Another new Brexit thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ric
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese said:
We've already been informed by Remainers that a us trade deal would be of no consequence other than selling out the NHS and importing food horrors, so surely Biden is good news for Brexit?
Click to expand...
Indeed - there have been a great number of posts to that effect.

Well - at least we have had a great many posts saying that a trade deal with the US would be on the basis of the UK selling of the NHS - accepting chlorinated chicken etc. - so actually just the UK being abused and sold out.

And we have had very many posts exulting in the views expressed in the US that a Biden victory would mean that the UK would be alienated etc.
 
Last edited:
bluethrunthru said:
Brexit Ultra's - Biden wins and your No Deal ambitions are dropped - Johnson is an opportunistic liar.............who knew?

www.theguardian.com

Johnson will wait for US election result before no-deal Brexit decision

Former UK envoy to the EU says prime minister will think ‘history was going his way’ if Donald Trump is re-elected
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
Click to expand...
Cough cough....

Did you read the article? Did you see who the source of these great insights was? Did you read of the people that he has been speaking to to inform his thinking?

"Ivan Rogers, who was the UK’s permanent representative in Brussels from 2013 to 2017, told the Observer that a view shared by ministers and officials he has talked to in recent weeks in several European capitals, is that Johnson is biding his time – and is much more likely to opt for no deal if his friend and Brexit supporter Donald Trump prevails over the Democratic challenger, Joe Biden."

Rogers FFS - no chance of a grudge being held is there?
 
Ric said:
We have 100s of posts that a US trade deal “would be of no consequence”? Really?!
Click to expand...
I have found today that there is a need to be more careful in 'exact wording' - so the answer to your question is yes - in the context of what I was meaning and I also think the poster that I was responding to was meaning

But I have edited my post to ensure that there cannot be overly-narrow interpretation
 
mcfc1632 said:
I have found today that there is a need to be more careful in 'exact wording' - so the answer to your question is yes - in the context of what I was meaning and I also think the poster that I was responding to was meaning

But I have edited my post to ensure that there cannot be overly-narrow interpretation
Click to expand...
Ha, are you Ben Bradley?!
 
Ric said:
I already did.
Click to expand...
My point is its plausible to claim either a deal or no Deal with the US post brexit may be bad news, but less plausible to claim both. Doing so suggests that actually it's nothing to do with us trade, just a bitterness/unhappiness about brexit - which is fine btw, but odd to dress it up as a balanced view imho.
 
mcfc1632 said:
Cough cough....

Did you read the article? Did you see who the source of these great insights was? Did you read of the people that he has been speaking to to inform his thinking?

"Ivan Rogers, who was the UK’s permanent representative in Brussels from 2013 to 2017, told the Observer that a view shared by ministers and officials he has talked to in recent weeks in several European capitals, is that Johnson is biding his time – and is much more likely to opt for no deal if his friend and Brexit supporter Donald Trump prevails over the Democratic challenger, Joe Biden."

Rogers FFS - no chance of a grudge being held is there?
Click to expand...

Of course you Ultra's would reject it - I posted it in the full knowledge - after all the Holy Grail that is Brexit must be achieved at whatever cost whatever collateral damage. I have no doubt that once again Johnson will have two speeches written - one for if Trump wins one for if Biden wins - he will pick the one that suits his ends and will have no fucking care about the impact on the country or its citizens cos it will be all about him as usual.
 
mcfc1632 said:
I have found today that there is a need to be more careful in 'exact wording' - so the answer to your question is yes - in the context of what I was meaning and I also think the poster that I was responding to was meaning

But I have edited my post to ensure that there cannot be overly-narrow interpretation
Click to expand...
Sometimes you just need to admit you were wrong rather than making out other people are being pedantic because they refuse to interpret one thing as something else.
 
mcfc1632 said:
Yes - I found the entire article quite balanced and provided some straight-forward discussion on what is likely going on. Getting the EU to start on the legal text is quite a positive outcome for the UK

There was not much on the fishing topic but I thought this section was interesting:

"However, the official adds: "Getting the texts on the level playing field, governance and fisheries - that will take a bit of time. That will touch on our interests as member states. That will be an interesting experience."

Ultimately, to the EU what matters now is what political choices the UK is prepared to make.

"Do you want to work with us on achieving high standards in the future?" says one diplomat. "Do you want to get a stable and sustainable agreement on fish, where you get market access in return for us keeping a large chunk of our current fishing rights? If it’s a political choice, solutions are in reach."

Some posters talk about how we don't eat certain fish - that fishing is such a small part of the economy and we only have a small fleet etc......

That bit highlighted leads onto why I think that the best outcome for the UK is a deal that agrees a 3 - 5 year period of transition for the EU fleets to enjoy exactly the same access as they have now.

The words from the article speak of a deal where we get more quotas and the EU less - that is less good for us as it suggest an actual deal. That said - you can see that the subject of fishing is more important than some have realised - because here there is a suggestion of the EU trading some level of access to the SM in return

But that can be discussed more - otherwise this will turn into a long post

BTW - you have my full agreement on your view: "We may still get to it as long as the grown ups keep Johnson away from things until the deal is done."
Click to expand...
Good grief. I'm really lost. "The best outcome is a deal" so long as it's not "an actual deal".

The bolded question is not some brilliant new insight. It's what I've been trying to get you to discuss for months.

(From June :)
Vic said:
....
Two questions then.

What would we want in exchange for agreeing fishing quotas in our waters (which is a treaty obligation anyway to prevent overfishing and which we seem willing to do on an annual basis)?

And do we not want continued access for our seafood exporters to EU markets?

(I'm actually more sympathetic to Cornish and west coast Scottish small boat fishermen looking to secure their EU market than the rich owners of much of our quotas on the east coast - and half of English quotas are foreign owned. I can't see how we could expand the fleet without more foreign ownership and/or foreign crews.)
Click to expand...
 
I think when you end uprooting yourself to support your argument that says a lot. Fwiw I think we will strike some sort of a deal on fishing that suits all concerned. Behind all the bluster from Gove, boris and Barnier plus other EU mouthpieces I suspect the grownups will be having an adult conversation.
 
Vic said:
Good grief. I'm really lost. "The best outcome is a deal" so long as it's not "an actual deal".
Click to expand...

Brexit - in Brexit Ultra's heads - when they don't know who they will actually blame but they do ( reluctantly ) recognise it ain't gonna end well. The poster you were responding to cites Robbins and May as culprits for the Brexit mess but they have been nowhere near it for 15 months but hey you know......
 
bluethrunthru said:
Of course you Ultra's would reject it - I posted it in the full knowledge - after all the Holy Grail that is Brexit must be achieved at whatever cost whatever collateral damage. I have no doubt that once again Johnson will have two speeches written - one for if Trump wins one for if Biden wins - he will pick the one that suits his ends and will have no fucking care about the impact on the country or its citizens cos it will be all about him as usual.
Click to expand...
Does it matter who wins the US election - so long as they are willing to agree a favourable trade deal with the UK?
 
Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese said:
I think when you end uprooting yourself to support your argument that says a lot. Fwiw I think we will strike some sort of a deal on fishing that suits all concerned. Behind all the bluster from Gove, boris and Barnier plus other EU mouthpieces I suspect the grownups will be having an adult conversation.
Click to expand...

Interested to know what you think that fishing deal will be? Acceptance that the EU boats are banned from our waters as of 1/1/21 which is what is pledged or continued fishing rights in our waters for EU boats as of 1/1/21 which it has been claimed as a red line by Brexiteers? Where is the middle ground in that?
 
mcfc1632 said:
Does it matter who wins the US election - so long as they are willing to agree a favourable trade deal with the UK?
Click to expand...

No - except you don't seem to be aware of what Bidens team have said. Just avoiding the issue doesn't mean its not there you know.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top