Another new Brexit thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ric
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
bluethrunthru said:
PMSL

EO-L3c3WsAADyVo
Click to expand...


Nice try. Saw the reference to "the totemic blue British passport" and spluttered a bit, then saw the legend on the coat of arms.
 
bluethrunthru said:
which bit didn't Mnuchin say?
Click to expand...
You don't seem to be understanding what he, others and I were/are actually saying

You are also not setting out the full scope of the exchange - just selecting some words to try and use to run the UK/Brexit down - hence my comment

I fear for you should the UK actually achieve a decent TA with the US or EU
 
Last edited:
BobKowalski said:
There are overt statements from both sides albeit those by the Chancellor are now varying by the hour to the extent it seems either the UK has no strategy or if it has then the Chancellor is not privy to it.

Financial Services is the one area where U.K. has genuine leverage and the EU will I think strike a balanced deal as it is in their interests but the granting of equivalance will always come with a unilateral right to rescind and there will be demands placed by the EU on UK regulators as the price for equivalence and the ECJ will have arbitration sway. It’s their equivalence so it’s their rules. We of course do not have to seek equivalence but we will and truthfully I just don’t see either side rocking the boat too much on Financial Services.

If the EU dictate sequencing of negotiations then Fishing, Financial Services and zero tariffs on goods will be the prime EU targets. Zero tariffs will come at a price. Level playing field, environment, labour and state aid regs, climate etc. New NI protocols will be hanging over all of this as well. EU don’t want any weaselling out of what has been agreed in the WA.

Everything else simply won’t get done in the timeframe unless we just sign up to everything. Outside of that then it’s down to a basic deal on the key issues that matter to the EU or no deal in which case the WA applies and a ‘robust’ border in the Irish Sea and Frontex running NI/GB Customs at Belfast port. That will be fun :)
Click to expand...
There are a couple of points in there that I think will be really interesting to observe over the coming weeks and months - and which will indicate just where the key negotiating areas are and what the fallback positions might be.

I do not for a moment fail to recognise that the EU are - on the face of it - in the strongest position and have much leverage to use. I just do not take it always as a given that the UK will have to/choose to comply - as they would of course done with the utter amateur Robbins running things.

Other noises coming out of the EU is a delay to the start of negotiations - a very different stance to 2016. I would expect this as they will be needing time (as will the UK) to properly prepare their strategy, approach and governance - again I see this as a good sign from a negotiating POV.

Strangely, you might think, I would not be greatly surprised at this point if the situation is as you say - ".....albeit those by the Chancellor are now varying by the hour to the extent it seems either the UK has no strategy or if it has then the Chancellor is not privy to it."

And you are right that the part of the EU's approach will be to seek to again dictate the sequencing - let us hope that we have learned from past incompetence and have a plan of how to address this challenge.

You are right to observe - although I would word it very differently that the "....EU don’t want any weaselling out of what has been agreed in the WA." The utterly ruinous unfettered backstop may have been removed, but there is much poison still in what remains largely the May/Robbins WA.

That is May's legacy - our starting position is worse now because of what needs to be unpicked from her WA than it was in 2016.

I have a similar view - but different take - on your last point: "....Outside of that then it’s down to a basic deal on the key issues that matter to the EU or no deal...."

You again word things reflecting your view that the UK will buckle to the all-powerful EU and of course your take is that any areas that will be agreed will be those prioritised by the EU and the UK will be dictated to. My own view is that there will be a late agreement on a deal to prevent a No-Deal outcome and that the deal will be in fact a number of key agreements and a framework, process and timetable to agree others - with the status quo continuing until each sector is agreed. I expect this to reflect (eventually) a genuine Canada++ but introduced incrementally in a way that ensures that neither party is seen to have won/lost but instead are seen to confirm and celebrate a close partnership.

The extent to which that your view or mine prevail will be dependent of course on the extent to which we have assessed and prepared to execute a walk-away option if it comes to that. This is needed because it has always been true that we will not see movement from the EU unless and until they face a viable walk-away option and the political will to use it.

Viability and political will have always been the key words. We have a situation now where the political will may be present, supported by the governance (large majority) to act - I hope that in secure rooms in Westminster a small group of people are plotting how to achieve viability.

​
 
Ardwick Green Blue said:
Sooooo...from 11pm on the 31st his thread is redundant as we leave the EU then. We will need a new one so suggestions for a title please...my opening shot is...

The UK as an independent trading nation
Click to expand...
I was thinking:

BREXIT - The End Game

But I am not sure that we want the thread to run for that many years
 
mcfc1632 said:
There are a couple of points in there that I think will be really interesting to observe over the coming weeks and months - and which will indicate just where the key negotiating areas are and what the fallback positions might be.

I do not for a moment fail to recognise that the EU are - on the face of it - in the strongest position and have much leverage to use. I just do not take it always as a given that the UK will have to/choose to comply - as they would of course done with the utter amateur Robbins running things.

Other noises coming out of the EU is a delay to the start of negotiations - a very different stance to 2016. I would expect this as they will be needing time (as will the UK) to properly prepare their strategy, approach and governance - again I see this as a good sign from a negotiating POV.

Strangely, you might think, I would not be greatly surprised at this point if the situation is as you say - ".....albeit those by the Chancellor are now varying by the hour to the extent it seems either the UK has no strategy or if it has then the Chancellor is not privy to it."

And you are right that the part of the EU's approach will be to seek to again dictate the sequencing - let us hope that we have learned from past incompetence and have a plan of how to address this challenge.

You are right to observe - although I would word it very differently that the "....EU don’t want any weaselling out of what has been agreed in the WA." The utterly ruinous unfettered backstop may have been removed, but there is much poison still in what remains largely the May/Robbins WA.

That is May's legacy - our starting position is worse now because of what needs to be unpicked from her WA than it was in 2016.

I have a similar view - but different take - on your last point: "....Outside of that then it’s down to a basic deal on the key issues that matter to the EU or no deal...."

You again word things reflecting your view that the UK will buckle to the all-powerful EU and of course your take is that any areas that will be agreed will be those prioritised by the EU and the UK will be dictated to. My own view is that there will be a late agreement on a deal to prevent a No-Deal outcome and that the deal will be in fact a number of key agreements and a framework, process and timetable to agree others - with the status quo continuing until each sector is agreed. I expect this to reflect (eventually) a genuine Canada++ but introduced incrementally in a way that ensures that neither party is seen to have won/lost but instead are seen to confirm and celebrate a close partnership.

The extent to which that your view or mine prevail will be dependent of course on the extent to which we have assessed and prepared to execute a walk-away option if it comes to that. This is needed because it has always been true that we will not see movement from the EU unless and until they face a viable walk-away option and the political will to use it.

Viability and political will have always been the key words. We have a situation now where the political will may be present, supported by the governance (large majority) to act - I hope that in secure rooms in Westminster a small group of people are plotting how to achieve viability.

​
Click to expand...


Thats a very long way of saying 'We're Fucked'
 
Ifwecouldjust....... said:
We always had a choice of colour for our passports .... it didn't have to be burgundy. But now we choose to leave the Eu we chose 'Blue' ...... the colour that was imposed on us by the League of Nations .


Taking back control? or simply missing the days of Empire
Click to expand...

Desperate or what?

We had blue passports before we joined the EU so it is logical to go back to that colour.
 
Ifwecouldjust....... said:
We always had a choice of colour for our passports .... it didn't have to be burgundy. But now we choose to leave the Eu we chose 'Blue' ...... the colour that was imposed on us by the League of Nations .


Taking back control? or simply missing the days of Empire
Click to expand...
But the League of Nations never "imposed" that we had the words "League of Nations" emblazed on the top, like we were owned by it.

Why did the EU insist our passports had "European Union" on them? We had a choice of colour, why not a choice in other aspects of the design? We never had to have "European Economic Community" on them when we joined the EEC. It was a trend, a worrying trend, the flag, the anthem, the Parliament, the currency, the "defence force", one that was continuing to encroach that showed no signs of abating, and we've nipped it in the bud right at it's beginnings.

The rest of Europe might fall under it's spell, but we're now free from it affecting us. Trade only.
 
Last edited:
bluejon said:
Fuck me mate, you are quite special. You said the ONS figures only use employed/unemployed, I checked, they don't. They use three categories therefore confirming erm.... exactly what i'd said. And as for 'more people employed than ever', well yes. There's also more people than ever. But it's okay, everything's going to be great when brexit happens thanks to fucking geniuses like your good self.
Click to expand...

bluejon said:
Employment stats are at a record high, actual employment however is not (government figures are based on those 'jobseeking' allowing them to ignore millions of people who are unemployed but supposedly not actively looking for work).
Click to expand...
Examine, exactly, what you said here, we're now expected to believe that 'Millions' of jobseekers are not claiming benefits.
So,what must follow, is that that these millions are so fucking minted they don't need to toddle to the jobcentres to sign on.
inbetween said:
What point would there be in measuring the amount of people who aren't looking for work?

Would you ever need to class a retired billionaire as unemployed?
Click to expand...

^^^^^^^


bluejon said:
Also, the number of people in employment but not earning enough to survive on is also in the millions.
Click to expand...
When the idiot that was Brown introduced his wage top ups, paid by the state, that gave many companies Carte Blanche to pay
only the minimum wage, so that's what they do.
What do you think the minimum wage should be now, £15ph? £25ph?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top