Brexit - Post Match Reaction

[AlexLaw76]

22 minutes ago, buctootim said:

I think the point he is making is that the EU have retained the benefits they got as Britain being a member ie a market for where their products are strong but we have lost access to our biggest market for our biggest earner - services 

Let me guess.  Resolving this issue (whilst having been granted access to the markets) will be "impossible"? will lead in a "hard Tory" version? we wont be able to have our cake and eat it? can't be achieved in the timeline the UK sets out? 

I am sure you get my drift.

[Tamesaint]

One thing that is now true is that the Brexiteers  have achieved  what they wanted. They have the hard Brexit which even satisfies Farage.

Apparently  we now have to expect a few "bumps in the road". God knows how long and how extensive these will be. God knows what damage will be done to the British  economy, the union and to personal rights and freedoms.

If Brexit turns out to be a shitshow and the "bumps in the road" turn out to be huge potholes there can be no excuses from the Brexiteers.  This isn't BRINO. This is what they wanted.

Lets just hope that they own up to it when the time comes. 

 

[badgerx16]

42 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Let me guess.  Resolving this issue (whilst having been granted access to the markets) will be "impossible"? will lead in a "hard Tory" version? we wont be able to have our cake and eat it? can't be achieved in the timeline the UK sets out? 

I am sure you get my drift.

It seems that in financial services the UK clearing houses have been granted temporary equivalence whilst the EU determines how to proceed. The granting of equivalence is entirely in the EU's gift, and can be granted or removed at their whim. I'm not sure what we have on our side of any discussion to balance this.

[Lord Duckhunter]

48 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Let me guess.  Resolving this issue (whilst having been granted access to the markets) will be "impossible"? will lead in a "hard Tory" version? we wont be able to have our cake and eat it? can't be achieved in the timeline the UK sets out? 

I am sure you get my drift.

You’re right. This will be their next whinge, despite the fact there’s never been a fully formed single market in services. Clutching at straws. They’re so desperate for something to go wrong, but the reality is that the vast vast majority of the country will be happy with the outcome. 
 

 

Edited 26 December, 2020 by Lord Duckhunter

[badgerx16]

So on fishing - there will be a gradual decrease up to 25% of EU catch in UK waters over the next five and a half years.  After that there will be discussions to work out what happens next.

We really stood up to them there.

[Lord Duckhunter]

Lol. More clutching at straws.

[badgerx16]

1 hour ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

Lol. More clutching at straws.

Not at all, just shows how determined Boris was over his 'red lines', and we end up with more cans being kicked along the Queen's highway. This deal isn't the 'great deal' Boris claims as he tries to pull the wool over the ERG's eyes, but neither is it a truly 'hard' Brexit. Everybody will spin it to claim advantage, but at the last minute both sides fudged it for fear of the cliff edge.

[Lord Duckhunter]

4 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

Not at all, just shows how determined Boris was over his 'red lines', and we end up with more cans being kicked along the Queen's highway. This deal isn't the 'great deal' Boris claims as he tries to pull the wool over the ERG's eyes, but neither is it a truly 'hard' Brexit. Everybody will spin it to claim advantage, but at the last minute both sides fudged it for fear of the cliff edge.

Got to love the way  Remoaners “hard Brexit” keeps changing . Once it meant leaving the SM & CU, now it means WTO. There never was hard or soft Brexit, there was just Brexit & a future relationship negotiated by the PM and then voted through by Parliament.
 

I’d imagine this future relationship pleases most leave voters, but if not, we’ll punish Boris at the polls, and there’s only one direction any change to the relationship is heading. If you think the British people will vote to rejoin you’re deluded. Rejoining means accepting the Euro, becoming part of Schegen and paying in without the great lady’s rebate. It’s not going to happen. It’s over, but I do understand you and others desire to somehow paint this as a betrayal that leavers don’t understand. It can’t be easy to come to terms with being so comprehensively out of touch with the great unwashed and as you’ve spent 4 years calling them thick , racists and generally being condescending, there’s really no reason to stop now. 

[badgerx16]

Ducky, you are entitled to your opinions, no matter how wrong they might be. As for where we go from here, waaaaaay back on this thread I posted that as we had voted to leave we should simply do so, and I am perfectly aware and content with the fact that returning to the EU is almost certainly a non-starter. However, we were never going to get everything that was promised from the 'deal', and ultimately most of what seems to have been agreed is a fudge; Yes we no longer have freedom of movement from the EU, but we no longer have the ease of travel to the continent we have become used to, and our students can no longer take advantage of the Erasmus scheme. We can determine our own trade deals, but we now have a 'border' between Ulster and Britain. We have not yet regained control of our coastal waters such that the EU is no longer 'plundering' our waters. Our financial services sector is keeping it's collective fingers crossed over their future rights to access the EU financial sector.

But we do now have blue passports.

[Lord Duckhunter]

31 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

Yes we no longer have freedom of movement from the EU, but we no longer have the ease of travel to the continent we have become used to

Pony.

It won’t make a blind bit of difference to  “ease of travel”.

 

 

Edited 26 December, 2020 by Lord Duckhunter

[badgerx16]

7 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

Pony.

It won’t make a blind bit of difference to  “ease of travel”.

 

 

Is that all that you took issue with ?

[Super_Uwe]

On the whole I welcome the fact a deal has been agreed. The myth of no deal is finally put to bed.

Doesn't look like there is going to be any sort of implementation period though. On many levels I really don't think that is going to be a good idea. Primarily it's totally unacceptable for businesses as a whole to have a completely new legal regime that they have been given a week's notice on. However I guess there may be some room for parliamentary debate next week.

Edited 26 December, 2020 by Super_Uwe

[Wes Tender]

4 minutes ago, Super_Uwe said:

On the whole I welcome the fact a deal has been agreed. The myth of no deal is finally put to bed.

Doesn't look like there is going to be any sort of implementation period though. On many levels I really don't think that is going to be a good idea. Primarily it's totally unacceptable for businesses as a whole to have a completely new legal regime that they have been given a week's notice on. However I guess there may be some room for parliamentary debate next week.

Implementation period? What do you think that was since 31st January? Over 90% of businesses don't trade with the EU, and those that do will have had a pretty good idea of what sort of changes would come about throughout the talks, and what preparations they would have to put in place. Incidentally, the legal regime now in place will be the UK law courts, not the ECJ.

[Guided Missile]

Quote

Britain’s economy will outperform European rivals such as France over the next 15 years, according to morale-boosting forecasts published in the wake of the Government's Brexit trade deal with Brussels. A new ranking shows the UK remaining the world’s 5th biggest economy next year. From 2025 it slips one place, but still performs better than many peer western economies. The UK’s economy will be 23pc larger than that of France by 2035, the Centre for Economics and Business Research (CEBR) predicts.

Up yours, Delors...

[aintforever]

1 hour ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

Got to love the way  Remoaners “hard Brexit” keeps changing . Once it meant leaving the SM & CU, now it means WTO. There never was hard or soft Brexit, there was just Brexit & a future relationship negotiated by the PM and then voted through by Parliament.
 

I’d imagine this future relationship pleases most leave voters, but if not, we’ll punish Boris at the polls, and there’s only one direction any change to the relationship is heading. If you think the British people will vote to rejoin you’re deluded. Rejoining means accepting the Euro, becoming part of Schegen and paying in without the great lady’s rebate. It’s not going to happen. It’s over, but I do understand you and others desire to somehow paint this as a betrayal that leavers don’t understand. It can’t be easy to come to terms with being so comprehensively out of touch with the great unwashed and as you’ve spent 4 years calling them thick , racists and generally being condescending, there’s really no reason to stop now. 

The British public’s view on rejoining will obviously depend on how it turns out. If it’s a complete shit show people’s loyalties to Brexit won’t last long. Its obviously going to take a few years for the effects to become clear but I wouldn’t be surprised if we end up going back in eventually.

The vast majority of people just want to be better off, they aren’t weirdo Brexit jihadis like you and the others on here.

[Lord Duckhunter]

57 minutes ago, aintforever said:

The British public’s view on rejoining will obviously depend on how it turns out. If it’s a complete shit show people’s loyalties to Brexit won’t last long. Its obviously going to take a few years for the effects to become clear but I wouldn’t be surprised if we end up going back in eventually.

The vast majority of people just want to be better off, they aren’t weirdo Brexit jihadis like you and the others on here.

If you think the British public will want the following, you’re more out of touch than even I thought you were. 

To rejoin we’ll have to;

Accept the euro 

Be part of Schegen 

Pay in without our previous rebate. 
 

That’s before the discussion of sovereignty, ever closer Union, CFP & CAP has even started. We’ll also be years of integration further down the line, more federal, more of what the brits don’t want. Then there’s the new members in those years, good luck selling FoM from Albania or Serbia. 
 

The British people voted out despite our special arms length relationship, they’re not going to vote to rejoin as fully fledged members with all its bells and whistles . People like Grievance, Soubry & Bercow  understood this, even if you don’t. That’s why they fought so hard to overturn the vote. 

Edited 26 December, 2020 by Lord Duckhunter

[Fan The Flames]

We will never rejoin, I say this as a remainer, it's too much of a hard sell. I would rather energy be spent now on keeping standards high here and on making things work.

[trousers]

1 hour ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

The British people voted out despite our special arms length relationship, they’re not going to vote to rejoin as fully fledged members with all its bells and whistles

Thinking out loud... On the assumption that the EU would quite like a country on their doorstep, with the 5th/6th largest economy in the world, to be part of their union, who's to say that they wouldn't offer us some concessions/incentives to (re)join? Whilst said concessions might not be as generous as the concessions we've left behind, it may not necessarily be a given that rejoining would have to be on 'vanilla' terms? 

The fact that the EU were very keen for us not to leave in the first place would tend to suggest there would be some room for manoeuvre regarding rejoining terms. Maybe? Maybe not...

Edited 26 December, 2020 by trousers

[aintforever]

30 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

If you think the British public will want the following, you’re more out of touch than even I thought you were. 

To rejoin we’ll have to;

Accept the euro 

Be part of Schegen 

Pay in without our previous rebate. 
 

That’s before the discussion of sovereignty, ever closer Union, CFP & CAP has even started. We’ll also be years of integration further down the line, more federal, more of what the brits don’t want. Then there’s the new members in those years, good luck selling FoM from Albania or Serbia. 
 

The British people voted out despite our special arms length relationship, they’re not going to vote to rejoin as fully fledged members with all its bells and whistles . People like Grievance, Soubry & Bercow  understood this, even if you don’t. That’s why they fought so hard to overturn the vote. 

I disagree, the EU have made it clear they would welcome us back so there is no reason why they wouldn’t make concessions, especially if Brexit proves bad for both parties. 

It all depends how things pan out, if we thrive outside as Boris says then obviously going back in won’t happen.

[Fan The Flames]

What will be interesting is what hsppens when Scotland joins the EU

[Lord Duckhunter]

34 minutes ago, aintforever said:

I disagree, the EU have made it clear they would welcome us back so there is no reason why they wouldn’t make concessions, especially if Brexit proves bad for both parties. 

 

You really think they’d give us more favourable terms than countries that haven’t left. A rules based organisation, would bend their rules for a country that had left it once before. You’re deluded. 

[trousers]

23 minutes ago, Fan The Flames said:

What will be interesting is what hsppens when Scotland joins the EU

Wouldn't Spain veto such an eventuality?

[Fan The Flames]

1 hour ago, trousers said:

Wouldn't Spain veto such an eventuality?

Apparently not https://www.thenational.scot/news/17686950.spain-will-not-block-independent-scotlands-eu-membership/

 

[trousers]

23 minutes ago, Fan The Flames said:

Apparently not https://www.thenational.scot/news/17686950.spain-will-not-block-independent-scotlands-eu-membership/

 

I'm not sure the SNP's mouthpiece is the best go-to publication for balanced reporting. Meanwhile...

https://www.politico.eu/article/spain-fires-diplomat-in-scotland-over-eu-membership-letter/

 

Edited 27 December, 2020 by trousers

[Fan The Flames]

6 hours ago, trousers said:

I'm not sure the SNP's mouthpiece is the best go-to publication for balanced reporting. Meanwhile...

https://www.politico.eu/article/spain-fires-diplomat-in-scotland-over-eu-membership-letter/

 

It wasn't SNPs mouthpiece who wrote the letter they just reported it, I guess then the answer is it depends who's in power in Spain.

[Wes Tender]

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/948093/TCA_SUMMARY_PDF.pdf

Here's a summary of the FTA with the EU if anybody wished to see more detail withiut ploughing through the full 1200 odd pages.

No doubt we will see criticism of some aspects of it when enough time has been devoted to it by the legal eagles scrutinising it in detail during the next few days. Call me a cynic, but I suspect that the whole thing has deliberately been padded out verbosely in order to hide some legal small print. In any event, something so detailed and important to our future requires more intense scrutiny than is being suggested. 

I see that Mad Andy Adonis and even madder A C Grayling have never accepted the democratic votes to leave the EU and will not rest until we have rejoined. What a pity that it will not happen in either of their lifetimes, most probably never. 

[Fan The Flames]

Mad because they don't agree with you.

[Wes Tender]

Anneliese Dodds, Labour's Shadow Chancellor, apparently stated in an interview that Starmer would have obtained a better deal with the EU than Boris and Frost managed. I couldn't find the interview, but if anybody else can provide a link to it, I would be really curious to know in what ways Starmer could have bettered the deal. Presumably he would have kept us in the SM, CU and the CFP. Or maybe he would have gone the full Timmy and gone for the Norwegian option as some half way house. Bearing in mind that when he was in charge of Brexit policy for the Marxist's Shadow Cabinet he advocated holding another referendum vote, one doesn't have a great deal of respect for his ability to obtain anything better from the EU than the UK's abject surrender to whatever terms they wanted to punish us with.

[Lord Duckhunter]

10 minutes ago, Wes Tender said:

Anneliese Dodds, Labour's Shadow Chancellor, apparently stated in an interview that Starmer would have obtained a better deal with the EU than Boris and Frost managed. I couldn't find the interview, but if anybody else can provide a link to it, I would be really curious to know in what ways Starmer could have bettered the deal. Presumably he would have kept us in the SM, CU and the CFP. Or maybe he would have gone the full Timmy and gone for the Norwegian option as some half way house. Bearing in mind that when he was in charge of Brexit policy for the Marxist's Shadow Cabinet he advocated holding another referendum vote, one doesn't have a great deal of respect for his ability to obtain anything better from the EU than the UK's abject surrender to whatever terms they wanted to punish us with.

I wouldn’t worry about it. They’re just tying themselves in knots to justify being against the deal, yet voting for it. 

Edited 27 December, 2020 by Lord Duckhunter

[trousers]

12 hours ago, Fan The Flames said:

It wasn't SNPs mouthpiece who wrote the letter they just reported it

Yes, but If there were, say, 5 letters, 1 of which supported the SNP stance and 4 which didn't, The National would report the 1 letter and ignore the other 4. Much like any other bias rag would do dependant on which way they lean. 

[Wes Tender]

26 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

I wouldn’t worry about it. They’re just tying themselves in knots to justify being against the deal, yet voting for it. 

Pledged to vote for it before even having read it apparently 🤣

[aintforever]

29 minutes ago, Wes Tender said:

Pledged to vote for it before even having read it apparently 🤣

It’s almost as if some bell-end has left it to the last minute meaning they have no option.

[Weston Super Saint]

2 minutes ago, aintforever said:

It’s almost as if some bell-end has left it to the last minute meaning they have no option.

Bit of a harsh way to talk about Bernier.

[Fan The Flames]

3 hours ago, trousers said:

Yes, but If there were, say, 5 letters, 1 of which supported the SNP stance and 4 which didn't, The National would report the 1 letter and ignore the other 4. Much like any other bias rag would do dependant on which way they lean. 

What a lumpy argument. It's not any old letter it's one from a Spanish diplomat based in Scotland, of course it's newsworthy even in a nationalist rag.

He's one from Reuters, is that neutral enough https://www.google.com/amp/s/uk.mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUKKCN1NP25P

Anyway it's safe to say any veto will depend on who's in power in Spain or any other EU country for that matter.

[Fan The Flames]

4 hours ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

I wouldn’t worry about it. They’re just tying themselves in knots to justify being against the deal, yet voting for it. 

Their position is simple, the deal is better than a no deal but the deal belongs 100% to the Tory party.

[Wes Tender]

11 hours ago, Fan The Flames said:

Their position is simple, the deal is better than a no deal but the deal belongs 100% to the Tory party.

That's very understanding of you to give all of the credit to Boris and the Conservatives. They can get all of the benefits of it electorally when it turns into a great success. Everybody knows that it wouldn't have happened had Labour been in control of it, so their best position is to keep their heads down and say nowt. 

[Lord Duckhunter]

11 hours ago, Fan The Flames said:

Their position is simple, the deal is better than a no deal but the deal belongs 100% to the Tory party.

Then abstain. If they want the Tories to own it 100%, that’s the route to take.  
 

You’re right though, their position is simple. They want to be in the position to tell their remain seats they were against it,and their former “red wall” seats they voted for it. 

[AlexLaw76]

Just now, Lord Duckhunter said:

Then abstain. If they want the Tories to own it 100%, that’s the route to take.  
 

You’re right though, their position is simple. They want to be in the position to tell their remain seats they were against it,and their former “red wall” seats they voted for it. 

At the run up to the next election, looking forward to watching Angela Raynor being tied up in knots as she tries to explain how she was dead-against the deal she voted for.  It will be a total car crash.

[Fan The Flames]

We are constantly being told that this is observing the will of the people, what can they do, this deal represents the best deal possible between this government and EU, they have to ensures that it happens, we can then move on and hd the tories accountable for their deal. Abstaining creates the possibility that it gets voted down and a no deal is worse for the people. Labour putting the country before politics.

[Fan The Flames]

9 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

At the run up to the next election, looking forward to watching Angela Raynor being tied up in knots as she tries to explain how she was dead-against the deal she voted for.  It will be a total car crash.

You can vote fot something you dont agree with if the alternative is worse.

You can either vote on principles or for the best outcome. It is simple to explain, I look forward to see the tory press fail to make this simple position into a trap. 

[badgerx16]

1 hour ago, AlexLaw76 said:

At the run up to the next election, looking forward to watching Angela Raynor being tied up in knots as she tries to explain how she was dead-against the deal she voted for.  It will be a total car crash.

At the run up to the next election it will be the Tories either (a) crowing about how successful Brexit seems to be turning out to be, or (b) trying to find a way to polish the turd that Brexit is turning out to be, and desperately distancing themselves from parts of the deal that have proved deeply unpopular.

[Wes Tender]

1 hour ago, Fan The Flames said:

We are constantly being told that this is observing the will of the people, what can they do, this deal represents the best deal possible between this government and EU, they have to ensures that it happens, we can then move on and hd the tories accountable for their deal. Abstaining creates the possibility that it gets voted down and a no deal is worse for the people. Labour putting the country before politics.

During the past four and a half years we have seen Labour's sitting on the fence, trying to appear to be pro-remain to the champagne socialist metropolitan elite and pro-leave to their traditional heartlands red wall seats. They were prepared to back the Bill in the House proposed by that idiot Benn to scupper our negotiating position by declaring that we would not accept no deal, no matter how bad the deal would be. Half the Party, led by their current leader was in favour of holding a second referendum, before the first one had been enacted, hopeful that this would return the decision that should have been returned in the first one.

I therefore have to have a good belly laugh at your assertion that Labour puts the country before politics. They have little idea of what is best for the country as they prove time and time again.

 

 

 

[Wes Tender]

13 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

At the run up to the next election it will be the Tories either (a) crowing about how successful Brexit seems to be turning out to be, or (b) trying to find a way to polish the turd that Brexit is turning out to be, and desperately distancing themselves from parts of the deal that have proved deeply unpopular.

I just know that you are hoping that it will be the second scenario, just so that you can crow about how you predicted it. At the time of the next election it will also be pertinent to factor in how the EU fares without us. I suspect there will be a general feeling that we left at the right time to avoid the economic implications of its decline when others follow us out.

[badgerx16]

4 minutes ago, Wes Tender said:

I just know that you are hoping that it will be the second scenario, just so that you can crow about how you predicted it.

Just goes to show how little you know, but then again it shouldn't be a surprise to people reading this thread.

[Wes Tender]

30 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

Just goes to show how little you know, but then again it shouldn't be a surprise to people reading this thread.

I was guided by your comment about polishing the turd that Brexit was turning out to be, before the FTA had been properly examined forensically by legal experts.

[Wes Tender]

Speaking of those shooting from the lip, that bloated Scottish windbag Ian Blackford has been bemoaning the FTA as an unforgivable act of economic vandalism and gross stupidity. He rants on about the betrayal of their fisheries sector, the loss of trade with their biggest market. He ranted on...

"It is clear that the only way to protect Scotland's interests, and regain the full benefits of EU membership, is to become an independent country.

"This is a very bad deal for Scotland, which will terminate our membership of the EU, rip us out of the world's largest single market and customs union, end our freedom of movement rights, and impose mountains of red tape, added costs and barriers to trade for Scottish businesses

He seems totally oblivious that if they were allowed to rejoin the EU, their fisheries would again be wide open to exploitation by all EU coastal member states under the CFP. Those facing a decline in rights to fish our waters, will gladly accept the right to fish Scottish waters instead.

They wouldn't be an independent country as a member of the EU. They will have left one union to join another. Their freedom of movement rights will be countered by the freedom of movement of that 400 million peoples' rights to enter Scotland under the Schengen Agreement they will be required to join. He bleats on about the loss of trade with their biggest market, the EU, when that biggest market for them is in fact the UK. Were the Scots to have independence from us, and rejoin the EU, then there would be the red tape and customs forms to complete and added costs and barriers to trade for their businesses cross border with us. 

What has really upset him, is that this FTA with the EU has taken much of the wind out of the sails of the whole reason for their party's existence. He and Wee Krankie were hoping for WTO.

 

[badgerx16]

1 hour ago, Wes Tender said:

I was guided by your comment about polishing the turd that Brexit was turning out to be, before the FTA had been properly examined forensically by legal experts.

Can you not understand that that comment was being posed in a hypothtical future; at the time of the next election campaign it may be that Brexit has turned out to be a turd. Funny how you didn't try to transposition the first scenario, that Brexit might be turning out to be successful, into the present.

Edited 28 December, 2020 by badgerx16

[badgerx16]

42 minutes ago, Wes Tender said:

Those facing a decline in rights to fish our waters, will gladly accept the right to fish Scottish waters instead.

 

Not to mention the remains of the UK losing the 80% of total landings that are made in Scottish ports, from the 60% of UK waters that are Scottish.

If, somehow, Scotland gains indepence and then votes to join the EU, having considered all the arguments, then I would expect such a keen supporter of the Democratic Mandate as yourself to fully support their decision, and wish them well of it.

 

Edited 28 December, 2020 by badgerx16

[Wes Tender]

17 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

Not to mention the remains of the UK losing the 80% of total landings that are made in Scottish ports, from the 60% of UK waters that are Scottish.

If, somehow, Scotland gains indepence and then votes to join the EU, having considered all the arguments, then I would expect such a keen supporter of the Democratic Mandate as yourself to fully support their decision, and wish them well of it.

I would be quite ambivalent about the Scots gaining independence, quite frankly. Without their 58 MPs able to vote in our Parliament against zero English MPs able to vote in theirs, the Government would almost certainly be Conservative from then on. Naturally I would prefer for the Union to continue for the benefit of the UK, but if the Scottish electorate voted in a referendum to leave the UK, then I would have no objection for the reason above. They'll be welcome to lose the Barnett formula payments from us, to raise their own taxation to pay for their socialist utopia, to have the Euro as their currency and all of the border problems trading with us, the main market for their products.

And of course as a democrat I will be equally supportive of the results of a referendum vote by Orkney and Shetland to leave Scotland.

[buctootim]

I read about 150 pages of the deal and skim read a few hundred more. Got to say it doesn't read like any good commercial contract. A lot (most?) of the detail and specifics is missing. It's more like a half formed principles paper - "this is what we want, not sure how we're going to do that yet, so we both retain the right to punish each other in the meantime if we don't like something". Seems as though the language is deliberately vague so that it can be read different ways for different audiences.  Cameron said negotiations would take ten years and they will need all of the five years left and more to resolve all the further can kicking and get a real deal.   

 

NB The doc is here if anyone is interested. https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/regdoc/rep/1/2020/EN/COM-2020-857-F1-EN-ANNEX-1-PART-1.PDF

Edited 28 December, 2020 by buctootim
add link