Cable Forum
Page 39 of 56 « First 2935363738 39 4041424349 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)

OLD BOY 13-09-2020 20:14
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36049909)
I think he did, old bean.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/12...el-barnier-spt

THE EU's chief Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier has ruled out granting Prime Minister Boris Johnson a Canada-style trade deal - something he had previously promised the UK, unearthed reports reveal.

1andrew1 13-09-2020 20:43
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36049859)
But you’ve just dodged Nomad’s core question?

That’s the problem with several of you Remainers.
The questuioin has been answered and it's time to move on - we've left the EU.

---------- Post added at 20:24 ---------- Previous post was at 20:20 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36049902)
You are very quick to claim a breach of trust by the UK, but you ignore the fact that the EU is responsible for this state of affairs and is itself breaching trust.

We know you only have eyes for the EU, Andrew, but you take your bias to extraordinary lengths.

What has happened to the promise of a Canadian-style deal that Barnier dangled in front of us not long ago? What happened to his reference to a no-tariff free trade deal he was happy to sign up to in the political declaration?

You read a lot, so you must be aware that the tweeking of the Withdrawal Agreement is necessary only if the EU fails to honour that political commitment, and that the tweeks are necessary to prevent a food blockade, which the EU have hinted at rather menacingly.

Open your eyes, Andrew. We are not asking for anything that the EU hasn't granted to other countries, yet you call the British government out on this. We will not relinquish our sovereignty or have our democracy undermined. We are leaving the jurisdiction of the EU whether they like it or not and if they won't strike a deal (thus flying in the face of common sense) then they won't get any allocation of our fish at all.
I'm with your fellow Berkshire poster. If the amendment is needed, it's not needed now. It's antagonistic willy-waving to introduce it at this stage of the negotiations which shows a torrid and desperate approach.

It's been stated before why the EU won't allow a neighbouring country to compete on unequal terms yet have tariff-free access to the Single Market so no need to retread the well-worn track.

---------- Post added at 20:43 ---------- Previous post was at 20:24 ----------

Pretty clear evidence here that BoJo is witholding a good deal with the EU from the British people. Why can't he give the EU the same guarantees he has given Japan? Frankly, it looks rather incompetent. Let's get a deal with the EU and move on, BoJo!
Quote:
Japan trade deal commits UK to stricter state aid curbs than in EU talks
The UK’s new trade deal with Japan commits it to tougher restrictions on state aid than the ones it is currently offering the EU in the Brexit talks, potentially undermining its negotiating position with Brussels.

In the bilateral UK-Japan agreement announced in principle on Friday, London and Tokyo have agreed to replicate the restrictions on subsidies in the EU-Japan deal that went into effect last year. That agreement prohibits the governments from indefinitely guaranteeing the debts of struggling companies or providing an open-ended bailout without a clear restructuring plan in place.

By contrast, the UK has repeatedly told the EU that it must have total freedom over state aid after the end of the Brexit transition period with complete autonomy over future subsidy decisions, subject to WTO rules.
https://www.ft.com/content/edb7d155-...3-31b2247fa178

nomadking 13-09-2020 20:46
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36049909)
How does "particular proximity" translate into fishing rights? Are EU deals with those also in "particular proximity", eg Norway, Iceland, Turkey, Switzerland, and Ukraine, dependent on fishing rights? The EU is asking of the UK, things that it asks of nobody else.

Sephiroth 13-09-2020 20:47
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36049909)
Didn't he?

https://www.politicshome.com/news/ar...eting-with-mps

Quote:
Michel Barnier has dealt a further blow to Theresa May’s beleaguered Brexit plan by reportedly telling MPs she should ditch the Chequers deal and pursue a Canada-style arrangement instead.
Also https://www.euractiv.com/section/uk-...style-eu-deal/

nomadking 13-09-2020 21:39
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36049914)
The questuioin has been answered and it's time to move on - we've left the EU.

---------- Post added at 20:24 ---------- Previous post was at 20:20 ----------


I'm with your fellow Berkshire poster. If the amendment is needed, it's not needed now. It's antagonistic willy-waving to introduce it at this stage of the negotiations which shows a torrid and desperate approach.

It's been stated before why the EU won't allow a neighbouring country to compete on unequal terms yet have tariff-free access to the Single Market so no need to retread the well-worn track.

---------- Post added at 20:43 ---------- Previous post was at 20:24 ----------

Pretty clear evidence here that BoJo is witholding a good deal with the EU from the British people. Why can't he give the EU the same guarantees he has given Japan? Frankly, it looks rather incompetent. Let's get a deal with the EU and move on, BoJo!

https://www.ft.com/content/edb7d155-...3-31b2247fa178
Do all EU countries operate on equal terms with each other? Of course not. Are you going to compare Romania(or anywhere else) with Germany? Any "equality" is because Germany sets it's OWN rules, and then forces the EU to follow suit.

It has to be implemented NOW, simply because time is running out and the Joint committee that is to supposedly decide and agree everything NI-related, hasn't decided or agreed on anything.

Typical nonsense comparisons.
The UK-Japan state subsidy restrictions are LIMITED in nature.
Quote:
That agreement prohibits the governments from indefinitely guaranteeing the debts of struggling companies or providing an open-ended bailout without a clear restructuring plan in place.
No mention of level of state aid which is just one of the things the EU is insisting upon. I should imagine that on the issue of state aid, if that was all the EU was asking for, that aspect would've been agreed long ago. Where is the evidence that is the only concern of the EU on state aid?
Link
Quote:
The EU Commission says too much steel is produced in Europe. As a result, it has been inclined to take a fairly tough line on state aid in this sector.
In 2016 for example, the commission ordered Belgium to recover 211m euros in illegal state aid it had given to its steel industry.
...
The Labour leader said the government should have decided it wanted to own British Steel and nationalised it - but that is also tricky under EU rules.
A government can own a company under state-aid rules - but it is not allowed to keep it going if it would otherwise fail.
...
Therefore, it seems likely that EU single market rules are not the only thing limiting state aid.
Anyway.
Quote:
Aside from what is agreed with the EU, after Brexit, Britain will still belong to the World Trade Organization, which also has state-aid rules: members can impose tariffs - taxes on imports - on countries that excessively subsidise domestic industry.
Doesn't mean the UK is going to run amok with anything, just that the limits shouldn't be set by the EU and ECJ, where we have no say whatsoever. Did the EU insist that it was they and the ECJ to rule on anything with Japan etc, including state aid? OF COURSE NOT. Does the EU say that they can change the state aid rules, and Japan is FORCED to follow suit. OF COURSE NOT.

Damien 13-09-2020 22:24
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Geoffrey Cox is voting against:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/g...word-qx36n6hwk

Sorry for not being able to post the whole thing, no subscription. However this the link with the news of his rebellion.

Quote:
When the Queen’s minister gives his word, on her behalf, it should be axiomatic that he will keep it, even if the consequences are unpalatable. By doing so he pledges the faith, honour and credit of this nation and it diminishes the standing and reputation of Britain in the world if it should be seen to be otherwise.

Chris 13-09-2020 22:46
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 36049935)
Geoffrey Cox is voting against:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/g...word-qx36n6hwk

Sorry for not being able to post the whole thing, no subscription. However this the link with the news of his rebellion.
For all his fine words, he appears to have voted with the government on the Finance Act 2013 at every stage. This piece of legislation similarly breached international treaty in certain very specific ways.

I wonder if he’s had a falling out with Boris?

1andrew1 13-09-2020 23:22
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
More details on Geoffrey Cox's approach from Tom Newton Dunn of Times Radio in this tweet thread

Includes:
Quote:
Cox has been in repeated contact with No10 and the PM, and spoke to Boris Johnson personally today to ask him to go down the dispute resolution route. The PM refused. Cox will abstain at 2nd reading and then vote against the bill at every other stage unless PM changes his mind.
https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/stat...50002885804032

---------- Post added at 23:16 ---------- Previous post was at 23:08 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36049930)
Do all EU countries operate on equal terms with each other? Of course not. Are you going to compare Romania(or anywhere else) with Germany? Any "equality" is because Germany sets it's OWN rules, and then forces the EU to follow suit.
I don't have time to correct everything in this post today but suffice to say one country doesn't have the kind of absolute power over the EU you pretend it does.

---------- Post added at 23:22 ---------- Previous post was at 23:16 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris (Post 36049936)
For all his fine words, he appears to have voted with the government on the Finance Act 2013 at every stage. This piece of legislation similarly breached international treaty in certain very specific ways
Channel 4 have factchecked that particular claim - made originally by the hapless Brandon Lewis - and found it to be incorrect.

Quote:
And when the 2013 Act was still a draft bill, a senior HMRC official told the Select Committee on Economic Affairs: “we believe that the GAAR does not override our international obligations. […] We really do not see that there is an issue there.”

So at the time they were voting on it, MPs were assured by the government that passing the legislation would not breach international commitments.

That’s a very different situation to the one the current crop find themselves in today, with the government making no bones about the fact that their plans would do just that.

The actual question of whether the 2013 Finance Act did violate international treaties is a little more complicated. In short, the answer appears to be that it did not.
https://www.channel4.com/news/factch...seem-to-add-up

Damien 14-09-2020 09:12
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Cameron now: https://twitter.com/joepike/status/1305407945929297920

Although he doesn't have a vote, it's more notable simply because all living PMs have spoke out or expressed concerns about the bill (I don't know if the non-living PMs have expressed any concerns).

Hugh 14-09-2020 09:48
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Today’s Times editorial

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/t...75b75ca97c5216

Quote:
If the government believes the EU has acted in bad faith sufficient to justify breaking international law, it should provide compelling evidence

If the government wants the benefit of the doubt, it would help if it could get its story straight. Since the news that it planned to renege on key aspects of the Brexit withdrawal agreement first emerged, its explanations as to what it is doing and why it is doing it have been constantly shifting. Downing Street initially briefed journalists that the new bill would not breach international law, only for Brandon Lewis, the Northern Ireland secretary, to confirm that it would. The government first suggested that the EU was acting in bad faith in negotiations over the implementation of the Northern Irish protocol, but now says the bad faith relates to the wider trade negotiations, which could have consequences for Northern Ireland. Meanwhile Boris Johnson, who in January had hailed the withdrawal agreement as “fantastic” and good for Britain, now claims that it was negotiated in haste and is being used by the EU to break up Britain and destroy Northern Ireland’s peace process.

It is important that the government gets its story straight because the stakes could hardly be higher. It claims the clauses in the internal market bill that will allow ministers to override the legal obligations in the withdrawal agreement are an insurance policy in the event of no trade deal but insist they do still want a deal. Yet many fear that by lobbing this hand grenade into the negotiations, the government has made a deal far less likely. Last week the EU set a deadline of the end of the month for the government to withdraw the offending clauses if trade negotiations were to continue. The government may hope that the decision by EU foreign ministers to discuss Brexit at their summit next week could lead to a softening of the bloc’s position but it is just as likely to entrench it...

... If Mr Johnson believes that the EU is acting in bad faith sufficient to justify breaking international law, damaging Britain’s global standing and potentially torpedoing an EU trade deal, he should present his evidence. He needs to explain why ministers believe they must break the law rather than rely on the dispute resolution process in the withdrawal agreement. If the government believes the EU is making unreasonable demands in areas such as phytosanitary checks and state aid rules, it should set out what exactly it is that the UK wants to do that the EU is blocking. What the government cannot do is expect the public automatically to take its side in a blame game over a deal that there is evidence to suggest it never had any intention of honouring. If it wants the benefit of the doubt it needs to earn it.
Full readable article in link above.

---------- Post added at 09:48 ---------- Previous post was at 09:44 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36049923)
Thank you - I stand corrected

heero_yuy 14-09-2020 10:31
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Quote from Damien: Although he doesn't have a vote, it's more notable simply because all living PMs have spoke out or expressed concerns about the bill
All of whom are remain supporters, May being the closet one, so no surprise that they would take the EU side against their own country.

Quote:
(I don't know if the non-living PMs have expressed any concerns).
I'm sure if you dug up Heath he'd parrot the same. :D

Kushan 14-09-2020 10:39
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Why does holding your country to a standard mean you're supporting the EU?

Is it not possible to support your own country while demanding better of your own government? Is it not possible to expect your Prime Minister to not break the law?

It's almost as if it's useful for someone, somewhere that we fight amongst ourselves deciding who to blame rather than paying closer attention to what's going on right under our noses.

Blame the EU all you want, but the EU didn't force us to make that agreement, BoJo did. Blame him for signing a bad deal and having to live with the consequences.

Otherwise, stop rabbiting on to remainers to get over it and respect the vote. You get to pick one, but not both - either what was agreed was agreed, or it wasn't.

I have accepted the vote, why can't people accept the WA?

Damien 14-09-2020 10:47
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by heero_yuy (Post 36049996)
All of whom are remain supporters, May being the closet one, so no surprise that they would take the EU side against their own country.
There are leavers who think this is a bad idea too. Boris Johnson can't wrap himself in the flag to get away with all criticism of what he does by trying to pretend it's against Britain rather than his actions.

denphone 14-09-2020 10:48
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kushan (Post 36049999)
Why does holding your country to a standard mean you're supporting the EU?

Is it not possible to support your own country while demanding better of your own government? Is it not possible to expect your Prime Minister to not break the law?

It's almost as if it's useful for someone, somewhere that we fight amongst ourselves deciding who to blame rather than paying closer attention to what's going on right under our noses.

Blame the EU all you want, but the EU didn't force us to make that agreement, BoJo did. Blame him for signing a bad deal and having to live with the consequences.

Otherwise, stop rabbiting on to remainers to get over it and respect the vote. You get to pick one, but not both - either what was agreed was agreed, or it wasn't.

I have accepted the vote, why can't people accept the WA?
They seem to want their cake and eat it as l have accepted the vote as this is an Withdrawal agreement that
-he negotiated
-he agreed to it.
-he called it 'oven-ready'.
-he campaigned on it.
-for which he won a general election mandate, and
-that he transposed into law on a three-line whip
-His agreement
-He owns it

Sephiroth 14-09-2020 10:53
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
I am in no doubt that the Guvmin has acted stupidly by being so forthright as to bring the legislation into being (still in debate though) this early.

I am also in no doubt that the Guvmin's fears are justified on the basis of Barnier's reported threats.

The correct way of handling this would have been to prepare emergency legislation in the event that the fears materialised . The UK's case would be stronger at an internaional court and the EU would be the perceived baddies and not us.

Remainers have no defence bleating that the Guvmin shouldn't have signed up to the WA terms if it didn't like them. The WA is a vehicle for leaving the EU according to the electorate's votes. Remainers should also acknowledge the validity of the point being made by the Guvmin that an extreme interpretation by the EU of the WA would put the UK into grave peril as far as integrity is concerned.

By all means a shot across the EU's bows, but turning us into pariah status to any degree is not right.

1andrew1 14-09-2020 11:02
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by heero_yuy (Post 36049996)
All of whom are remain supporters, May being the closet one, so no surprise that they would take the EU side against their own country.
You can crticise poor government without taking the side of another bloc. That's what democracy is all about.

The remain theory also falls apart when we look at some others who have criticised the amendment:
- Geoffrey Cox
- Michael Howard
- Norman Lamont

All leavers. I think they would firmly put you in your place if you said that they were taking the EU side.

Plenty of people warned us that Boris and his cabinet are incompetent so this mess should not surprise us.

---------- Post added at 11:02 ---------- Previous post was at 10:58 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36050005)
I am in no doubt that the Guvmin has acted stupidly by being so forthright as to bring the legislation into being (still in debate though) this early.

I am also in no doubt that the Guvmin's fears are justified on the basis of Barnier's reported threats.

The correct way of handling this would have been to prepare emergency legislation in the event that the fears materialised . The UK's case would be stronger at an internaional court and the EU would be the perceived baddies and not us.

Remainers have no defence bleating that the Guvmin shouldn't have signed up to the WA terms if it didn't like them. The WA is a vehicle for leaving the EU according to the electorate's votes. Remainers should also acknowledge the validity of the point being made by the Guvmin that an extreme interpretation by the EU of the WA would put the UK into grave peril as far as integrity is concerned.

By all means a shot across the EU's bows, but turning us into pariah status to any degree is not right.
There's a perfectly good appeals mechanism which the Government can call upon if it has any issues with the Withdrawal Agreement before taking any drastic steps.

Sephiroth 14-09-2020 11:09
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kushan (Post 36049999)
Why does holding your country to a standard mean you're supporting the EU?

Is it not possible to support your own country while demanding better of your own government? Is it not possible to expect your Prime Minister to not break the law?

It's almost as if it's useful for someone, somewhere that we fight amongst ourselves deciding who to blame rather than paying closer attention to what's going on right under our noses.

Blame the EU all you want, but the EU didn't force us to make that agreement, BoJo did. Blame him for signing a bad deal and having to live with the consequences.

Otherwise, stop rabbiting on to remainers to get over it and respect the vote. You get to pick one, but not both - either what was agreed was agreed, or it wasn't.

I have accepted the vote, why can't people accept the WA?
This really riles me (as if anyone cares).

Surely you recognise that the feared adverse consequences (EU putting an extreme interpretation on the WA) would be bad for the UK. Do you?

I'll await your response, which I hope will be direct to the questio, before commenting further.



---------- Post added at 11:09 ---------- Previous post was at 11:07 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36050010)
You can crticise poor government without taking the side of another bloc. That's what democracy is all about.

The remain theory also falls apart when we look at some others who have criticised the amendment:
- Geoffrey Cox
- Michael Howard
- Norman Lamont

All leavers. I think they would firmly put you in your place if you said that they were taking the EU side.

Plenty of people warned us that Boris and his cabinet are incompetent so this mess should not surprise us.

---------- Post added at 11:02 ---------- Previous post was at 10:58 ----------


There's a perfectly good appeals mechanism which the Government can call upon if it has any issues with the Withdrawal Agreement before taking any drastic steps.
Is it "perfectly good"? The moment that an incident occurs threatening the UK's integrity, the Guvmin must act and not suffer the procrastination of the appeals mechanism.

1andrew1 14-09-2020 11:18
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36050015)
[COLOR="Blue"]
Is it "perfectly good"? The moment that an incident occurs threatening the UK's integrity, the Guvmin must act and not suffer the procrastination of the appeals mechanism.
Um, that's not what we signed up to Seph. If we don't use the appeals mechaism then why have it there in the first place?

nomadking 14-09-2020 11:27
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kushan (Post 36049999)
Why does holding your country to a standard mean you're supporting the EU?

Is it not possible to support your own country while demanding better of your own government? Is it not possible to expect your Prime Minister to not break the law?

It's almost as if it's useful for someone, somewhere that we fight amongst ourselves deciding who to blame rather than paying closer attention to what's going on right under our noses.

Blame the EU all you want, but the EU didn't force us to make that agreement, BoJo did. Blame him for signing a bad deal and having to live with the consequences.

Otherwise, stop rabbiting on to remainers to get over it and respect the vote. You get to pick one, but not both - either what was agreed was agreed, or it wasn't.

I have accepted the vote, why can't people accept the WA?
What were the alternatives to accepting the WA? Remember the NI protocol was meant to be a "backstop" in the event of nothing further being agreed, not something that definitely was going to happen. Introduction of this proposed law WON'T break any law "unless and until" a specific action is taken with it.
The NI protocol also places commitments on the EU, NONE OF WHICH have been adhered to. Eg Have the Joint committee agreed to anything that allows goods to move from GB to NI? It is the EU. NOT the UK threatening a hard border.
This is from just a month ago and has several things that require a decision by the Joint Committee which hasn't agreed any of that. Even sending a letter from GB to NI would be blocked.:shocked:
Quote:
4.6 Non-freight

Any requirements for goods in luggage, Royal Mail and parcels are still under consideration. Further guidance will be set out in due course.
And cigarettes.
Quote:
12.6 Tobacco and e-cigarette products

These products will have to comply with the EU Tobacco Products Directive and packaging will need to feature the EU picture library.
To be sold in Northern Ireland, a notification will need to be made. Discussions with the EU are still on going on how this process will take place and further guidance will follow
From Political Declaration.
Quote:
73. Within the context of the overall economic partnership the Parties should establish a new
fisheries agreement on, inter alia, access to waters and quota shares.
74. The Parties will use their best endeavours to conclude and ratify their new fisheries
agreement by 1 July 2020 in order for it to be in place in time to be used for determining
fishing opportunities for the first year after the transition period.
So fishing rights are NOT meant to be central to any deal, but a SEPARATE agreement.

Mick 14-09-2020 12:03
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kushan (Post 36049999)
Why does holding your country to a standard mean you're supporting the EU?

Is it not possible to support your own country while demanding better of your own government? Is it not possible to expect your Prime Minister to not break the law?

It's almost as if it's useful for someone, somewhere that we fight amongst ourselves deciding who to blame rather than paying closer attention to what's going on right under our noses.

Blame the EU all you want, but the EU didn't force us to make that agreement, BoJo did. Blame him for signing a bad deal and having to live with the consequences.

Otherwise, stop rabbiting on to remainers to get over it and respect the vote. You get to pick one, but not both - either what was agreed was agreed, or it wasn't.

I have accepted the vote, why can't people accept the WA?
For a start, wind your neck in and stop telling others to be quiet. :nono:

The WA has been highlighted to have flaws, the NI Protocol being one of them, the EU have clearly breached a legal obligation to act in good faith during the process of this WA negotiations, that not bother you?

No, of course not, you Remainers cannot see past your EU rose tinted spectacles. The EU are at fault here, they are the ones who cannot accept we chose to leave their corrupted and cretinous empire and now want to punish the UK by giving us the worst possible arrangement, or none at all just to get back at us.

As a Brexiteer, I was quite happy to accept an agreement and the EU to continue without us being a member and we made a trade pact that was acceptable to all, now I want that disgusting project to fail and fail badly, it is a power hungry and disgraceful entity that pretends to be a Democratic institution, i.e the "Keep on voting" until we get the result we want mantra. Well they can stuff off now.

1andrew1 14-09-2020 12:10
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36050025)
For a start, wind your neck in and stop telling others to be quiet. :nono:

The WA has been highlighted to have flaws, the NI Protocol being one of them, the EU have clearly breached a legal obligation to act in good faith during the process of this WA negotiations, that not bother you?

No, of course not, you Remainers cannot see past your EU rose tinted spectacles. The EU are at fault here, they are the ones who cannot accept we chose to leave their corrupted and cretinous empire and now want to punish the UK by giving us the worst possible arrangement, or none at all just to get back at us.
Boris signed the deal for the UK. If you've belatedly got an issue with it, pick it up with him.

Mick 14-09-2020 12:16
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36050026)
Boris signed the deal for the UK. If you've belatedly got an issue with it, pick it up with him.
You wind your neck in as well.

I have absolutely no need to pick it up with Boris, he's seen the flaw and is now correcting it via the Internal Market Bill, I couldn't give a shit if it breaks International Law, the EU has little respect for it, so you and others stop being hypocrites about following International Law when your "precious EU" doesn't do the same.

Kushan 14-09-2020 12:22
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36050015)
[COLOR="Blue"]This really riles me (as if anyone cares).

Surely you recognise that the feared adverse consequences (EU putting an extreme interpretation on the WA) would be bad for the UK. Do you?

I'll await your response, which I hope will be direct to the questio, before commenting further.
Of course I recognise that it'd be bad for the UK. I recognised that leaving the EU in any capacity would be bad for the UK, but we wanted that sovreignty, right?

You can't tell remainers who were screaming until they were blue in the face that "this is a terrible idea and the UK will suffer for it" to get over it, then do a shocked pikachu face when it turns out that this whole thing is bad for the UK.

You were warned that this would happen. Much like Boris was warned that this would happen.

https://www.cableforum.uk/images/local/2020/09/7.png

The only difference is that I'm not blaming the EU for this, I'm blaming the government that made the agreement. This agreement that Boris tried to ram through the last parliament, that he wouldnt let people scruitinise in any meaningful way. Remember that mess? We had a whole election over it.

Maybe if there was more scruitny of the WA, more people could have been warned, but that wasn't on the agenda, that wasn't allowed, we just wanted to "Get Brexit done", without any oversight, without any regard for the consequences and now the consequences are ramping up.

You have to respect the vote, though, accept it, remember? The EU didn't cause this, the government and by extension we - ourselves - we did this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36050021)
What were the alternatives to accepting the WA?
Tossing it back and saying "this isn't good enough, either give us an alternative or we walk away". Remember, no deal is better than a bad deal, right?

---------- Post added at 12:22 ---------- Previous post was at 12:17 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36050025)
For a start, wind your neck in and stop telling others to be quiet. :nono:
2 things:

1) Is this an official doctrine/warning as a moderator on this forum, or just your opinion as a brexiteer?

2) I'm not telling anyone to be quiet.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36050025)
he WA has been highlighted to have flaws, the NI Protocol being one of them
This was highlighted way back in January, before anything was signed. Shouldn't have signed it if it had such a legal flaw in it.

Mick 14-09-2020 12:30
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kushan (Post 36050028)
Of course I recognise that it'd be bad for the UK. I recognised that leaving the EU in any capacity would be bad for the UK, but we wanted that sovreignty, right?
You are now just taking the piss, here we go again with this crap about "we the remainers were right about leaving", it's utter bollocks, if it has escaped your attention, because of the last four years of Remainiac MPs in the last parliament trying to thwart Brexit, trying to cancel one of the largest democratic processes in this country. Because of this dither and deliberate delay from the Remainiac MPs - We are still in a transitional phase of Brexit, we trying to negotiate an arrangement with the EU still. :rolleyes:

1andrew1 14-09-2020 12:32
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kushan (Post 36050028)
This was highlighted way back in January, before anything was signed. Shouldn't have signed it if it had such a legal flaw in it.
Exactly. Theresa May's deal was better but Boris's ego wouldn't allow him to keep it intact. Instead, he called criticism at the time Project Fear whilst rolling over and letting the EU tickle his tummy.

Back in February 2018, Theresa May rejected the EU’s proposal for Northern Ireland to remain aligned with the Republic after Brexit, insisting “no United Kingdom prime minister could ever agree to it”. Unfortunately, BoJo did.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a8232631.html

Mick 14-09-2020 12:51
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kushan (Post 36050028)

1) Is this an official doctrine/warning as a moderator on this forum, or just your opinion as a brexiteer?
Well if it was an opinion as a Brexiteer, it's ok for you as a Remainer to tell us Brexiteers to stop "rabbiting on" but when I tell you to stop, you ask a mundane question such as the one above.

But yeah, I was telling you to cease telling others to be silent and in future, if you have a question regarding a site matter/member of the forum team/instruction, raise it via the site owners, that is myself or Paul, if you have an issue with me, as I am one of the site owners, you will need to go to Paul, asking such questions in this thread is not the correct avenue.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kushan
]2) I'm not telling anyone to be quiet.
Good stuff.

jonbxx 14-09-2020 12:57
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36050027)
You wind your neck in as well.

I have absolutely no need to pick it up with Boris, he's seen the flaw and is now correcting it via the Internal Market Bill, I couldn't give a shit if it breaks International Law, the EU has little respect for it, so you and others stop being hypocrites about following International Law when your "precious EU" doesn't do the same.
So were the government negligent, incompetent or intransigent is signing the agreement in the first place?

Mick 14-09-2020 13:11
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonbxx (Post 36050036)
So were the government negligent, incompetent or intransigent is signing the agreement in the first place?
Yes.

But I am now happy they are trying to correct it via IMB.

It should have been spotted and dealt with sooner but, you know, there was a Pandemic that kind of took precedent.

Sephiroth 14-09-2020 13:32
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36050026)
Boris signed the deal for the UK. If you've belatedly got an issue with it, pick it up with him.
A silly reply.

As with all Remainers on this thread, you refuse to address the matter of the EU using an extreme interpretation of the WA?

Again, do you agree that that the Eu should be able to affect food imports to England from NI?

nomadking 14-09-2020 13:44
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kushan (Post 36050028)
Of course I recognise that it'd be bad for the UK. I recognised that leaving the EU in any capacity would be bad for the UK, but we wanted that sovreignty, right?

You can't tell remainers who were screaming until they were blue in the face that "this is a terrible idea and the UK will suffer for it" to get over it, then do a shocked pikachu face when it turns out that this whole thing is bad for the UK.


This was highlighted way back in January, before anything was signed. Shouldn't have signed it if it had such a legal flaw in it.
The "no deal is better than a bad deal" REFERS TO ANY FUTURE DEAL.:rolleyes: Certainly not one that is only meant to be in place for a matter of months, and is meant to have an END. Gets quite tedious and ridiculous when the Remain side of things constantly misattributes comments to the wrong deal etc.
Link

Quote:
What happens on 1 February 2020?
When the United Kingdom leaves the European Union on 31 January 2020, after full ratification of the Withdrawal Agreement, we will enter into the transition period. This time-limited period was agreed as part of the Withdrawal Agreement and will last until at least 31 December 2020.
...
The EU and the United Kingdom will use these months to agree on a new and fair partnership for the future, based on the Political Declaration agreed between the EU and the United Kingdom in October 2019.
From recent Barnier speech
Quote:
Yet the UK government's position would lock out Ireland's fishermen and women from waters they fished in long before Ireland or the UK joined the European Economic Community in 1973.
And of course, the fishermen and women of many other EU countries.
That is just not acceptable.
We fully understand and respect that the UK will become an independent coastal state, outside the Common Fisheries Policy.
It is 1982 UN Conference of the Laws of the Seas that decided that States were precluded from making historic claims to fishing rights in other countries. The EU is insisting on breaking that UN Treaty/Law(or whatever).
Quote:
Without a long-term, fair and sustainable solution on fisheries, there will simply be no new economic partnership with the UK.
That was NOT in the Political Declaration, quite the opposite.
Quote:
British proposals on road transport would allow British truckers to drive on EU roads without having to comply with the same working conditions as EU drivers.
Nonsense as usual. Drivers driving on EU roads have to follow EU rules, JUST AS ANY OTHER NON-EU COUNTRY DOES. There are wider driving rules set that include non-EU countries such as Turkey and Russia. Currently if you drive in only in GB, then you are subject to GB rules, but if your journey includes the EU, then you are subject to EU/AETR rules for that part of the journey. Nothing wrong with that approach, and nobody apart from the EU is suggesting otherwise.
Quote:
The UK's proposals on air transport would allow British airlines to operate inside the EU without having to respect the same labour and environmental standards.
Are EU airlines the only ones flying in EU airspace? Of course not.:rolleyes:
Quote:
In this area, as in others: without a common framework on state aid, the UK government would be free to hand out subsidies at will.
We've quite a long way to go to match Germany's levels of state aid.

Link

Quote:
The EU measures how much money countries spend on state aid, as a proportion of their economy.
The UK ranks very low down, spending just 0.38% of its gross domestic product - the total value of all good and services produced. This is far lower than Germany (1.31%), France (0.76%) and Poland (1.59%).
Therefore, it seems likely that EU single market rules are not the only thing limiting state aid.
Level playing field? Not even within the EU.


Quote:
While Germany makes up for about a quarter of the EU’s GDP, it accounts for some 52% of the total value of the emergency coronavirus state aid cleared so far, Commission data shows.
Continuing with Barnier speech.

Quote:
If English farmers and industrials are no longer bound by high standards on water pollution – wouldn't they gain a decisive – and unfair – cost advantage?
How likely is it that we would widely diverge from EU standards?:rolleyes:
Quote:
We have no issue with regulatory divergence.
Really?:shocked: Since when?

Quote:
It is normal that the UK wants to set its own standards and rules.
But if these serve to distort competition with us, then we have a problem.
Does the EU insist on EU standards and rules for all trade deals? Does Vietnam have it's own internal standards and rules set by the EU?:rolleyes:

1andrew1 14-09-2020 13:55
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36050039)
A silly reply.

As with all Remainers on this thread, you refuse to address the matter of the EU using an extreme interpretation of the WA?

Again, do you agree that that the Eu should be able to affect food imports to England from NI?
Again? This is the first time you've asked the question.

If Boris was silly enough to sign up to this, he should resign and call an election as he was elected on the basis of an oven-ready deal that doesn't exist. The new Prime Minister should then raise this point via the disputes committee whilst seeking an extension to allow enough time to get a good deal and not making mess-ups like this one.

A competent Leave Government could have tackled matters in a better way:
Quote:
A declaration of intent in 2016 to leave the EU at the end of the budget period on 31 December 2020, or possibly even later, would have given a breathing space in which to prepare. Above all, the government would have had to level with the public about what was to come.

There would have been an outcry. The Northern Ireland peace process was very much an international effort and there would have been widespread disapproval of anything that threatened it. Even so, the UK government could have constructed a reasonable argument to say that the Good Friday Agreement is over 20 years old and was concluded in very different circumstances. It would be unconscionable for such a treaty to prevent a sovereign nation from leaving a trading bloc when its people had expressed their wish to do so through a democratic vote. There would have been complaints about the UK breaching a treaty but the government could have put forward a moral case for doing so. It would not have convinced everyone but it would have been good enough for many.
https://flipchartfairytales.wordpres...e-word-slogan/

nomadking 14-09-2020 14:06
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36050033)
Exactly. Theresa May's deal was better but Boris's ego wouldn't allow him to keep it intact. Instead, he called criticism at the time Project Fear whilst rolling over and letting the EU tickle his tummy.

Back in February 2018, Theresa May rejected the EU’s proposal for Northern Ireland to remain aligned with the Republic after Brexit, insisting “no United Kingdom prime minister could ever agree to it”. Unfortunately, BoJo did.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a8232631.html
:confused: May's deal that she agreed to, had it applying "unless and until" the EU agreed otherwise. How is that better than "after 4 years NI can decide that it isn't to continue"? There were other differences.
Parliament had REJECTED May's deal, so something had to change.

---------- Post added at 14:06 ---------- Previous post was at 14:02 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36050041)
Again? This is the first time you've asked the question.

If Boris was silly enough to sign up to this, he should resign and call an election as he was elected on the basis of an oven-ready deal that doesn't exist. The new Prime Minister should then raise this point via the disputes committee whilst seeking an extension to allow enough time to get a good deal and not making mess-ups like this one.

A competent Leave Government could have tackled matters in a better way:

https://flipchartfairytales.wordpres...e-word-slogan/
Yet again....:rolleyes:The "oven-ready" referred to the revised Withdrawal Agreement ALONE, and whether Parliament would agree to it. IT DIDN'T, AND COULDN'T POSSIBLY APPLY TO ANY FUTURE TRADE DEAL. Negotiations couldn't start until the WA was activated.

Sephiroth 14-09-2020 14:09
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36050041)
Again? This is the first time you've asked the question.

If Boris was silly enough to sign up to this, he should resign and call an election as he was elected on the basis of an oven-ready deal that doesn't exist. The new Prime Minister should then raise this point via the disputes committee whilst seeking an extension to allow enough time to get a good deal and not making mess-ups like this one.

A competent Leave Government could have tackled matters in a better way:

https://flipchartfairytales.wordpres...e-word-slogan/
Whatever. So, please answer the question and stop ducking and weaving.

Again, do you agree that that the Eu should be able to affect food imports to England from NI?

1andrew1 14-09-2020 14:28
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36050044)
Whatever. So, please answer the question and stop ducking and weaving.

Again, do you agree that that the Eu should be able to affect food imports to England from NI?
If we've agreed to it then we're plonkers for doing so and need to invoke the disputes mechanism in the first instance without impacting trade negotiatons adversely.

Do you think that the Government's handling of Brexit is better than its handling of Covid-19, worse, or about the same?

Kushan 14-09-2020 14:31
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36050031)
You are now just taking the piss, here we go again with this crap about "we the remainers were right about leaving", it's utter bollocks, if it has escaped your attention, because of the last four years of Remainiac MPs in the last parliament trying to thwart Brexit, trying to cancel one of the largest democratic processes in this country. Because of this dither and deliberate delay from the Remainiac MPs - We are still in a transitional phase of Brexit, we trying to negotiate an arrangement with the EU still. :rolleyes:
Those "Remainiac MP's of the last parliament" were voted in after the referrendum. Those Remainiac MP's were voted in via the same democratic process this country has used for centuries. But sure, let's just say remainers went on a rampage and thwarted everything, it was a shambles it was a disaster. Sure.

We then had another election where Tory/leaver MPs were overwhelmingly voted in, in a landslide not seen for decades. It was those MP's that voted for this WA. It was those MP's that ignored the warnings.

But it's the EU that's at fault, right?

Never mind that the likes of yourselves have been cursing the EU for years now, that Boris himself doesn't miss a beat in telling you how awful the EU are and that the ERG couldn't wait to walk away from the EU - they still signed an agreement that allowed the corrupt EU to get one over our country? Really? If the EU is so terrible, why would you sign something that could clearly be interpereted in such a way? Why give them that ammunition?

Couldn't be short-sighted politicians or sheer incompetance, nooo....

[Admin Edit(Mick): Ridiculous accusations removed - I said, if you have an issue with the site - use the correct channels, ignore this again at your own peril!]

Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36050040)
The "no deal is better than a bad deal" REFERS TO ANY FUTURE DEAL.:rolleyes: Certainly not one that is only meant to be in place for a matter of months, and is meant to have an END. Gets quite tedious and ridiculous when the Remain side of things constantly misattributes comments to the wrong deal etc.
But that's my point. The question asked was "what was the alternative to the WA?". The alternative was nothing. No deal. Always has been. The slogan has been battered around that many times, how could we forget?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36050039)
A silly reply.

As with all Remainers on this thread, you refuse to address the matter of the EU using an extreme interpretation of the WA?

Again, do you agree that that the Eu should be able to affect food imports to England from NI?
I thought this was answered, but I'll do it again - we signed the WA. It's a legally binding document. The EU is as legally bound to it as we are and they're exercising their legal rights.

Is it bad for the UK? Yes. Is the EU taking advantage of a bad agreement? Maybe. Hell, lets say yes as well. I would want our country to get the best deal possible using any legal means possible. The EU is playing their hand, you can like it, you can lump it, but the time to stop it was back in January.

Much like the time to stop brexit was 2016. Both ships have sailed. The only thing you can possibly do to stop it is to burn the whole ship down.

Sephiroth 14-09-2020 14:35
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36050047)
If we've agreed to it then we're plonkers for doing so and need to invoke the disputes mechanism in the first instance without impacting trade negotiatons adversely.

Do you think that the Government's handling of Brexit is better than its handling of Covid-19, worse, or about the same?
Everyone on this thread can see that you are avoiding the answer; ducking and weaving.

Again, do you agree that that the Eu should be able to affect food imports to England from NI?

In reply to your question, the Government's current handling of Brexit is very poor. It's handling of CV is poor as regards testing.

Now, answer my question properly, please?

1andrew1 14-09-2020 14:40
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36050051)
Everyone on this thread can see that you are avoiding the answer; ducking and weaving.

Again, do you agree that that the Eu should be able to affect food imports to England from NI?

In reply to your question, the Government's current handling of Brexit is very poor. It's handling of CV is poor as regards testing.

Now, answer my question properly, please?
I've answered it fully. In an ideal world it shouldn't and if Boris has agreed to it then we should raise the issue via the disputes mechanism.

Sephiroth 14-09-2020 14:49
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kushan (Post 36050049)
<SNIP>


Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth
A silly reply.

As with all Remainers on this thread, you refuse to address the matter of the EU using an extreme interpretation of the WA?

Again, do you agree that that the Eu should be able to affect food imports to England from NI?
I thought this was answered, but I'll do it again - we signed the WA. It's a legally binding document. The EU is as legally bound to it as we are and they're exercising their legal rights.

Is it bad for the UK? Yes. Is the EU taking advantage of a bad agreement? Maybe. Hell, lets say yes as well. I would want our country to get the best deal possible using any legal means possible. The EU is playing their hand, you can like it, you can lump it, but the time to stop it was back in January.

Much like the time to stop brexit was 2016. Both ships have sailed. The only thing you can possibly do to stop it is to burn the whole ship down.
Kush, I wasn't asking you. I was asking a ducking and weaving Andrew.

Albeit, you've loosely answered. You haven't explicitly said whether or not you agree that the EU should be able to affect food imports from NI to England?

The rest of what you've is said is perfectly valid even though I would forgive Boris if in fact he had taken the cynical view just to fulfil his electoral obligation to leave the EU. My preference now is that we don't break International Law by reneging on the WA, because we can take action down the line if necessary should the EU try to pull that trick.




---------- Post added at 14:49 ---------- Previous post was at 14:43 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36050052)
I've answered it fully. In an ideal world it shouldn't and if Boris has agreed to it then we should raise the issue via the disputes mechanism.
Andrew, you haven't answered the question at all. I'm trying to get to the bottom of YOUR view and take the Remainer aspect out of it.

This "ideal world it shouldn't" phrase is pure weasel wording. It doesn't get to the root of your belief.

The problem you have here is that of course you don't want the EU to screw us over - but you can't bring yourself to say so. I don't find that particularly honest.

jonbxx 14-09-2020 14:51
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36050051)
Everyone on this thread can see that you are avoiding the answer; ducking and weaving.

Again, do you agree that that the Eu should be able to affect food imports to England from NI?

In reply to your question, the Government's current handling of Brexit is very poor. It's handling of CV is poor as regards testing.

Now, answer my question properly, please?
IF Northern Ireland staying in the Single Market is the only way to preserve the Good Friday Agreement, respecting views on both sides of the border, then adherence to Sanitary and Phytosanitary Standards (SPS) is a consequence of this.

This is only an issue if we were to accept food standards lower than the EU SPS standards. If we match or exceed EU SPS, then we are golden as a 'third country'.

Sephiroth 14-09-2020 15:46
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonbxx (Post 36050055)
IF Northern Ireland staying in the Single Market is the only way to preserve the Good Friday Agreement, respecting views on both sides of the border, then adherence to Sanitary and Phytosanitary Standards (SPS) is a consequence of this.

This is only an issue if we were to accept food standards lower than the EU SPS standards. If we match or exceed EU SPS, then we are golden as a 'third country'.
I can't dispute what you've said. But - we currently adhere to all their standards yet the EU has explicitly threatened the UK with not being recognised as a third country food supplier. The EU is not acting in good faith.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics...-food-exports/

Mick 14-09-2020 15:57
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kushan (Post 36050049)
Those "Remainiac MP's of the last parliament" were voted in after the referrendum. Those Remainiac MP's were voted in via the same democratic process this country has used for centuries.
You have failed again I see.

Most of those Remainiac MPs ran on a ticket of get Brexit done, so they were democratically elected on this premise, so to go against this and defy the Democratic result of the 2016 referendum and then join parties to stop Brexit, they were a disgrace, funny innit how absolutely none of them got elected again in the last General Election just gone.

Justice served in true Democratic fashion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kushan
We then had another election where Tory/leaver MPs were overwhelmingly voted in, in a landslide not seen for decades. It was those MP's that voted for this WA. It was those MP's that ignored the warnings.
And now they are correcting that fault.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kushan
But it's the EU that's at fault, right?

Never mind that the likes of yourselves have been cursing the EU for years now, that Boris himself doesn't miss a beat in telling you how awful the EU are and that the ERG couldn't wait to walk away from the EU - they still signed an agreement that allowed the corrupt EU to get one over our country? Really? If the EU is so terrible, why would you sign something that could clearly be interpereted in such a way? Why give them that ammunition?

Couldn't be short-sighted politicians or sheer incompetance, nooo....
Drop the attitude, it will not work with me.

I do not need Boris or any other politician to tell me how shit and corrupt the EU is, I have a pair of eyes and I can see for myself, pity you are as blind as a bat when it comes to your pathetic love for them.

jonbxx 14-09-2020 16:01
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36050057)
I can't dispute what you've said. But - we currently adhere to all their standards yet the EU has explicitly threatened the UK with not being recognised as a third country food supplier. The EU is not acting in good faith.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics...-food-exports/
The statement was;

Quote:
There are also many uncertainties about Great Britain's sanitary and phyto-sanitary regime as from 1 January 2021. More clarity is needed for the EU to do the assessment for the third-country listing of the UK.
I guess you good perceive this as a threat or a request for more clarity on the UKs SPS standards post 2020. If SPS standards are just being carried over with no regression, surely couldn't Defra just pull an file and it's done?

Kushan 14-09-2020 16:20
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36050059)
You have failed again I see.

Most of those Remainiac MPs ran on a ticket of get Brexit done, so they were democratically elected on this premise, so to go against this and defy the Democratic result of the 2016 referendum and then join parties to stop Brexit, they were a disgrace, funny innit how absolutely none of them got elected again in the last General Election just gone.
Wasn't "Get Brexit done" the slogan of the 2019 Conservative Election manifesto, not the 2017 election? Genuine question, as I don't remember much about May's 2017 campaign other than how awful it was.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36050059)
And now they are correcting that fault.
I've just noticed the APR on my credit card is higher than I would like. I'm going to just stop paying my bill until they correct it. The Bank is being unfair by holding me to the consequences of the legal document I signed.

Breaking the law, even if you absolutely don't agree with the wording (or an interpretation of the wording) just to spite the EU isn't going to do us any favours. That's true cutting your nose off to spite your face territory.

Sephiroth 14-09-2020 16:29
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonbxx (Post 36050060)
The statement was;

Quote:
There are also many uncertainties about Great Britain's sanitary and phyto-sanitary regime as from 1 January 2021. More clarity is needed for the EU to do the assessment for the third-country listing of the UK.
I guess you good perceive this as a threat or a request for more clarity on the UKs SPS standards post 2020. If SPS standards are just being carried over with no regression, surely couldn't Defra just pull an file and it's done?
That was verbal trickery from Barnier. He was merely saying, in weasel wording, that the UK hadn't yet published its future regime. "Many uncertainties"? What's that about?

But again, you are right. Barnier's approach can be seen as either a threat or a request for more information. The way the EU has been negotiating, I side with it being a threat.

Why would you, a Brit, give the benefit of the doubt to the EU?



---------- Post added at 16:29 ---------- Previous post was at 16:25 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kushan (Post 36050064)
Wasn't "Get Brexit done" the slogan of the 2019 Conservative Election manifesto, not the 2017 election? Genuine question, as I don't remember much about May's 2017 campaign other than how awful it was.



I've just noticed the APR on my credit card is higher than I would like. I'm going to just stop paying my bill until they correct it. The Bank is being unfair by holding me to the consequences of the legal document I signed.

Breaking the law, even if you absolutely don't agree with the wording (or an interpretation of the wording) just to spite the EU isn't going to do us any favours. That's true cutting your nose off to spite your face territory.
If I might just comment on your reply to Mick ...

There is a wealth of difference at many levels between international political agreements (treaties) and a piddling civil contract. The analogy doesn't hold because the former affects millions of people whilst the latter afeects "you".

Mick 14-09-2020 16:31
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kushan (Post 36050064)
Wasn't "Get Brexit done" the slogan of the 2019 Conservative Election manifesto, not the 2017 election? Genuine question, as I don't remember much about May's 2017 campaign other than how awful it was.
Several Tory MPs jumped ship, after winning their seats on a get Brexit done, they certainly did not campaign on a stopping Brexit, they left their party after they formed the party of many names, Change UK?

They then jumped ship again to a totally irrelevant party, think it's called something like the Illiberal Undemocrats. Each of the MPs that left their parties, Labour ones included, all lost their seats at the last election.

As I said, justice served.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kushan
I've just noticed the APR on my credit card is higher than I would like. I'm going to just stop paying my bill until they correct it. The Bank is being unfair by holding me to the consequences of the legal document I signed.
Well actually this is a rather poor analogy, if ever I saw one.

You signed a legal document that clearly states the APR is variable, which means they can change it, as long as they notify you as per the terms of the agreement, all perfectly legal and above board, you cannot say you have a problem with the wording, as all that has changed is the APR, which was said in the agreement that was variable, i.e, it can change to go either higher or lower.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kushan
Breaking the law, even if you absolutely don't agree with the wording (or an interpretation of the wording) just to spite the EU isn't going to do us any favours. That's true cutting your nose off to spite your face territory.
The EU has broken it, they have failed in the legal obligation to act in good faith in these negotiations, so if they can break/ignore the law, why can't we?

1andrew1 14-09-2020 16:45
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36050053)
Kush, I wasn't asking you. I was asking a ducking and weaving Andrew.

Albeit, you've loosely answered. You haven't explicitly said whether or not you agree that the EU should be able to affect food imports from NI to England?

The rest of what you've is said is perfectly valid even though I would forgive Boris if in fact he had taken the cynical view just to fulfil his electoral obligation to leave the EU. My preference now is that we don't break International Law by reneging on the WA, because we can take action down the line if necessary should the EU try to pull that trick.



---------- Post added at 14:49 ---------- Previous post was at 14:43 ----------



Andrew, you haven't answered the question at all. I'm trying to get to the bottom of YOUR view and take the Remainer aspect out of it.

This "ideal world it shouldn't" phrase is pure weasel wording. It doesn't get to the root of your belief.

The problem you have here is that of course you don't want the EU to screw us over - but you can't bring yourself to say so. I don't find that particularly honest.
You can't take these things in isolation. If we do have to follow EU guidelines on food standards then what do we gain by this?
If the gain outweighs the disbenefit then it might be worth it.

jonbxx 14-09-2020 16:56
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36050065)
Why would you, a Brit, give the benefit of the doubt to the EU?
Because this is not like supporting a football team where one side can do no wrong and the other side is the 'enemy'. I get the feeling sometimes (not from you I might add) That getting one over on Johnny Foreigner is more important than doing well ourselves.

A mutually beneficial deal with the minimum of disruption is my ideal end game and, if either side are putting in place things to disrupt this, then I will call it out.

Idealist, I know...

Carth 14-09-2020 16:57
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
I still don't see what all the fuss is about. A 'no deal' seems to be nearer than it ever has been - and time's running out.

Will this change to a previously agreed deal change that?

Sephiroth 14-09-2020 16:58
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36050068)
You can't take these things in isolation. If we do have to follow EU guidelines on food standards then what do we gain by this?
If the gain outweighs the disbenefit then it might be worth it.
Quote:
Andrew, you haven't answered the question at all. I'm trying to get to the bottom of YOUR view and take the Remainer aspect out of it.

This "ideal world it shouldn't" phrase is pure weasel wording. It doesn't get to the root of your belief.

The problem you have here is that of course you don't want the EU to screw us over - but you can't bring yourself to say so. I don't find that particularly honest.
Andrew, You must know that you're dodging the question. Nothing is taken in isolation. The nub of the problem is the possibility that the EU can interfere with food traffic between England and NI.

There is no gain in disrupting the Union by this means.

So, again: Do you agree that that the EU should be able to affect food imports to England from NI?

1andrew1 14-09-2020 17:05
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36050067)
The EU has broken it, they have failed in the legal obligation to act in good faith in these negotiations, so if they can break/ignore the law, why can't we?
I think BoJo could have tried to take the moral high ground but he blew it with the current bill that his own ministers admit breaks international law, albeit in a specific and limited way. It means the EU will be less likely to concede ground and is a poor political judgment. He's now left with the tricky task of bullying his own MPs into backing him whilst the party's original Eurosceptics like Michael Howard condemn his reputation-damaging approach.

---------- Post added at 17:05 ---------- Previous post was at 17:03 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carth (Post 36050070)
I still don't see what all the fuss is about. A 'no deal' seems to be nearer than it ever has been - and time's running out.

Will this change to a previously agreed deal change that?
No deal and no WA means a hard border between NI and Eire which breaks the Good Friday Agreement.
Whilst neither the EU or UK wants a hard border, membership of the WTO would mandate this.
BoJo's current WA places a border between GB and NI.

Hugh 14-09-2020 17:07
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36050071)


Andrew, You must know that you're dodging the question. Nothing is taken in isolation. The nub of the problem is the possibility that the EU can interfere with food traffic between England and NI.

There is no gain in disrupting the Union by this means.

So, again: Do you agree that that the EU should be able to affect food imports to England from NI?
I agree there should be processes in place that would stop food that doesn’t meet EU Standards getting into the EU (from Northern Ireland to Ireland) - don’t you?

Carth 14-09-2020 17:16
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36050074)
I agree there should be processes in place that would stop food that doesn’t meet EU Standards getting into the EU (from Northern Ireland to Ireland) - don’t you?
Is there a process in place that prevents movement in the opposite direction?

Sephiroth 14-09-2020 17:26
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36050074)
I agree there should be processes in place that would stop food that doesn’t meet EU Standards getting into the EU (from Northern Ireland to Ireland) - don’t you?
I always answer questions put to me even if you answered a question I did not put.

Given that the WA recognises that NI is inseparably part of the UK and within the UK's customs territory, I see that this causes conflict when seen against the no border provisions. They are incompatible, it seems to me, because the consequences of the latter enables the EU to split the EU or at least try to.

Now, your question to me, like much of what Andrew says, takes the EU perspective and not the UK's. So, were I a German, for example, I would agree with you. But I'm British and I don't agree if the price is that the EU can dictate what happens when food is exported in either direction.

Personally, I don't see a problem with processes that simulate a NI/Eire border in respect of food products. But with Barnier offering threats that we won't be recognised as a supplier to the EU unless we put our national interests at risk, I can't stomach that.

Kushan 14-09-2020 17:34
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36050065)
If I might just comment on your reply to Mick ...

There is a wealth of difference at many levels between international political agreements (treaties) and a piddling civil contract. The analogy doesn't hold because the former affects millions of people whilst the latter afeects "you".
There's a wealth of difference, but one of those differences is not whether or not a legally binding document is erm...legally binding.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36050067)
Several Tory MPs jumped ship, after winning their seats on a get Brexit done, they certainly did not campaign on a stopping Brexit, they left their party after they formed the party of many names, Change UK?

They then jumped ship again to a totally irrelevant party, think it's called something like the Illiberal Undemocrats. Each of the MPs that left their parties, Labour ones included, all lost their seats at the last election.

As I said, justice served.
I don't think any of this was contested by anyone in this thread. But I do think "Get Brexit done" as a slogan is a Boris special, for whatever little that's worth. I think in 2017 we were still on "Brexit means Brexit".


Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36050067)
Well actually this is a rather poor analogy, if ever I saw one.

You signed a legal document that clearly states the APR is variable, which means they can change it, as long as they notify you as per the terms of the agreement, all perfectly legal and above board, you cannot say you have a problem with the wording, as all that has changed is the APR, which was said in the agreement that was variable, i.e, it can change to go either higher or lower.
Great, so we agree that signed legal documents are legally binding. Glad that's cleared up.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36050067)
The EU has broken it, they have failed in the legal obligation to act in good faith in these negotiations, so if they can break/ignore the law, why can't we?
I keep seeing this, but where's the legal obligation here?

If the EU has broken a legal obligation, why aren't we getting lawyers involved? Why are our own lawers claiming we're in the wrong here? IF the EU had broken the law, the treaty would be void from their doing and we'd be off the hook. So why is everyone saying the UK is trying to break the law?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36050071)


Andrew, You must know that you're dodging the question. Nothing is taken in isolation. The nub of the problem is the possibility that the EU can interfere with food traffic between England and NI.

There is no gain in disrupting the Union by this means.

So, again: Do you agree that that the EU should be able to affect food imports to England from NI?
Seph, your doggedness here is bordering on the No True Scotsman logical fallacy. What exactly are you trying to get Andrew to say here? Whether he thinks it's okay or not isn't really up for debate, what matters is what's legal or not.


Anyway.....


Another Tory MP quits over this.

Before peopel get the pitchforks out, note that Rehman Chishti voted leave in 2016. So he's not a remainer and he thinks the government is wrong - enoguh to quit his position over it.

nomadking 14-09-2020 17:36
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36050072)
I think BoJo could have tried to take the moral high ground but he blew it with the current bill that his own ministers admit breaks international law, albeit in a specific and limited way. It means the EU will be less likely to concede ground and is a poor political judgment. He's now left with the tricky task of bullying his own MPs into backing him whilst the party's original Eurosceptics like Michael Howard condemn his reputation-damaging approach.

---------- Post added at 17:05 ---------- Previous post was at 17:03 ----------


No deal and no WA means a hard border between NI and Eire which breaks the Good Friday Agreement.
Whilst neither the EU or UK wants a hard border, membership of the WTO would mandate this.
BoJo's current WA places a border between GB and NI.
The IRA still being supported, armed, and active, breaks the GFA. The constant threats of ending the "peace process" also breaks the GFA, and prevents any decision taken as being invalid, as it's under duress. What other situation would a decision be valid when made under the threat of violence?

The bill DOESN'T mean a hard border UNLESS the EU wants it that way. The CURRENT NI protocol allows for it to be stopped sometime in the future anyway.

Mick 14-09-2020 17:51
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kushan (Post 36050077)
There's a wealth of difference, but one of those differences is not whether or not a legally binding document is erm...legally binding.



I don't think any of this was contested by anyone in this thread. But I do think "Get Brexit done" as a slogan is a Boris special, for whatever little that's worth. I think in 2017 we were still on "Brexit means Brexit".
Well then, my point still stands, there were no Tory MPs from 2017 Election that stood on a mantra of stopping Brexit, like you claimed there had been.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kushan
Great, so we agree that signed legal documents are legally binding. Glad that's cleared up.
You have cleared nothing up, you posted a poor analogy and then got it wrong in spectacular fashion.

You would not be able to stop paying your credit card bill on the basis that you do not agree with the increase in APR.

WTF has this got anything in common with Irish Protocol?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kushan
I keep seeing this, but where's the legal obligation here?

If the EU has broken a legal obligation, why aren't we getting lawyers involved? Why are our own lawers claiming we're in the wrong here? IF the EU had broken the law, the treaty would be void from their doing and we'd be off the hook. So why is everyone saying the UK is trying to break the law?
There you go again with the "If the EU has broken international law", they have!

They are cretins and you still support these morons is beyond me.

1andrew1 14-09-2020 17:54
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36050078)
The IRA still being supported, armed, and active, breaks the GFA. The constant threats of ending the "peace process" also breaks the GFA, and prevents any decision taken as being invalid, as it's under duress. What other situation would a decision be valid when made under the threat of violence?

The bill DOESN'T mean a hard border UNLESS the EU wants it that way. The CURRENT NI protocol allows for it to be stopped sometime in the future anyway.
It's the WTO who would insist upon a hard border. And which trading block would be most capable of resisting the WTO:
a) A 27-nation trading bloc with trade deals in place with all major trading blocs and countries in the World?
b) A country with a couple of trade deals in place which has recently admitted the bill being debated in Parliament right now breaks international law?

nomadking 14-09-2020 17:54
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36050074)
I agree there should be processes in place that would stop food that doesn’t meet EU Standards getting into the EU (from Northern Ireland to Ireland) - don’t you?
How does the bill change that?:confused: No plans for there to be any differences.

We're forced to accept food related items that don't meet our standards. Eg Many years ago we had different rules to France on UHT milk. We tried to stop French UHT milk coming into the UK. The EU stopped us. It may seem a small example, but an example it still is. There may have been others I'm not aware of.

The horse meat scandal originated in the EU.
Where else in the world does the EU insist on following their rules, simply because of a shared border?
Does anything stop the EU changing their rules and it not fitting UK rules?
The current outstanding issues cover an AWFUL LOT MORE than this, eg letters and parcels.

Damien 14-09-2020 17:57
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
The fact the entire country is arguing about Brexit again is probably the best thing Boris Johnson wanted out of this.

1andrew1 14-09-2020 17:57
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36050079)
There you go again with the "If the EU has broken international law", they have!
Show us an authoritative link to evidence that the EU has broken international law and I'm sure you'll find a change of tune from everyone.

Kushan 14-09-2020 18:17
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36050079)
Well then, my point still stands, there were no Tory MPs from 2017 Election that stood on a mantra of stopping Brexit, like you claimed there had been.
Woah! Where did I claim this? Can you quote me please?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36050079)
You have cleared nothing up, you posted a poor analogy and then got it wrong in spectacular fashion.

You would not be able to stop paying your credit card bill on the basis that you do not agree with the increase in APR.

WTF has this got anything in common with Irish Protocol?
I love that this is such a sticking point. Legally binding is legally binding, be it a credit card or international treaty. If you decide 6 months down the line after signing it that you no longer like the terms, well...tough...you signed it. You can try renegotiating but you can't just break the law without consequence.

And that's exactly what's being discussed here, consequence.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36050079)
There you go again with the "If the EU has broken international law", they have!

They are cretins and you still support these morons is beyond me.
Can you link to an actual, legal source that shows where the EU has broken international law? I'm begging for a source now. Enlighten me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 36050083)
The fact the entire country is arguing about Brexit again is probably the best thing Boris Johnson wanted out of this.
Sadly I think you're right. Keeping us divided has worked well for him for the longest time. It doesn't help that there are people out there who feel he can do no wrong.

BenMcr 14-09-2020 18:20
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36050082)
We're forced to accept food related items that don't meet our standards. Eg Many years ago we had different rules to France on UHT milk. We tried to stop French UHT milk coming into the UK. The EU stopped us. It may seem a small example, but an example it still is. There may have been others I'm not aware of.
That doesn't seem to have been the situation.

As far as I can see our laws for UHT milk within the UK broke EEC common market rules we'd signed up to. We didn't want to check the quality of UHT milk from the EEC or have any method to do so.

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-cont...CJ0124&from=FR

So the the ruling was as we couldn't explain exactly how other EEC members could meet the criteria for imports without onerous obligations not required of UK producers, we were in breach of the treaty.

1andrew1 14-09-2020 18:45
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kushan (Post 36050091)
It doesn't help that there are people out there who feel he can do no wrong.
If there's one think that Boris is still great at, it's this.

Mr K 14-09-2020 18:49
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36050097)
If there's one think that Boris is still great at, it's this.
I don't think Brexiteers rate him either, but he's all they've got. There isn't much talent that side of the fence, hence the cabinet of incompetents we've got now.

Sephiroth 14-09-2020 18:54
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kushan (Post 36050077)
<SNIP>




Seph, your doggedness here is bordering on the No True Scotsman logical fallacy. What exactly are you trying to get Andrew to say here? Whether he thinks it's okay or not isn't really up for debate, what matters is what's legal or not.

[/URL]

<SNIP>
Kush,

I'm trying to show that Andrew cannot answer a pointed question about the EU putting the UK union at risk. He is a Remainer who cannot bring himself to admit the wrong doing of the EU.

If Andrew were to concede my point, it would make less credible his constant siding with the EU (which he'll deny) and his constant sniping at the British Government (which he wants to continue doing).

Mick 14-09-2020 19:05
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kushan (Post 36050091)
Woah! Where did I claim this? Can you quote me please?
I am not playing your stupid games, you posted earlier that MPs were elected after the referendum, and that they were allowed to be elected to stop brexit and this was manifestly ridiculous given many of them were elected to continue the democratic mandate to leave the EU, hence why I called them Remainiacs for going against what got them elected to their seat.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kushan
I love that this is such a sticking point. Legally binding is legally binding, be it a credit card or international treaty. If you decide 6 months down the line after signing it that you no longer like the terms, well...tough...you signed it. You can try renegotiating but you can't just break the law without consequence.
Well as I keep pointing out, which you are conveniently ignoring and generally being a complete troll, the EU breaks laws, so why can't we?

Several times you ignored this question!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kushan
Can you link to an actual, legal source that shows where the EU has broken international law? I'm begging for a source now. Enlighten me.
Beg all you want, they have broken rules/laws/international treaties fact, they are breaking one now by not acting in good faith which is a legal requirement, another fact you keep ignoring.

Kushan 14-09-2020 19:10
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36050099)
Kush,

I'm trying to show that Andrew cannot answer a pointed question about the EU putting the UK union at risk. He is a Remainer who cannot bring himself to admit the wrong doing of the EU.

If Andrew were to concede my point, it would make less credible his constant siding with the EU (which he'll deny) and his constant sniping at the British Government (which he wants to continue doing).
Boris couldn't answer pointed questions about anything. He hid in a fridge, remember?

I think you would be better off just letting it go. There are people on both sides who have dug their heels in and won't back down (I'm sure people would accuse me of the same) and you may as well talk to a brick wall in that case.

But in this specific debate, about the WA and the legalities and the government's attempt to subvert it, it almost doesn't matter what the EU has or hasn't done - what should matter is what is and isn't legal.

We left the EU. We left under an agreement that Boris promoted and pushed, that was scruitanised by our own MPs in our own parliament. It had all sorts of legal eyes on it (eventually) and any issues with it were raised as necesary. It was signed by our government.

The EU has it's flaws, but they're just the current in a long line of boogeymen that the likes of Boris throws up in front of you to rile you up and get you on their side. And it's working.

If nothing else, this should be a hint that whomever is in government now isn't doing a very good job of it, particularly if they have to resort to breaking the law.

1andrew1 14-09-2020 19:14
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36050101)
Well as I keep pointing out, which you are conveniently ignoring and generally being a complete troll, the EU breaks laws, so why can't we?

Several times you ignored this question!

Beg all you want, they have broken rules/laws/international treaties fact, they are breaking one now by not acting in good faith which is a legal requirement, another fact you keep ignoring.
Why can't you put us all out of our miseries and provide an authoritative link?

OLD BOY 14-09-2020 19:16
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36050072)
I think BoJo could have tried to take the moral high ground but he blew it with the current bill that his own ministers admit breaks international law, albeit in a specific and limited way. It means the EU will be less likely to concede ground and is a poor political judgment. He's now left with the tricky task of bullying his own MPs into backing him whilst the party's original Eurosceptics like Michael Howard condemn his reputation-damaging approach.

---------- Post added at 17:05 ---------- Previous post was at 17:03 ----------


No deal and no WA means a hard border between NI and Eire which breaks the Good Friday Agreement.
Whilst neither the EU or UK wants a hard border, membership of the WTO would mandate this.
BoJo's current WA places a border between GB and NI.
That's an easy one to solve. The EU gives us the deal it said was wanted and there's no need for us to introduce the Bill.

The EU have threatened a food blockade. I haven't heard you condemn that.

1andrew1 14-09-2020 19:23
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36050099)
Kush,

I'm trying to show that Andrew cannot answer a pointed question about the EU putting the UK union at risk. He is a Remainer who cannot bring himself to admit the wrong doing of the EU.

If Andrew were to concede my point, it would make less credible his constant siding with the EU (which he'll deny) and his constant sniping at the British Government (which he wants to continue doing).
Some questions can't be answered by a simple yes or no or I would have done precisely this.
I believe that its everyone's right to hold the government of the day to account for its actions, whatever the colour of the government.

---------- Post added at 19:23 ---------- Previous post was at 19:20 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36050115)
The EU have threatened a food blockade. I haven't heard you condemn that.
That's because they haven't. You're getting confused with Pritti Patel who threatened to starve the Irish. Do you condemn her threats?
https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/pr...warning-318794

OLD BOY 14-09-2020 19:29
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonbxx (Post 36050069)
Because this is not like supporting a football team where one side can do no wrong and the other side is the 'enemy'. I get the feeling sometimes (not from you I might add) That getting one over on Johnny Foreigner is more important than doing well ourselves.

A mutually beneficial deal with the minimum of disruption is my ideal end game and, if either side are putting in place things to disrupt this, then I will call it out.

Idealist, I know...
No, this is a choice between giving what the electorate voted for rather than the alternative. Barnier is standing in the way, and threatening not to give us a no tariff free trade deal, as per the political declaration.

Given that the treaty was based on the premise that we would get such a deal, it stands to reason that if the EU is now acting in bad faith and reneging on this, we need to make some adjustments to the treaty.

These adjustments are actually relatively very minor indeed and not worth making such a fuss about.

And if the EU honour what they promised us, there will be no need to adjust the treaty.

---------- Post added at 19:29 ---------- Previous post was at 19:25 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36050072)
I think BoJo could have tried to take the moral high ground but he blew it with the current bill that his own ministers admit breaks international law, albeit in a specific and limited way. It means the EU will be less likely to concede ground and is a poor political judgment. He's now left with the tricky task of bullying his own MPs into backing him whilst the party's original Eurosceptics like Michael Howard condemn his reputation-damaging approach.

---------- Post added at 17:05 ---------- Previous post was at 17:03 ----------


No deal and no WA means a hard border between NI and Eire which breaks the Good Friday Agreement.
Whilst neither the EU or UK wants a hard border, membership of the WTO would mandate this.
BoJo's current WA places a border between GB and NI.
And there will be no such problem if the EU give us a no tariff trade deal, either. Trust you to bat for the other side! Just as well this isn't a real war...

1andrew1 14-09-2020 19:36
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36050118)
Trust you to bat for the other side! Just as well this isn'tva real war...
I don't bat for Labour or the EU, for the record.
I know it's doubtless meant in a light-heartened manner but it's verging on the offensive to imply I'm some kind of traitor. This isn't a war, it's just a poor implementation of a referendum result which your rose-coloured spectacles prevent you from seeing.

OLD BOY 14-09-2020 19:42
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 36050098)
I don't think Brexiteers rate him either, but he's all they've got. There isn't much talent that side of the fence, hence the cabinet of incompetents we've got now.
It's a lot worse on the other side of the House, my dear chap.

---------- Post added at 19:42 ---------- Previous post was at 19:37 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36050121)
I don't bat for Labour or the EU, for the record.
I know it's doubtless meant in a light-heartened manner but it's verging on the offensive to imply I'm some kind of traitor. This isn't a war, it's just a poor implementation of a referendum result which your rose-coloured spectacles prevent you from seeing.
Of course it was light hearted Andrew. But I think you should take a better look at who is wearing the rose coloured spectacles! :D

nomadking 14-09-2020 19:43
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenMcr (Post 36050093)
That doesn't seem to have been the situation.

As far as I can see our laws for UHT milk within the UK broke EEC common market rules we'd signed up to. We didn't want to check the quality of UHT milk from the EEC or have any method to do so.

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-cont...CJ0124&from=FR

So the the ruling was as we couldn't explain exactly how other EEC members could meet the criteria for imports without onerous obligations not required of UK producers, we were in breach of the treaty.
IIRC it was reported as the UK placing more onerous conditions on UK suppliers, than the French had to follow.

That also highlights the fact that there were NO common EEC rules on UHT milk. Even Scotland and NI had different rules to England. As there were no EEC level standards, what else were we expected to do? So did the other EEC countries allow UK inspectors as the Commission suggested?
My central point is still valid, in that the EEC/EU forces us to accept items which don't meet our own internal standards.
Link

Quote:
Member countries are entitled to take stricter measures, if they wish - the EU welfare standards are a minimum all countries have to follow.
If the UK wanted to put further restrictions on live animal exports, it could do so while it is still in the EU.
But if it wanted to fully ban them, it would not be allowed to do so under the current EU single market rules.

...
For example, the UK, as well as most other EU countries, has domestic legislation that prohibits production of foie gras on animal welfare grounds.
Belgium, France, Hungary, Spain and Bulgaria do not prohibit the production and under the EU principle of free movement of goods, the UK is unable to ban the import of foie gras.

1andrew1 14-09-2020 19:44
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36050122)
It's a lot worse on the other side of the House, my dear chap.
Ed Milliband performed well tonight, I was very surprised to see how effectively he stepped up. https://twitter.com/PoliticsJOE_UK/s...46881272029188

Mad Max 14-09-2020 19:47
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1;36050127[B
]Ed Milliband performed well tonight[/B], I was very surprised to see how effectively he stepped up. https://twitter.com/PoliticsJOE_UK/s...46881272029188

Jeez oh, he could put a ward of newborn babies to sleep with his blethering crap.

OLD BOY 14-09-2020 19:49
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36050127)
Ed Milliband performed well tonight, I was very surprised to see how effectively he stepped up. https://twitter.com/PoliticsJOE_UK/s...46881272029188
Pity he's still on the wrong side of the argument, though! :D

nomadking 14-09-2020 20:01
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36050116)
Some questions can't be answered by a simple yes or no or I would have done precisely this.
I believe that its everyone's right to hold the government of the day to account for its actions, whatever the colour of the government.

---------- Post added at 19:23 ---------- Previous post was at 19:20 ----------


That's because they haven't. You're getting confused with Pritti Patel who threatened to starve the Irish. Do you condemn her threats?
https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/pr...warning-318794
She didn't threaten anything. It is the EU and weirdly the Irish talking about blocking things to the UK. The net result of the EUs actions would be shortages in Ireland, as they themselves figured out some time ago.
Link

Quote:
The Irish public could be in for a huge shock in the days after a hard Brexit with the country facing potential food and medicine shortages.
By agreeing to the WA we were helping them.
Link

Quote:
The UK has said it would be "very unusual" for the EU to seek to block post-Brexit food imports amid a growing dispute over the issue.
The EU has cast doubt on whether it would grant Britain a "third-country listing" for exports of products of animal origin, citing "uncertainties" over its biosecurity controls.
Such exports are worth £5bn to the UK.
A government spokesman said the right to export was the foundation of any kind of agricultural relationship.
So where is it that the UK is the one blocking exports to Ireland?:confused:

Nothing wrong in pointing out what would be result of the actions of the EU. That does NOT constitute a threat. Calling it a threat, yet again highlights the complete and utter lack of "good faith" from the EU, and especially the Irish.

Mick 14-09-2020 20:16
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36050084)
Show us an authoritative link to evidence that the EU has broken international law and I'm sure you'll find a change of tune from everyone.
They are breaking one right now by not acting in good faith during these negotiations. (As I have said many many times now).

---------- Post added at 20:16 ---------- Previous post was at 20:14 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Max (Post 36050130)
Jeez oh, he could put a ward of newborn babies to sleep with his blethering crap.
Agreed, but what startled me was how Starmer allowed this "has been", to the Labour dispatch box in the first place, especially when Starmer's Deputy, was several feet away, did he not have confidence in his deputy to take on Boris?

Mad Max 14-09-2020 20:18
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36050155)
They are breaking one right now by not acting in good faith during these negotiations. (As I have said many many times now).

---------- Post added at 20:16 ---------- Previous post was at 20:14 ----------



Agreed, but what startled me was how Starmer allowed this "has been", to the Labour dispatch box in the first place, especially when Starmer's Deputy, was several feet away, did he not have confidence in his deputy to take on Boris?
Yes, I noticed that and wondered why myself.

Sephiroth 14-09-2020 20:28
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36050116)
Some questions can't be answered by a simple yes or no or I would have done precisely this.
I believe that its everyone's right to hold the government of the day to account for its actions, whatever the colour of the government.
That particular question was easily answered by a yes or no.

If you approve of the EU's threat to disrupt food supplies between NI & England, then you're unpatriotic and wouldn't want to admit it.

If you disapprove, you should say so, so that other boundaries can then be drawn in the conversation.

But as a Remainer, you don't seem to want to call the EU out or criticism in any way.

As to the bit I highlighted in red - yes, of course.

Kushan 14-09-2020 21:06
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36050155)
They are breaking one right now by not acting in good faith during these negotiations. (As I have said many many times now).
You've said it many times, but that doesn't make it true.

I can repeatedly say that I'm Jeremy Corbyn secretly posting on this forum out of sheer pettiness, but that doesn't make it true. Or does it? :erm:

We've asked for evidence many times. We'll keep on asking you to back up your claim until you provide it. Until then, you're just wasting your breath.

Hugh 14-09-2020 21:14
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36050115)
That's an easy one to solve. The EU gives us the deal it said was wanted and there's no need for us to introduce the Bill.

The EU have threatened a food blockade. I haven't heard you condemn that.
What they actually said...

Quote:
In a statement following the latest round of talks on Thursday, the EU’s chief negotiator Michel Barnier said there were “many uncertainties” about the UK’s animal hygiene regime.

He said “more clarity” was needed if Britain was to receive the “third-country listing” entitling it to export animal products to the EU.
Frost has interpreted this as a threat of a blockade, but the EU would be treating us no differently than any other "third country" - prove we are meeting EU standards.

Mick 14-09-2020 21:21
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kushan (Post 36050166)
You've said it many times, but that doesn't make it true.

I can repeatedly say that I'm Jeremy Corbyn secretly posting on this forum out of sheer pettiness, but that doesn't make it true. Or does it? :erm:

We've asked for evidence many times. We'll keep on asking you to back up your claim until you provide it. Until then, you're just wasting your breath.
Careful - I am beginning to believe you possibly could be him, given how rubbish he was at debating.

It is true, go look it up, I ain't your lackey.

Acting in good faith is a legal requirement, it is one of the fundamental principles the EU is suppose to have, but fail to follow when it comes to itself.

1andrew1 14-09-2020 21:31
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36050167)
What they actually said...

Frost has interpreted this as a threat of a blockade, but the EU would be treating us no differently than any other "third country" - prove we are meeting EU standards.
It's apparent that some people are having difficulty in accepting that we've left the EU and want to pretend we're still a member and should be treated as such. ;)

nomadking 14-09-2020 21:39
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36050167)
What they actually said...

Frost has interpreted this as a threat of a blockade, but the EU would be treating us no differently than any other "third country" - prove we are meeting EU standards.
Uncertainties? We'd still be following the same rules as the day before, and that's a certainty.:rolleyes:

Not just food related items.
Quote:
4.6 Non-freight

Any requirements for goods in luggage, Royal Mail and parcels are still under consideration. Further guidance will be set out in due course.
Quote:
12.6 Tobacco and e-cigarette products

These products will have to comply with the EU Tobacco Products Directive and packaging will need to feature the EU picture library.
To be sold in Northern Ireland, a notification will need to be made. Discussions with the EU are still on going on how this process will take place and further guidance will follow.
Quote:
12.5 Medical devices

Devices will need to be compliant with the EU Medical Devices Regulation (MDR) from May 2021 and In Vitro Medical Devices Regulation (IVDR) from May 2022. The device must be registered in Eudamed (for MDR-compliant products) and be registered with the MHRA. If the manufacturer is based in GB, the manufacturer will be required to have an Authorised Representative in NI or the EU.

Damien 14-09-2020 21:42
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Order Order estimates about 17 Tories rebelling. Well off enough to defeat the bill but no one was expecting that. The question will be if the rumours of them removing the whip from these MPs proves to be true.

nomadking 14-09-2020 21:43
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36050170)
It's apparent that some people are having difficulty in accepting that we've left the EU and want to pretend we're still a member and should be treated as such. ;)
:confused: It's the EU insisting we be treated as if we were still a member and have to follow EU rules.

Mick 14-09-2020 21:53
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 36050174)
Order Order estimates about 17 Tories rebelling. Well off enough to defeat the bill but no one was expecting that. The question will be if the rumours of them removing the whip from these MPs proves to be true.
I heard it was about 20, but not all of them will vote against it, they will abstain. Either way the DUP have signalled they will be voting with the Government tonight which will give some much extra comfy head room to the Government.

1andrew1 14-09-2020 22:08
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36050168)

It is true, go look it up, I ain't your lackey.

Acting in good faith is a legal requirement, it is one of the fundamental principles the EU is suppose to have, but fail to follow when it comes to itself.
It's a bit much asking Kushan to find the evidence for you when the British government has been unable to find any such evidence! :D

Quote:
The Times 14th September 2020
If the government believes the EU has acted in bad faith sufficient to justify breaking international law, it should provide compelling evidence.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/t...game-2wjs89l7t

---------- Post added at 22:08 ---------- Previous post was at 22:04 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 36050174)
Order Order estimates about 17 Tories rebelling. Well off enough to defeat the bill but no one was expecting that. The question will be if the rumours of them removing the whip from these MPs proves to be true.
Wow! Hopefully BoJo will learn from this.

The founder of Conservative Home, Tim Montgomerie calls it right tonight.

Quote:
Tim Montgomerie Turning off Twitter until tmrw. Very rare I’m ashamed of the Conservative Party but I am tonight. The PM fiddling with his phone on the frontbench, ignoring parliamentary scrutiny. And Tory MPs queuing up to endorse a Bill they know breaks international law. What next Dom?
https://twitter.com/montie/status/1305597830455853057

Quote:
Ed Miliband: "He can't blame [Theresa May]. He can't blame John Major. He can't blame the judges... There's only one person responsible for it and that's him. This is his deal. It's his mess. It's his failure."

Sephiroth 14-09-2020 22:20
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36050175)
:confused: It's the EU insisting we be treated as if we were still a member and have to follow EU rules.
I wish I'd got in with that one!

Mick 14-09-2020 22:22
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
BREAKING: 349 MPs vote against Labour's Amendment on the IMB (Basically their amendment nullified the Bill at second reading).

1andrew1 14-09-2020 22:26
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36050180)
I wish I'd got in with that one!
You would have let your standards drop had you done so, as you are normally more rational.

Mick 14-09-2020 22:31
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
BREAKING:

The Internal Market Bill clears its first major parliamentary hurdle - as MPs pass it at second reading.

Ayes: 340

Noes: 263

Damien 14-09-2020 22:32
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Passed with a majory of 77

With the DUP it makes it tedious to work out the Tory rebels. Anyone?

Mick 14-09-2020 22:35
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36050182)
You would have let your standards drop had you done so, as you are normally more rational.
And what is wrong with the standard that the EU still expects the UK to follow it's rules that Nomad stated, which is again true?

Come on Andrew your everlasting love for the EU is drawing very thin.

Pierre 14-09-2020 22:39
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
77 majority, it’s irrelevant who voted against it, it will go through.

Chris 14-09-2020 22:42
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 36050184)
Passed with a majory of 77

With the DUP it makes it tedious to work out the Tory rebels. Anyone?
I think the list of who voted for what takes about half an hour to appear.

1andrew1 14-09-2020 22:43
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36050185)
And what is wrong with the standard that the EU still expects the UK to follow it's rules that Nomad stated, which is again true?

Come on Andrew your everlasting love for the EU is drawing very thin.
It's been a tough night for you, Mick, with BoJo losing a debate to a Labour has-been ,so I'll try and be gentle. ;) The EU doesn't expect anything that the UK hasn't requested of it. I think you're referring to the Withdrawal Agreement, which the UK requested, not the EU.

nomadking 14-09-2020 22:53
Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20
 
There's Barnier's lies on fishing and transport driving in the EU.
The UK is signatory to the AETR rules on driving, and they are aligned with the EUs.
The claim is that the UK is unfairly blocking a historic right to fish in UK waters. If there is meant to be a "historic right", doesn't that also mean the UK and everybody else, can freely fish in EU waters with no quotas of any sort? It is the UN agreement on Laws of the Seas, that removed any notion of historic rights. Yet this is meant to be the issue that the EU is insisting is blocking ALL notions of a trade deal.

The common fisheries policy was a power grab by the EEC in the first place. It was conveniently introduced just as several countries with large control over fishing, were looking to join.


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 21:47.
Page 39 of 56 « First 2935363738 39 4041424349 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