What a disaster the Tories are.
Discussion
Jimboka said:
But looking to the future, any other trading partners are most likely to link freedom of movement with market access, it's the way of the world.
Mays visit to India:-
''Some things are clear and all too familiar. Trade and immigration are linked. If the UK wants better access to Indian markets, the government in Delhi wants a looser approach to UK work and student visas. This week saw Britain's visa rules for foreign visitors tightened.''
I guess Boris & co will be along soon to say it's all nonsense of course.
Interesting bit on Radio 4 over the weekend. The general concensus in India that this trip is about May proving a point to the UK and very little to do with UK-India trading. They pointed out to the fact the trip was hastly brought forward. To quote one Indian "The UK wants our money, but not our people"; her trip is a waste of time. She should be dealing with the issues here.Mays visit to India:-
''Some things are clear and all too familiar. Trade and immigration are linked. If the UK wants better access to Indian markets, the government in Delhi wants a looser approach to UK work and student visas. This week saw Britain's visa rules for foreign visitors tightened.''
I guess Boris & co will be along soon to say it's all nonsense of course.
Esseesse said:
jsf said:
Jimboka said:
But looking to the future, any other trading partners are most likely to link freedom of movement with market access, it's the way of the world.
No it's not.The most recently signed trade deal, the EU-Canada deal, does not have freedom of movement.
The TTIP does not have freedom of movement.
NAFTA doesn't have freedom of movement.
The China-New Zealand trade agreement doesn't have freedom of movement.
TTIP, for example, has provisions for free movement of managers and employees for work purposes.
Most of these negotiations will include some element of movement of employees at the very least.
TEKNOPUG said:
How can there be any trade deals struck with the EU until we have triggered Article 50 and begun negotiations with the EU, over said trade deals and even movement of people? What is your actual understanding of the process? Not just you but the vast majority of people who seem to post in this and other threads?
Article 50 has not been triggered yet - so there have been zero negotiations with the EU. Zero decisions made about trade or tariffs or freedom of movement. Yet there seem to be an awful lot of people who seem to think that negotiations have already been held and in fact final decisions have been made and they are privy to the outcome. It's very odd behaviour. Stranger still the people who think that the negotiation strategy should be argued in Parliament - did these same people advise GB on selling the gold too?
People would be well to simply wait until Article 50 has been triggered, UKGOV has held negotiations with the EU and then they can argue in the HoC as to whether Parliament is going to accept the terms or not.
Or you can just spend months and months working yourselves up into a state, over things that are pure speculation and that no one here has any actual knowledge about, in fact even the people in charge, here and in the EU can't answer because negotiations haven't even begun yet...
I think most people are concerned, not sure if that's the same thing as getting worked up into a state, perhaps you're showing some signs of anxiety yourself there! If you really don't think negotiations have already begun then I would beg to differ, I think the process has been underway for some time, just not on an official basis but I have yet to read anyone suggesting that final decisions have been made, perhaps you could enlighten me and others. As for freedom of movement, it's an educated guess on my part that FoM will be a key issues in most of our trade negotiations with the EU and elsewhere.Article 50 has not been triggered yet - so there have been zero negotiations with the EU. Zero decisions made about trade or tariffs or freedom of movement. Yet there seem to be an awful lot of people who seem to think that negotiations have already been held and in fact final decisions have been made and they are privy to the outcome. It's very odd behaviour. Stranger still the people who think that the negotiation strategy should be argued in Parliament - did these same people advise GB on selling the gold too?
People would be well to simply wait until Article 50 has been triggered, UKGOV has held negotiations with the EU and then they can argue in the HoC as to whether Parliament is going to accept the terms or not.
Or you can just spend months and months working yourselves up into a state, over things that are pure speculation and that no one here has any actual knowledge about, in fact even the people in charge, here and in the EU can't answer because negotiations haven't even begun yet...
Trabi601 said:
Esseesse said:
jsf said:
Jimboka said:
But looking to the future, any other trading partners are most likely to link freedom of movement with market access, it's the way of the world.
No it's not.The most recently signed trade deal, the EU-Canada deal, does not have freedom of movement.
The TTIP does not have freedom of movement.
NAFTA doesn't have freedom of movement.
The China-New Zealand trade agreement doesn't have freedom of movement.
TTIP, for example, has provisions for free movement of managers and employees for work purposes.
Most of these negotiations will include some element of movement of employees at the very least.
Blue62 said:
I agree. Very worrying times politically, socially and economically and listening to Farage threatening civil unrest just adds to the sense that the country is in a parlous state. I reckon the government are terrified of a debate in the HoP because it will expose the fact that there is no plan, we are stuck, no trade deals with Europe or elsewhere without movement of people.
Threatening civil unrest? Like the protest marches that the Remain side had? There is perfectly good questions to ask of the brexit side that should be answered, but please be reasonable in reading too much into what is said or twisting words to suit your opinion.PugwasHDJ80 said:
powerstroke said:
MarshPhantom said:
powerstroke said:
MarshPhantom said:
Do you not realise that was a big fat lie? Why aren't the brexiteers getting angry about stuff like this instead of the current situation?
Farage was saying on Andrew Marr yesterday there would be rioting if the brexiteers didn't get their way, the t
t.
"we will see political anger the like of which we have never seen before".
When asked if he thought there'd be disturbance in the streets he said yes.
Well it would make a change to see normal people rioting rather than the trustafarins ,soap dodgers, and leftwing scum!!!Farage was saying on Andrew Marr yesterday there would be rioting if the brexiteers didn't get their way, the t
t."we will see political anger the like of which we have never seen before".
When asked if he thought there'd be disturbance in the streets he said yes.
Edited by MarshPhantom on Monday 7th November 07:00
You can see it on the posts in here- if you don't agree with a leftie then you must be evil and put to death (sic)
Blue62 said:
TEKNOPUG said:
How can there be any trade deals struck with the EU until we have triggered Article 50 and begun negotiations with the EU, over said trade deals and even movement of people? What is your actual understanding of the process? Not just you but the vast majority of people who seem to post in this and other threads?
Article 50 has not been triggered yet - so there have been zero negotiations with the EU. Zero decisions made about trade or tariffs or freedom of movement. Yet there seem to be an awful lot of people who seem to think that negotiations have already been held and in fact final decisions have been made and they are privy to the outcome. It's very odd behaviour. Stranger still the people who think that the negotiation strategy should be argued in Parliament - did these same people advise GB on selling the gold too?
People would be well to simply wait until Article 50 has been triggered, UKGOV has held negotiations with the EU and then they can argue in the HoC as to whether Parliament is going to accept the terms or not.
Or you can just spend months and months working yourselves up into a state, over things that are pure speculation and that no one here has any actual knowledge about, in fact even the people in charge, here and in the EU can't answer because negotiations haven't even begun yet...
I think most people are concerned, not sure if that's the same thing as getting worked up into a state, perhaps you're showing some signs of anxiety yourself there! If you really don't think negotiations have already begun then I would beg to differ, I think the process has been underway for some time, just not on an official basis but I have yet to read anyone suggesting that final decisions have been made, perhaps you could enlighten me and others. As for freedom of movement, it's an educated guess on my part that FoM will be a key issues in most of our trade negotiations with the EU and elsewhere.Article 50 has not been triggered yet - so there have been zero negotiations with the EU. Zero decisions made about trade or tariffs or freedom of movement. Yet there seem to be an awful lot of people who seem to think that negotiations have already been held and in fact final decisions have been made and they are privy to the outcome. It's very odd behaviour. Stranger still the people who think that the negotiation strategy should be argued in Parliament - did these same people advise GB on selling the gold too?
People would be well to simply wait until Article 50 has been triggered, UKGOV has held negotiations with the EU and then they can argue in the HoC as to whether Parliament is going to accept the terms or not.
Or you can just spend months and months working yourselves up into a state, over things that are pure speculation and that no one here has any actual knowledge about, in fact even the people in charge, here and in the EU can't answer because negotiations haven't even begun yet...
As you've said that there have been no official negotiations, how can there be any debate in the HoP? Debate about what? And how could the debate expose anything? There have been no official negotiations. Even though you admit that there have been no official negotiations, you ascertain that a debate in the HoP would prove that we are stuck? It would expose that we have no trade deals (obviously as there have been no negotiations, we haven't triggered A50 and we are still in the EU). Then you say that it's just a guess on your part about FOM but at the same time a debate in the HoP would expose this to be a fact? You think that the process is underway but you have absolutely zero evidence to support this or even what these clandestine negotiations have been about? Perhaps the EU are happy to give us single market access without FOM, providing we keep Nicola Sturgeon?
How could you possibly come to any of those conclusions unless some final decisions have been made? It's simply unsubstantiated speculation, unfounded in reality and doesn't stand up to even the slightest scrutiny. Why bother until there is some actual news to discuss?
Rovinghawk said:
irocfan said:
SKP555 said:
sidicks said:
My calculus professor at University was from Hungary - he integrated extremely well indeed.
Surely it should be easy enough to differentiate people like him from the undesirables? If joking then send the parrot my way.
Edited by irocfan on Monday 7th November 19:17
MarshPhantom said:
Do you not realise that was a big fat lie? Why aren't the brexiteers getting angry about stuff like this instead of the current situation?
Farage was saying on Andrew Marr yesterday there would be rioting if the brexiteers didn't get their way, the tt.
"we will see political anger the like of which we have never seen before".
When asked if he thought there'd be disturbance in the streets he said yes.
so - no different to the left thenFarage was saying on Andrew Marr yesterday there would be rioting if the brexiteers didn't get their way, the t
t."we will see political anger the like of which we have never seen before".
When asked if he thought there'd be disturbance in the streets he said yes.
Edited by MarshPhantom on Monday 7th November 07:00
irocfan said:
MarshPhantom said:
Do you not realise that was a big fat lie? Why aren't the brexiteers getting angry about stuff like this instead of the current situation?
Farage was saying on Andrew Marr yesterday there would be rioting if the brexiteers didn't get their way, the tt.
"we will see political anger the like of which we have never seen before".
When asked if he thought there'd be disturbance in the streets he said yes.
so - no different to the left thenFarage was saying on Andrew Marr yesterday there would be rioting if the brexiteers didn't get their way, the t
t."we will see political anger the like of which we have never seen before".
When asked if he thought there'd be disturbance in the streets he said yes.
Edited by MarshPhantom on Monday 7th November 07:00
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff