Brexited | the worst threads live the longest

Do you think there will be a Deal or No Deal?


  • Total voters
    194
  • Poll closed .
At this point the government simply needs to be called out as corrupt liars.

I would guess most people over thirty years of age would recognize this about most governments (of whatever political persuasion) we have ever had... but strangely enough we keep on re-electing them... perhaps secretly we all want to be lied to, trusting it will be in our best interests and to avoid upsetting the children!
 
I need to ask, do you think that the UK are still a member?

Well that begs the question, when did we leave, or how can we say we left if we are still taking/following EU rules?

This has been one of the big problems all the way through, how can a country that is still a member in terms of following EU rules, negotiate with a representative of its self?

Some clarification was given when on the 31st Jan 2020 we officially left.... but yet still for another year, we continue to follow EU rules?

At the end of this year (so we are told) we will have left everything 'EU'ish', behind, properly, completely, and without doubt.... that is unless Boris caves in, or is replaced as PM, or some new fangled extra transition extension (not called an extension though) is enacted... maybe now a new period to oversee how we move from the present position to some WO arrangement, that is not in fact a TD, but a series of mini/small scale deals based around certain products/services and varying between member countries within the EU?
But we will definitely be out because we are not taking EU rules anymore...or are we?

Boris has say 3/4 years before he has to put his government up for re-election to the general public, but possibly a lot less than that to stop some internal Tory Party Coup to get rid of him and replace him with someone deemed more competent. Either way he does have something of a period of grace to fudge something else with the EU that still involves us hanging on to EU coat-tails.

The catalyst for this will be the threat to attempt to 'unpick' the WA agreement by the UK government, this not only says to the UK public "see we are going to do this properly", but also to the EU, by saying "lets see if we can hang on a bit longer, even if we seem to be arguing over a 'done deal'..."who knows?
 
Well that begs the question, when did we leave, or how can we say we left if we are still taking/following EU rules?

This has been one of the big problems all the way through, how can a country that is still a member in terms of following EU rules, negotiate with a representative of its self?

Some clarification was given when on the 31st Dec 2019 we officially left.... but yet still for another year, we continue to follow EU rules?

At the end of this year (so we are told) we will have left everything 'EU'ish', behind, properly, completely, and without doubt.... that is unless Boris caves in, or is replaced as PM, or some new fangled extra transition extension (not called an extension though) is enacted... maybe now a new period to oversee how we move from the present position to some WO arrangement, that is not in fact a TD, but a series of mini/small scale deals based around certain products/services and varying between member countries within the EU?
But we will definitely be out because we are not taking EU rules anymore...or are we?

Boris has say 3/4 years before he has to put his government up for re-election to the general public, but possibly a lot less than that to stop some internal Tory Party Coup to get rid of him and replace him with someone deemed more competent. Either way he does have something of a period of grace to fudge something else with the EU that still involves us hanging on to EU coat-tails.

The catalyst for this will be the threat to attempt to 'unpick' the WA agreement by the UK government, this not only says to the UK public "see we are going to do this properly", but also to the EU, by saying "lets see if we can hang on a bit longer, even if we seem to be arguing over a 'done deal'..."who knows?

So you posted numerous posts about the subject without even understanding the most basic thing?

The UK left on January 31st after signing the withdrawal agreement on January 24th. That withdrawal agreements included a transition period during which the UK would benefit from the treaties that they signed as a member state, that transition period ends after December 31st 2020. Since February 1st the UK isn't a member of the EU.
 
I would guess most people over thirty years of age would recognize this about most governments (of whatever political persuasion) we have ever had... but strangely enough we keep on re-electing them... perhaps secretly we all want to be lied to, trusting it will be in our best interests and to avoid upsetting the children!
Unlawfully suspending parliament to avoid parlimentary scrutiny on a deal which now the government themselves are saying is a terrible deal and they will break international law to avoid.

Taking back control? Give me a break.
 
Unlawfully suspending parliament to avoid parlimentary scrutiny on a deal which now the government themselves are saying is a terrible deal and they will break international law to avoid.

That is exactly what those in control do...because they can, they play according to their rules, wake up and smell the coffee please
 
The trade negotiations between the UK and all the countries in the world, never mind the EU, will be mindblowing.

Country X: In order to export your goods to us they have to comply with our rules and regulations and the packaging and materials also have to comply with these other rules and regulations.
UK: How dare you, we are an independent country and you cannot tell us what we can or cannot do, we'll damn well ship to you anything we want to.
Country X: Goodbye.
 
Been reading Boris 'playbook' again Paul?

Boris lives in his own world which is far detached from reality. Less than four months till reality smacks him in the face. What are the odds that he will still be PM in six months time? Although as time progresses the UK PM's get worse and worse. Odds on Grayling for next PM?
 
Whats going on with Gibralta - especially with this whole overblown fuss over fishing rights

Can the UK claim an exclusion zone around Gibralta and ban spanish fishing vessels - if so next summer is perfectly set up for the spanish armarda trying to steal our fish and chips and pritti patel et all wanting to send in the gunships

Gibralta is proper fecked without a deal though isnt it?
 
Whats going on with Gibralta - especially with this whole overblown fuss over fishing rights

Can the UK claim an exclusion zone around Gibralta and ban spanish fishing vessels - if so next summer is perfectly set up for the spanish armarda trying to steal our fish and chips and pritti patel et all wanting to send in the gunships

Gibralta is proper fecked without a deal though isnt it?
Gibraltar.

The fishing question is complicated because many british fishermen sold their licenses, so it's a bit weird to talk about stealing, I assume that you are being facetious with that part but the distinction should be important for british authorities who should talk to fishermen unions directly and try to fix that issue.
 
Gibraltar.

The fishing question is complicated because many british fishermen sold their licenses, so it's a bit weird to talk about stealing, I assume that you are being facetious with that part but the distinction should be important for british authorities who should talk to fishermen unions directly and try to fix that issue.
I'm more talking about how boris will spin it in the press
 
I'm more talking about how boris will spin it in the press

That's why I assumed that you were being facetious with that term. But on a serious note, these quotas/licenses were purchased following british laws, so the british government should fix that issue if they care about the rules of law and fairness.
 
That's why I assumed that you were being facetious with that term. But on a serious note, these quotas/licenses were purchased following british laws, so the british government should fix that issue if they care about the rules of law and fairness.
...yeah.
 

I know but I had to say it and assume that they care even a little bit. Particularly when I imagine that tories will make licenses/quotas still easily tradable since it was their idea in the first place.
 
I know but I had to say it and assume that they care even a little bit. Particularly when I imagine that tories will make licenses/quotas still easily tradable since it was their idea in the first place.

The state aid argument is also hilarious. The UK hardly uses any of the state aid allowance that they can, additionally Tories + State Aid doesn't compute.
 
The state aid argument is also hilarious. The UK hardly uses any of the state aid allowance that they can, additionally Tories + State Aid doesn't compute.
I think the big issue is the UK wants to do some things differently - particularly with tech companies and whilst state aid is often considered to prop up struggling businesses they want to proactivley invest in new sectors - the EU (rightly imo) sees that this could harm the organic development of those sectors in their own countries especially if the UK has access to the single market
 
https://www.monckton.com/the-governments-new-state-aid-proposals-are-the-worst-of-all-worlds/

The EU’s determination to make sure that the UK stays within the state aid framework is shown by the startling provisions in Article 10 of the new Northern Ireland protocol to the current Withdrawal Agreement, accepted by the Johnson government without apparent demure (or perhaps without even realising, in the rush, what it had agreed to). That Article keeps the United Kingdom fully bound by the EU state aid rules—including enforcement by the Commission and Court of Justice of the EU—to the extent that any UK measure is a state aid that affects trade between Northern Ireland and the EU. That means that any general UK tax measure extending to Northern Ireland that favours a particular sector will almost certainly be subject to prior approval by the Commission, subject only to an appeal to the Court of Justice. But the control goes further: any UK government measure that affects Northern Ireland—for example a grant to an English company with significant Northern Ireland operations—may well, because of Article 10, fall under the Commission’s powers.

that sounds about right to me
 
How does it compare to the norm?

And what is it specifically they think is so unacceptable now that they hadn't realised before?

What do you mean by your first question and the government allegedly wants to rewrite the NI protocol and allow themselves to unilaterally decide about the questions concering the border and custom issues between the UK and the EU.
 
What do you mean by your first question and the government allegedly wants to rewrite the NI protocol and allow themselves to unilaterally decide about the questions concering the border and custom issues between the UK and the EU.

Oh I just meant how many senior govt folks resign in a typical term at this stage?

The whole NI thing then, nothing in the finer details? That's absurd. It was one of the main points of contention a year ago and they celebrated that resolution as negotiated win. Surely no-one could accept that with a straight face, whichever side they're on...
 
Surely breaking one of the first international agreements since the Brexit vote doesn't bode well for future negotiations with other countries for Britain.
 
Oh I just meant how many senior govt folks resign in a typical term at this stage?

The whole NI thing then, nothing in the finer details? That's absurd. It was one of the main points of contention a year ago and they celebrated that resolution as negotiated win. Surely no-one could accept that with a straight face, whichever side they're on...

Since yesterday I have tried to understand what it was actually about and my interpretation is that the government is realizing that they won't have a deal before the end of the transition period which means that the bad sides of the WA will kick in and they are mentioned in @sun_tzu quotes, from the moment they published the WA proposals it was obvious that neither side would like it but that tories would hate it because they either have to effectively separate NI from the rest of the UK or apply EU rules everywhere.
 
Well that begs the question, when did we leave, or how can we say we left if we are still taking/following EU rules?

This has been one of the big problems all the way through, how can a country that is still a member in terms of following EU rules, negotiate with a representative of its self?

This loose use of language by Brexiters does my head in, it enables them to completely miss the point. eg this business about 'following EU rules' - there is no way the EU is going to allow the UK to access the single market with subsidised industries that can unfairly compete with their own. That's what this 'State Aid' stuff is about. (Not even the WTO allows it). And we wouldn't allow it either! But this rather straightforward point about 'ensuring a level playing field' - which you would expect if you wanted to trade on an equal basis in a market - gets turned into a point about the unfair / domineering EU. It's madness.
 
I think the big issue is the UK wants to do some things differently - particularly with tech companies and whilst state aid is often considered to prop up struggling businesses they want to proactivley invest in new sectors - the EU (rightly imo) sees that this could harm the organic development of those sectors in their own countries especially if the UK has access to the single market

They are wrong to do so. Good lord, it's not hard to get funding for a tech company if your idea is halfway decent, there's a giant amount of capital looking for a home. What this really is, is the govt (a) thinking it can pick winners (b) funding companies VCs don't want to touch - eg the rubbish ones. Such a big fight over such a bad, bad idea.
 
I'm stunned at what a poor administration this is. They are in for a very big shock.
 
Its unusual for a minister to admit the government is going to break the law


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-54073836

And its probably incompetence... but part of me wonders if it isn't to push the eu into taking them to court... its the one thing sure to galvanise the brexit vote into blaming the eu

And if the government does go ahead with legislation which appears to contradict the withdrawal agreement?

"There is a chance," says Prof Barnard, "that the EU will decide to trigger the dispute resolution mechanism in the withdrawal agreement, which could lead to arbitration and a case before the European Court of Justice."
 
Its unusual for a minister to admit the government is going to break the law


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-54073836

And its probably incompetence... but part of me wonders if it isn't to push the eu into taking them to court... its the one thing sure to galvanise the brexit vote into blaming the eu
Wouldn't put it past this government. Can't blame Labour, so shift the blame on the EU