What relationship does the EU actually want with us ?
To leave completely, but keep paying the bills, and with the effective annexation of 5,450 square miles of our territory.
I don’t think that’s true. I’m sure the EU doesn’t want us to leave, as apart from de Gaulle, European political leaders generally saw our participation as desirable, and indeed highly desirable.
I suspect there’d be a huge sigh of relief if we turned round and asked to come back. All this ‘negotiation’ is a dreadful waste of everyone’s time.
And to those of us who would no longer consider ourselves in a free country as a result? What’s the EU going to offer?
What relationship does the EU actually want with us ?
To leave completely, but keep paying the bills, and with the effective annexation of 5,450 square miles of our territory.
I don’t think that’s true. I’m sure the EU doesn’t want us to leave, as apart from de Gaulle, European political leaders generally saw our participation as desirable, and indeed highly desirable.
I suspect there’d be a huge sigh of relief if we turned round and asked to come back. All this ‘negotiation’ is a dreadful waste of everyone’s time.
And to those of us who would no longer consider ourselves in a free country as a result? What’s the EU going to offer?
You seem to be happy enough to have Westminster as your overlord, though?
What relationship does the EU actually want with us ?
To leave completely, but keep paying the bills, and with the effective annexation of 5,450 square miles of our territory.
I don’t think that’s true. I’m sure the EU doesn’t want us to leave, as apart from de Gaulle, European political leaders generally saw our participation as desirable, and indeed highly desirable.
I suspect there’d be a huge sigh of relief if we turned round and asked to come back. All this ‘negotiation’ is a dreadful waste of everyone’s time.
And to those of us who would no longer consider ourselves in a free country as a result? What’s the EU going to offer?
The EU27 have not tried to coerce into staying, merely stood up for their own interests. The idea that the EU27 would take our interests into account was always delusional. I don't think we will abandon Brexit, but if we do it will be a free decision of our sovereign parliament.
What relationship does the EU actually want with us ?
To leave completely, but keep paying the bills, and with the effective annexation of 5,450 square miles of our territory.
I don’t think that’s true. I’m sure the EU doesn’t want us to leave, as apart from de Gaulle, European political leaders generally saw our participation as desirable, and indeed highly desirable.
I suspect there’d be a huge sigh of relief if we turned round and asked to come back. All this ‘negotiation’ is a dreadful waste of everyone’s time.
And to those of us who would no longer consider ourselves in a free country as a result? What’s the EU going to offer?
You seem to be happy enough to have Westminster as your overlord, though?
Yes. Because I regard myself as British not “European”. An idea and an entity to which I feel no loyalty. I do not believe in sharing my citizenship or my vote with 27 other states.
What relationship does the EU actually want with us ?
To leave completely, but keep paying the bills, and with the effective annexation of 5,450 square miles of our territory.
I don’t think that’s true. I’m sure the EU doesn’t want us to leave, as apart from de Gaulle, European political leaders generally saw our participation as desirable, and indeed highly desirable.
I suspect there’d be a huge sigh of relief if we turned round and asked to come back. All this ‘negotiation’ is a dreadful waste of everyone’s time.
And to those of us who would no longer consider ourselves in a free country as a result? What’s the EU going to offer?
You seem to be happy enough to have Westminster as your overlord, though?
Yes. Because I regard myself as British not “European”. An idea and an entity to which I feel no loyalty. I do not believe in sharing my citizenship or my vote with 27 other states.
What about your fellow countrymen who want an independent Wales?
What relationship does the EU actually want with us ?
To leave completely, but keep paying the bills, and with the effective annexation of 5,450 square miles of our territory.
I don’t think that’s true. I’m sure the EU doesn’t want us to leave, as apart from de Gaulle, European political leaders generally saw our participation as desirable, and indeed highly desirable.
I suspect there’d be a huge sigh of relief if we turned round and asked to come back. All this ‘negotiation’ is a dreadful waste of everyone’s time.
And to those of us who would no longer consider ourselves in a free country as a result? What’s the EU going to offer?
Much of the EU is more democratic than we are. Further, there have been a number of issues where the EU ....... and remember we were partners in all decisions....... have improved lives. I never got the feeling I was any less ‘free’ in the 80’s or 90’s than I was in the 60’s and 70’s. In fact free movement made me 'freer' Although both were better than the 50’s at least in part because of the end of compulsory military service.
What relationship does the EU actually want with us ?
To leave completely, but keep paying the bills, and with the effective annexation of 5,450 square miles of our territory.
I don’t think that’s true. I’m sure the EU doesn’t want us to leave, as apart from de Gaulle, European political leaders generally saw our participation as desirable, and indeed highly desirable.
I suspect there’d be a huge sigh of relief if we turned round and asked to come back. All this ‘negotiation’ is a dreadful waste of everyone’s time.
And to those of us who would no longer consider ourselves in a free country as a result? What’s the EU going to offer?
You seem to be happy enough to have Westminster as your overlord, though?
Yes. Because I regard myself as British not “European”. An idea and an entity to which I feel no loyalty. I do not believe in sharing my citizenship or my vote with 27 other states.
What about your fellow countrymen who want an independent Wales?
They can think what they like, of course.
Personally I think living under Momentum would be an economic paradise compared to the complete fruit loops that inhabit Plaid Cymru’s leadership,
Barnier’s lost the plot. He effectively wants to partly annex part of our country. The EU really is a malign power?
If “reverse Brexit” is his tactics, what’s his strategy? How on earth does he think this will foster long term goodwill between the U.K. and the EU, when millions of Brits would see voting counts for nothing when it comes to the EU?
It’s a seriously stupid strategy being pursued for short term (possible) tactical gain.
Still usual negotiating posturing today one hopes.
Just like ultra-leavers want Proper Brexit at Any Cost, Barnier wants EU Principles (ie the freedoms) Maintained at Any Cost. In addition, probably forced by the threat of an Irish veto, Barnier's acting as a rather tougher guarantor of the GFA than some might initially have expected.
They're both valid enough principles, but neither is considering the practicals of future relationship, economic benefits, planes continuing to fly and the rest of it. My personal guess, in terms of pure size, is that Barnier has less to lose from it all going tits up than the UK does.
F1: practice underway. After Canada there's the usual fortnight gap, but then France, Austria, and the UK events all occur on consecutive weekends, which is a bit rushed.
Mr. Ace, is that the test whereby you don't bother actually engaging with what the other person says but just assume they're wrong because they've clearly used a word you've decided invalidates their entire argument?
Impressive that this BBC article on the EU's internet idiocy manages to seemingly avoid any mention of link taxes or screwing smaller news agencies/journalists: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-44412025
A clear demonstration of the decline in quality within the DUP. Their former leader only required four words to deliver the same message, and those four words were the same word repeated.
Thanks Harry for the article, although some of don’t wish to be reminded of the perils of betting with the heart rather than the head. I finished about £800 down, saved only by the Scottish Tories and the highlight of a crap night, the defenestration of Alec Salmond.
I did a quick reverse ferret after the exit poll*, and combined with fairly accurately forecasting LD wins, came out about £200 up. The BFex was still evens on NOM an hour after polls closed, so plenty of ferretting time.
What relationship does the EU actually want with us ?
It would rather we stayed in. But it respects our decision to leave. It is up to the UK, who is changing the relationship to state what long term relationship it wants. It needs to be clear whether it wants an arm length relationship (Canada +) or a close relationship (EEA/CU). The EU has made it clear, for obvious reasons, that it can't have both. (Cake and eat it.).
When the UK has decided on the nature of the relationship, (arms length or very close), then the EU will respond with proposals on how that can be achieved.
Except the EU is insisting on the island of Ireland being treated as a whole. So anything beyond SM&CU automatically creates an Irish sea border which is unacceptable to Corbyn even let alone the Tories (And forget the DUP)
That's right. That's why we will end up with EEA/CU. And many people will ask "what's the point of that. We might as well stay in". Others will feel betrayed, vote for a UKIP Mark2 and split the right wing vote for a generation. What's not to like?
What relationship does the EU actually want with us ?
It would rather we stayed in. But it respects our decision to leave. It is up to the UK, who is changing the relationship to state what long term relationship it wants. It needs to be clear whether it wants an arm length relationship (Canada +) or a close relationship (EEA/CU). The EU has made it clear, for obvious reasons, that it can't have both. (Cake and eat it.).
When the UK has decided on the nature of the relationship, (arms length or very close), then the EU will respond with proposals on how that can be achieved.
Except the EU is insisting on the island of Ireland being treated as a whole. So anything beyond SM&CU automatically creates an Irish sea border which is unacceptable to Corbyn even let alone the Tories (And forget the DUP)
That's right. That's why we will end up with EEA/CU. And many people will ask "what's the point of that. We might as well stay in". Others will feel betrayed, vote for a UKIP Mark2 and split the right wing vote for a generation. What's not to like?
Sounds good to me, but Car Crash Populist Trade War Brexit is at least as likely.
The worst result of the election was leaving the Gov in hoc to the DUP. With a majority of 150 pliant Tories May could have sold NI down the river any time.
A crucial advantage the EU has, in these negotiations, is that their side has no electorate to answer to. Barnier, Juncker, Selmayr, the rest of them, they are all unelected eurocrats and have no fear of being voted out if it goes tits-up. So they can do what they want.
TMay is democratically elected and can get the boot from her MPs AND from the voters if she screws up. And the Opposition leader is a Marxist who would sell us all to Putin.
So she is much more constricted in her choices, and her negotiations. The same would apply to ANY UK leader or minister attempting Brexit.
This is why our democracy is in danger if we stay in. It’s rule by bureaucrats and you can only vote within prescribed limits set by them. I can see why Corbyn’s not rose tinted about it, and from a democracy standpoint, (deep breath) he’s is totally right.
Nope - all Member States have delegated Barnier to negotiate on their behalf. Just like we vote in our government to set the Calorie Tax, or penalise high earners. All perfectly democratic.
Plus, iirc the EU Parliament gets a veto/final vote on the deal, something that seems to be constantly forgotten.
What relationship does the EU actually want with us ?
To leave completely, but keep paying the bills, and with the effective annexation of 5,450 square miles of our territory.
I don’t think that’s true. I’m sure the EU doesn’t want us to leave, as apart from de Gaulle, European political leaders generally saw our participation as desirable, and indeed highly desirable.
I suspect there’d be a huge sigh of relief if we turned round and asked to come back. All this ‘negotiation’ is a dreadful waste of everyone’s time.
And to those of us who would no longer consider ourselves in a free country as a result? What’s the EU going to offer?
Much of the EU is more democratic than we are. Further, there have been a number of issues where the EU ....... and remember we were partners in all decisions....... have improved lives. I never got the feeling I was any less ‘free’ in the 80’s or 90’s than I was in the 60’s and 70’s. In fact free movement made me 'freer' Although both were better than the 50’s at least in part because of the end of compulsory military service.
I’m not all that interested in relative levels of democracy (however measured?) in Estonia or Portugal, I simply do not wish to be as embedded as we are directly with them, nice people and places though they are.
I do, frankly bitterly, resent the fact that we got from an EEC in 1975 to 2016 without ever being asked directly if we approved the morphing of the organisation that went on. Lisbon being exhibit A where we were lied to, nakedly, by our politicians that we would get a say. So all the A50 shenanigans could’ve ( and would’ve ) been avoided but for Gordon Brown sneaking in under cover of darkness to sign our vetos away having dodged the voters blatantly.
I freely voted to Leave in June 2016. “The Government will implement your decision”, said the leaflet delivered for nine million quid.
If it’s not, I’m not living in a free country, and I fear we really will be off to the races.
What relationship does the EU actually want with us ?
'Cake and eat it', apparently, or some magic kingdom where unicorns prance over the Irish border but otherwise we are a third country.
One might view this as overcautious but I can see enough water between the EU and the Gov'ts position now to take my stake out of the 29th March 2019 bet, and I have done so (leaving the profit on Out).. I'm genuinely surprised by this latest move from Barnier, May got Davis' line about time limiting effectively legally nullified yesterday - and essentially prostrated the UK out in front of the EU giving them what they want on the 'backstop'. That this now won't apply to the whole of the UK creates a situation where the Gov't of the UK (Which has the DUP) simply can't agree to anything the EU would find acceptable.
Barnier has only said the EU backstop proposal on CU can't apply to whole of the UK. He hasn't said anything about the actual negotiated relationship.
I suspect (depending on next Tuesday) it may be a CU/SM deal on goods and FTA on services with a fudge on FOM. May will have to be seen as kicking and screaming against this (she's a surprisingly good thespian) so I think you were wise to take your stake out of the 29th March 2019 bet.
Mr. Barnesian, that assumes it'll be entirely different to last time, when the socially conservative old left backed UKIP (in 2015) to a significant extent, harming Labour far more than the Conservatives.
What relationship does the EU actually want with us ?
To leave completely, but keep paying the bills, and with the effective annexation of 5,450 square miles of our territory.
I don’t think that’s true. I’m sure the EU doesn’t want us to leave, as apart from de Gaulle, European political leaders generally saw our participation as desirable, and indeed highly desirable.
I suspect there’d be a huge sigh of relief if we turned round and asked to come back. All this ‘negotiation’ is a dreadful waste of everyone’s time.
And to those of us who would no longer consider ourselves in a free country as a result? What’s the EU going to offer?
You seem to be happy enough to have Westminster as your overlord, though?
Yes. Because I regard myself as British not “European”. An idea and an entity to which I feel no loyalty. I do not believe in sharing my citizenship or my vote with 27 other states.
What about your fellow countrymen who want an independent Wales?
Has there ever been a majority in Wales for such an idea? In a poll, or referendum?
What relationship does the EU actually want with us ?
To leave completely, but keep paying the bills, and with the effective annexation of 5,450 square miles of our territory.
I don’t think that’s true. I’m sure the EU doesn’t want us to leave, as apart from de Gaulle, European political leaders generally saw our participation as desirable, and indeed highly desirable.
I suspect there’d be a huge sigh of relief if we turned round and asked to come back. All this ‘negotiation’ is a dreadful waste of everyone’s time.
And to those of us who would no longer consider ourselves in a free country as a result? What’s the EU going to offer?
Much of the EU is more democratic than we are. Further, there have been a number of issues where the EU ....... and remember we were partners in all decisions....... have improved lives. I never got the feeling I was any less ‘free’ in the 80’s or 90’s than I was in the 60’s and 70’s. In fact free movement made me 'freer' Although both were better than the 50’s at least in part because of the end of compulsory military service.
I’m not all that interested in relative levels of democracy (however measured?) in Estonia or Portugal, I simply do not wish to be as embedded as we are directly with them, nice people and places though they are.
I do, frankly bitterly, resent the fact that we got from an EEC in 1975 to 2016 without ever being asked directly if we approved the morphing of the organisation that went on. Lisbon being exhibit A where we were lied to, nakedly, by our politicians that we would get a say. So all the A50 shenanigans could’ve ( and would’ve ) been avoided but for Gordon Brown sneaking in under cover of darkness to sign our vetos away having dodged the voters blatantly.
I freely voted to Leave in June 2016. “The Government will implement your decision”, said the leaflet delivered for nine million quid.
If it’s not, I’m not living in a free country, and I fear we really will be off to the races.
What relationship does the EU actually want with us ?
To leave completely, but keep paying the bills, and with the effective annexation of 5,450 square miles of our territory.
I don’t think that’s true. I’m sure the EU doesn’t want us to leave, as apart from de Gaulle, European political leaders generally saw our participation as desirable, and indeed highly desirable.
I suspect there’d be a huge sigh of relief if we turned round and asked to come back. All this ‘negotiation’ is a dreadful waste of everyone’s time.
And to those of us who would no longer consider ourselves in a free country as a result? What’s the EU going to offer?
You seem to be happy enough to have Westminster as your overlord, though?
Yes. Because I regard myself as British not “European”. An idea and an entity to which I feel no loyalty. I do not believe in sharing my citizenship or my vote with 27 other states.
What about your fellow countrymen who want an independent Wales?
Has there ever been a majority in Wales for such an idea? In a poll, or referendum?
"It is now that I am expecting those surviving UKIP supporters to declare “Now come on, all parties have problems fielding candidates in the year after a general!”"
Are there any UKIP supporters left on here? I thought the whole point was that UKIP having served its purpose is now pointless (unless the Government really is dumb enough to listen to the Remoaners and scrap Brexit).
What relationship does the EU actually want with us ?
To leave completely, but keep paying the bills, and with the effective annexation of 5,450 square miles of our territory.
I don’t think that’s true. I’m sure the EU doesn’t want us to leave, as apart from de Gaulle, European political leaders generally saw our participation as desirable, and indeed highly desirable.
I suspect there’d be a huge sigh of relief if we turned round and asked to come back. All this ‘negotiation’ is a dreadful waste of everyone’s time.
And to those of us who would no longer consider ourselves in a free country as a result? What’s the EU going to offer?
Much of the EU is more democratic than we are. Further, there have been a number of issues where the EU ....... and remember we were partners in all decisions....... have improved lives. I never got the feeling I was any less ‘free’ in the 80’s or 90’s than I was in the 60’s and 70’s. In fact free movement made me 'freer' Although both were better than the 50’s at least in part because of the end of compulsory military service.
I’m not all that interested in relative levels of democracy (however measured?) in Estonia or Portugal, I simply do not wish to be as embedded as we are directly with them, nice people and places though they are.
I do, frankly bitterly, resent the fact that we got from an EEC in 1975 to 2016 without ever being asked directly if we approved the morphing of the organisation that went on. Lisbon being exhibit A where we were lied to, nakedly, by our politicians that we would get a say. So all the A50 shenanigans could’ve ( and would’ve ) been avoided but for Gordon Brown sneaking in under cover of darkness to sign our vetos away having dodged the voters blatantly.
I freely voted to Leave in June 2016. “The Government will implement your decision”, said the leaflet delivered for nine million quid.
If it’s not, I’m not living in a free country, and I fear we really will be off to the races.
Norway is not in the EU.
There's a customs border between Norway and Sweden so we can rule a "Norway" option out altogether.
"It is now that I am expecting those surviving UKIP supporters to declare “Now come on, all parties have problems fielding candidates in the year after a general!”"
Are there any UKIP supporters left on here? I thought the whole point was that UKIP having served its purpose is now pointless (unless the Government really is dumb enough to listen to the Remoaners and scrap Brexit).
Cancelling Brexit would be political suicide for the Conservatives, Corbyn would get a big majority.
What relationship does the EU actually want with us ?
To leave completely, but keep paying the bills, and with the effective annexation of 5,450 square miles of our territory.
I don’t think that’s true. I’m sure the EU doesn’t want us to leave, as apart from de Gaulle, European political leaders generally saw our participation as desirable, and indeed highly desirable.
I suspect there’d be a huge sigh of relief if we turned round and asked to come back. All this ‘negotiation’ is a dreadful waste of everyone’s time.
And to those of us who would no longer consider ourselves in a free country as a result? What’s the EU going to offer?
You seem to be happy enough to have Westminster as your overlord, though?
Yes. Because I regard myself as British not “European”. An idea and an entity to which I feel no loyalty. I do not believe in sharing my citizenship or my vote with 27 other states.
What about your fellow countrymen who want an independent Wales?
Has there ever been a majority in Wales for such an idea? In a poll, or referendum?
My point is everyone draws their own lines short of living in a dictatorship. @welshowl says he is happy being ruled by Westminster and sees nothing undemocratic, yet is concerned that the UK as part of the EU is undemocratic.
What relationship does the EU actually want with us ?
To leave completely, but keep paying the bills, and with the effective annexation of 5,450 square miles of our territory.
I don’t think that’s true. I’m sure the EU doesn’t want us to leave, as apart from de Gaulle, European political leaders generally saw our participation as desirable, and indeed highly desirable.
I suspect there’d be a huge sigh of relief if we turned round and asked to come back. All this ‘negotiation’ is a dreadful waste of everyone’s time.
And to those of us who would no longer consider ourselves in a free country as a result? What’s the EU going to offer?
Much of the EU is more democratic than we are. Further, there have been a number of issues where the EU ....... and remember we were partners in all decisions....... have improved lives. I never got the feeling I was any less ‘free’ in the 80’s or 90’s than I was in the 60’s and 70’s. In fact free movement made me 'freer' Although both were better than the 50’s at least in part because of the end of compulsory military service.
I’m not all that interested in relative levels of democracy (however measured?) in Estonia or Portugal, I simply do not wish to be as embedded as we are directly with them, nice people and places though they are.
I do, frankly bitterly, resent the fact that we got from an EEC in 1975 to 2016 without ever being asked directly if we approved the morphing of the organisation that went on. Lisbon being exhibit A where we were lied to, nakedly, by our politicians that we would get a say. So all the A50 shenanigans could’ve ( and would’ve ) been avoided but for Gordon Brown sneaking in under cover of darkness to sign our vetos away having dodged the voters blatantly.
I freely voted to Leave in June 2016. “The Government will implement your decision”, said the leaflet delivered for nine million quid.
If it’s not, I’m not living in a free country, and I fear we really will be off to the races.
Norway is not in the EU.
And I’d dispute how free they are. Can’t control their borders can they?
Still if your GDP per head is nearly US 100k and your government’s main issue is what to do with the proceeds of a colossal investment fund you can probably salve your wounds with large denomination bank notes in ways other countries just cannot.
What relationship does the EU actually want with us ?
To leave completely, but keep paying the bills, and with the effective annexation of 5,450 square miles of our territory.
I don’t think that’s true. I’m sure the EU doesn’t want us to leave, as apart from de Gaulle, European political leaders generally saw our participation as desirable, and indeed highly desirable.
I suspect there’d be a huge sigh of relief if we turned round and asked to come back. All this ‘negotiation’ is a dreadful waste of everyone’s time.
And to those of us who would no longer consider ourselves in a free country as a result? What’s the EU going to offer?
Much of the EU is more democratic than we are. Further, there have been a number of issues where the EU ....... and remember we were partners in all decisions....... have improved lives. I never got the feeling I was any less ‘free’ in the 80’s or 90’s than I was in the 60’s and 70’s. In fact free movement made me 'freer' Although both were better than the 50’s at least in part because of the end of compulsory military service.
I’m not all that interested in relative levels of democracy (however measured?) in Estonia or Portugal, I simply do not wish to be as embedded as we are directly with them, nice people and places though they are.
I do, frankly bitterly, resent the fact that we got from an EEC in 1975 to 2016 without ever being asked directly if we approved the morphing of the organisation that went on. Lisbon being exhibit A where we were lied to, nakedly, by our politicians that we would get a say. So all the A50 shenanigans could’ve ( and would’ve ) been avoided but for Gordon Brown sneaking in under cover of darkness to sign our vetos away having dodged the voters blatantly.
I freely voted to Leave in June 2016. “The Government will implement your decision”, said the leaflet delivered for nine million quid.
If it’s not, I’m not living in a free country, and I fear we really will be off to the races.
Norway is not in the EU.
And I’d dispute how free that are. Can’t control their borders can they?
Still if your GDP per head is nearly US 100k and your government’s main issue is what to do with the proceeds of a colossal investment fund you can probably salve your wounds with large denomination bank notes in ways other countries just cannot.
They could pull out of the EEA any time they want. That is pretty free.
Yes. Because I regard myself as British not “European”. An idea and an entity to which I feel no loyalty. I do not believe in sharing my citizenship or my vote with 27 other states.
"British" as a political identity is contingent on the English continuing to see it as in their interests to uphold such a thing. If you act against the interests of England, don't be surprised if your identity is a casualty.
In case anyone is wondering if the substance of Barnier's speech doesn't match the headline, here:
“On regulatory alignment we have been pragmatic and developed the least disruptive system for citizens and businesses on both sides. Let’s go to pragmatism. Checks carried out on ferries are less disruptive than along a 500km land border.”
What relationship does the EU actually want with us ?
'Cake and eat it', apparently, or some magic kingdom where unicorns prance over the Irish border but otherwise we are a third country.
One might view this as overcautious but I can see enough water between the EU and the Gov'ts position now to take my stake out of the 29th March 2019 bet, and I have done so (leaving the profit on Out).. I'm genuinely surprised by this latest move from Barnier, May got Davis' line about time limiting effectively legally nullified yesterday - and essentially prostrated the UK out in front of the EU giving them what they want on the 'backstop'. That this now won't apply to the whole of the UK creates a situation where the Gov't of the UK (Which has the DUP) simply can't agree to anything the EU would find acceptable.
TMay can't accept the EU's Irish Sea Border. The EU won't offer anything else.
We have finally reached impasse. This is it.
She now has to go to her MPs and say: the UK must accept something like EEA status, for the moment, it's my only option. Your call.
They can either vote her down and collapse the government, risking the calamity of a Corbyn win (which itself means Soft Brexit, or even Remain), or another weak Tory-led Coalition which will face precisely the same Irish dilemma (only with less time to get real). Or they could just replace her with another leader but he'd ALSO face the same dilemma.
Or they can reluctantly agree to EEA.
We fucked Brexit. Dominic Cummings is right.
TMay should never have set her red lines, hemming herself in, and she should never have triggered A50, until all this had been thrashed out.
Engineer a withdrawal of the A50 negotiation in order for the UK to have time to decide what it wants? Out of two unpalatable options, it may be the best for saving her skin (which is likely to be the key criterion, after all). EEA sounds a more permanent, irreversible betrayal to the ERG and friends.
But there's no consensus in the Tory party what it wants from Brexit, let alone in the country as a whole. Any suspension or temporary revocation of A50 is likely to become permanent in practice; the longer its delayed the more it's going to become as likely to happen as Norway paying back Margaret of Denmark's dowry and claiming back Orkney and Shetland.
As a Remainer I'd be delighted to see the entire disaster quietly "suspended" and we all agree never to speak of this again, but it ain't going to happen like that.
"It is now that I am expecting those surviving UKIP supporters to declare “Now come on, all parties have problems fielding candidates in the year after a general!”"
Are there any UKIP supporters left on here? I thought the whole point was that UKIP having served its purpose is now pointless (unless the Government really is dumb enough to listen to the Remoaners and scrap Brexit).
Cancelling Brexit would be political suicide for the Conservatives, Corbyn would get a big majority.
Economic meltdown no-deal Brexit would be political suicide for the Conservatives, Corbyn [etc]
"It is now that I am expecting those surviving UKIP supporters to declare “Now come on, all parties have problems fielding candidates in the year after a general!”"
Are there any UKIP supporters left on here? I thought the whole point was that UKIP having served its purpose is now pointless (unless the Government really is dumb enough to listen to the Remoaners and scrap Brexit).
Cancelling Brexit would be political suicide for the Conservatives, Corbyn would get a big majority.
Economic meltdown no-deal Brexit would be political suicide for the Conservatives, Corbyn [etc]
Yes it's wonderful isn't it? Every possible outcome results in the utter destruction of the Conservative party!
"It is now that I am expecting those surviving UKIP supporters to declare “Now come on, all parties have problems fielding candidates in the year after a general!”"
Are there any UKIP supporters left on here? I thought the whole point was that UKIP having served its purpose is now pointless (unless the Government really is dumb enough to listen to the Remoaners and scrap Brexit).
Cancelling Brexit would be political suicide for the Conservatives, Corbyn would get a big majority.
Economic meltdown no-deal Brexit would be political suicide for the Conservatives, Corbyn [etc]
What relationship does the EU actually want with us ?
To leave completely, but keep paying the bills, and with the effective annexation of 5,450 square miles of our territory.
I don’t think that’s true. I’m sure the EU doesn’t want us to leave, as apart from de Gaulle, European political leaders generally saw our participation as desirable, and indeed highly desirable.
I suspect there’d be a huge sigh of relief if we turned round and asked to come back. All this ‘negotiation’ is a dreadful waste of everyone’s time.
And to those of us who would no longer consider ourselves in a free country as a result? What’s the EU going to offer?
You seem to be happy enough to have Westminster as your overlord, though?
Yes. Because I regard myself as British not “European”. An idea and an entity to which I feel no loyalty. I do not believe in sharing my citizenship or my vote with 27 other states.
What about your fellow countrymen who want an independent Wales?
Has there ever been a majority in Wales for such an idea? In a poll, or referendum?
My point is everyone draws their own lines short of living in a dictatorship. @welshowl says he is happy being ruled by Westminster and sees nothing undemocratic, yet is concerned that the UK as part of the EU is undemocratic.
Because it is. As the OP by Harry said we were a few seats away from a dramatic change in direction with a new government. We've changed government at the ballot box and had some very serious choices in our democratic model many times.
Please name any election ever in the EU where the course of how it is governed was dramatically changed because of the results of the election.
When the exit poll came out I immediately thought I was fucked as I'd bet on the Cons doing well in Scotland and assumed Lab would be picking up dozen or so seats in Scotland so I'd be totally wiped out.
Instead I found that utterly unlikely punts like Cons winning Ayr, Carrick and Cumnock came in (after I had advised people on here not to back it).
Pre-Edit: Ah, I see there was some financial irregularity stuff that went on in Ayr with the SNP candidate - that could well have been decisive
If there is no deal, a large factor that will determine polling responses will be who the public holds responsible.
If they think the EU is being utterly unreasonable/intransigent, they may well side with the Government.
If they think the Government has been incompetent/reckless, they may well blame the Conservatives.
Sins of omission and commission may also play into this. In a 'bad' (certainly to a minor extent) outcome, declining a potentially worse deal may play better than agreeing to something horrendous and then having to constantly defend it.
Because it is. As the OP by Harry said we were a few seats away from a dramatic change in direction with a new government. We've changed government at the ballot box and had some very serious choices in our democratic model many times.
Please name any election ever in the EU where the course of how it is governed was dramatically changed because of the results of the election.
Yes. Because I regard myself as British not “European”. An idea and an entity to which I feel no loyalty. I do not believe in sharing my citizenship or my vote with 27 other states.
"British" as a political identity is contingent on the English continuing to see it as in their interests to uphold such a thing. If you act against the interests of England, don't be surprised if your identity is a casualty.
Just for once, try and stop being too smugly clever by half.
Everything is solved with EEA (or EEA-type) CU/SM alignment by the whole of the UK.
Apart of course from FoM but no one really cares about that, do they?
Much as I would love to see an EEA endpoint, it would not solve the Irish border question. We cannot be in EFTA and the Customs Union at the same time so it is an either/or. And since both would be required to prevent some sort of border controls - just as exist between Norway and Sweden - that will not meet the EU's requirements.
Their position is indeed nonsensical as they want something that under their own rules cannot happen.
What relationship does the EU actually want with us ?
To leave completely, but keep paying the bills, and with the effective annexation of 5,450 square miles of our territory.
I don’t think that’s true. I’m sure the EU doesn’t want us to leave, as apart from de Gaulle, European political leaders generally saw our participation as desirable, and indeed highly desirable.
I suspect there’d be a huge sigh of relief if we turned round and asked to come back. All this ‘negotiation’ is a dreadful waste of everyone’s time.
And to those of us who would no longer consider ourselves in a free country as a result? What’s the EU going to offer?
You seem to be happy enough to have Westminster as your overlord, though?
Yes. Because I regard myself as British not “European”. An idea and an entity to which I feel no loyalty. I do not believe in sharing my citizenship or my vote with 27 other states.
What about your fellow countrymen who want an independent Wales?
Has there ever been a majority in Wales for such an idea? In a poll, or referendum?
My point is everyone draws their own lines short of living in a dictatorship. @welshowl says he is happy being ruled by Westminster and sees nothing undemocratic, yet is concerned that the UK as part of the EU is undemocratic.
Because it is. As the OP by Harry said we were a few seats away from a dramatic change in direction with a new government. We've changed government at the ballot box and had some very serious choices in our democratic model many times.
Please name any election ever in the EU where the course of how it is governed was dramatically changed because of the results of the election.
You're comparing apples and chalk. The EU is a huge club with an ancient (well reasonably old) rulebook. We decided to be a member of that club, and have now decided to leave it. The very essence of democracy, freedom, sovereignty, you name it.
Saying that you don't like the fact that the other members outvoted us and instigarted the mandatory wearing of ties at lunch on Friday does not make the club undemocratic.
Mr. Topping, point of order: the idea the EU has a reasonably old, let alone ancient, rulebook is contrary to reality. The iconoclast argument in Constantinople lasted longer than the EU has existed.
My point is everyone draws their own lines short of living in a dictatorship. @welshowl says he is happy being ruled by Westminster and sees nothing undemocratic, yet is concerned that the UK as part of the EU is undemocratic.
Because it is. As the OP by Harry said we were a few seats away from a dramatic change in direction with a new government. We've changed government at the ballot box and had some very serious choices in our democratic model many times.
Please name any election ever in the EU where the course of how it is governed was dramatically changed because of the results of the election.
You're comparing apples and chalk. The EU is a huge club with an ancient (well reasonably old) rulebook. We decided to be a member of that club, and have now decided to leave it. The very essence of democracy, freedom, sovereignty, you name it.
Saying that you don't like the fact that the other members outvoted us and instigarted the mandatory wearing of ties at lunch on Friday does not make the club undemocratic.
It does because the votes are cast by countries not be people.
For the UK: We the people elect our Parliament that determines our laws. For the EU: We the people elect our Parliament that determines our government that votes along with other governments to determine our laws.
There is no European demos or European election night that determines who forms the next European government and what direction it will take.
"It is now that I am expecting those surviving UKIP supporters to declare “Now come on, all parties have problems fielding candidates in the year after a general!”"
Are there any UKIP supporters left on here? I thought the whole point was that UKIP having served its purpose is now pointless (unless the Government really is dumb enough to listen to the Remoaners and scrap Brexit).
Cancelling Brexit would be political suicide for the Conservatives, Corbyn would get a big majority.
Economic meltdown no-deal Brexit would be political suicide for the Conservatives, Corbyn [etc]
Parties have no inherent right to exist and I would not be sorry to see the Tory party collapse.
It wouldn't change the fact that there would still be something around at least 50% of the country wanting to vote for right or centre right candidates. The collapse of the Tory party would be no more of a victory for the Left than the Collapse of Labour would be for the Right.
What we lack in this country now is an economically Right wing, small state but very socially liberal party.
"It is now that I am expecting those surviving UKIP supporters to declare “Now come on, all parties have problems fielding candidates in the year after a general!”"
Are there any UKIP supporters left on here? I thought the whole point was that UKIP having served its purpose is now pointless (unless the Government really is dumb enough to listen to the Remoaners and scrap Brexit).
Cancelling Brexit would be political suicide for the Conservatives, Corbyn would get a big majority.
Economic meltdown no-deal Brexit would be political suicide for the Conservatives, Corbyn [etc]
Parties have no inherent right to exist and I would not be sorry to see the Tory party collapse.
It wouldn't change the fact that there would still be something around at least 50% of the country wanting to vote for right or centre right candidates. The collapse of the Tory party would be no more of a victory for the Left than the Collapse of Labour would be for the Right.
What we lack in this country now is an economically Right wing, small state but very socially liberal party.
Which ironically is exactly what Cameron's Tory Party was.
Mr. Tyndall, I agree but right now the direction of travel is wrong in both regards. Meddling and censorship is increasingly popular, economics is increasingly leftwing idiocy.
"It is now that I am expecting those surviving UKIP supporters to declare “Now come on, all parties have problems fielding candidates in the year after a general!”"
Are there any UKIP supporters left on here? I thought the whole point was that UKIP having served its purpose is now pointless (unless the Government really is dumb enough to listen to the Remoaners and scrap Brexit).
Cancelling Brexit would be political suicide for the Conservatives, Corbyn would get a big majority.
Economic meltdown no-deal Brexit would be political suicide for the Conservatives, Corbyn [etc]
Parties have no inherent right to exist and I would not be sorry to see the Tory party collapse.
It wouldn't change the fact that there would still be something around at least 50% of the country wanting to vote for right or centre right candidates. The collapse of the Tory party would be no more of a victory for the Left than the Collapse of Labour would be for the Right.
What we lack in this country now is an economically Right wing, small state but very socially liberal party.
Which ironically is exactly what Cameron's Tory Party was.
It was certainly trying although with May at the Home Office and his continued belief in the EU the 'small state' element was certainly lacking.
I have always said Cameron's one great achievement was Gay Marriage. He can certainly be forgiven a lot of other rubbish for that one piece of legislation.
"It is now that I am expecting those surviving UKIP supporters to declare “Now come on, all parties have problems fielding candidates in the year after a general!”"
Are there any UKIP supporters left on here? I thought the whole point was that UKIP having served its purpose is now pointless (unless the Government really is dumb enough to listen to the Remoaners and scrap Brexit).
Cancelling Brexit would be political suicide for the Conservatives, Corbyn would get a big majority.
Economic meltdown no-deal Brexit would be political suicide for the Conservatives, Corbyn [etc]
Parties have no inherent right to exist and I would not be sorry to see the Tory party collapse.
It wouldn't change the fact that there would still be something around at least 50% of the country wanting to vote for right or centre right candidates. The collapse of the Tory party would be no more of a victory for the Left than the Collapse of Labour would be for the Right.
What we lack in this country now is an economically Right wing, small state but very socially liberal party.
Which ironically is exactly what Cameron's Tory Party was.
Shame he didn’t say in March 2016 “I’ve tried, but the EU is tone deaf, let’s vote out”.He’d probably have walked it. But sadly he was only negotiating for show like all the others around that table.
Nobody had twigged the real possibleity of a Leave vote. A possibility only turbo charged by the crap nature of Cameron’s deal which bombed within hours terminally.
Mr. Tyndall, I agree but right now the direction of travel is wrong in both regards. Meddling and censorship is increasingly popular, economics is increasingly leftwing idiocy.
Yep. We are poorly served by almost all of our politicians these days - with a few honourable exceptions.
That is very striking, perhaps the abortion referendum has created the ideal long run consitions for a united Ireland - particularly with the DUP still being a socially very illiberal party.
"It is now that I am expecting those surviving UKIP supporters to declare “Now come on, all parties have problems fielding candidates in the year after a general!”"
Are there any UKIP supporters left on here? I thought the whole point was that UKIP having served its purpose is now pointless (unless the Government really is dumb enough to listen to the Remoaners and scrap Brexit).
Cancelling Brexit would be political suicide for the Conservatives, Corbyn would get a big majority.
Economic meltdown no-deal Brexit would be political suicide for the Conservatives, Corbyn [etc]
Parties have no inherent right to exist and I would not be sorry to see the Tory party collapse.
It wouldn't change the fact that there would still be something around at least 50% of the country wanting to vote for right or centre right candidates. The collapse of the Tory party would be no more of a victory for the Left than the Collapse of Labour would be for the Right.
What we lack in this country now is an economically Right wing, small state but very socially liberal party.
Which ironically is exactly what Cameron's Tory Party was.
Shame he didn’t say in March 2016 “I’ve tried, but the EU is tone deaf, let’s vote out”.He’d probably have walked it. But sadly he was only negotiating for show like all the others around that table.
Nobody had twigged the real possibleity of a Leave vote. A possibility only turbo charged by the crap nature of Cameron’s deal which bombed within hours terminally.
... and yet we're likely going to be worse off than before.
That is very striking, perhaps the abortion referendum has created the ideal long run consitions for a united Ireland - particularly with the DUP still being a socially very illiberal party.
And the fieldwork for this poll was a month ago, before David Davis's nonsense 10 mile buffer zone proposal. Public opinion seems to be moving fairly quickly.
Among people in the "other" national identity category (neither British nor Irish) support for unification is 80%, and protestants are now less committed to the union with over 20% either backing unification or not sure.
"It is now that I am expecting those surviving UKIP supporters to declare “Now come on, all parties have problems fielding candidates in the year after a general!”"
Are there any UKIP supporters left on here? I thought the whole point was that UKIP having served its purpose is now pointless (unless the Government really is dumb enough to listen to the Remoaners and scrap Brexit).
Cancelling Brexit would be political suicide for the Conservatives, Corbyn would get a big majority.
Economic meltdown no-deal Brexit would be political suicide for the Conservatives, Corbyn [etc]
Parties have no inherent right to exist and I would not be sorry to see the Tory party collapse.
It wouldn't change the fact that there would still be something around at least 50% of the country wanting to vote for right or centre right candidates. The collapse of the Tory party would be no more of a victory for the Left than the Collapse of Labour would be for the Right.
What we lack in this country now is an economically Right wing, small state but very socially liberal party.
Which ironically is exactly what Cameron's Tory Party was.
Shame he didn’t say in March 2016 “I’ve tried, but the EU is tone deaf, let’s vote out”.He’d probably have walked it. But sadly he was only negotiating for show like all the others around that table.
Nobody had twigged the real possibleity of a Leave vote. A possibility only turbo charged by the crap nature of Cameron’s deal which bombed within hours terminally.
... and yet we're likely going to be worse off than before.
In case anyone is wondering if the substance of Barnier's speech doesn't match the headline, here:
“On regulatory alignment we have been pragmatic and developed the least disruptive system for citizens and businesses on both sides. Let’s go to pragmatism. Checks carried out on ferries are less disruptive than along a 500km land border.”
Is there a source for that quote? Just Googled it and Google isn't coming up with that quote which is odd.
In case anyone is wondering if the substance of Barnier's speech doesn't match the headline, here:
“On regulatory alignment we have been pragmatic and developed the least disruptive system for citizens and businesses on both sides. Let’s go to pragmatism. Checks carried out on ferries are less disruptive than along a 500km land border.”
Is there a source for that quote? Just Googled it and Google isn't coming up with that quote which is odd.
"It is now that I am expecting those surviving UKIP supporters to declare “Now come on, all parties have problems fielding candidates in the year after a general!”"
Are there any UKIP supporters left on here? I thought the whole point was that UKIP having served its purpose is now pointless (unless the Government really is dumb enough to listen to the Remoaners and scrap Brexit).
Cancelling Brexit would be political suicide for the Conservatives, Corbyn would get a big majority.
Economic meltdown no-deal Brexit would be political suicide for the Conservatives, Corbyn [etc]
Parties have no inherent right to exist and I would not be sorry to see the Tory party collapse.
It wouldn't change the fact that there would still be something around at least 50% of the country wanting to vote for right or centre right candidates. The collapse of the Tory party would be no more of a victory for the Left than the Collapse of Labour would be for the Right.
What we lack in this country now is an economically Right wing, small state but very socially liberal party.
Which ironically is exactly what Cameron's Tory Party was.
It was certainly trying although with May at the Home Office and his continued belief in the EU the 'small state' element was certainly lacking.
I have always said Cameron's one great achievement was Gay Marriage. He can certainly be forgiven a lot of other rubbish for that one piece of legislation.
Agreed.
It's rather sad that the author of the "nasty party" speech is the one person who has been the nastiest in office over the last eight years.
In case anyone is wondering if the substance of Barnier's speech doesn't match the headline, here:
“On regulatory alignment we have been pragmatic and developed the least disruptive system for citizens and businesses on both sides. Let’s go to pragmatism. Checks carried out on ferries are less disruptive than along a 500km land border.”
Is there a source for that quote? Just Googled it and Google isn't coming up with that quote which is odd.
He also stressed his preference for the EU's border in the Irish sea plan, saying: "Checks carried out on ferries are less disruptive than along a 500km-long land border."
It's not the whole quote which provides the context.
In case anyone is wondering if the substance of Barnier's speech doesn't match the headline, here:
“On regulatory alignment we have been pragmatic and developed the least disruptive system for citizens and businesses on both sides. Let’s go to pragmatism. Checks carried out on ferries are less disruptive than along a 500km land border.”
Is there a source for that quote? Just Googled it and Google isn't coming up with that quote which is odd.
In case anyone is wondering if the substance of Barnier's speech doesn't match the headline, here:
“On regulatory alignment we have been pragmatic and developed the least disruptive system for citizens and businesses on both sides. Let’s go to pragmatism. Checks carried out on ferries are less disruptive than along a 500km land border.”
Is there a source for that quote? Just Googled it and Google isn't coming up with that quote which is odd.
"On customs, Northern Ireland would form part of our customs territory. What is feasible with a territory the size of Northern Ireland is not necessarily feasible with the whole UK. "
A bit of negotiation wriggle room there.
EDIT: Leave out Scotland? Big area but not much economic value.
In case anyone is wondering if the substance of Barnier's speech doesn't match the headline, here:
“On regulatory alignment we have been pragmatic and developed the least disruptive system for citizens and businesses on both sides. Let’s go to pragmatism. Checks carried out on ferries are less disruptive than along a 500km land border.”
Is there a source for that quote? Just Googled it and Google isn't coming up with that quote which is odd.
He also stressed his preference for the EU's border in the Irish sea plan, saying: "Checks carried out on ferries are less disruptive than along a 500km-long land border."
It's not the whole quote which provides the context.
Might as well go for pragmatism: Ireland should join the UK and leave the EU.
In case anyone is wondering if the substance of Barnier's speech doesn't match the headline, here:
“On regulatory alignment we have been pragmatic and developed the least disruptive system for citizens and businesses on both sides. Let’s go to pragmatism. Checks carried out on ferries are less disruptive than along a 500km land border.”
Is there a source for that quote? Just Googled it and Google isn't coming up with that quote which is odd.
"On customs, Northern Ireland would form part of our customs territory. What is feasible with a territory the size of Northern Ireland is not necessarily feasible with the whole UK. "
A bit of negotiation wriggle room there.
EDIT: Leave out Scotland? Big area but not much economic value.
Why does the size of the territory matter? It sounds like a totally arbitrary distinction.
And "a part of our customs territory"? They literally want to annex it, don't they?
Perhaps if the EU would actually start negotiating the future trading relationship there wouldn't be any need for a backstop? Just a thought....
There's no backstop under Article 50. The default if there's no deal is that there's full barriers across Ireland, not across the UK in the sea. The EU needs a deal more than the DUP does.
In case anyone is wondering if the substance of Barnier's speech doesn't match the headline, here:
“On regulatory alignment we have been pragmatic and developed the least disruptive system for citizens and businesses on both sides. Let’s go to pragmatism. Checks carried out on ferries are less disruptive than along a 500km land border.”
Is there a source for that quote? Just Googled it and Google isn't coming up with that quote which is odd.
"On customs, Northern Ireland would form part of our customs territory. What is feasible with a territory the size of Northern Ireland is not necessarily feasible with the whole UK. "
A bit of negotiation wriggle room there.
EDIT: Leave out Scotland? Big area but not much economic value.
Why does the size of the territory matter? It sounds like a totally arbitrary distinction.
And "a part of our customs territory"? They literally want to annex it, don't they?
I seem to remember some Brexiteers a couple of years ago arguing that threatening to hand over the burden of Northern Ireland was another card we could play to force the EU to give us a sweetheart deal.
The Judge has refused the remit on the basis that it is a hypothetical question because the government have been consistently clear that they have no intention of doing so. Some may remember that the action did not pass the sift at first instance on the same point but the Inner house allowed the application to proceed for reasons that seemed as clear as mud to me.
Whether these petitioners are minded to appeal this again is a matter for them but the clock is ticking on any such question ever being answered before we have actually left. I suspect that this is the end of this.
In case anyone is wondering if the substance of Barnier's speech doesn't match the headline, here:
“On regulatory alignment we have been pragmatic and developed the least disruptive system for citizens and businesses on both sides. Let’s go to pragmatism. Checks carried out on ferries are less disruptive than along a 500km land border.”
Is there a source for that quote? Just Googled it and Google isn't coming up with that quote which is odd.
"On customs, Northern Ireland would form part of our customs territory. What is feasible with a territory the size of Northern Ireland is not necessarily feasible with the whole UK. "
A bit of negotiation wriggle room there.
EDIT: Leave out Scotland? Big area but not much economic value.
Why does the size of the territory matter? It sounds like a totally arbitrary distinction.
And "a part of our customs territory"? They literally want to annex it, don't they?
Trying to impose an internal border between Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK would surely conflict with the GFA.
In any case, I would have thought that a back-stop that keeps the whole of the UK in the Customs Union would be very much to the advantage of the Irish Republic. East-West trade is far more extensive than North-South trade.
What relationship does the EU actually want with us ?
It would rather we stayed in. But it respects our decision to leave. It is up to the UK, who is changing the relationship to state what long term relationship it wants. It needs to be clear whether it wants an arm length relationship (Canada +) or a close relationship (EEA/CU). The EU has made it clear, for obvious reasons, that it can't have both. (Cake and eat it.).
When the UK has decided on the nature of the relationship, (arms length or very close), then the EU will respond with proposals on how that can be achieved.
Except the EU is insisting on the island of Ireland being treated as a whole. So anything beyond SM&CU automatically creates an Irish sea border which is unacceptable to Corbyn even let alone the Tories (And forget the DUP)
There are a confluence of issues that have hobbled the UK:
1. The UK's unwillingness to invest in a "No Deal" outcome at the start. If you haven't spent a single pound on infrastructure for a scenario, and haven't hired a single additional customs officer, then threats to walk out of negotiations, or genuinely go down the WTO route are very hollow indeed. (Which is why Boris was talking crap. Acting irrational if you haven't made the preparations makes you look like a complete idiot.)
2. The disastrous 2017 election, which left the Conservative Party without a majority, dependent on a Northern Ireland party, and at the mercy of rebels on both sides.
3. A foolish tone early in the process. We are dumping the EU. And, just like when you have to let your girlfriend down, it's best if you don't do it by crowing about how you were always too good for her. Because if you take that tone, the likelihood that she will be keen to share ownership of the cat is zero.
4. Weak leadership: May, Johnson, Davis and Fox have all been poor at various times and for various reasons.
5. The EU has been uncommonly united. For all the talk about them being unelected, and unshackled from their electorates, the governments of individual EU countries have backed the Commission, when we might have expected them to be more sympathetic to us. Also, (3) didn't help here.
The correct outcome, given where we are now, is for a time limited EEA agreement with the EU, with some restrictions on FoM. This would give them money and power, but would remove the worst parts of ECJ jurisdiction, take us out of the CFP and CAP, and allow us to have a united government down the line that can sort out the longer term relationship with the EU.
In case anyone is wondering if the substance of Barnier's speech doesn't match the headline, here:
“On regulatory alignment we have been pragmatic and developed the least disruptive system for citizens and businesses on both sides. Let’s go to pragmatism. Checks carried out on ferries are less disruptive than along a 500km land border.”
Is there a source for that quote? Just Googled it and Google isn't coming up with that quote which is odd.
"On customs, Northern Ireland would form part of our customs territory. What is feasible with a territory the size of Northern Ireland is not necessarily feasible with the whole UK. "
A bit of negotiation wriggle room there.
EDIT: Leave out Scotland? Big area but not much economic value.
Why does the size of the territory matter? It sounds like a totally arbitrary distinction.
And "a part of our customs territory"? They literally want to annex it, don't they?
I seem to remember some Brexiteers a couple of years ago arguing that threatening to hand over the burden of Northern Ireland was another card we could play to force the EU to give us a sweetheart deal.
It was. Quite clearly the EU is quite clearly absolutely desperate to avoid any barriers across Ireland. The problem is we were decent and simply said we wouldn't put barriers up while the EU is being indecent and acting as if they will put up barriers if they don't let us annex Northern Ireland.
It's total bovine manure but they're playing the card as we aren't.
Barnier today has effectively said that progress is stalled unless the UK redraws its red lines (Guardian live blog - "He says, if the UK were to adjust their red lines, the EU would adjust their offer").
Rowing back on the red lines is the one thing that might make Johnson and Davis finally resign.
The correct outcome, given where we are now, is for a time limited EEA agreement with the EU, with some restrictions on FoM. This would give them money and power, but would remove the worst parts of ECJ jurisdiction, take us out of the CFP and CAP, and allow us to have a united government down the line that can sort out the longer term relationship with the EU.
The word "correct" here presumably means the outcome that would allow Brexiteers to save the maximum amount of face. Why is that in the interests of anyone other than the Brexiteers whose reputations are at stake?
In case anyone is wondering if the substance of Barnier's speech doesn't match the headline, here:
“On regulatory alignment we have been pragmatic and developed the least disruptive system for citizens and businesses on both sides. Let’s go to pragmatism. Checks carried out on ferries are less disruptive than along a 500km land border.”
Is there a source for that quote? Just Googled it and Google isn't coming up with that quote which is odd.
"On customs, Northern Ireland would form part of our customs territory. What is feasible with a territory the size of Northern Ireland is not necessarily feasible with the whole UK. "
A bit of negotiation wriggle room there.
EDIT: Leave out Scotland? Big area but not much economic value.
Why does the size of the territory matter? It sounds like a totally arbitrary distinction.
And "a part of our customs territory"? They literally want to annex it, don't they?
Trying to impose an internal border between Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK would surely conflict with the GFA.
In any case, I would have thought that a back-stop that keeps the whole of the UK in the Customs Union would be very much to the advantage of the Irish Republic. East-West trade is far more extensive than North-South trade.
Yes I think Barnier will accept extension to whole of UK - and clarification that end 2021 is simply an aspiration. Next step is regulatory alignment for the whole of the UK. That might be more difficult for both May and Barnier for different reasons. For May because of her Brexiteers. For Barnier because the UK would be getting the benefits of the single market without FOM. He might propose extending the transition period indefinitely as the back-stop which does include FOM.
In case anyone is wondering if the substance of Barnier's speech doesn't match the headline, here:
“On regulatory alignment we have been pragmatic and developed the least disruptive system for citizens and businesses on both sides. Let’s go to pragmatism. Checks carried out on ferries are less disruptive than along a 500km land border.”
Is there a source for that quote? Just Googled it and Google isn't coming up with that quote which is odd.
"On customs, Northern Ireland would form part of our customs territory. What is feasible with a territory the size of Northern Ireland is not necessarily feasible with the whole UK. "
A bit of negotiation wriggle room there.
EDIT: Leave out Scotland? Big area but not much economic value.
Why does the size of the territory matter? It sounds like a totally arbitrary distinction.
And "a part of our customs territory"? They literally want to annex it, don't they?
I seem to remember some Brexiteers a couple of years ago arguing that threatening to hand over the burden of Northern Ireland was another card we could play to force the EU to give us a sweetheart deal.
It was. Quite clearly the EU is quite clearly absolutely desperate to avoid any barriers across Ireland. The problem is we were decent and simply said we wouldn't put barriers up while the EU is being indecent and acting as if they will put up barriers if they don't let us annex Northern Ireland.
It's total bovine manure but they're playing the card as we aren't.
That's not a serious argument. Arguing that you can leave a customs and regulatory union without creating any trade barriers is fantasy island stuff.
Barnier today has effectively said that progress is stalled unless the UK redraws its red lines (Guardian live blog - "He says, if the UK were to adjust their red lines, the EU would adjust their offer").
Rowing back on the red lines is the one thing that might make Johnson and Davis finally resign.
Interesting times.
The EU is bluffing. If they let us crash out without a deal then there's the hardest of hard borders across Ireland.
In case anyone is wondering if the substance of Barnier's speech doesn't match the headline, here:
“On regulatory alignment we have been pragmatic and developed the least disruptive system for citizens and businesses on both sides. Let’s go to pragmatism. Checks carried out on ferries are less disruptive than along a 500km land border.”
Is there a source for that quote? Just Googled it and Google isn't coming up with that quote which is odd.
"On customs, Northern Ireland would form part of our customs territory. What is feasible with a territory the size of Northern Ireland is not necessarily feasible with the whole UK. "
A bit of negotiation wriggle room there.
EDIT: Leave out Scotland? Big area but not much economic value.
Why does the size of the territory matter? It sounds like a totally arbitrary distinction.
And "a part of our customs territory"? They literally want to annex it, don't they?
I seem to remember some Brexiteers a couple of years ago arguing that threatening to hand over the burden of Northern Ireland was another card we could play to force the EU to give us a sweetheart deal.
It was. Quite clearly the EU is quite clearly absolutely desperate to avoid any barriers across Ireland. The problem is we were decent and simply said we wouldn't put barriers up while the EU is being indecent and acting as if they will put up barriers if they don't let us annex Northern Ireland.
It's total bovine manure but they're playing the card as we aren't.
That's not a serious argument. Arguing that you can leave a customs and regulatory union without creating any trade barriers is fantasy island stuff.
Then there will be trade barriers across Ireland, end of story.
Barnier today has effectively said that progress is stalled unless the UK redraws its red lines (Guardian live blog - "He says, if the UK were to adjust their red lines, the EU would adjust their offer").
Rowing back on the red lines is the one thing that might make Johnson and Davis finally resign.
Interesting times.
The EU is bluffing. If they let us crash out without a deal then there's the hardest of hard borders across Ireland.
If they let us crash out without a deal, the UK would break up within months.
Comments
O/T, but this is the probably the first time in my lifetime that the Conservatives have lead Labour on best policies for unemployment.
Although both were better than the 50’s at least in part because of the end of compulsory military service.
Personally I think living under Momentum would be an economic paradise compared to the complete fruit loops that inhabit Plaid Cymru’s leadership,
https://twitter.com/NigelDoddsDUP/status/1005092261577789443
Just like ultra-leavers want Proper Brexit at Any Cost, Barnier wants EU Principles (ie the freedoms) Maintained at Any Cost. In addition, probably forced by the threat of an Irish veto, Barnier's acting as a rather tougher guarantor of the GFA than some might initially have expected.
They're both valid enough principles, but neither is considering the practicals of future relationship, economic benefits, planes continuing to fly and the rest of it. My personal guess, in terms of pure size, is that Barnier has less to lose from it all going tits up than the UK does.
Reminds me a bit of this.. allocate roles according to your own beliefs: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sYsdUgEgJrY
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-44412025
* I reckoned on Con Maj 25-50 ish.
I do, frankly bitterly, resent the fact that we got from an EEC in 1975 to 2016 without ever being asked directly if we approved the morphing of the organisation that went on. Lisbon being exhibit A where we were lied to, nakedly, by our politicians that we would get a say. So all the A50 shenanigans could’ve ( and would’ve ) been avoided but for Gordon Brown sneaking in under cover of darkness to sign our vetos away having dodged the voters blatantly.
I freely voted to Leave in June 2016. “The Government will implement your decision”, said the leaflet delivered for nine million quid.
If it’s not, I’m not living in a free country, and I fear we really will be off to the races.
https://twitter.com/NigelDoddsDUP/status/806852079683796993
Are there any UKIP supporters left on here? I thought the whole point was that UKIP having served its purpose is now pointless (unless the Government really is dumb enough to listen to the Remoaners and scrap Brexit).
Still if your GDP per head is nearly US 100k and your government’s main issue is what to do with the proceeds of a colossal investment fund you can probably salve your wounds with large denomination bank notes in ways other countries just cannot.
“On regulatory alignment we have been pragmatic and developed the least disruptive system for citizens and businesses on both sides. Let’s go to pragmatism. Checks carried out on ferries are less disruptive than along a 500km land border.”
As a Remainer I'd be delighted to see the entire disaster quietly "suspended" and we all agree never to speak of this again, but it ain't going to happen like that.
Let’s hope the Norwegians have that right in practice. If they wanted to.
Please name any election ever in the EU where the course of how it is governed was dramatically changed because of the results of the election.
Instead I found that utterly unlikely punts like Cons winning Ayr, Carrick and Cumnock came in (after I had advised people on here not to back it).
Pre-Edit: Ah, I see there was some financial irregularity stuff that went on in Ayr with the SNP candidate - that could well have been decisive
If they think the EU is being utterly unreasonable/intransigent, they may well side with the Government.
If they think the Government has been incompetent/reckless, they may well blame the Conservatives.
Sins of omission and commission may also play into this. In a 'bad' (certainly to a minor extent) outcome, declining a potentially worse deal may play better than agreeing to something horrendous and then having to constantly defend it.
Been to Wales lately??????
Their position is indeed nonsensical as they want something that under their own rules cannot happen.
Saying that you don't like the fact that the other members outvoted us and instigarted the mandatory wearing of ties at lunch on Friday does not make the club undemocratic.
For the UK: We the people elect our Parliament that determines our laws.
For the EU: We the people elect our Parliament that determines our government that votes along with other governments to determine our laws.
There is no European demos or European election night that determines who forms the next European government and what direction it will take.
It wouldn't change the fact that there would still be something around at least 50% of the country wanting to vote for right or centre right candidates. The collapse of the Tory party would be no more of a victory for the Left than the Collapse of Labour would be for the Right.
What we lack in this country now is an economically Right wing, small state but very socially liberal party.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-ontario-pcs-romp-to-comfortable-majority-as-ndp-forms-the-official/
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/080618_bbcfullreport.pdf
I have always said Cameron's one great achievement was Gay Marriage. He can certainly be forgiven a lot of other rubbish for that one piece of legislation.
Nobody had twigged the real possibleity of a Leave vote. A possibility only turbo charged by the crap nature of Cameron’s deal which bombed within hours terminally.
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/774237975223885824
The combination of the UK leaving the EU and abortion reform in Ireland is catnip to Northern Ireland's younger voters.
Among people in the "other" national identity category (neither British nor Irish) support for unification is 80%, and protestants are now less committed to the union with over 20% either backing unification or not sure.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/cars/article-5820565/Vehicle-pollution-charges-cover-inner-London.html
Why wait?
It's rather sad that the author of the "nasty party" speech is the one person who has been the nastiest in office over the last eight years.
He also stressed his preference for the EU's border in the Irish sea plan, saying: "Checks carried out on ferries are less disruptive than along a 500km-long land border."
It's not the whole quote which provides the context.
A bit of negotiation wriggle room there.
EDIT: Leave out Scotland? Big area but not much economic value.
Might as well go for pragmatism: Ireland should join the UK and leave the EU.
Just as likely to happen...
And "a part of our customs territory"? They literally want to annex it, don't they?
Con 10 short of a majority
Con 316 (-2)
Lab 358 (-4)
LD 16 (+4)
The Judge has refused the remit on the basis that it is a hypothetical question because the government have been consistently clear that they have no intention of doing so. Some may remember that the action did not pass the sift at first instance on the same point but the Inner house allowed the application to proceed for reasons that seemed as clear as mud to me.
Whether these petitioners are minded to appeal this again is a matter for them but the clock is ticking on any such question ever being answered before we have actually left. I suspect that this is the end of this.
In any case, I would have thought that a back-stop that keeps the whole of the UK in the Customs Union would be very much to the advantage of the Irish Republic. East-West trade is far more extensive than North-South trade.
1. The UK's unwillingness to invest in a "No Deal" outcome at the start. If you haven't spent a single pound on infrastructure for a scenario, and haven't hired a single additional customs officer, then threats to walk out of negotiations, or genuinely go down the WTO route are very hollow indeed. (Which is why Boris was talking crap. Acting irrational if you haven't made the preparations makes you look like a complete idiot.)
2. The disastrous 2017 election, which left the Conservative Party without a majority, dependent on a Northern Ireland party, and at the mercy of rebels on both sides.
3. A foolish tone early in the process. We are dumping the EU. And, just like when you have to let your girlfriend down, it's best if you don't do it by crowing about how you were always too good for her. Because if you take that tone, the likelihood that she will be keen to share ownership of the cat is zero.
4. Weak leadership: May, Johnson, Davis and Fox have all been poor at various times and for various reasons.
5. The EU has been uncommonly united. For all the talk about them being unelected, and unshackled from their electorates, the governments of individual EU countries have backed the Commission, when we might have expected them to be more sympathetic to us. Also, (3) didn't help here.
The correct outcome, given where we are now, is for a time limited EEA agreement with the EU, with some restrictions on FoM. This would give them money and power, but would remove the worst parts of ECJ jurisdiction, take us out of the CFP and CAP, and allow us to have a united government down the line that can sort out the longer term relationship with the EU.
It's total bovine manure but they're playing the card as we aren't.
https://twitter.com/DavidHenigUK/status/1005090442097160192
Barnier today has effectively said that progress is stalled unless the UK redraws its red lines (Guardian live blog - "He says, if the UK were to adjust their red lines, the EU would adjust their offer").
Rowing back on the red lines is the one thing that might make Johnson and Davis finally resign.
Interesting times.
And, weren't free before the First World War, because at the point, we had no restrictions on anyone coming to the UK?