Cable Forum
Page 12 of 56 « First 2891011 12 1314151622 Last »
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Cable Forum (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/index.php)
-   Current Affairs (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/forumdisplay.php?f=20)
-   -   UK & EU Agree Post-Brexit Trade Deal (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/showthread.php?t=33708171)

nomadking 08-10-2019 14:03
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36013201)
You can't actually evidence that any of your prediction is true. Stick to predicting the imminent death of linear television, it's got marginally more credibility. Marginally.

Nobody has said we won't be able to holiday, only that it'll be more expensive to do so. This is true already. Nor has anyone predicted planes falling from the sky. You are conflating genuine risk with the ridiculous to try and minimise its importance.

The literal existence of Northern Ireland.
NI specifically voted for it at the time, ie independence from Ireland.
Quote:
On 7 December 1922 the houses of the Parliament of Northern Ireland approved an address to George V, requesting that its territory not be included in the Irish Free State.
...
The Free State was renamed "Ireland" in its new constitution of 1937, which claimed jurisdiction over the entire island.

pip08456 08-10-2019 14:12
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36013213)
I don't. Ireland voted for independence. Got partitioned by Britain. I'd invite you to point out what part isn't true but don't want to sidetrack the discussion further.

Ironic that is why we are now in this mess, trying to protect our crumbled Empire.
When did Ireland vote for independence? Link please.

Meanwhile you may wish to read this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partition_of_Ireland

denphone 08-10-2019 14:15
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ntluser (Post 36013214)
Currently as EU members we are subject to the EU four freedoms and operating on a legal & trading framework acceptable to the EU and the UK..

When we leave we hope to shed the Freedom Of Movement requirement and the legal and trading frameworks may well be different and these are the barriers to our deal with the EU.

The problems with immigration were mainly due to the government failing to deal with the consequences of immigration like shortages of doctors, dentists, teachers, appropriate school places, jobs and affordable housing, all things that the government could address.

To satisfy the EU, Boris will need to remove the Freedom Of Movement red line thus allowing the people of Ireland & Ulster to move freely between both areas.

He will also need to equalise the legal & trading conditions on both sides of the Irish border so that, rights, responsibilities, procedures, protocols etc are the same, with the exception that issues raised in Ireland will be dealt with by the EU courts and issues in Ulster will be dealt with by the UK courts. When the same issue is raised in both areas, an Arbitration panel consisting say of 2 EU judges & 2 UK judges would look at the issue and try to find a mutually acceptable & legal solution. In effect, trading will just be as if we were still in the EU but the EU jurisdiction will only apply in Ireland as the UK jurisdiction will be in Ulster.

Given the bullying, bull-in-a china-shop tactics used by Boris, he has not only upset our EU friends but he has also failed to renegotiate our exit, apparently aiming to leave the EU at all costs without really trying to make a deal. He may well find leaving the EU like that to be satisfactory but there are plenty of poor people & businesses who will not. The massive borrowing required will not only put us further in debt but will also bring further years of austerity which can be avoided,

My bet is that neither he or Stephen Barclay have even asked the EU if such changes would make a difference and until he does he cannot really say that no deal is the only option.

I will also bet than no journalists have questioned Boris , Michel Barnier or Donald Tusk about discussing such changes in the Brexit negotiations.

Given the repeated requests from the EU for written proposals, it is the UK government which is at fault for belatedly supplying the ill thought-out proposals recently submitted.

No-one in government seems to be asking what the EU concerns are and as we do not know what they are how can the government address them.

The whole process has been a shambles from start to finish. Lots of ordinary people will suffer if we crash out of the EU like this.

I can only hope that all politicians involved will use some common sense and bring this deal to a successful conclusion.
A pretty much spot on analysis.

Damien 08-10-2019 14:20
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ntluser (Post 36013214)
To satisfy the EU, Boris will need to remove the Freedom Of Movement red line thus allowing the people of Ireland & Ulster to move freely between both areas.

This isn't the issue as we already have that pre-EU. It's physical goods that are the issue.

jfman 08-10-2019 14:23
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by denphone (Post 36013218)
A pretty much spot on analysis.
A lot of disaster capitalists will be rich though!

denphone 08-10-2019 14:27
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36013221)

A lot of disaster capitalists will be rich though!
Indeed as the ones who get hit the hardest will be those at the bottom of the pile as usual.

nomadking 08-10-2019 14:31
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ntluser (Post 36013214)
Currently as EU members we are subject to the EU four freedoms and operating on a legal & trading framework acceptable to the EU and the UK..

When we leave we hope to shed the Freedom Of Movement requirement and the legal and trading frameworks may well be different and these are the barriers to our deal with the EU.

The problems with immigration were mainly due to the government failing to deal with the consequences of immigration like shortages of doctors, dentists, teachers, appropriate school places, jobs and affordable housing, all things that the government could address.

To satisfy the EU, Boris will need to remove the Freedom Of Movement red line thus allowing the people of Ireland & Ulster to move freely between both areas.

He will also need to equalise the legal & trading conditions on both sides of the Irish border so that, rights, responsibilities, procedures, protocols etc are the same, with the exception that issues raised in Ireland will be dealt with by the EU courts and issues in Ulster will be dealt with by the UK courts. When the same issue is raised in both areas, an Arbitration panel consisting say of 2 EU judges & 2 UK judges would look at the issue and try to find a mutually acceptable & legal solution. In effect, trading will just be as if we were still in the EU but the EU jurisdiction will only apply in Ireland as the UK jurisdiction will be in Ulster.

Given the bullying, bull-in-a china-shop tactics used by Boris, he has not only upset our EU friends but he has also failed to renegotiate our exit, apparently aiming to leave the EU at all costs without really trying to make a deal. He may well find leaving the EU like that to be satisfactory but there are plenty of poor people & businesses who will not. The massive borrowing required will not only put us further in debt but will also bring further years of austerity which can be avoided,

My bet is that neither he or Stephen Barclay have even asked the EU if such changes would make a difference and until he does he cannot really say that no deal is the only option.

I will also bet than no journalists have questioned Boris , Michel Barnier or Donald Tusk about discussing such changes in the Brexit negotiations.

Given the repeated requests from the EU for written proposals, it is the UK government which is at fault for belatedly supplying the ill thought-out proposals recently submitted.

No-one in government seems to be asking what the EU concerns are and as we do not know what they are how can the government address them.

The whole process has been a shambles from start to finish. Lots of ordinary people will suffer if we crash out of the EU like this.

I can only hope that all politicians involved will use some common sense and bring this deal to a successful conclusion.
Load of nonsense. Technically the exit is a done deal. Either way it's meant to happen. There is the "deal" which the WA, which is "transitional, and unambiguously limited in time", and then there is the "deal", which is in the future after the WA and is not allowed to be even negotiated yet until after we've left the EU. Will people stop mixing the 2 up.:mad: With the WA "deal" we "crash" out anyway, just at the end of next year instead.



The UK Parliament won't say what they would agree to, and the EU won't budge. Anything allegedly of concern to the EU comes after the end of the transitional phase of the WA, which the WA is not allowed to deal with.


Now with the Benn act, the UK Parliament and Ireland are never in a million years going to agree to anything. They'll keep moving the goalposts. They've been given a loaded gun and have itchy trigger fingers.

jfman 08-10-2019 14:35
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Emotive terminology there. The Benn Act does no such thing. Johnson is obliged to ask for an extension once. That's it. It doesn't stop Britain leaving without a deal after that extension elapses.

ntluser 08-10-2019 14:50
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 36013220)
This isn't the issue as we already have that pre-EU. It's physical goods that are the issue.
It will be interesting to hear how goods are currently being moved from Ireland to Ulster.

I'm guessing that as the legal & trading frameworks on either side of the Irish border are the same because we are currently both EU members there are no checkpoints or few checkpoints.

We need to recreate the same equal legal & trading frameworks but with Ireland answerable to EU courts & Ulster answerable to UK courts.

If everything else is equal both courts should arrive at the same verdict/conclusion with any issue raised.

---------- Post added at 14:50 ---------- Previous post was at 14:40 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36013224)
Load of nonsense. Technically the exit is a done deal. Either way it's meant to happen. There is the "deal" which the WA, which is "transitional, and unambiguously limited in time", and then there is the "deal", which is in the future after the WA and is not allowed to be even negotiated yet until after we've left the EU. Will people stop mixing the 2 up.:mad: With the WA "deal" we "crash" out anyway, just at the end of next year instead.



The UK Parliament won't say what they would agree to, and the EU won't budge. Anything allegedly of concern to the EU comes after the end of the transitional phase of the WA, which the WA is not allowed to deal with.


Now with the Benn act, the UK Parliament and Ireland are never in a million years going to agree to anything. They'll keep moving the goalposts. They've been given a loaded gun and have itchy trigger fingers.
So are you saying because of the WA, Boris is intending to leave the EU only to re-apply to the EU for a trade deal after we have left, or is he just intending to leave and not bother with a deal.

Not sure how well that will go down especially if Boris withholds the leaving money.

pip08456 08-10-2019 15:02
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ntluser (Post 36013226)
It will be interesting to hear how goods are currently being moved from Ireland to Ulster.

I'm guessing that as the legal & trading frameworks on either side of the Irish border are the same because we are currently both EU members there are no checkpoints or few checkpoints.

We need to recreate the same equal legal & trading frameworks but with Ireland answerable to EU courts & Ulster answerable to UK courts.

If everything else is equal both courts should arrive at the same verdict/conclusion with any issue raised.

---------- Post added at 14:50 ---------- Previous post was at 14:40 ----------



So are you saying because of the WA, Boris is intending to leave the EU only to re-apply to the EU for a trade deal after we have left, or is he just intending to leave and not bother with a deal.

Not sure how well that will go down especially if Boris withholds the leaving money.
There is no application for a free trade deal at present. No discussions for a future deal untill a withdrawal agreement is reached or after we leave.

ntluser 08-10-2019 15:20
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pip08456 (Post 36013228)
There is no application for a free trade deal at present. No discussions for a future deal untill a withdrawal agreement is reached or after we leave.
So it does look like the UK could just leave and then either go for a trade deal with the EU or not.

I sure hope the No Deal preparations are really good or a lot of people are going to suffer.

Leaving without a deal may also affect the pound,the stock market, businesses & employment.It could be a real mess.

nomadking 08-10-2019 16:22
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ntluser (Post 36013229)
So it does look like the UK could just leave and then either go for a trade deal with the EU or not.

I sure hope the No Deal preparations are really good or a lot of people are going to suffer.

Leaving without a deal may also affect the pound,the stock market, businesses & employment.It could be a real mess.
Which deal are you referring to?:rolleyes: You seemed have mentioned both of them and in the 3rd para, both at the same time. That's quite a feat.

---------- Post added at 15:45 ---------- Previous post was at 15:25 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36013225)
Emotive terminology there. The Benn Act does no such thing. Johnson is obliged to ask for an extension once. That's it. It doesn't stop Britain leaving without a deal after that extension elapses.
It's gives impossible conditions that are completely out of his hands. If their intention was to force a never-ending extension, then that is what the bill should have been solely about.
Section 2(5)
Quote:
(5)The Secretary of State shall make a further report under subsection (1) at least every 28 calendar days starting on 7 February 2020 either until an agreement with the European Union is reached or until otherwise indicated by a resolution of the House of Commons


---------- Post added at 16:22 ---------- Previous post was at 15:45 ----------

Link

Quote:
In an extraordinary briefing about the confidential discussion between the leaders, a No 10 source later said the German chancellor’s demands for Northern Ireland to remain in a customs union made a deal look “essentially impossible, not just now but ever”.
Called moving the goalposts. There was never going to be anything that Boris or anybody else, could come up with that Ireland would approve.

ntluser 08-10-2019 16:39
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36013230)
Which deal are you referring to?:rolleyes: You seemed have mentioned both of them and in the 3rd para, both at the same time. That's quite a feat.

---------- Post added at 15:45 ---------- Previous post was at 15:25 ----------


It's gives impossible conditions that are completely out of his hands. If their intention was to force a never-ending extension, then that is what the bill should have been solely about.
Section 2(5)


---------- Post added at 16:22 ---------- Previous post was at 15:45 ----------

Link

Called moving the goalposts. There was never going to be anything that Boris or anybody else, could come up with that Ireland would approve.
This last point sounds more like the EU helping Ireland to become a united Ireland. Having said that Boris has not really offered anything that would give the EU the kind of legal security it requires.

Basically,it wants to be legally able to prevent the UK from establishing checkpoints, which is strange because the UK wants preserve the Good Friday agreement and not have checkpoints either.

However, the insistence of a Stormont Input every 4 years may have put paid to that.

jfman 08-10-2019 16:54
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36013230)
Which deal are you referring to?:rolleyes: You seemed have mentioned both of them and in the 3rd para, both at the same time. That's quite a feat.

---------- Post added at 15:45 ---------- Previous post was at 15:25 ----------


It's gives impossible conditions that are completely out of his hands. If their intention was to force a never-ending extension, then that is what the bill should have been solely about.
Section 2(5)


---------- Post added at 16:22 ---------- Previous post was at 15:45 ----------

Link

Called moving the goalposts. There was never going to be anything that Boris or anybody else, could come up with that Ireland would approve.
None of what you claim forces an indefinite extension. It's out and out demonstrably false to claim that is what the Benn Act facilitates.

nomadking 08-10-2019 16:58
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ntluser (Post 36013237)
This last point sounds more like the EU helping Ireland to become a united Ireland. Having said that Boris has not really offered anything that would give the EU the kind of legal security it requires.

Basically,it wants to be legally able to prevent the UK from establishing checkpoints, which is strange because the UK wants preserve the Good Friday agreement and not have checkpoints either.

However, the insistence of a Stormont Input every 4 years may have put paid to that.
The point is that there has never ever been anything else that would satisfy Ireland. Impossible to find something that UK Parliament hasn't turned down already, that the EU would agree to. So all this guff about the EU wanting an agreement and Boris blocking it, along with "it's up to the UK to come up with a solution" is total nonsense, as usual. The EU has not been negotiating in "good faith".

---------- Post added at 16:58 ---------- Previous post was at 16:54 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36013240)
None of what you claim forces an indefinite extension. It's out and out demonstrably false to claim that is what the Benn Act facilitates.
The "extension" in the bill only goes up to 31st Jan 2020. so how else does 7th Feb 2020 and beyond come into it?:confused: Impossible unless it means indefinite extensions.

1andrew1 08-10-2019 17:40
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36013241)
So all this guff about the EU wanting an agreement and Boris blocking it, along with "it's up to the UK to come up with a solution" is total nonsense, as usual. The EU has not been negotiating in "good faith".
The backstop was an agreed solution between Theresa May's Government and the EU. When removed, the EU's stance was that the UK needs to come up with a solution that solves the problems that the backstop solved. It has failed to do so.

nomadking 08-10-2019 18:01
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36013245)
The backstop was an agreed solution between Theresa May's Government and the EU. When removed, the EU's stance was that the UK needs to come up with a solution that solves the problems that the backstop solved. It has failed to do so.
And Merkel has now effectively admitted that the backstop was always the only option as far as the EU is concerned. The WA is a draft agreement, and the backstop is still there. The Irish haven't attempted to seek any solution either.



Quote:
However, the anonymous No 10 source spoke to broadcast journalists, saying Merkel “made clear a deal is overwhelmingly unlikely and she thinks the EU has a veto on us leaving the customs union”. “Merkel said that if Germany wanted to leave the EU they could do it no problem, but the UK cannot leave without leaving Northern Ireland behind in a customs union and in full alignment forever,” the source said.
How could Germany leave? They have a very long land border(3700km) with other countries.

OLD BOY 08-10-2019 18:01
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36013201)
You can't actually evidence that any of your prediction is true. Stick to predicting the imminent death of linear television, it's got marginally more credibility. Marginally.

Nobody has said we won't be able to holiday, only that it'll be more expensive to do so. This is true already. Nor has anyone predicted planes falling from the sky. You are conflating genuine risk with the ridiculous to try and minimise its importance.



The literal existence of Northern Ireland.
Don't be silly! You don't distinguish between statements that are fact and those that are not meant to be taken literally, do you?

Of course no-one has suggested seriously that planes would fall from the sky, but many have been under the impression that the UK will not be able to fly its planes over Europe, which of course is not the case. Some have been of the opinion that they will no longer be able to holiday in Europe, and I have met a few of them!

As far as NI, solutions are available, but Europe refuses to engage. The reality is, that if there is no deal, there will be no backstop. This seems to have eluded the Irish PM!

1andrew1 08-10-2019 18:14
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36013246)
And Merkel has now effectively admitted that the backstop was always the only option as far as the EU is concerned. The WA is a draft agreement, and the backstop is still there. The Irish haven't attempted to seek any solution either.
Where has she admitted that? There's been some inadmissible off-the-record briefings from the UK Government but has she said anything like this?

---------- Post added at 18:14 ---------- Previous post was at 18:12 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36013247)
. The reality is, that if there is no deal, there will be no backstop. This seems to have eluded the Irish PM!
It's basically extension, election and then who knows what! It's the brave who can predict what that might bring with regard to Brexit.

OLD BOY 08-10-2019 18:21
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36013248)
Where has she admitted that? There's been some inadmissible off-the-record briefings from the UK Government but has she said anything like this?

---------- Post added at 18:14 ---------- Previous post was at 18:12 ----------


It's basically extension, election and then who knows what! It's the brave who can predict what that might bring with regard to Brexit.
You seem to believe that an extension is inevitable, Andrew, but it is not. You are conveniently ignoring at least two other possibilities.

1. The EU may fail to grant an extension.

2. Boris's master plan could be to apply for Article 24 of GATT, by which we could apply a protection period of up to 10 years. If the EU is as desperate for a deal as they make out, there is no reason why they should not support this. It deals with the backstop until such time as we agree a trade agreement, as well.

It sounds as though Boris also has other measures up his sleeve, which he is not revealing right now for obvious reasons.

nomadking 08-10-2019 18:43
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36013248)
Where has she admitted that? There's been some inadmissible off-the-record briefings from the UK Government but has she said anything like this?
The quote begins "Merkel said". If it had been anything else, it would/should have consisted of detailed specific objections to each part of the proposal, and which parts they were ok with. Have the EU said what parts they are ok with or could be tweaked?



What proposals have the EU even hinted at that would acceptable to them?
Link(again)

Quote:
The story of the backstop is not of a flawlessly executed Celtic masterplan, however. Dublin conceived it fitfully and gradually in response to British contradictions and missteps. But once crystallised as a goal, the Irish pursued it hell for leather.
They won't consider anything other option, they didn't even bother looking in the past 4 years for what according to them is a major issue.

Link

Quote:
Mr Varadkar has warned the Johnson plan could actually undermine that principle by giving one party in Northern Ireland a veto over what happens to the country as a whole.
"Country as a whole"? Shows the true motive behind the backstop. No alternative measures will ever be allowed. The backstop gives a veto to the IRA, Ireland, and the EU over what happens to the UK as a whole, and that's somehow reasonable and acceptable?

Damien 08-10-2019 18:53
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36013246)
And Merkel has now effectively admitted that the backstop was always the only option as far as the EU is concerned. The WA is a draft agreement, and the backstop is still there. The Irish haven't attempted to seek any solution either.
It's a bit of a coincidence that the account of the call from a 'No 10 source' of Merkel's call suits their overall argument. She is being unreasonable, admitting her cynical ploy and effectiely taking all the responsibility for No Deal.

Mr K 08-10-2019 18:57
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Have to say wish Merkel was our leader. Seems like a nice old bird. And she's vaguely competent, which puts her streets ahead of our leaders/potential leaders

nomadking 08-10-2019 19:05
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 36013253)
It's a bit of a coincidence that the account of the call from a 'No 10 source' of Merkel's call suits their overall argument. She is being unreasonable, admitting her cynical ploy and effectiely taking all the responsibility for No Deal.
And the denials aren't bit of a coincidence?
Other than the backstop, when have they ever said what proposals might be acceptable? It's always been a complete blanket no to the merest hint of a solution. Have Ireland and the EU ever said that X might be made to work? If you actually want to find a solution to something, the usual approach is either try and come up with something yourself, or at least be more supportive of other suggestions.

jfman 08-10-2019 19:26
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 36013255)
Have to say wish Merkel was our leader. Seems like a nice old bird. And she's vaguely competent, which puts her streets ahead of our leaders/potential leaders
At least we can be in no doubt she is acting in the best interests of Germany/the EU. As opposed to disaster capitalists, vultures and the USA.

mrmistoffelees 08-10-2019 19:34
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36013250)
You seem to believe that an extension is inevitable, Andrew, but it is not. You are conveniently ignoring at least two other possibilities.

1. The EU may fail to grant an extension.

2. Boris's master plan could be to apply for Article 24 of GATT, by which we could apply a protection period of up to 10 years. If the EU is as desperate for a deal as they make out, there is no reason why they should not support this. It deals with the backstop until such time as we agree a trade agreement, as well.

It sounds as though Boris also has other measures up his sleeve, which he is not revealing right now for obvious reasons.
Gatt24 cannot be used as Article 24 only applies to countries who are on the verge of finalizing free-trade agreements with each other

Is our current position anywhere near that ??? I don’t believe so

Also the EU et all would have to agree to the use of Article 24

Damien 08-10-2019 20:11
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36013258)
And the denials aren't bit of a coincidence?
Other than the backstop, when have they ever said what proposals might be acceptable? It's always been a complete blanket no to the merest hint of a solution. Have Ireland and the EU ever said that X might be made to work? If you actually want to find a solution to something, the usual approach is either try and come up with something yourself, or at least be more supportive of other suggestions.
Because it's all noise. If you don't want a border in Ireland then:
  1. No Brexit
  2. UK stays in a Customs Union
  3. N.Ireland stays in a Customs Union

You can't simultaneously have the whole of the U.K outside of the Customs Union and no border or infrastructure in Ireland. Since all three options above are red lines then we're heading towards a border in Ireland of some sort. We can have checks away from the border but that is still a less than smooth movement between the two countries.

Personally I can see two things happening to avoid it:
  1. We agree to kick the can down the road. N.Ireland stays in the Customs Union for now. Some fudge is made on the backstop (but who knows what that is)
  2. Or, more likely, The Tories win a majority in an election and can ignore the DUP putting the backstop in the Irish sea

Pierre 08-10-2019 20:12
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 36013255)
Have to say wish Merkel was our leader. Seems like a nice old bird. And she's vaguely competent, which puts her streets ahead of our leaders/potential leaders
Good old Mutty, ( that’s what they her, it is a term of affection)

richard s 08-10-2019 20:21
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
So we won two World Wars.. and still came out on the S*** side.



Strange how the Conservative mob dislike anything with the word UNION in it.

Hugh 08-10-2019 20:29
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 36013267)
Good old Mutty, ( that’s what they her, it is a term of affection)
Mutti - German for mummy.

1andrew1 08-10-2019 20:41
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Anything Jezza can do, BoJo can do better...
Quote:
Downing Street Is Split As Senior Boris Johnson Allies Turn On Dominic Cummings
As talks with Brussels appeared close to breakdown on Tuesday, BuzzFeed News can reveal details of a “parallel government” being run out of Number 10 by Johnson’s longstanding adviser Eddie Lister, how the prime minister’s top team is split over its aggressive media strategy, and an imminent power grab over the approach the Conservative Party should take during an election — pencilled in for the end of November — and who should run the campaign.
Several backbench Tory MPs and a core group of cabinet ministers led by Julian Smith, Robert Buckland, Matt Hancock, and Nicky Morgan have raised concerns over the direction taken by Number 10 in recent weeks.
https://www.buzzfeed.com/alexwickham...ohnsons-allies

nomadking 08-10-2019 20:58
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by richard s (Post 36013270)
So we won two World Wars.. and still came out on the S*** side.



Strange how the Conservative mob dislike anything with the word UNION in it.
Conservative Party is the shortened name. Guess what word appears in the full version.:rolleyes:


It's about not wanting to told to do by other countries and being under their control.

1andrew1 08-10-2019 21:06
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 36013265)
Because it's all noise.
You're right - it's all noise. But there's plenty of people who are more than happy to convince themselves it's not.

Hugh 08-10-2019 21:18
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
1 Attachment(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36013276)
Conservative Party is the shortened name. Guess what word appears in the full version.:rolleyes:


It's about not wanting to told to do by other countries and being under their control.
Union doesn’t - Unionist does... ;)

And don’t forget, a majority of Conservative members would sacrifice the integrity of the U.K. for Brexit, so don’t seem very "unionist"...

Mick 08-10-2019 21:51
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
We seem to be forgetting the principle reason I re-opened this thread. Brexit developments only discussion.

I do not want to see non-Brexit development nonsense shared from social media posted in this topic, unless it is actually in the main news.

1andrew1 08-10-2019 23:02
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Makes sense, there's not much you can get done between now and January if you have an election in late November.
Quote:
EU may offer to extend deadline for Brexit deal to June
The European Union is poised to extend Brexit talks into as late as next summer after the European council and commission presidents dismissed Boris Johnson’s strategy as a “blame game”.
A “range of dates” will now be in play at the meeting of European leaders next week but sources suggested the natural cut-off date would be June.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...deal-to-summer

---------- Post added at 23:02 ---------- Previous post was at 22:53 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees (Post 36013262)
Gatt24 cannot be used as Article 24 only applies to countries who are on the verge of finalizing free-trade agreements with each other

Is our current position anywhere near that ??? I don’t believe so

Also the EU et all would have to agree to the use of Article 24
Exactly and I'm sure we've tried to help Old Boy understand this point before.

No EU country will weaken the union by voting against an extension. It's in no member country's interests.

Carth 09-10-2019 03:11
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36013296)
No EU country will weaken the union by voting against an extension. It's in no member country's interests.
October, January, now it's June . . eventually it will be 12 month extensions and we still won't get anywhere :rolleyes:

There's only one way out, and everybody knows what it is

jfman 09-10-2019 04:46
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carth (Post 36013306)
October, January, now it's June . . eventually it will be 12 month extensions and we still won't get anywhere :rolleyes:

There's only one way out, and everybody knows what it is
That may well be true, but leaving without a deal arbitrarily at the end of this month, a date decided by the EU, is reckless. The transitional element of Theresa May’s effectively moved exit day (in real terms) December next year anyway. Why not stay in until then, or as close to then) and leave without a deal? Businesses then can prepare knowing the outcome.

People in darkened rooms can start planning trade deals.

Leaving now is only important to those driven by ideology or the disaster capitalists.

1andrew1 09-10-2019 07:33
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carth (Post 36013306)

There's only one way out, and everybody knows what it is
Are you still harking on about revoking Article 50? :D

ianch99 09-10-2019 08:47
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36013309)
Are you still harking on about revoking Article 50? :D
That's funny :clap:

---------- Post added at 08:47 ---------- Previous post was at 08:39 ----------

It does seem Cummings is out of control though. He clearly does not tolerate leaks in No. 10 and so the "leaks" to the Spectator and the one about the Merkel phone call are clearly penned by him.

This description of No. 10 from the other side of the table is apt and accurate:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...brexit-trouble

Quote:
Donald Tusk had read the reports while travelling to Berlin. The European council president was going to see Merkel at the chancellery as part of a routine tour of European capitals before next week’s EU summit, where Brexit is again crowding out the agenda. Tusk, an anglophile former Polish prime minister with a sharp turn of phrase, has been deeply frustrated by what he sees as Downing Street’s attempt to avoid responsibility.

As his car headed to the chancellery, he decided it was time to hit back and accused Johnson directly of playing “some stupid blame game” and making a deal impossible. “Where are you going?” he asked in Latin.

He was not alone in that view. In Brussels, European diplomats were aghast at what they saw as the No 10 spin machine out of control. “It’s incredibly immature. Kids in the kindergarten behave more maturely than this,” one senior diplomat said of the latest No 10 briefings. “It’s amazing, that’s all I can say.”

The diplomat told the Guardian it might be better to simply ignore the statements, suggesting they could not represent the strategy of a serious country. “This is so strange and immature. This can’t be government policy, this can’t be a majority opinion in Downing Street.”

The same diplomat described No 10’s account of the call with Merkel as “an incredible distortion of facts”, saying she would have repeated the EU’s longstanding position that a customs border was not compatible with the UK’s obligations under the Good Friday agreement.

Another diplomat described No 10’s account of the call as “quite shocking”, pointing to claims that Merkel had apparently said Germany could leave the EU “no problem” if it wanted. “She would never have mentioned Germany leaving the EU - it’s quite gross and ridiculous,” the diplomat said. “For me, it was obvious that it was designed for a domestic audience but, at the same time, how could they attribute that to the chancellor?”
Embarrassing times to be British ..

Carth 09-10-2019 09:06
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 36013310)
Embarrassing times to be British ..

Don't you mean Embarrassing times to be English?

That Verruca fella in Ireland is being a pain in the rear, closely followed by others both North & South.

Meanwhile, the Scots are trying to do away with Parliament altogether and use their courts (again) to decide what we do.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotla...itics-49975066

Quote:
Three Scottish judges are due to announce later whether a court can sign a Brexit extension letter on behalf of the government.
It's time we showed these heathens who's boss and invaded again, pitchforks and blazing torches at the ready lads :D :D

nomadking 09-10-2019 09:33
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 36013310)
That's funny :clap:

---------- Post added at 08:47 ---------- Previous post was at 08:39 ----------

It does seem Cummings is out of control though. He clearly does not tolerate leaks in No. 10 and so the "leaks" to the Spectator and the one about the Merkel phone call are clearly penned by him.

This description of No. 10 from the other side of the table is apt and accurate:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...brexit-trouble

Embarrassing times to be British ..
And how is "EU’s longstanding position that a customs border was not compatible" inconsistent with what Merkel is claimed to have said? Was Tusk in on the call? Doesn't seem so.

denphone 09-10-2019 10:15
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Special sitting for MPs to decide Brexit future.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49984367

Quote:
The House of Commons has only sat on four Saturdays since 1939, including on 2 September that year, due to the outbreak of World War Two.
Quote:
The last time there was a Saturday sitting was 3 April 1982, due to the invasion of the Falkland Islands.

papa smurf 09-10-2019 10:17
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by denphone (Post 36013321)
Special sitting for MPs to decide Brexit future.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49984367
Great let's hope we are declaring war on the EU.

denphone 09-10-2019 10:21
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 36013323)
Great let's hope we are declaring war on the EU.
Wars get you nowhere as l thought one would have realised that by now..

Mr K 09-10-2019 10:36
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by denphone (Post 36013325)
Wars get you nowhere as l thought one would have realised that by now..
I think the Smurf was be humorous which I for one, applaud on this desperately depressing thread.

If he wasn't being humorous it's become more depressing..

ianch99 09-10-2019 10:54
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 36013330)
I think the Smurf was be humorous which I for one, applaud on this desperately depressing thread.

If he wasn't being humorous it's become more depressing..
The depressing part is that you actually don't know for certain if he was being humorous :)

---------- Post added at 10:54 ---------- Previous post was at 10:52 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36013315)
And how is "EU’s longstanding position that a customs border was not compatible" inconsistent with what Merkel is claimed to have said? Was Tusk in on the call? Doesn't seem so.
Just ignore the spin from the Propaganda Ministry at No. 10. Probably the best course of action ..

nomadking 09-10-2019 11:07
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 36013339)
The depressing part is that you actually don't know for certain if he was being humorous :)

---------- Post added at 10:54 ---------- Previous post was at 10:52 ----------


Just ignore the spin from the Propaganda Ministry at No. 10. Probably the best course of action ..
As Col. Nathan R. Jessep(Jack Nicholson) said.....

papa smurf 09-10-2019 11:11
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
1 Attachment(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 36013330)
I think the Smurf was be humorous which I for one, applaud on this desperately depressing thread.

If he wasn't being humorous it's become more depressing..

ianch99 09-10-2019 11:22
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36013344)
As Col. Nathan R. Jessep(Jack Nicholson) said.....
You mean someone who is not authentic saying something that betrayed his position as being unlawful? :)

---------- Post added at 11:22 ---------- Previous post was at 11:21 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carth (Post 36013314)
Don't you mean Embarrassing times to be English?

That Verruca fella in Ireland is being a pain in the rear, closely followed by others both North & South.

Meanwhile, the Scots are trying to do away with Parliament altogether and use their courts (again) to decide what we do.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotla...itics-49975066



It's time we showed these heathens who's boss and invaded again, pitchforks and blazing torches at the ready lads :D :D
Irony can be a cruel mistress ..

Hugh 09-10-2019 11:28
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 36013323)
Great let's hope we are declaring war on the EU.
Funny how a lot of people who call for wars have rarely seen combat, or are likely to...

Carth 09-10-2019 12:54
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Wars, nasty things that happen occasionally.

Lots of people see combat once, and for a very brief time.

Some people make quite a bit of money from them.

They do tend to cull excessive population growth nicely though.

Those who want and instigate wars should lead from the front :Yes:

Mr K 09-10-2019 13:30
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carth (Post 36013355)
Wars, nasty things that happen occasionally.

Lots of people see combat once, and for a very brief time.

Some people make quite a bit of money from them.

They do tend to cull excessive population growth nicely though.

Those who want and instigate wars should lead from the front :Yes:
I honestly believe some of our older senile generation would love a war. They could wheel Vera Lynn out, eat powdered egg and sing rude songs about foreigners, who they are reliant on for care....

ntluser 09-10-2019 14:02
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
There's always the possibility that Boris is planning to leave the EU with a purpose.

If we crash out there will be economic chaos in both the UK and the EU.

However, once we are out of the EU he can take up all the deals that Liam Fox provisionally facilitated around the world plus of course a deal with America.

The EU won't really be able to do that and they also need to find where the contribution money gap created by the UK leaving is going to come from.

The EU will be losing out on the UK market and our businesses will be using our new deals to market the products that would have gone to the EU, so that's the EU's loss.

Then of course Boris can apply sometime later to do a trade deal with the EU but on his terms. Given that our trade potential should be a lot higher from all the new deals, the EU might be happier to do a deal with us in the future.

But we'll have to wait and see.

Hugh 09-10-2019 14:06
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
I believe in gambling that sort of proposition is called a six-fold accumulator - a lot has to go right to win it...

denphone 09-10-2019 14:10
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36013363)
I believe in gambling that sort of proposition is called a six-fold accumulator - a lot has to go right to win it...
Six-fold accumulators rarely come up and when they do its very occasionally..

Mr K 09-10-2019 16:37
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Damian Green, leader of the One Nation caucus of MPs, says Boris Johnson told him at meeting:
- he will not go into election promising no deal Brexit
- he will not make a pact with Nigel Farage.
"We looked each other in the eye. I accept and believe the reassurances," says Green
https://twitter.com/rowenamason/stat...396004354?s=20
Interesting.
Firstly that he now admits Brexit maybe delayed. Secondly that going into an election on a No Deal platform is unacceptable to many in his party, Also he hates Farage, and who can blame him for that.

He could of course be lying, unlikely I know...

papa smurf 09-10-2019 16:43
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 36013375)
https://twitter.com/rowenamason/stat...396004354?s=20
Interesting.
Firstly that he now admits Brexit maybe delayed. Secondly that going into an election on a No Deal platform is unacceptable to many in his party, Also he hates Farage, and who can blame him for that.

He could of course be lying, unlikely I know...
No mr K you're the one who hates Farage,Boris just won't have an election pact with him, you should seek medical help for your hate issues before your health is impacted.

jfman 09-10-2019 17:01
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 36013376)
No mr K you're the one who hates Farage,Boris just won't have an election pact with him, you should seek medical help for your hate issues before your health is impacted.
When did this forum become full of medical professionals? I suppose with the inevitable medicine shortages after no deal Brexit we might resort to following old wives tales in vain attempts to heal illnesses.

1andrew1 09-10-2019 17:12
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36013378)
When did this forum become full of medical professionals? I suppose with the inevitable medicine shortages after no deal Brexit we might resort to following old wives tales in vain attempts to heal illnesses.
There won't be a no-deal Brexit. Not even Boris will sign off on it. ;)

papa smurf 09-10-2019 17:16
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36013378)
When did this forum become full of medical professionals? I suppose with the inevitable medicine shortages after no deal Brexit we might resort to following old wives tales in vain attempts to heal illnesses.
About the same time as it became full of Barristers,judges,and armchair generals.;)

OLD BOY 09-10-2019 17:17
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees (Post 36013262)
Gatt24 cannot be used as Article 24 only applies to countries who are on the verge of finalizing free-trade agreements with each other

Is our current position anywhere near that ??? I don’t believe so

Also the EU et all would have to agree to the use of Article 24
I don't know where you get that from, that you have to be 'on the verge' of finalising an agreement. It's a protection period of up to 10 years, remember?

Anyway, both the UK and the EU know what they want from the trade deal, so it would be relatively simple to set that out in an appropriate document to satisfy Article 24.

Why would the EU not sign it? They don't want a disruption of a 'no deal' according to them, and this provides the breathing space both sides need. If we can't agree on a deal, this is the practical means of resolving the transitional problems of our leaving.

papa smurf 09-10-2019 17:17
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36013379)
There won't be a no-deal Brexit. Not even Boris will sign off on it. ;)
Put a tenner on it at the bookies if your that sure;)

OLD BOY 09-10-2019 17:23
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36013296)
Exactly and I'm sure we've tried to help Old Boy understand this point before.

No EU country will weaken the union by voting against an extension. It's in no member country's interests.
The point made is incorrect. You cannot point to any part of the GATT Agreement that proves your point. It's just more smoke and mirrors from the Remain side

1andrew1 09-10-2019 17:27
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 36013382)
Put a tenner on it at the bookies if your that sure;)
I've put £100!

---------- Post added at 17:27 ---------- Previous post was at 17:25 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36013384)
The point made is incorrect. You cannot point to any part of the GATT Agreement that proves your point. It's just more smoke and mirrors from the Remain side
Wrong - per the independent fact-checkers.
https://fullfact.org/europe/article-24/

Hugh 09-10-2019 17:28
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 36013380)
About the same time as it became full of Barristers,judges,and armchair generals.;)
You appear to be confusing people who reference barristers and judges with people who think they are barristers and judges.

For example, I don't think you're the Daily Express, even though you reference it frequently...

OLD BOY 09-10-2019 17:35
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36013385)
Wrong - per the independent fact-checkers.
https://fullfact.org/europe/article-24/
Oh, yeah, and it's so difficult to come up with a 'plan and schedule'! I don't think so!

jfman 09-10-2019 18:46
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36013389)
Oh, yeah, and it's so difficult to come up with a 'plan and schedule'! I don't think so!
That the EU would agree to?

pip08456 09-10-2019 18:47
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36013385)
I've put £100!

---------- Post added at 17:27 ---------- Previous post was at 17:25 ----------


Wrong - per the independent fact-checkers.
https://fullfact.org/europe/article-24/
Wrong, that does not say it is impossible, merely very unlikely in practice.

Carth 09-10-2019 19:03
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 36013382)
Put a tenner on it at the bookies if your that sure;)
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36013385)
I've put £100!
You're willing to throw £100 on Boris not doing a 'no deal brexit', yet continually harp on about Boris and his chums definitely wanting one in order to earn their £millions . . . make your mind up fella ;)

Gavin78 09-10-2019 19:27
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
It won't do him any favours to extend if you go by the adverts we are leaving on the 31st

Sephiroth 09-10-2019 19:28
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
It's all very simple. The EU is playing the game it has always played when a referendum doesn't go their way: Coerce the dissenting country to hold a second referendum. They smell this coming and so they give nothing away in terms of concessions.

As I and others have said before, those antidemocratic charlatans are intent on carving off a piece of the UK as punishment for daring to want to leave their poxy organisation.

Why would reasonable Remainers want to part of such an organisation?



Mr K 09-10-2019 19:29
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carth (Post 36013398)
You're willing to throw £100 on Boris not doing a 'no deal brexit', yet continually harp on about Boris and his chums definitely wanting one in order to earn their £millions . . . make your mind up fella ;)
It's 1/4 that No Deal won't happen so Andrew would only make £25 on his £100 stake, although pretty much guaranteed. Tempted to put a grand on ;)
https://www.oddschecker.com/politics/brexit

nomadking 09-10-2019 19:35
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36013363)
I believe in gambling that sort of proposition is called a six-fold accumulator - a lot has to go right to win it...
Nothing at all to do with gambling, of course. It's negotiating 101. In no way would a trade union be expected to approach a dispute in the way the Remain side expect the UK to do. Any trade union official that used the Remain "tactics" would be soon kicked out as a traitor.

jfman 09-10-2019 19:49
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36013402)
It's all very simple. The EU is playing the game it has always played when a referendum doesn't go their way: Coerce the dissenting country to hold a second referendum. They smell this coming and so they give nothing away in terms of concessions.

As I and others have said before, those antidemocratic charlatans are intent on carving off a piece of the UK as punishment for daring to want to leave their poxy organisation.

Why would reasonable Remainers want to part of such an organisation?


When you stop framing things in the context of England being the centre of the universe, you find out the EU is acting in its own best interests. Given it is a trade bloc this is not hugely surprising.

We can't even act in our own best interests!

denphone 09-10-2019 19:49
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 36013404)
It's 1/4 that No Deal won't happen so Andrew would only make £25 on his £100 stake, although pretty much guaranteed. Tempted to put a grand on ;)
https://www.oddschecker.com/politics/brexit
The bookies are rarely wrong as you find me a poor bookie.

Damien 09-10-2019 20:00
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36013402)
It's all very simple. The EU is playing the game it has always played when a referendum doesn't go their way: Coerce the dissenting country to hold a second referendum. They smell this coming and so they give nothing away in terms of concessions.

As I and others have said before, those antidemocratic charlatans are intent on carving off a piece of the UK as punishment for daring to want to leave their poxy organisation.

Why would reasonable Remainers want to part of such an organisation?


What would your solution to N.Ireland border/no-border be then?

Sephiroth 09-10-2019 20:05
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36013406)
When you stop framing things in the context of England being the centre of the universe, you find out the EU is acting in its own best interests. Given it is a trade bloc this is not hugely surprising.

We can't even act in our own best interests!
I've done nothing of the sort. Our nation is the UK to no less an extent that Germany comprises its Laender.

Nobody is arguing that the EU is acting in its own best interests - or at least I'm not. But their actions shouldn't make us happy at being part of their undemocratic organisation.

Your last sentence - spot on.

nomadking 09-10-2019 20:08
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 36013408)
What would your solution to N.Ireland border/no-border be then?
The onus is on the receiving country, ie the EU. That is the way it operates everywhere else in the World. Eg Is China expected to enforce border controls on behalf of other countries? They can ship whatever they like, it is up to the destination country to control and choose what they let in and what they don't.

Link
Quote:
Mr Barnier said the UK's suggested alternative to the Irish backstop - which would see customs checks conducted away from the border at business premises or electronically - "had not been tested" and was "largely based" on exemptions for small businesses and technology that "has yet to be developed".
The bit in bold goes for each and every possible solution, ironically including the backstop. And the EU still claim they are ready to accept a "valid" solution.

Damien 09-10-2019 20:16
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36013411)
The onus is on the receiving country, ie the EU. That is the way it operates everywhere else in the World. Eg Is China expected to enforce border controls on behalf of other countries? They can ship whatever they like, it is up to the destination country to control and choose what they let in and what they don't.
Both countries exist either side of the border. Stuff will come into the UK too.

jfman 09-10-2019 20:31
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 36013413)
Both countries exist either side of the border. Stuff will come into the UK too.
We will man the border to keep immigrants out while waving smugglers of chlorinated chicken through.

nomadking 09-10-2019 20:32
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 36013413)
Both countries exist either side of the border. Stuff will come into the UK too.
But that is for the UK to decide. Just as the EU decides what to accept from China.


Article 50 says, we can leave. The EU, including Ireland, is bound by that.

Damien 09-10-2019 20:35
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36013415)
But that is for the UK to decide. Just as the EU decides what to accept from China.
So should be have no customs checks, no border, in Ireland or should we?

Sephiroth 09-10-2019 20:36
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36013415)
But that is for the UK to decide. Just as the EU decides what to accept from China.


Article 50 says, we can leave. The EU, including Ireland, is bound by that.
Merkel says that Germany can leave quite simply; the UK cannot leave without leaving Ulster in the SM & CU for ever.

Damien 09-10-2019 20:39
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36013417)
Merkel says that Germany can leave quite simply; the UK cannot leave without leaving Ulster in the SM & CU for ever.
According the No 10's 'source' that is. We don't have her saying that publicly or confirming she said it in that call. Instead she seemed to have given perfect ammunition to No 10 according to No 10s account. No 10 heading by that most honest of politicians Boris Johnson who wouldn't lie, lie and lie again whenever he felt like it.

nomadking 09-10-2019 20:50
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36013414)
We will man the border to keep immigrants out while waving smugglers of chlorinated chicken through.
Just as the EU currently keeps illegal immigrants and horse meat masquerading as beef, out of the EU.:rolleyes:
Nothing stopping a country sending chlorinated chicken, which is safer the the EU version. The issue was about imposing more costly abattoir standards on the rest of the EU and beyond.


Chlorinated chicken: How safe is it?
Quote:
Fears over chlorine-washed chicken and other US farming practices have been described by US ambassador to the UK Woody Johnson as "inflammatory and misleading".
Mr Johnson urged the UK to embrace US farming methods after Washington published its objectives for a UK-US trade deal. He said the process was used by EU farmers to treat vegetables, and that it was the best way to deal with salmonella and other bacteria.
So is it safe? The evidence suggests the chlorine wash itself is not harmful. But the concern is that treating meat with chlorine at the end allows poorer hygiene elsewhere in the production process.
Quote:
It's not consuming chlorine itself that the EU is worried about - in fact in 2005 the European Food Safety Authority said that "exposure to chlorite residues arising from treated poultry carcasses would be of no safety concern". Chlorine-rinsed bagged salads are common in the UK and other countries in the EU. But the EU believes that relying on a chlorine rinse at the end of the meat production process could be a way of compensating for poor hygiene standards - such as dirty or crowded abattoirs.
And dirty or crowded abattoirs don't exist, with EU rules in place?


Link

Quote:
Poultry carcass treatment: While this practice is commonly used in the US and other countries, it is forbidden in the EU. In conjunction with other controls, it is an effective tool to reduce the risk of Salmonella contamination in poultry meat.
This is what the EU allows in
Quote:
Brazil is the largest exporter of frozen chicken in the world, exporting $750m-worth of the meat to Europe last year. But about one in five of its birds are contaminated with the food poisoning bug salmonella.
How is washing with air and water better?

Sephiroth 09-10-2019 20:52
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 36013418)
According the No 10's 'source' that is. We don't have her saying that publicly or confirming she said it in that call. Instead she seemed to have given perfect ammunition to No 10 according to No 10s account. No 10 heading by that most honest of politicians Boris Johnson who wouldn't lie, lie and lie again whenever he felt like it.
Nor has she come back and said that was a lie,

jfman 09-10-2019 20:56
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Fears over US farming standards have been dismissed.... By US farmers. The new Boeing jet was safe too.

Beyond parody.

---------- Post added at 20:56 ---------- Previous post was at 20:54 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36013421)
Nor has she come back and said that was a lie,
Probably doesn't have time to pander to German morons, never mind English ones.

nomadking 09-10-2019 20:56
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 36013418)
According the No 10's 'source' that is. We don't have her saying that publicly or confirming she said it in that call. Instead she seemed to have given perfect ammunition to No 10 according to No 10s account. No 10 heading by that most honest of politicians Boris Johnson who wouldn't lie, lie and lie again whenever he felt like it.
So under the official EU claimed reason, which EU countries could decide to leave? Only Malta could leave as there is no land borders.

jfman 09-10-2019 21:01
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36013425)
So under the official EU claimed reason, which EU countries could decide to leave? Only Malta could leave as there is no land borders.
What "EU claimed reason" are you referring to? In what Treaty?

Damien 09-10-2019 21:10
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36013421)
Nor has she come back and said that was a lie,
She probably doesn't want to outright accuse them of lying especially since, as with their way, the cowardly approach to the statement that means No 10 can deny it anyway. You're not meant to be doing these things as leaders of countries talking to each other.

They have also said via 'sources' the transcription was inaccurate but left it at that: https://www.irishtimes.com/news/worl...rkel-1.4044213

Quote:
Senior German sources say the conversation between the two leaders was not as described in the UK media.


---------- Post added at 21:10 ---------- Previous post was at 21:09 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36013425)
So under the official EU claimed reason, which EU countries could decide to leave? Only Malta could leave as there is no land borders.
So you think we need to take the border approach?

ntluser 09-10-2019 21:20
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36013414)
We will man the border to keep immigrants out while waving smugglers of chlorinated chicken through.
Immigrants are not the problem as we need them to do the jobs that UK nationals can't and/or don't want to do.

It's the government's failure to manage the consequences of immigration that is the problem and probably the main reason why people voted to leave the EU.

That's why we are short of teachers, doctors, nurses, radiographers etc not to mention adequate amounts of housing,appropriate numbers of school places,prison places, power stations etc. Basically, it's a lack of foresight and planning.

jfman 09-10-2019 21:23
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ntluser (Post 36013432)
Immigrants are not the problem as we need them to do the jobs that UK nationals can't and/or don't want to do.

It's the government's failure to manage the consequences of immigration that is the problem and probably the main reason why people voted to leave the EU.

That's why we are short of teachers, doctors, nurses, radiographers etc not to mention adequate amounts of housing,appropriate numbers of school places,prison places, power stations etc. Basically, it's a lack of foresight and planning.
Preaching to the converted mate.

nomadking 09-10-2019 21:36
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36013423)
Fears over US farming standards have been dismissed.... By US farmers. The new Boeing jet was safe too.

Beyond parody.

---------- Post added at 20:56 ---------- Previous post was at 20:54 ----------



Probably doesn't have time to pander to German morons, never mind English ones.
Doesn't matter one little bit, what the farming standards are. The important bit is the final end result, ie which is safer.

The Poultry World article was "By Rick van Oort, Ceva Sante Animale, France", and seems to be a European website.

The fact remains that chlorinated washing is safer than with just air and water. It certainly can't be worse, as common sense says that air and water is already included in the chlorinated washing. The EU has pronounced that it is a safe process.

Other measures are the ones that have actually reduced infection rates, and the US has their own ones which have also done that.

EU measures work so well don't they.:rolleyes:
Link
Quote:
Every home-cooked chicken poses a food poisoning risk because supermarkets are acting too slowly to eradicate a dangerous bug, officials have said.
Tests over the past nine months found 73 per cent of chickens in supermarkets contained campylobacter, which makes 280,000 people ill every year and can cause death.
Quote:
Marks & Spencer said a trial of five new policies, which included offering bonuses to farmers who kept campylobacter out of their flocks and blasting the surface of chickens with liquid nitrogen, had produced a "step-change improvement".
That's outside of EU regs.

---------- Post added at 21:36 ---------- Previous post was at 21:27 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36013427)
What "EU claimed reason" are you referring to? In what Treaty?
Link

Quote:
"We need operational real controls, credible controls, we are talking about the credibility of the single market here - its credulity to consumers, to companies, and to third counties that we have agreements with."
How would that also not apply to any EU country with a land border?


Article 50 is in the Lisbon Treaty, which Ireland(eventually) approved in a referendum.
Quote:
This is all the more important as Article 50 TEU lowers the conditions for a withdrawal as stipulated under international law.

jfman 09-10-2019 21:37
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Farming standards don't matter.

We've had enough of experts

nomadking 09-10-2019 22:05
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36013438)
Farming standards don't matter.

We've had enough of experts
They're not relevant in the context of chlorinated chicken and EU rules. As I said, the important thing is the end result. Chlorinated washing improves the end result. Whatever way you look at it, EU foodstuffs would be safer if they used chlorinated washing. If the EU was that interested in food safety, then it would seem they should impose a regime of washing with liquid nitrogen.
Quote:
Marks & Spencer said a trial of five new policies, which included offering bonuses to farmers who kept campylobacter out of their flocks and blasting the surface of chickens with liquid nitrogen, had produced a "step-change improvement".

1andrew1 09-10-2019 22:17
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36013427)
What "EU claimed reason" are you referring to? In what Treaty?
It's Cummings' famous fake news spin that even BoJo couldn't bring himself to repeat to his Cabinet.

Carth 10-10-2019 00:15
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Keep your chickens, I haven't touched them for years.

I've already seen and read enough about places in the UK that process and package chickens, to avoid them at all costs.

Oh, and if you think processing factories are any different in other countries . . . . . :dozey:

I used to work in a food factory . . quality control my arse :rolleyes:

Maggy 10-10-2019 08:12
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
So what are the NEW developments if any?

papa smurf 10-10-2019 09:24
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maggy (Post 36013451)
So what are the NEW developments if any?
Boris is talking to Leo...........


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:04.
Page 12 of 56 « First 2891011 12 1314151622 Last »
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
All Posts and Content are © Cable Forum