Quote:
Originally Posted by ianch99
|
The simple answer is that the electorate voted to leave. That means we either leave with a deal with the EU which does not impact on our ability to forge new trade deals or we leave under WTO rules. That's how it works. No point in nit-picking, we just have to get on and do it.
---------- Post added at 13:24 ---------- Previous post was at 13:19 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth
I read in a newspaper analysis today(I forget which) something that absolutely chimed with me. It was in relation to the EU breaking Article 8 (and indeed Article 50) by not negotiating with us to bring about a decent agreement.
The article highlighted the difference between the UK which has a flexible unwritten constitution and the rest of the EU that are rules based in their Treaty documents and thus totally inflexible. Aka we look alike but don't think alike.
Put that into the mix with the Guvmin's total bodge job, a Canada style deal is something we should jump at just to get the job done. Except that they want to tie up the £39 billion first and May now cannot give them that scot free and survive.
But the political situation here is so volatile, and the Chequers deal must not be allowed to survive, that it's either going to be a fudge or a political change and a second referendum.
|
What exactly do you perceive to be wrong with the Chequers deal, or are you just relying on the reaction of the Brexiteers?
The only thing about it that bothers me is the 'common rulebook' because I can't make out if that would only apply to goods to and from the EU or whether it would apply to all trade that we do with other countries as well.
If the former, this is just like any comprehensive trade deal we might enter into with any country. If the latter, it is unacceptable.