Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY
I thought you guys were arguing for a transition period rather than a 'hard Brexit'!
Theresa can't do anything right for some, it seems, even if she gives them exactly what they've asked for!
Given that we won't know the outcome of the negotiations until a deal is struck, it makes perfect sense to have a two year transitional period so we can put all the new arrangements in place.
|
I'm not going to speak for Mr K, however for the first time in a while the right tone was struck.
That said, all was very vague. We're still very light on details. A few concessions were made to the EU and it's very clear the UK still hasn't settled on what we actually want.
Those most upset over the speech seem to be those who've been listening to Boris and those at the extremes of the leave campaigns who were under the impression it would be easy and that no deal was a viable option on the table.
At the extremes I probably have to include the man in charge of DExEU given his statements from the middle of 2016.
---------- Post added at 11:44 ---------- Previous post was at 11:30 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K
A 2 year extension? During which time we pretend we're not in the EU but are in all but name. Sounds as though she really doesn't want to leave at all. Don't blame her, the more delay the more time for us to see sense.
|
This is a tricky one.
Theresa May is hard to read on this one. She's strongly against immigration, so wants out of FoM, however she and the Party have an awful lot of influential people bending their ear. She has also seen the various impact assessments that the Government see fit to deny us, which implies their contents isn't good.
She was a waste of space as Home Secretary for the most part. An ideologue who was ineffective at most things bar cutting services. Someone who preferred to spend time getting publicity for standing up to the ECJ and ECtHR than actually getting her job done.
The request for a 2 year extension is simply required. The UK falling out of the EU onto WTO terms would harm the UK economy profoundly according to most commentators, so remaining in the SM/CU until such a deal can be put in place is important. I also note it was mentioned as 'about' 2 years. This is likely extraordinarily optimistic if we are to get the kind of trade deal the UK needs, but has been left open-ended.
If this means a more pragmatic tone going forward this is good for the UK. You can also chill on the negativity a bit. This means we're not even a quarter of the way through the process, and that more sensible voices have prevailed with the ridiculous claims that they need us more than we need them and we can drop onto WTO terms and immediately see our trade burst into the stratosphere have been abandoned. WTO terms would carry a heavy price for the UK, a far less acute one for the EU.
That said, it's worth keeping an open mind on everything for right now. We still have no idea what our actual endgame is.
This is somewhat conspiracy theory, well more than somewhat, but an interesting read:
https://veritasetlibertasdeannolxxxi.../2017/05/30/5/
EDIT: Something that was interesting about the speech on more thought is how she wanted to place some responsibility on the EU for making the process a success. I think this is in vain - their opinion on the whole is that it's our mess and we should be the ones fixing it, and that's a perfectly reasonable position to take. Their thoughts on the matter are abundantly clear by those in audience for that speech - British politicians and mostly British journalists. Foreign dignitaries were invited and declined.
---------- Post added at 11:50 ---------- Previous post was at 11:44 ----------
Heh. The UK Government is promoting May's speech with paid-for tweets in European languages. Dutch and German I've seen so far.