-weaker-ties-to-eu-brexit?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Create_note

[Wes Tender]

On 6/25/2020 at 5:01 PM, hypochondriac said:

In your mind what do you think is more likely, that there's compromise on both sides that, leads to a deal or there's no deal? 

Apologies for the delay in replying. Under the new board, I am restricted to only three posts a day, as it has me as a Registered member rather than a Full Member, despite me paying my membership last August, so it should still be current. I had written to Saintsweb using the contact memo on at least three occasions pointing this out over the months without success, but as it had allowed multiple posts previously, I had let it slide. Now that I am disallowed the multiple posts that I ought to be entitled to, I have contacted Saintsweb again today.

As far as I can see, the red lines on fisheries, the "level playing field" and the disallowance of the jurisdiction of the ECJ are the three things that we will not compromise on. Barnier believes that a deal can be done if they offer something on fisheries to gain a concession on the level playing field, or something in that area to get concessions on fisheries, but it is slowly penetrating that we will not budge on any of the three positions. Therefore, either the EU accept that, or there is no FT deal.

For myself, whereas since the Brexit vote I had wanted a FT deal, I am now totally ambivalent about it and would prefer no deal rather than one where there were compromises on any of our three red lines.

[Wes Tender]

38 minutes ago, CB Fry said:

The German car manufacturers have finally got to Merkel, and it seems now she is being forced to concede to everything the UK is asking for. Tough times for Angela.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/26/angela-merkel-uk-must-live-with-consequences-of-weaker-ties-to-eu-brexit?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Create_note

“We need to let go of the idea that it is for us to define what Britain should want, that is for Britain to define – and we, the EU27, will respond appropriately.”” Merkel said

Finally, the penny drops with a deafening clang, it isn't up to you to tell us what we want, Frau Merkel. We have already told you clearly what we want. We want to be treated as a third country and given a similar trade deal to those that have already been granted by the EU to Canada, S. Korea and Japan. As the EU trade with us is far greater than it is with those three, one would have thought that a deal on those terms would have been perfectly feasible, without the EU insisting on continuing to plunder our coastal fisheries waters, impose their protectionist rules on us and have their courts determine the outcome of any resultant disputes.

If Britain does not want to have rules on the environment and the labour market or social standards that compare with those of the EU, our relations will be less close. That will mean it does not want standards to go on developing along parallel lines.”

As an independent sovereign third country, it isn't that we don't want to have rules that compare with those of the EU, it is that we will no longer accept that the EU sets those rules and we are forced to abide by them. Of course, in many cases we have higher standards in those areas than the EU anyway. And if we choose at any stage in those areas to introduce measures that diverge from your rules, Frau Merkel, in order to make our economy more competitive and successful, then that is partly why we voted to leave the EU.

[Earthworm Jim]

13 hours ago, CB Fry said:

The German car manufacturers have finally got to Merkel, and it seems now she is being forced to concede to everything the UK is asking for. Tough times for Angela.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/26/angela-merkel-uk-must-live-with-consequences-of-weaker-ties-to-eu-brexit?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Create_note

The issue is regulatory alignment with the EU is at odds with any deal we do with the US, and also with the race to the bottom that this Government wants. 

[Plastic]

15 hours ago, Wes Tender said:

Of course, in many cases we have higher standards in those areas than the EU anyway.

Examples please. 

[Baird of the land]

always felt Eu approach with extension offers etc have been to try and avoid the blame for internal no deal consequences which has been misinterpreted by brexiteers as a sign that they will baulk from no deal and cave. Merkel’s comments seems to be preparing for end stage of tending Eu no deal wounds and let uk deal with its own gaping no deal wounds.

[hypochondriac]

15 minutes ago, Baird of the land said:

always felt Eu approach with extension offers etc have been to try and avoid the blame for internal no deal consequences which has been misinterpreted by brexiteers as a sign that they will baulk from no deal and cave. Merkel’s comments seems to be preparing for end stage of tending Eu no deal wounds and let uk deal with its own gaping no deal wounds.

Don't agree. Both sides want a deal and there will be a fudge with ambiguous language that both sides will use to claim victory. Privately both sides will know that that outcome is preferable to a no deal. 

[hypochondriac]

16 hours ago, Wes Tender said:

Apologies for the delay in replying. Under the new board, I am restricted to only three posts a day, as it has me as a Registered member rather than a Full Member, despite me paying my membership last August, so it should still be current. I had written to Saintsweb using the contact memo on at least three occasions pointing this out over the months without success, but as it had allowed multiple posts previously, I had let it slide. Now that I am disallowed the multiple posts that I ought to be entitled to, I have contacted Saintsweb again today.

As far as I can see, the red lines on fisheries, the "level playing field" and the disallowance of the jurisdiction of the ECJ are the three things that we will not compromise on. Barnier believes that a deal can be done if they offer something on fisheries to gain a concession on the level playing field, or something in that area to get concessions on fisheries, but it is slowly penetrating that we will not budge on any of the three positions. Therefore, either the EU accept that, or there is no FT deal.

For myself, whereas since the Brexit vote I had wanted a FT deal, I am now totally ambivalent about it and would prefer no deal rather than one where there were compromises on any of our three red lines.

I asked what you think is most likely to happen nor what you want to happen. No deal or some sort of fudge deal? What is most likely? 

[Lord Duckhunter]

40 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

I asked what you think is most likely to happen nor what you want to happen. No deal or some sort of fudge deal? What is most likely? 

They’ll be a fudge, there always is. 

[hypochondriac]

29 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

They’ll be a fudge, there always is. 

Correct answer. 

[Wes Tender]

4 hours ago, hypochondriac said:

I asked what you think is most likely to happen nor what you want to happen. No deal or some sort of fudge deal? What is most likely? 

Apologies for the delay in replying. I am still categorised as a Registered user with three posts a day, although I have made two further requests to have my status changed to Full member having paid the £5 subscription last August.

Therefore, either the EU accept that, or there is no FT deal.

I thought that this statement made clear what my opinion was on what was likely to happen. I don't believe for one minute that we will attempt to produce a fudge by weakening our stance on any other of those three red lines. If there is any fudging to be done it will be on the EU side. As things stand, we are headed towards WTO. However, the EU are past masters of brinkmanship, and although the deadline for extending expires in three days, the next deadline to get some sort of deal arranged with time to implement it before the 31st December, is October. So the EU won't give way on anything until then, and they and the remoaners will orchestrate project fear on steroids regarding the dire consequences of us leaving without a FTA. They will become more and more desperate as we get closer to that date, and all Frost has to do is stand firm.

Plastic:  I''ll reply to your post here, as I only still have the three posts a day.

Examples of where our standards are higher than the EU's:-

https://facts4eu.org/static/media/factsheet_11_workers_rights_v11.pdf

 

 

[Saint_clark]

49 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

Was Leave.EU on Premier league shirts, did premier league players indulge in a gesture of solidarity with Nigel every game? 

And vote leave had one aim - to leave the EU in the 2016 referendum. It had no hidden agenda. 

[East Kent Saint]

7 minutes ago, Saint_clark said:

And vote leave had one aim - to leave the EU in the 2016 referendum. It had no hidden agenda. 

Their agenda wasn't hidden it was openly racist against migrants from europe which we now know were quite handy to harvest our food . That is before our farming industry is destroyed by cheap dodgy imports so they won't be needed afterall.

What it failed to do was to show how an island in the North Sea would become a world leader on our own without an Empire or any industry worth talking about etc (not by a world beating football team anyway !)

[Saint_clark]

2 minutes ago, East Kent Saint said:

Their agenda wasn't hidden it was openly racist against migrants from europe which we now know were quite handy to harvest our food . That is before our farming industry is destroyed by cheap dodgy imports so they won't be needed afterall.

What it failed to do was to show how an island in the North Sea would become a world leader on our own without an Empire or any industry worth talking about etc (not by a world beating football team anyway !)

You talk about migrants being handy as we can ship them over here to harvest our food for us...and people who voted leave are the racist ones? 😂

Double check your facts. Multiple polls of those who voted leave showed that immigration was actually only the main reason for 33%, with nearly half of people voting for leave as they believed that the UK should have the final say on all decisions affecting the UK, including trade agreements, court decisions etc. 

And your argument is based on the idea that anyone who has any concern over immigration is automatically racist. Maybe if peoples concerns were taken seriously from the get go instead of them just being shouted down, leave would never have garnered as much support. 

[East Kent Saint]

10 minutes ago, Saint_clark said:

You talk about migrants being handy as we can ship them over here to harvest our food for us...and people who voted leave are the racist ones? 😂

Double check your facts. Multiple polls of those who voted leave showed that immigration was actually only the main reason for 33%, with nearly half of people voting for leave as they believed that the UK should have the final say on all decisions affecting the UK, including trade agreements, court decisions etc. 

And your argument is based on the idea that anyone who has any concern over immigration is automatically racist. Maybe if peoples concerns were taken seriously from the get go instead of them just being shouted down, leave would never have garnered as much support. 

Sorry poor choice of words ! and no I didn't mean to imply that if you worry about immigration you are automatically racist so I'll shut up now.

[tajjuk]

1 hour ago, Saint_clark said:

You talk about migrants being handy as we can ship them over here to harvest our food for us...and people who voted leave are the racist ones? 😂

Double check your facts. Multiple polls of those who voted leave showed that immigration was actually only the main reason for 33%, with nearly half of people voting for leave as they believed that the UK should have the final say on all decisions affecting the UK, including trade agreements, court decisions etc. 

And your argument is based on the idea that anyone who has any concern over immigration is automatically racist. Maybe if peoples concerns were taken seriously from the get go instead of them just being shouted down, leave would never have garnered as much support. 

That is wrong from the the data I have seen, immigration was the no.1 reason for vote leave people, it was nearly 40% as well, and it was over 70% of peoples first or second reasons for voting leave, which makes it the clear driving force behind the vote and the campaign put it front and centre because of that. 

https://ukandeu.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/CSI-Brexit-4-People’s-Stated-Reasons-for-Voting-Leave.pdf

And their reasons in the main part were ignorance, most of things said about immigrants by the leave campaign and leave votes I saw was just factually false, i.e they take our jobs, they don't pay taxes, they use more of our services services, they more commit crime, they cost our taxpayers etc.

All pretty much false and you have to ask why people believe these things, some levels of prejudice and stereotyping has to be behind it. 

I mean Farage stood in front of picture that basically was the jews being marched off to concentration camps and yet people wonder why the leave vote was branded racist. 

[Lord Duckhunter]

2 minutes ago, tajjuk said:

 

I mean Farage stood in front of picture that basically was the jews being marched off to concentration camps and yet people wonder why the leave vote was branded racist. 

No he didn’t. 

[Hockey_saint]

1 hour ago, Saint_clark said:

And vote leave had one aim - to leave the EU in the 2016 referendum. It had no hidden agenda. 

That's either wishful thinking or a little bit ignorant of the people behind it.

[Saint_clark]

1 hour ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

No he didn’t. 

It's the most absurd rhetoric used time and time again. 

 

53 minutes ago, Hockey_saint said:

That's either wishful thinking or a little bit ignorant of the people behind it.

We're comparing black lives matter with vote leave, which aside from the fact is an absurd comparison to make vote leave only ever had one mission statement, whereas black lives matter openly admits to more but the majority of people supporting it are ignorant of what those are.