Brexited | the worst threads live the longest
- Thread starter Silva
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
I'm sure Clarke would love to derail Brexit. I'll be extremely surprised if May is still PM this time next year.
I tried to bet on her going last night, but I could only find odds on who the next leader would be. Everyone's saying Boris, as if. I was bit worse for wear though.
With May probably being the worst PM in my lifetime, Boris might even surpass that.
But he's right though, May having a small majority or a large majority made little difference, having no majority does make a difference.
He still should shut up, it doesn't matter if he is right or not. The man doesn't have an ounce of diplomacy and discretion in him.
Europe will absolutely ream us for everything and rightly so.
I don't know why you say 'rightly so'....
As I posted on Wednesday in the other thread....
I don't vote, of course, but if I was, I'd break the habit of a lifetime and vote Tory.
Everything you say is absolutely why I've always been left-of-centre. But to me the BIGGEST problem for the UK over the next few years is the eventual state of the UK after the UK leaves the EU.
Get BREXIT wrong, and all the problems you're describing will be even more so and even worse....Even more devisive....
Much as I dislike May and many members of her cabinet, it seems to me that they are preferable to a coalition of Labour/LibDen/SNP, all of whom don't want the UK out of the EU, and so don't have the determination or the enthusiasm to make sure the UK doesn't get absolutely, totally screwed by the EU.
Labour or LibDem next time, perhaps, has to be the sensible way forward for the UK - but not this time....
I've just been listening to Tusk on World Service and he was remarkably restrained. I'd have been tempted to put the boot in 'Look, it's a year since you said you were leaving and you still don't seem ready to negotiate, how long are we supposed to give you before we consider you as a failed state and impose our own terms?'.
It's in their best interests to destroy us in the negotiations to make a point to the other member states about what happens if you choose to leave the club.
It's not morally right but they've got all the power and we've got absolutely nothing to offer in response so they're going to bend us over and shaft us for all we're worth.
Idiots voted to leave the Union instead of effect change from inside it, instead of opening up dialogue about the issues and sorting it out we took our ball and went home instead, now we'll rightfully pay the price.
At the end of the day, they're 26 countries in one big block and we're a tiny isolated rock with nothing to offer.
Not all Tories wanted out of the union and not all Labour members want to stay in, Corbyn doesn't for one. I can't look at the likes of May and Boris and think 'yeah, we're gonna do alright in negotiations here'.
It's because many of us recognise our negotiating position is not very strong (500m v 60m) and trust Labour/Lib Dems/more moderate wing of Conservatives to take a pragmatic approach to negotiations as, for them, it's ultimately a rational commercial decision. The worry with May's "Brexiteers" (Davies and Fox etc) is that they are ideological zeolots who would genuinely walk away with no deal.
You mean like Greece ?
Greece seeks debt relief as it edges closer to default
The Greek government has rejected a compromise proposal by the International Monetary Fund to resolve the impasse over the country’s debts, raising the possibility of a sovereign default within weeks. Alexis Tsipras, the prime minister, and his ruling Syriza party said that the proposal offered Greece a “less than an honourable solution”.
The IMF believes that Greece needs debt relief, which Germany has strongly resisted before it holds national elections later in the year. With German voters increasingly apprehensive about signing more credit cheques for Greece, any talk of debt forgiveness has been billed a vote-loser for Angela Merkel. As a concession Christine Lagarde, the IMF’s managing director, told the German newspaper Handelsblatt that the fund could bow to the wishes of Mrs Merkel’s government and stay on board in the Greek bailout. She said that the fund would resist providing any further financial aid to Greece until debt relief measures had been clarified, potentially long after the German election.
Greece, however, does not want to wait. It is seeking greater clarity now on debt relief measures that could be carried out after its bailout ends in 2018 to convince wary investors that its debt, now at 197 per cent of gross domestic product, will be sustainable. This would allow Europe’s weakest economy to return to bond markets as early as the end of the year. “The IMF cannot just continue deferring decisions,” Panagiotis Rigas, a leading Syriza member, said. “It cannot insist that Greece take painful measures and when it does, turn around and say, ‘Not to worry. We’ll deal with your debt at a later time in the distant future. We have met our obligations to creditors. It is also their time to deliver.”
The remarks indicate growing frustration among leading members of the ruling party in Athens as it faces falling popularity ratings while the protracted talks continue to keep Greece’s economy in crisis. Like other government officials, Mr Rigas said he was hopeful that Greece and its creditors, with both sides scrambling to find a compromise solution, would do so ahead of a meeting of eurozone finance ministers on June 15. Greece wants eurozone lenders to disburse €7 billion at that meeting. Failure to secure the aid funds could push Greece into default by July, when it has to meet more than €7 billion in bond repayments.
In an attempt to encourage its skittish lenders, Athens legislated €4.9 billion in fresh austerity measures last month. Eurozone finance ministers, however, failed to agree with the IMF last month on debt relief terms for Greece. This week José Manuel Barroso, the former president of the European Commission, warned that Greece was still at risk of being pushed out of the single european currency. “But whether Grexit happens or not,” he told an Athens conference, “now rests on the moves of the Greek government.”
Think the attitude now after listening to a few people is that the Uk will leave in March 2019, if you want something come and talk to us, time is running out, first things will be EU citizens rights and if the Uk are going to pay the bill but chances are there will be no deal as May will not be able to have a mandate to agree to anything and the EU just want the whole process over with as soon as possible and get on with other things.
We voted a year ago and still don't have a negotiating position.
SO why do the EU insist that talks about 'Exiting' have to finish before talks about 'Trading' can even start ?
Can't multitask ?
They must be laughing at the UK right now, assuming they weren't already.
The Exit has to be dealt with first to ensure the rights of citizens are intact and that the Uk give a commitment to pay the bill (not necessarily straight away) whatever that ends up as . There are plenty of other points to talk about as well and the trading talks could take years but will not start until the EU know what the UK intend to do. So far nobody knows and that includes the UK government and the British people.
May couldn't have made more of a pig's ear of this if she tried.
We voted a year ago and still don't have a negotiating position.
Well....Half of that time was spent trying to deal with Gina Miller and her REMAIN friends.....
Citizens Rights ? Thought that could be 'sorted' this evening IF the EU would drop its position that even when the UK is out of the EU, EU citizens in the UK must still be subject to jurisdiction of the ECJ - which even I think is just plain stupid.
Pig's Ear ? Couldn't agree more....
No multitasking then?
Got me !!
Anything agreed with the EU will no doubt have to be covered by the ECJ.
I don't see the EU giving up the jurisdiction of the ECJ easily.
I thought that the EU were insisting that EU citizens inside / resident in the UK must still be covered/protected by the ECJ even after the UK has left the EU.
Or am I wrong ?
Because if that's the case, that's just plain crazy - Americans living in France can't claim that the US DoJ and courts have superiority to the French courts ?
But do British citizens living abroad have access to the protection of the British embassy or consulate?
A second referendum and undoing the stupidity of last year on the cards.
Not quite the same....
EU citizens in the UK would / will always have access to Consular assistance of the country of which they are citizens while in the UK...
Whether they would ever pitch up for assistance at the EU Embassy in London rather than their own Enbassy in London, I'm not sure, but to be honest, I don't think it has ever, ever entered my head to go to an EU Embassy rather than a UK Embassy when I've been in the USA or Russia.
But I don't know anywhere in the world ( outside the EU, of course ) which allows another country's legal system to have precedence over its own, which, as I understand it, is the sticking point between what May wants for UK citizens inside the EU and what the EU wants for its citizens resident in the UK post-BREXT.
In other words, it would be impractical to have 60 million British citizens in the UK for whom the UK Supreme Court or The House of Lords is the ultimate Legal Jurisdiction, and then have another four or five million non-British citizens in the UK for whom the ECJ is the ultimate Legal Jurisdiction.
Maybe I'm wrong, but as I understand it, that's the sticking point between the UK and the EU over the treatment of each others' citizens post-BREXIT - not Heathcare, Rights to Remain, etc....
EU citizens in the UK would / will always have access to Consular assistance of the country of which they are citizens while in the UK...
Whether they would ever pitch up for assistance at the EU Embassy in London rather than their own Enbassy in London, I'm not sure, but to be honest, I don't think it has ever, ever entered my head to go to an EU Embassy rather than a UK Embassy when I've been in the USA or Russia.
But I don't know anywhere in the world ( outside the EU, of course ) which allows another country's legal system to have precedence over its own, which, as I understand it, is the sticking point between what May wants for UK citizens inside the EU and what the EU wants for its citizens resident in the UK post-BREXT.
In other words, it would be impractical to have 60 million British citizens in the UK for whom the UK Supreme Court or The House of Lords is the ultimate Legal Jurisdiction, and then have another four or five million non-British citizens in the UK for whom the ECJ is the ultimate Legal Jurisdiction.
Maybe I'm wrong, but as I understand it, that's the sticking point between the UK and the EU over the treatment of each others' citizens post-BREXIT - not Heathcare, Rights to Remain, etc....
Why do you think the Tories will be more desperate to avoid hard borders now as opposed to before?
As for the Irish enjoying benefits that other countries don't, it's probably inevitable unless you want to undermine the principles of the GFA. So many people living in NI also have the benefit of being able to claim Irish (ie. EU) citizenship while those in mainland UK don't.
Really Brexit is quite at odds with the direction the NI peace process was heading in. Few in the UK seemed to notice that beforehand though given it was barely a feature of the referendum campaign. *shrugs*
DUP will probably not support a government who is willing to return to hard borders. That can be used by Brussels to EU favour. We all know that the Tories only care about staying into power for as many years as possible
I really don't understand how this would work and what part of the citizens' rights would be covered by the ECJ, the parties need to get together and discuss this asap.
The referendum happened yesterday. LibDems gained 3 seats.
Are you suggesting that some governments do not prioritise staying in power?
Yes. In my country the labour government kept losing election after election because he remained anti EU. People didn't vote for the party but respected it for it. The current government called for an early election 1 year early because allegations were made against it and it was hurting the economy. It had a solid majority that May would probably sell Boris to slavery for and yet it did the right thing.
When a party did cling to power (ex Gonzi administration) it got massacred in the following elections.
Cameron resigned after Brexit, though. He accepted the will of the British people.
He created this whole mess to destroy UKIP and he resigned rather then sort the mess that he created. That's different. In 1982 the labour party changed the entire voting political system in Malta which it inherited from the Brits and which constantly made it win elections with the majority of seats despite not having the majority of votes. That condemned the party to 10 years of opposition. I can't see the Tory Party doing that sort of sacrifices for the good of the country.
I am a Brexiteer, but now I have to say I am less confident about Brexit. Yesterdays election result was terrible for Brexit negotiations. It's weakened the government's bargaining position considerably.
The bargaining position would be the same IF the political class in the UK put national interest ahead of their own