UK & EU Agree Post-Brexit Trade Deal

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Maggy

If we leave without a deal and in bad faith who is going to want to deal with us..How can they trust us not to turn around and do the same with them?

It'll be fine. America who have just slapped billions in tariffs onto the EU, because Boeing planes crash, will give us a deal.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by Maggy

If we leave without a deal and in bad faith who is going to want to deal with us..How can they trust us not to turn around and do the same with them?

What? In bad faith? It strikes me that the current proposal is made in good faith. If the EU reject it out of hand, how could it be us not acting in good faith?

[pip08456]

Originally Posted by jfman

Shows he’s scared to put his hold agenda to the people. Brexit supporters know it.

I don’t know why you’re all so worried. If you are right we are leaving. If you are wrong...

If he is so scared why has he tried to get an election on more than one ocassion and each time the remainers have denied him.

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

@Hugh: I've never twisted anything. My view is well balanced.
Whereas your's is entirely a remainer's take with a bent to discredit leavers.

You used to suffer from false modesty - not anymore, you're perfect now...

[jfman]

Originally Posted by pip08456

If he is so scared why has he tried to get an election on more than one ocassion and each time the remainers have denied him.

Because he was trying to force no deal through an election on which he could stipulate the date, hence no extension.

You know this, I'm not sure why you are demonstrating an inability to understand the blindingly obvious. It's beneath even you.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

All that leaving without a deal means is we negotiate from a weaker position so will pay more for less. We'll still have to pay the EU what we agreed before they open negotiations.

Assuming that the "what we agreed" is what was in May's withdrawal agreement, our Parliament never agreed it. So the UK never agreed anything.

Sure, the EU will try to set a price that amounts to the full £39 billion minus dues already paid, but those additional dues were to pay for the privilege of the transition period.

If the current offer from the guvmin forms the basis of a new deal, then I can't see us baulking on the dues.

If we crash out, then those "dues" are not owed but the EU will try to make them part of the price of a trade deal. My instinct is to tell them to do one - a nasty greedy step too far. If the EU negotiate with us on a fair, normal basis, then so much the better.

Fun still to be had, perhaps.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

All that leaving without a deal means is we negotiate from a weaker position so will pay more for less. We'll still have to pay the EU what we agreed before they open negotiations.

I don’t see why.

[pip08456]

Originally Posted by jfman

Because he was trying to force no deal through an election on which he could stipulate the date, hence no extension.

You know this, I'm not sure why you are demonstrating an inability to understand the blindingly obvious. It's beneath even you.

I know it's only ardent remainers who want an extention.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Pierre

I don’t see why.

I do.

[Carth]

If, as people say, the current Backstop idea would put the UK into an inescapable tie in to the EU, then we wouldn't be out would we.

If, as the EU keep saying, the backstop must stay or exist in a manner acceptable to them (HA), it seems to me that they themselves are forcing the 'no deal'.

Of course, it must be said that the EU wouldn't want a deal that grants the UK any favours, but their only alternatives seem to be either a no deal or a half baked excuse of a deal that's not even a deal people want.

anyway, back to the second half . . .

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by pip08456

I know it's only ardent remainers who want an extention.

It's more that the country doesn't want no deal, not that it wants an extension.

---------- Post added at 21:02 ---------- Previous post was at 20:58 ----------

Originally Posted by Carth

If, as people say, the current Backstop idea would put the UK into an inescapable tie in to the EU, then we wouldn't be out would we.

If, as the EU keep saying, the backstop must stay or exist in a manner acceptable to them (HA), it seems to me that they themselves are forcing the 'no deal'.

Of course, it must be said that the EU wouldn't want a deal that grants the UK any favours, but their only alternatives seem to be either a no deal or a half baked excuse of a deal that's not even a deal people want.

anyway, back to the second half . . .

The UK was tasked with finding a workable alternative to the backstop agreed with Theresa May. Remember, this was significantly different from the EU's original suggestion of a NI-only backstop. How workable the UK's suggestions are will be evaluated now.

[pip08456]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

It's more that the country doesn't want no deal, not that it wants an extension.

---------- Post added at 21:02 ---------- Previous post was at 20:58 ----------


The UK was tasked with finding a workable alternative to the backstop agreed with Theresa May. Remember, this was significantly different from the EU's original suggestion of a NI-only backstop. How workable the UK's suggestions are will be evaluated now.

Happy to know you speak for the Country Andrew.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

I do.

Good for you. Most insightful.

---------- Post added at 21:13 ---------- Previous post was at 21:11 ----------

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

It's more that the country doesn't want no deal, not that it wants an extension.

You’re probably 48% right.

[jfman]

It's impossible to say all 52% want no deal. Absolutely impossible.

[pip08456]

Originally Posted by jfman

It's impossible to say all 52% want no deal. Absolutely impossible.

No-one said that though.