How do we think EU negotiations will go?
Discussion
ash73 said:
As they insist on agreeing the divorce bill first Davies should make a token offer and sit back with his arms folded for 23 months. Let's see who cracks first. Meanwhile start planning for no deal.
The problem is, I think the British public will bottle it.
I would be quite happy to agree a generous deal in principle.The problem is, I think the British public will bottle it.
Then they know how much they would lose if we can't agree a sensible free trade arrangement.
Greg66 said:
///ajd said:
Barnier said quite clearly "we'll move on to that trade stuff Davis wants when he has made progress on citizens rights etc.". I.e. the EU will decide the pace and agenda.
Which is step 1 to f
king your counterpart. Of course, "I'm making stuff up", perhaps reality was Barnier was just a German car industry puppet, desperate to beg us to take have an uber deal trade, all cars & stuff tariff free, please please please David. Did I miss that bit?
loafer123 said:
I would be quite happy to agree a generous deal in principle.
Then they know how much they would lose if we can't agree a sensible free trade arrangement.
Ditto.Then they know how much they would lose if we can't agree a sensible free trade arrangement.
Let's face it, the number on the table will be quite sizeable anyway when you consider
- we'll still be paying in for 2 more yrs at least
- there will be a ton of stuff we already agreed to fund which we shouldn't automatically renege on
- there'll be other items that can't simply be stopped
30bn wouldn't be a problem IMO. But I'd want to see it all costed and would want to ensure that we continue to benefit from anything we continue to fund through this payment. If Davis can get that level of detail out of the EU, it's another relatively straightforward "sell" to the electorate IMO.
///ajd said:
Greg66 said:
///ajd said:
Barnier said quite clearly "we'll move on to that trade stuff Davis wants when he has made progress on citizens rights etc.". I.e. the EU will decide the pace and agenda.
Which is step 1 to fking your counterpart. Of course, "I'm making stuff up", perhaps reality was Barnier was just a German car industry puppet, desperate to beg us to take have an uber deal trade, all cars & stuff tariff free, please please please David. Did I miss that bit?
///ajd said:
Seems the logical way to read it, Barnier was almost enjoying it - "once little Davis has done his brexit bill homework, I'll let him play in the trade deal playground. There's a good boy, when I'm ready."
Of course, "I'm making stuff up", perhaps reality was Barnier was just a German car industry puppet, desperate to beg us to take have an uber deal trade, all cars & stuff tariff free, please please please David. Did I miss that bit?
Nope. You're just translating events to suit your own confirmation bias. As am I. Of course, "I'm making stuff up", perhaps reality was Barnier was just a German car industry puppet, desperate to beg us to take have an uber deal trade, all cars & stuff tariff free, please please please David. Did I miss that bit?
But at least you're doing a better reportage than you did on Hammond
Blue Oval84 said:
Digga said:
crankedup said:
Wine lovers in the EU will be begging us for our wonderful international award winning white wines!! All the more for us 
Never tried Nye Timber then?What has surprised me is that we weren't told to have another referendum to get "the right answer".
I never expected that the government would say "Brexit is Brexit" without at least a second vote on the matter. It's almost as if they wanted out, or didn't really care either way, and were just waiting for an excuse to go.
I still think that the Remainers displayed a terrible attitude before the vote that didn't do their cause any favours. There's was no attempt to even listen to debate, it was just an endless stream of insults and sneering. Whoever opposed them were racist, stupid, backward, "little Englanders", poorly educated or "old". Even a year on there is no attempt to understand, no attempt to debate, just endless insults and sneering.
Interestingly I found a statistical assessment of the claim the Brexiteers were ill educated that showed that while being educated to degree level correlated with voting remain those with a degree that had gone on get a higher socio economic status were more likely to vote out!
Most of the Brexiteers I know cited excessive and cumbersome regulations and rules that we were expected to follow but that no one else bothered with as the key reasons to vote out. They all cited cases from their own jobs as examples. After that there was a mixture of reasons; the desperate situation with Euro debts in Southern Europe, the chronic youth unemployment there, the catastrophic decisions over immigration, the kick in the teeth over BSE (they had it too but decided to let us suffer rather than work together), the destruction of UK fishing while they treat quotas as a joke.
I expect the negotiations to be an ongoing process for a long time. It took over forty years to get here, it will take at least ten to get out especially considering all the little awkward bits of which there are many...
I never expected that the government would say "Brexit is Brexit" without at least a second vote on the matter. It's almost as if they wanted out, or didn't really care either way, and were just waiting for an excuse to go.
I still think that the Remainers displayed a terrible attitude before the vote that didn't do their cause any favours. There's was no attempt to even listen to debate, it was just an endless stream of insults and sneering. Whoever opposed them were racist, stupid, backward, "little Englanders", poorly educated or "old". Even a year on there is no attempt to understand, no attempt to debate, just endless insults and sneering.
Interestingly I found a statistical assessment of the claim the Brexiteers were ill educated that showed that while being educated to degree level correlated with voting remain those with a degree that had gone on get a higher socio economic status were more likely to vote out!
Most of the Brexiteers I know cited excessive and cumbersome regulations and rules that we were expected to follow but that no one else bothered with as the key reasons to vote out. They all cited cases from their own jobs as examples. After that there was a mixture of reasons; the desperate situation with Euro debts in Southern Europe, the chronic youth unemployment there, the catastrophic decisions over immigration, the kick in the teeth over BSE (they had it too but decided to let us suffer rather than work together), the destruction of UK fishing while they treat quotas as a joke.
I expect the negotiations to be an ongoing process for a long time. It took over forty years to get here, it will take at least ten to get out especially considering all the little awkward bits of which there are many...
I was quite impressed with that first press conference, both sides seemed amiable, calm and rational. We do have ongoing commitments to which we signed up to which as a nation we must adhere to. Part of the UK Government stance is to remain fully committed to pacts, deals and treaties. That's why foreign aid will never be cut, as it's part of a treaty that certain nations adhere to a UN treaty to assign a certain proportion of GDP to foreign aid, which we do. In the wider scheme of things, it ensures the rest of the world know where we stand.
I'm having to trust the G to negotiate the best outcome on my behalf, as that is what democracy is - voting in people who we believe will take the best decisions on our behalf, as opposed to what some people think democracy is, where those we elect simply do what we tell them.
The last few months have been rough, and that hasn't helped with a lot of misplaced statements from (mainly the EU) both sides. Today, we saw what I hoped to be a very amiable start to discussions.
What I am concerned about was that the timetable would have 1 week in 4 as 'discussions' and the other 3 weeks as working on those discussions. The EU and its membership is a whopping behemoth, I can't see how negotiations on exit can take place in such a short space of time? Considering some trade deals take years, this is not a feasible time frame, unless the negotiations are looking at the bigger issues and the minutiae come later. But it's always the minutiae that create the biggest sticking points.
The free market was always a good idea and worked well. But once full sovereignty was signed away, things went downhill from there. To have tax rates imposed in the UK by the EU is beyond acceptable, for example VAT on fuel is 5% - I view fuel as a necessity, not a luxury, but the EU dictates each member state must levy VAT on fuel at a minimum rate of 5%.
Import tariffs from outside the EU have damaged UK industry. I mean, look at the cost of a bag of sugar, 55p from lidl (beet from Latvia) compared to £1.60 Tate and Lyle (cane sugar from Africa).
Crashing out of the EMU in '92 was a blessing in disguise. The euro is a disaster, the PIIGS can't devalue their currency in response to national pressures and look how Greece is faring as a result.
An amicable split is worth the £100 billion divorce bill, as is maintaining tariff free trade within the single market.
But before any of that is discussed, the first thing on the agenda is to create reassurance across the EU and the world that there is no longer any 'instability' and that discussions will be smooth, ordered and amicable, not nasty, bitter and divisive.
But that's just me. I know there's people out there that would like nothing more than to see the UK crash and burn just to say 'I told you so'.
I'm having to trust the G to negotiate the best outcome on my behalf, as that is what democracy is - voting in people who we believe will take the best decisions on our behalf, as opposed to what some people think democracy is, where those we elect simply do what we tell them.
The last few months have been rough, and that hasn't helped with a lot of misplaced statements from (mainly the EU) both sides. Today, we saw what I hoped to be a very amiable start to discussions.
What I am concerned about was that the timetable would have 1 week in 4 as 'discussions' and the other 3 weeks as working on those discussions. The EU and its membership is a whopping behemoth, I can't see how negotiations on exit can take place in such a short space of time? Considering some trade deals take years, this is not a feasible time frame, unless the negotiations are looking at the bigger issues and the minutiae come later. But it's always the minutiae that create the biggest sticking points.
The free market was always a good idea and worked well. But once full sovereignty was signed away, things went downhill from there. To have tax rates imposed in the UK by the EU is beyond acceptable, for example VAT on fuel is 5% - I view fuel as a necessity, not a luxury, but the EU dictates each member state must levy VAT on fuel at a minimum rate of 5%.
Import tariffs from outside the EU have damaged UK industry. I mean, look at the cost of a bag of sugar, 55p from lidl (beet from Latvia) compared to £1.60 Tate and Lyle (cane sugar from Africa).
Crashing out of the EMU in '92 was a blessing in disguise. The euro is a disaster, the PIIGS can't devalue their currency in response to national pressures and look how Greece is faring as a result.
An amicable split is worth the £100 billion divorce bill, as is maintaining tariff free trade within the single market.
But before any of that is discussed, the first thing on the agenda is to create reassurance across the EU and the world that there is no longer any 'instability' and that discussions will be smooth, ordered and amicable, not nasty, bitter and divisive.
But that's just me. I know there's people out there that would like nothing more than to see the UK crash and burn just to say 'I told you so'.
Legally we only have commitments up to the point we leave.
According to the EU we also have no call on any assets, despite 43 years of paying into the system.
If we were to crash the economy so under the treaty rules the EU have to pay us, then under their formulas we wouldn't have any commitments.
Its a most bonkers system we allowed ourselves to become entangled in.
There will be a fudge on the money and the commitments, don't expect it to make any sense in pure financial terms.
According to the EU we also have no call on any assets, despite 43 years of paying into the system.
If we were to crash the economy so under the treaty rules the EU have to pay us, then under their formulas we wouldn't have any commitments.
Its a most bonkers system we allowed ourselves to become entangled in.
There will be a fudge on the money and the commitments, don't expect it to make any sense in pure financial terms.
///ajd said:
Greg66 said:
///ajd said:
Barnier said quite clearly "we'll move on to that trade stuff Davis wants when he has made progress on citizens rights etc.". I.e. the EU will decide the pace and agenda.
Which is step 1 to fking your counterpart. Of course, "I'm making stuff up", perhaps reality was Barnier was just a German car industry puppet, desperate to beg us to take have an uber deal trade, all cars & stuff tariff free, please please please David. Did I miss that bit?
Wiccan of Darkness said:
t.
But that's just me. I know there's people out there that would like nothing more than to see the UK crash and burn just to say 'I told you so'.
You were doing reasonably well till that last line. Do you actually think that people want hardship on themselves and on people close to them 'just to say 'I told you so''?But that's just me. I know there's people out there that would like nothing more than to see the UK crash and burn just to say 'I told you so'.
cymtriks said:
Most of the Brexiteers I know cited excessive and cumbersome regulations and rules that we were expected to follow but that no one else bothered with as the key reasons to vote out.
DELETED: Comment made by a member who's account has been deleted.So we voted to leave to get away from the rules that we in the EU had to follow whilst other Nations in the EU did not follow. Hence proving that leaving is the only way to get out of not following those rules.
The promised bonfire of regulations is not so funny this week though, turns out legislation to protect the population is not such a bad thing.
///ajd said:
cymtriks said:
Most of the Brexiteers I know cited excessive and cumbersome regulations and rules that we were expected to follow but that no one else bothered with as the key reasons to vote out.
DELETED: Comment made by a member who's account has been deleted. So we voted to leave to get away from the rules that we in the EU had to follow whilst other Nations in the EU did not follow. Hence proving that leaving is the only way to get out of not following those rules.
The promised bonfire of regulations is not so funny this week though, turns out legislation to protect the population is not such a bad thing.
That is one reason why the EU will never be taken as seriously on an international business level, they don't follow the law to the same extent. It keeps the ECJ very busy sorting out the mess that gets generated because the culture is not to follow the law.
The UK has a very long history of legislating appropriately with regards to health and safety, we don't need the EU to do that.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff