Discussion
iphonedyou said:
Don said:
The EU is desperate to get us to "push the button" on Article 50 to end the uncertainty.
So that's a negotiating lever. If I was a negotiator right now I think I might have a cup of coffee. And then take a couple of weeks vacation. And then have another cup of coffee...
The age old 'ruin any remaining goodwill before you go in; that'll soften them up' technique.So that's a negotiating lever. If I was a negotiator right now I think I might have a cup of coffee. And then take a couple of weeks vacation. And then have another cup of coffee...
Timeless. Or it useless?
What we should have done is have had a vote with 3 options Stay, Go, Stay with Reform (or Go with No Reform). The latter would have almost certainly won and we would then have had some negotiating power.
However the issue we have is that politics is now a career choice, rather than a calling after a career, and therefore politicans do not have the experience needed for negotiations hence why we cant think of any to do the job!
looks like the americans intend to get the negotiations going on their own . back of the queue ,lmfao.
https://heatst.com/uk/us-uk-trade-bill-in-congress...
Despite claims that the US would banish Britain to the “back of the queue” if it dared to leave the European Union, Congress is already considering measures to boost trade with the UK.
A bill to lock down current trading arrangements, and fire the starting gun on a bilateral deal, was introduced to the US Senate yesterday.
The United Kingdom Trade Continuity Act mandates the US to keep trading on exactly the same terms after Britain leaves the EU.
https://heatst.com/uk/us-uk-trade-bill-in-congress...
Despite claims that the US would banish Britain to the “back of the queue” if it dared to leave the European Union, Congress is already considering measures to boost trade with the UK.
A bill to lock down current trading arrangements, and fire the starting gun on a bilateral deal, was introduced to the US Senate yesterday.
The United Kingdom Trade Continuity Act mandates the US to keep trading on exactly the same terms after Britain leaves the EU.
wc98 said:
looks like the americans intend to get the negotiations going on their own . back of the queue ,lmfao.
https://heatst.com/uk/us-uk-trade-bill-in-congress...
Despite claims that the US would banish Britain to the “back of the queue” if it dared to leave the European Union, Congress is already considering measures to boost trade with the UK.
A bill to lock down current trading arrangements, and fire the starting gun on a bilateral deal, was introduced to the US Senate yesterday.
The United Kingdom Trade Continuity Act mandates the US to keep trading on exactly the same terms after Britain leaves the EU.
"exactly the same terms"? So wtf was all the fuss in the UK about, if "exactly the same terms" is all that's going to come of it?https://heatst.com/uk/us-uk-trade-bill-in-congress...
Despite claims that the US would banish Britain to the “back of the queue” if it dared to leave the European Union, Congress is already considering measures to boost trade with the UK.
A bill to lock down current trading arrangements, and fire the starting gun on a bilateral deal, was introduced to the US Senate yesterday.
The United Kingdom Trade Continuity Act mandates the US to keep trading on exactly the same terms after Britain leaves the EU.
slow_poke said:
wc98 said:
looks like the americans intend to get the negotiations going on their own . back of the queue ,lmfao.
https://heatst.com/uk/us-uk-trade-bill-in-congress...
Despite claims that the US would banish Britain to the “back of the queue” if it dared to leave the European Union, Congress is already considering measures to boost trade with the UK.
A bill to lock down current trading arrangements, and fire the starting gun on a bilateral deal, was introduced to the US Senate yesterday.
The United Kingdom Trade Continuity Act mandates the US to keep trading on exactly the same terms after Britain leaves the EU.
"exactly the same terms"? So wtf was all the fuss in the UK about, if "exactly the same terms" is all that's going to come of it?https://heatst.com/uk/us-uk-trade-bill-in-congress...
Despite claims that the US would banish Britain to the “back of the queue” if it dared to leave the European Union, Congress is already considering measures to boost trade with the UK.
A bill to lock down current trading arrangements, and fire the starting gun on a bilateral deal, was introduced to the US Senate yesterday.
The United Kingdom Trade Continuity Act mandates the US to keep trading on exactly the same terms after Britain leaves the EU.
What they haven't spotted is that those terms are simply WTO MFN terms, given there is no FTA between the EU and US, but it's still a nice gesture of support.
The urge to do a quick FTA between the US and UK as well is nice, too.
loafer123 said:
Basically, they are saying that the US and UK can trade on the same terms as now, after we leave the EU.
What they haven't spotted is that those terms are simply WTO MFN terms, given there is no FTA between the EU and US, but it's still a nice gesture of support.
The urge to do a quick FTA between the US and UK as well is nice, too.
thanks for actually reading the link, slow poke obviously missed this bit "It also urges the President to start fast-track talks with the UK, with the aim of concluding a bilateral trade deal in just one year."What they haven't spotted is that those terms are simply WTO MFN terms, given there is no FTA between the EU and US, but it's still a nice gesture of support.
The urge to do a quick FTA between the US and UK as well is nice, too.
wc98 said:
loafer123 said:
Basically, they are saying that the US and UK can trade on the same terms as now, after we leave the EU.
What they haven't spotted is that those terms are simply WTO MFN terms, given there is no FTA between the EU and US, but it's still a nice gesture of support.
The urge to do a quick FTA between the US and UK as well is nice, too.
thanks for actually reading the link, slow poke obviously missed this bit "It also urges the President to start fast-track talks with the UK, with the aim of concluding a bilateral trade deal in just one year."What they haven't spotted is that those terms are simply WTO MFN terms, given there is no FTA between the EU and US, but it's still a nice gesture of support.
The urge to do a quick FTA between the US and UK as well is nice, too.
s2art said:
gothatway said:
Under EU law, are we allowed to enter negotiations with non-EU countries ? I suspect not.
Nothing stopping us having talks now, with the intent to have all the ducks lined up ready for Article 50 activation.Until conclusion of a50 talks (not activation), you are still member of EU. Which could take up to two years.
I do not understand, nor recognise, the assertion that the EU will not enter any pre negotiation before A50 is submitted. The fact that they have raised that point as a precursor indicates to me a weakness or fear that we need to sign A50 at the earliest to strengthen the EU position, ergo it is not in our interest to do so.
I would consider using industry to support the government in the negotiations, for government read civil service, to say that government are not up to the job is an understatement imhe. Beware the French, in my limited experience they behave like children in negotiations and have second thoughts after the fact. I'd nail them over the table and do not let them return to base to reflect on their stupidity and change what you thought they agreed to over the table. Again all imhe.
I would consider using industry to support the government in the negotiations, for government read civil service, to say that government are not up to the job is an understatement imhe. Beware the French, in my limited experience they behave like children in negotiations and have second thoughts after the fact. I'd nail them over the table and do not let them return to base to reflect on their stupidity and change what you thought they agreed to over the table. Again all imhe.
Surely it would be in the best interests of the UK government to put serious ££ behind HIRING a gold-plated negotiating team from the private sector?
Sure - needs to be headed up by a politician for democratic accountability, but the numbers involved are so huge it'd be worth paying almost any price for the very best.
Assemble a crack team of business big-hitters with a deal-making record (e.g. Sir Martin Sorrell, Bernie Ecclestone), and then give them as much top-class back-room support as they need. Give them more analytical horsepower than McKinsey, more legal firepower than the Magic Circle.
Even if the bill was £1bn, the difference between a good and bad deal would pay that back within the year.
Sure - needs to be headed up by a politician for democratic accountability, but the numbers involved are so huge it'd be worth paying almost any price for the very best.
Assemble a crack team of business big-hitters with a deal-making record (e.g. Sir Martin Sorrell, Bernie Ecclestone), and then give them as much top-class back-room support as they need. Give them more analytical horsepower than McKinsey, more legal firepower than the Magic Circle.
Even if the bill was £1bn, the difference between a good and bad deal would pay that back within the year.
brickwall said:
Surely it would be in the best interests of the UK government to put serious ££ behind HIRING a gold-plated negotiating team from the private sector?
Sure - needs to be headed up by a politician for democratic accountability, but the numbers involved are so huge it'd be worth paying almost any price for the very best.
Assemble a crack team of business big-hitters with a deal-making record (e.g. Sir Martin Sorrell, Bernie Ecclestone), and then give them as much top-class back-room support as they need. Give them more analytical horsepower than McKinsey, more legal firepower than the Magic Circle.
Even if the bill was £1bn, the difference between a good and bad deal would pay that back within the year.
I'd go with this approach, not sure about the characters, but current crop of blue chip international company players would be a must.Sure - needs to be headed up by a politician for democratic accountability, but the numbers involved are so huge it'd be worth paying almost any price for the very best.
Assemble a crack team of business big-hitters with a deal-making record (e.g. Sir Martin Sorrell, Bernie Ecclestone), and then give them as much top-class back-room support as they need. Give them more analytical horsepower than McKinsey, more legal firepower than the Magic Circle.
Even if the bill was £1bn, the difference between a good and bad deal would pay that back within the year.
jjlynn27 said:
s2art said:
gothatway said:
Under EU law, are we allowed to enter negotiations with non-EU countries ? I suspect not.
Nothing stopping us having talks now, with the intent to have all the ducks lined up ready for Article 50 activation.Until conclusion of a50 talks (not activation), you are still member of EU. Which could take up to two years.
HarryW said:
brickwall said:
Surely it would be in the best interests of the UK government to put serious ££ behind HIRING a gold-plated negotiating team from the private sector?
Sure - needs to be headed up by a politician for democratic accountability, but the numbers involved are so huge it'd be worth paying almost any price for the very best.
Assemble a crack team of business big-hitters with a deal-making record (e.g. Sir Martin Sorrell, Bernie Ecclestone), and then give them as much top-class back-room support as they need. Give them more analytical horsepower than McKinsey, more legal firepower than the Magic Circle.
Even if the bill was £1bn, the difference between a good and bad deal would pay that back within the year.
I'd go with this approach, not sure about the characters, but current crop of blue chip international company players would be a must.Sure - needs to be headed up by a politician for democratic accountability, but the numbers involved are so huge it'd be worth paying almost any price for the very best.
Assemble a crack team of business big-hitters with a deal-making record (e.g. Sir Martin Sorrell, Bernie Ecclestone), and then give them as much top-class back-room support as they need. Give them more analytical horsepower than McKinsey, more legal firepower than the Magic Circle.
Even if the bill was £1bn, the difference between a good and bad deal would pay that back within the year.
But more seriously, if I was in the government I'd be talking to the top lawyers and consultancies to make sure I had the very very best back-room support possible. You don't conduct this kind of negotiation on gut-feel and bravado - having the upper hand of information, analysis and insight is absolutely critical.
brickwall said:
Surely it would be in the best interests of the UK government to put serious ££ behind HIRING a gold-plated negotiating team from the private sector?
Sure - needs to be headed up by a politician for democratic accountability, but the numbers involved are so huge it'd be worth paying almost any price for the very best.
Assemble a crack team of business big-hitters with a deal-making record (e.g. Sir Martin Sorrell, Bernie Ecclestone), and then give them as much top-class back-room support as they need. Give them more analytical horsepower than McKinsey, more legal firepower than the Magic Circle.
Even if the bill was £1bn, the difference between a good and bad deal would pay that back within the year.
McKinsey's Barton - RemainerSure - needs to be headed up by a politician for democratic accountability, but the numbers involved are so huge it'd be worth paying almost any price for the very best.
Assemble a crack team of business big-hitters with a deal-making record (e.g. Sir Martin Sorrell, Bernie Ecclestone), and then give them as much top-class back-room support as they need. Give them more analytical horsepower than McKinsey, more legal firepower than the Magic Circle.
Even if the bill was £1bn, the difference between a good and bad deal would pay that back within the year.
Sorrell - Remainer
Bernie - Thinks that Putin should be in charge of UK.
Sorrell Bernie said:
“Do you mean Western Europe, Eastern Europe or both? Because you’re a great admirer of Vladimir Putin and what he’s done for Russia, aren’t you?” asked Sir Martin Sorrell.
“He should be running Europe.”
“He should be in Brussels running Europe?”
“We should get rid of Brussels and he should be in charge.”
“And in charge of us too?”
“Yes, of course,” said Mr Ecclestone, who says he admired the Russian premier because, “He does what he says he’s going to do. He gets the job done"
Still think it's a good idea?“He should be running Europe.”
“He should be in Brussels running Europe?”
“We should get rid of Brussels and he should be in charge.”
“And in charge of us too?”
“Yes, of course,” said Mr Ecclestone, who says he admired the Russian premier because, “He does what he says he’s going to do. He gets the job done"
ETA: damned quotes.
Edited by jjlynn27 on Saturday 2nd July 21:45
loafer123 said:
jjlynn27 said:
s2art said:
gothatway said:
Under EU law, are we allowed to enter negotiations with non-EU countries ? I suspect not.
Nothing stopping us having talks now, with the intent to have all the ducks lined up ready for Article 50 activation.Until conclusion of a50 talks (not activation), you are still member of EU. Which could take up to two years.
brickwall said:
HarryW said:
brickwall said:
Surely it would be in the best interests of the UK government to put serious ££ behind HIRING a gold-plated negotiating team from the private sector?
Sure - needs to be headed up by a politician for democratic accountability, but the numbers involved are so huge it'd be worth paying almost any price for the very best.
Assemble a crack team of business big-hitters with a deal-making record (e.g. Sir Martin Sorrell, Bernie Ecclestone), and then give them as much top-class back-room support as they need. Give them more analytical horsepower than McKinsey, more legal firepower than the Magic Circle.
Even if the bill was £1bn, the difference between a good and bad deal would pay that back within the year.
I'd go with this approach, not sure about the characters, but current crop of blue chip international company players would be a must.Sure - needs to be headed up by a politician for democratic accountability, but the numbers involved are so huge it'd be worth paying almost any price for the very best.
Assemble a crack team of business big-hitters with a deal-making record (e.g. Sir Martin Sorrell, Bernie Ecclestone), and then give them as much top-class back-room support as they need. Give them more analytical horsepower than McKinsey, more legal firepower than the Magic Circle.
Even if the bill was £1bn, the difference between a good and bad deal would pay that back within the year.
But more seriously, if I was in the government I'd be talking to the top lawyers and consultancies to make sure I had the very very best back-room support possible. You don't conduct this kind of negotiation on gut-feel and bravado - having the upper hand of information, analysis and insight is absolutely critical.
slow_poke said:
brickwall said:
HarryW said:
brickwall said:
Surely it would be in the best interests of the UK government to put serious ££ behind HIRING a gold-plated negotiating team from the private sector?
Sure - needs to be headed up by a politician for democratic accountability, but the numbers involved are so huge it'd be worth paying almost any price for the very best.
Assemble a crack team of business big-hitters with a deal-making record (e.g. Sir Martin Sorrell, Bernie Ecclestone), and then give them as much top-class back-room support as they need. Give them more analytical horsepower than McKinsey, more legal firepower than the Magic Circle.
Even if the bill was £1bn, the difference between a good and bad deal would pay that back within the year.
I'd go with this approach, not sure about the characters, but current crop of blue chip international company players would be a must.Sure - needs to be headed up by a politician for democratic accountability, but the numbers involved are so huge it'd be worth paying almost any price for the very best.
Assemble a crack team of business big-hitters with a deal-making record (e.g. Sir Martin Sorrell, Bernie Ecclestone), and then give them as much top-class back-room support as they need. Give them more analytical horsepower than McKinsey, more legal firepower than the Magic Circle.
Even if the bill was £1bn, the difference between a good and bad deal would pay that back within the year.
But more seriously, if I was in the government I'd be talking to the top lawyers and consultancies to make sure I had the very very best back-room support possible. You don't conduct this kind of negotiation on gut-feel and bravado - having the upper hand of information, analysis and insight is absolutely critical.
HarryW said:
slow_poke said:
brickwall said:
HarryW said:
brickwall said:
Surely it would be in the best interests of the UK government to put serious ££ behind HIRING a gold-plated negotiating team from the private sector?
Sure - needs to be headed up by a politician for democratic accountability, but the numbers involved are so huge it'd be worth paying almost any price for the very best.
Assemble a crack team of business big-hitters with a deal-making record (e.g. Sir Martin Sorrell, Bernie Ecclestone), and then give them as much top-class back-room support as they need. Give them more analytical horsepower than McKinsey, more legal firepower than the Magic Circle.
Even if the bill was £1bn, the difference between a good and bad deal would pay that back within the year.
I'd go with this approach, not sure about the characters, but current crop of blue chip international company players would be a must.Sure - needs to be headed up by a politician for democratic accountability, but the numbers involved are so huge it'd be worth paying almost any price for the very best.
Assemble a crack team of business big-hitters with a deal-making record (e.g. Sir Martin Sorrell, Bernie Ecclestone), and then give them as much top-class back-room support as they need. Give them more analytical horsepower than McKinsey, more legal firepower than the Magic Circle.
Even if the bill was £1bn, the difference between a good and bad deal would pay that back within the year.
But more seriously, if I was in the government I'd be talking to the top lawyers and consultancies to make sure I had the very very best back-room support possible. You don't conduct this kind of negotiation on gut-feel and bravado - having the upper hand of information, analysis and insight is absolutely critical.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff