Brexit - Post Match Reaction

[Nolan]

Then the EU need to tell us what they think or obligations are and stop asking us what we're willing to pay.

 

And maybe define what they think "sufficient progress" is

[shurlock]

 

Who the f**k is this clown.

[Lord Duckhunter]

Then the EU need to tell us what they think or obligations are and stop asking us what we're willing to pay.

 

And maybe define what they think "sufficient progress" is

 

Anyone who thinks the government is going to commit to paying any money without knowing what the future trading relationship is going to be is deluded. The can't risk the EU banking the €50 billion & then being awkward over a deal. Nothing is agreed until everything is agreed, everything else is just bluff. Our ace card is the ****ing big hole in their budget caused by us leaving, we ain't giving that up for nothing in return

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Nolan]

Anyone who thinks the government is going to commit to paying any money without knowing what the future trading relationship is going to be is deluded. The can't risk the EU banking the €50 billion & then being awkward over a deal. Nothing is agreed until everything is agreed, everything else is just bluff. Our ace card is the ****ing big hole in their budget caused by us leaving, we ain't giving that up for nothing in return

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Exactly, yet we don't know if any of the EU 27 net receivers are willing to become net contributors in the new EU reality.

[shurlock]

More kipper bunker talk.

 

Is this the new no deal is better than a bad deal?

[Nolan]

No deal is better than a bad deal. That's always been obvious to anyone with half a brain.

 

Would a union take a bad deal over no deal?

[Lord Duckhunter]

The opposite of "no deal is better than a bad deal", is " a bad deal is better than no deal". I'd have said paying £100 billion a year to trade with the EU was a bad deal and that operating under WTO rules would be better. Clearly the "bad deal is better than no deal" loons don't think so. Thank **** DD is running the negotiations and not them

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Weston Super Saint]

More kipper bunker talk.

 

Is this the new no deal is better than a bad deal?

 

There isn't going to be a deal.

 

Anyone who genuinely believes that the expectations of 27 countries - each with their own different agenda - can honestly be met during these negotiations is completely deluded!

 

Way too many fingers in the EU pie for this to be resolved by way of a fair deal for everyone. The next 18 months will be more of the same with each side 'leaking' that the other isn't playing ball until the inevitable split happens without any resolution in place.

[aintforever]

There isn't going to be a deal.

 

Anyone who genuinely believes that the expectations of 27 countries - each with their own different agenda - can honestly be met during these negotiations is completely deluded!

 

Way too many fingers in the EU pie for this to be resolved by way of a fair deal for everyone. The next 18 months will be more of the same with each side 'leaking' that the other isn't playing ball until the inevitable split happens without any resolution in place.

 

This. There is not a chance in hell of any sort of deal. Might as well just get on preparing for WTO rules on March 2019.

[John B]

No deal is better than a bad deal. That's always been obvious to anyone with half a brain.

 

Would a union take a bad deal over no deal?

 

Unfortunately uninformed and bigotted people like you need to realise that a no deal is worse than a bad deal and any deal is a worse deal than we currently have

[Nolan]

Unfortunately uninformed and bigotted people like you need to realise that a no deal is worse than a bad deal and any deal is a worse deal than we currently have

Pray tell. How am I bigoted?

 

Let me spell this out for you.

 

DEAL: WTO trade rules and lose gibralter

NO DEAL: WTO trade rules.

 

Which would be worse: deal? Or no deal?

Edited 3 September, 2017 by Nolan

[OldNick]

Pray tell. How am I bigoted?

 

Let me spell this out for you.

 

DEAL: WTO trade rules and lose gibralter

NO DEAL: WTO trade rules.

 

Which would be worse: deal? Or no deal?

i think we will not lose Gib as we have conceded the fishing rights

[Batman]

i think we will not lose Gib as we have conceded the fishing rights

 

surely, the future of Gibraltar is up to the gibbo's who live there?

like the falkland islanders, are very patriotic....

[Verbal]

Pray tell. How am I bigoted?

 

Let me spell this out for you.

 

DEAL: WTO trade rules and lose gibralter

NO DEAL: WTO trade rules.

 

Which would be worse: deal? Or no deal?

 

Not bigoted, but a kind of reverse, perverse Utilitarianism - the idea that the benefit of the very few should be borne by the very many.

 

You're willing to risk throwing the British economy of 65+ million people under a bus to keep UK citizenship for 35,000 Gibraltarians.

 

Bizarre.

[Nolan]

Not bigoted, but a kind of reverse, perverse Utilitarianism - the idea that the benefit of the very few should be borne by the very many.

 

You're willing to risk throwing the British economy of 65+ million people under a bus to keep UK citizenship for 35,000 Gibraltarians.

 

Bizarre.

as obvious in the thread of this.

 

I'm giving an example of what a bad deal, that is worse than no deal looks like.

Edited 3 September, 2017 by Nolan

[hypochondriac]

Unfortunately uninformed and bigotted people like you need to realise that a no deal is worse than a bad deal and any deal is a worse deal than we currently have

So hypothetically, the EU proposes a deal where we pay 400 billion euros a year. How is something like that better than no deal? Of course a really bad deal will be worse than no deal.

[Verbal]

So hypothetically, the EU proposes a deal where we pay 400 billion euros a year. How is something like that better than no deal? Of course a really bad deal will be worse than no deal.

 

...is the answer to the question: How delusionally far do Brexit Jihadists have to go to prove that no deal is better than a bad deal?

[John B]

...is the answer to the question: How delusionally far do Brexit Jihadists have to go to prove that no deal is better than a bad deal?

 

The two things that really worry brexit supporters are truth and reality

[Nolan]

...is the answer to the question: How delusionally far do Brexit Jihadists have to go to prove that no deal is better than a bad deal?

When the question should be. "Is there any deal that could be worse than WTO rules?" And the answer to that is yes.

[shurlock]

So hypothetically, the EU proposes a deal where we pay 400 billion euros a year. How is something like that better than no deal? Of course a really bad deal will be worse than no deal.

 

Fantastic reductio ad absurdum - that's nearly a quarter of UK GDP or roughly 45x UK's net contribution to the EU in 2016. Remind me what the total EU budget is?

 

Anyone can construct imaginary strawmen - let's stick to scenarios that have some realistic chance of taking place.

 

The UK has already given some sense of what a bad deal would look like via its red lines -a deal that doesn't completely end freedom of movement, jurisdiction of the ECJ among other things.

 

Are compromises on these issues worse than the consequences of no deal? For Brexit jihadists, they are -and that's why many believe significant damage to the economy and livelihoods is a price worth paying.

Edited 3 September, 2017 by shurlock

[Nolan]

"Is there any deal imaginable that could be worse than WTO rules?"

[John B]

"Is there any deal imaginable that could be worse than WTO rules?"

 

If the UK doesn't fix a new trade agreement with the EU, trade would fall back on World Trade Organisation (WTO) rules but that is not the only affect of a No Deal .

 

The UK trades with lots of countries under WTO rules. But the terms are far less favourable than trading within the single market, which is almost frictionless. The sudden imposition of WTO rules is likely to mean tariffs and customs checks, leading to increased financial and bureaucratic costs for British firms buying and selling goods from abroad.

Trucks could line up at the border, with customs agents making sure tariffs are imposed.

 

Many existing international trade arrangements, including WTO rules, are mainly concerned with the trade in goods. Services, especially finance, makes up a big chunk of the UK economy.

The City of London is the biggest financial hub in Europe and British companies operate extensively on the continent, thanks in part to the EU single market. A no deal scenario could have a serious impact on financial services. As a crucial issue is 'passporting': membership of the EU's single market allows businesses in one state to sell their financial services across the single market, instead of having to obtain licences in each individual country.

 

UK ministers say they want to maintain as "seamless and frictionless a border as possible" with Ireland, a wish shared by their counterparts in Dublin.

The UK and Ireland have a common travel area which pre-dates either country's EU membership. Many people live in the north and work in the south and vice versa. Goods and services go back and forth with no customs barriers. "No deal" would mean the UK, including Northern Ireland, leaving the EU's customs union.

 

There could perhaps be some bilateral agreement between the UK and Ireland but this would be difficult to do independent of the EU.

 

A pure no deal scenario would mean a border between EU and a non-EU state, and thus the sudden imposition of tariffs and customs checks.

Trade would likely slow down and there would be huge incentives for smuggling

.

It poses a hypothetical example: a Northern Irish farmer who exports meat and dairy to Ireland and other EU countries, tariff and paperwork free.

In the event of an "unplanned Brexit", the farmer "would face tariffs of between 30% and 40% on meat and dairy produce," which would make the farmer's goods uncompetitive.

Checks at the border would be a huge bureaucratic exercise which would involve specialised computer systems and a lot of staff.

 

Neither the UK, Ireland nor the EU wants hard borders and customs checks between Northern Ireland and the Republic but it is difficult to see how this could be avoided if no deal was reached.

 

The UK and Irish governments are co-guarantors of the 1998 Good Friday Agreement, which refers to both countries as "partners in the European Union".

Brexit, especially with no deal in place, may complicate an already intricate constitutional situation.

 

What about the fate of EU citizens already living in the UK, and of UK citizens resident in other EU countries?

According to ONS estimates, around 3.2 million EU citizens live in the UK, and about 900,000 Brits live in other EU countries.

 

Tourists may want to consider the likelihood of a no-deal breakup before booking a European holiday in March 2019.

Although it is unlikely that they would require visas for their trips, "some confusion at borders" could be expected.

 

Emergency healthcare insurance for UK tourists in the EU could turn out to be a tricky issue.

On the day after a no-deal Brexit, UK travellers to the EU would lose emergency health coverage that comes with the European Health Insurance Cards (EHIC).

 

Reports suggest the EU will hand the UK an exit bill of up to €60bn when it leaves this is to cover the UK's share of outstanding EU budget commitments. The actual amount of the divorce bill will be subject to negotiations, but it could well be a particularly tricky part of the Brexit talks but in my opinion is not insurmountable.

 

Here, a no-deal Brexit might be good news for the UK government as in the absence of an agreement, there would be no legal obligation for the UK to settle the Brexit bill.

 

Perhaps it would be a good idea to have a deal of somekind

[Weston Super Saint]

The theory sounds marvellous!

 

The reality is, 27 countries aren't all going to agree on the terms of a deal!

 

So, yes, it is a fantastic idea to have a deal in place. Not going to happen though!

[Nolan]

 

Perhaps it would be a good idea to have a deal of somekind

 

Indeed it would, but a deal "under any circumstances" doesn't lead to a good deal.

 

We would not be the only ones to be economically hit by a no deal, so we have to be willing to use that to get to an amicable arrangement.

 

But there comes the crunch, I don't mind the economic hit. I was told lots of times that it would be horrendously detrimental, it hasn't been, and soon we'll get our independence back.

[Lord Duckhunter]

"Is there any deal imaginable that could be worse than WTO rules?"

 

One negotiated by somebody who won't walk away. Somebody who at the start of the negotiations says "whatever deal you propose we will accept ". In other words, one negotiated by The Labour Party.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Verbal]

One negotiated by somebody who won't walk away.

 

Any sane person would hope that a UK government of any political colour wouldn't 'walk away' from the world's largest economic area, which just happens to be on our doorstep.

 

Somebody who at the start of the negotiations says "whatever deal you propose we will accept ". In other words, one negotiated by The Labour Party.

 

This is plainly false. Can you provide a link to where any Labour politician has said "whatever deal you propose we accept." (You're the one who's put it in quotes, so you presumably have evidence to back up the voices in your head that told you the quotes are real).

[Lord Duckhunter]

Any sane person would hope that a UK government of any political colour wouldn't 'walk away' from the world's largest economic area, which just happens to be on our doorstep .

 

Of course you have to be prepared to walk away, that's your bottom line in any negotiation. If you tell the person you're negotiating with that you will do a deal no matter what, what sort of deal do you think you'll get.

 

**** me, who taught you to negotiate, Forrest Gump?

 

I want to buy your house, but no matter how expensive it gets, I'm not going to walk away without buying it,because I need somewhere to live.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Portugalsaint]

The clock is ticking away faster than any of the negotiators think. It could be by 2019 that no deal is made and no monies are handed over. The UK is on its own. Will the lorries be stopped at the ports carrying food into the UK and out the following day or will the flow continue as it did the day before? Probably much of the same. Do you think the scare mongering about healthcare for the Brits abroad being treated will happen the day after the UK Brexit? If you do, do you think that the EU citizens in the UK who arrive at hospital the day after Brexit won't be treated? Unlikely. The EU countries will not see their citizens go short just as the UK won't. It's all posturing and wind. The UK won't sink without the EU.

 

Also, why do people who voted remain name call? Jihadists? BRexiteers? It's all a bit Billy bully Bunter. There was a democratic vote, the vote was "out" the country should pull together not name call its all very childish.

[Trader]

You'll be glad to know that mutual healthcare provision between UK and EU nationals has been negotiated successfully in the latest round.

[badgerx16]

Also, why do people who voted remain name call? Jihadists? BRexiteers? It's all a bit Billy bully Bunter. There was a democratic vote, the vote was "out" the country should pull together not name call its all very childish.

They would be the 'remoaners' presumably ? Stupidity and childish stroppines are demonstrated by both sides.

[trousers]

Iceland's Foreign Minister (FWIW)

 

[Winnersaint]

There was a democratic vote, the vote was "out" the country should pull together.

Take your point about the ridiculous name calling, but surely there was nothing in the vote that disallowed dissenting argument. To me that what democracy is all about. After all the referendum was borne out of opposition of the status quo.

[Portugalsaint]

Take your point about the ridiculous name calling, but surely there was nothing in the vote that disallowed dissenting argument. To me that what democracy is all about. After all the referendum was borne out of opposition of the status quo.

 

I agree with you, however, I am not too sure this debate would have even taken place if the vote was to stay in? The media have said it was the less intelligent that voted out, those without degrees and also the elderly, also, because of the migrant problem. This conjecture has fuelled the people who voted in and everyone starts "name calling". Unfortunately, this is not useful and the sooner the people and press realise this stupidity the better. Out is out and lets get on with it.

 

Interestingly, there is rumour around that if you are below pension age in 2019 you will not get free healthcare in Europe. TRader has enlightened us on this by saying that has been agreed? So, slowly surely catchy monkey the UK will get there. Interesting to see what other countries think about it all in an above quote from Trousers.

[Nolan]

EHIC continues after the leaving date...

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/aug/31/brexit-healthcare-deal-is-good-news-for-pensioners

[Guided Missile]

Iceland's Foreign Minister (FWIW)

 

 

I listened to him on the way into work on Radio 4. His comments should be required listening to anyone with an open mind about Brexit, from an informed third party without an axe to grind. Keen to get the UK into EFTA.

 

Nice to listen to a politician with an alternative lesson to educate the British about. Maybe Barnier should be sent an audio tape....

[Guided Missile]

Iceland Foreign Minister interview, now on the BBC website here.

 

"Are you watching, are you watching, are you watching Barnier....?"

Edited 5 September, 2017 by Guided Missile
now not wow, (well nearly wow...)

[shurlock]

So the UK wants to do its own trade deals, so it can basically cut and paste the deals that already exist with the EU. Genius.

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-09-04/u-k-said-to-favor-swiss-and-south-koreans-in-brexit-trade-plans

[Guided Missile]

...or, listen to the whole interview here, from 1:08:58 on. Uncomfortable listening to anyone with a hard-on, for Jean Claude-Juncker and his posse...

[Nolan]

So the UK wants to do its own trade deals, so it can basically cut and paste the deals that already exist with the EU. Genius.

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-09-04/u-k-said-to-favor-swiss-and-south-koreans-in-brexit-trade-plans

It makes sense as a starting point. Then you make bespoke improvements.

[shurlock]

Some common sense from the opposition:

 

https://www.ft.com/content/17c896a4-92fa-11e7-a9e6-11d2f0ebb7f0

[farawaysaint]

Yes yes, I agree... I should subscribe to the financial times.

[hutch]

Shurley's top secret article is a piece from Keir Starmer proposing that we should pretend to leave the EU but stay in really and hope nobody notices. Its mind blowing stuff, I'm surprised nobody else has thought of it.

[Nolan]

https://www.conservativehome.com/platform/2017/09/peter-lilley-dont-lose-your-head-over-henry-viii-powers.html

[trousers]

I thought Keir Starmer came across really well in the opening repeal bill debate in parliament today. Don't necessarily agree with all of what he said but he articulated it well.

[John B]

I thought Keir Starmer came across really well in the opening repeal bill debate in parliament today. Don't necessarily agree with all of what he said but he articulated it well.

 

What did you not agree with and why?

[Johnny Bognor]

Shurley's top secret article is a piece from Keir Starmer proposing that we should pretend to leave the EU but stay in really and hope nobody notices. Its mind blowing stuff, I'm surprised nobody else has thought of it.

 

A diametrically opposed cunning plan to mine (Pretend to stay in and then leave and hope nobody notices..)

[John B]

A diametrically opposed cunning plan to mine (Pretend to stay in and then leave and hope nobody notices..)

 

A superb forensic analysis of the law as it will be if the Bill remains unamended in clauses 9 and 17. Those who are not concerned and consider it a stalking horse for remain think on this: on the basis of those clauses in their current form any minister can introduce (without a vote in Parliament) a law amending any Act of Parliament that has preceded this Act (if it becomes one) and can even amend this Act.

In the correct circumstances, if Theresa May were ousted by a remain Tory as leader that means that person could by ministerial diktat repeal the Article 50 Act and amend the Withdrawal Act so as to prevent withdrawal, the powers are that wide. Further the Bill contains sunset clauses, there is nothing to prevent ministers from amending the sunset clauses under these powers.

Consider those powers in the hands of your personal political Bete Noir and consider whether you would wish to hand them such power? I would suggest that everyone compare these powers with those introduced in the text of the Enabling Act in Germany in 1933 to see the possibilities for misuse.

[John B]

Iceland Foreign Minister interview, now on the BBC website here.

 

"Are you watching, are you watching, are you watching Barnier....?"

 

But why leave

 

What did the EEC/EU ever do for us? Not much, apart from: providing 57% of our trade; structural funding to areas hit by industrial decline; clean beaches and rivers; cleaner air; lead free petrol; restrictions on landfill dumping; a recycling culture; cheaper mobile charges; cheaper air travel; improved consumer protection and food labelling; a ban on growth hormones and other harmful food additives; better product safety; single market competition bringing quality improvements and better industrial performance; break up of monopolies; Europe-wide patent and copyright protection; no paperwork or customs for exports throughout the single market; price transparency and removal of commission on currency exchanges across the eurozone; freedom to travel, live and work across Europe; funded opportunities for young people to undertake study or work placements abroad; access to European health services; labour protection and enhanced social welfare; smoke-free workplaces; equal pay legislation; holiday entitlement; the right not to work more than a 48-hour week without overtime; strongest wildlife protection in the world; improved animal welfare in food production; EU-funded research and industrial collaboration; EU representation in international forums; bloc EEA negotiation at the WTO; EU diplomatic efforts to uphold the nuclear non-proliferation treaty; European arrest warrant; cross border policing to combat human trafficking, arms and drug smuggling; counter terrorism intelligence; European civil and military co-operation in post-conflict zones in Europe and Africa; support for democracy and human rights across Europe and beyond; investment across Europe contributing to better living standards and educational, social and cultural capital.

[shurlock]

But why leave

 

What did the EEC/EU ever do for us? Not much, apart from: providing 57% of our trade; structural funding to areas hit by industrial decline; clean beaches and rivers; cleaner air; lead free petrol; restrictions on landfill dumping; a recycling culture; cheaper mobile charges; cheaper air travel; improved consumer protection and food labelling; a ban on growth hormones and other harmful food additives; better product safety; single market competition bringing quality improvements and better industrial performance; break up of monopolies; Europe-wide patent and copyright protection; no paperwork or customs for exports throughout the single market; price transparency and removal of commission on currency exchanges across the eurozone; freedom to travel, live and work across Europe; funded opportunities for young people to undertake study or work placements abroad; access to European health services; labour protection and enhanced social welfare; smoke-free workplaces; equal pay legislation; holiday entitlement; the right not to work more than a 48-hour week without overtime; strongest wildlife protection in the world; improved animal welfare in food production; EU-funded research and industrial collaboration; EU representation in international forums; bloc EEA negotiation at the WTO; EU diplomatic efforts to uphold the nuclear non-proliferation treaty; European arrest warrant; cross border policing to combat human trafficking, arms and drug smuggling; counter terrorism intelligence; European civil and military co-operation in post-conflict zones in Europe and Africa; support for democracy and human rights across Europe and beyond; investment across Europe contributing to better living standards and educational, social and cultural capital.

 

Banning endocrine disruptors.

[Lord Duckhunter]

But why leave

 

What did the EEC/EU ever do for us? Not much, apart from: providing 57% of our trade; structural funding to areas hit by industrial decline; clean beaches and rivers; cleaner air; lead free petrol; restrictions on landfill dumping; a recycling culture; cheaper mobile charges; cheaper air travel; improved consumer protection and food labelling; a ban on growth hormones and other harmful food additives; better product safety; single market competition bringing quality improvements and better industrial performance; break up of monopolies; Europe-wide patent and copyright protection; no paperwork or customs for exports throughout the single market; price transparency and removal of commission on currency exchanges across the eurozone; freedom to travel, live and work across Europe; funded opportunities for young people to undertake study or work placements abroad; access to European health services; labour protection and enhanced social welfare; smoke-free workplaces; equal pay legislation; holiday entitlement; the right not to work more than a 48-hour week without overtime; strongest wildlife protection in the world; improved animal welfare in food production; EU-funded research and industrial collaboration; EU representation in international forums; bloc EEA negotiation at the WTO; EU diplomatic efforts to uphold the nuclear non-proliferation treaty; European arrest warrant; cross border policing to combat human trafficking, arms and drug smuggling; counter terrorism intelligence; European civil and military co-operation in post-conflict zones in Europe and Africa; support for democracy and human rights across Europe and beyond; investment across Europe contributing to better living standards and educational, social and cultural capital.

 

Why are you still fighting the referendum campaign,move on. It's over,finished, your side lost. The country was asked & it gave its answer.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk