Brexit - was it worth it? (Vol. 2)
Discussion
Vasco said:
I think many of us suggested that it might be 5-10 years before everything settled down to 'normal' after Brexit - so, yes, quite ridiculous to make any judgement on Q1 figures!!
I agree with that in principle, but it's not ridiculous to and judgement of you are personally affected.JeffreyD said:
Vasco said:
I think many of us suggested that it might be 5-10 years before everything settled down to 'normal' after Brexit - so, yes, quite ridiculous to make any judgement on Q1 figures!!
I agree with that in principle, but it's not ridiculous to and judgement of you are personally affected.JeffreyD said:
Vasco said:
I think many of us suggested that it might be 5-10 years before everything settled down to 'normal' after Brexit - so, yes, quite ridiculous to make any judgement on Q1 figures!!
I agree with that in principle, but it's not ridiculous to and judgement of you are personally affected.
.Settling down to normal isn’t happening. There’s a new normal.
Question now (and has been for a while) which industries if any are the government tactically supporting, or are they just blustering over brexit being done. After all, they didn’t do a services agreement so it’s all about trade - isn’t it?
roger.mellie said:
JeffreyD said:
Vasco said:
I think many of us suggested that it might be 5-10 years before everything settled down to 'normal' after Brexit - so, yes, quite ridiculous to make any judgement on Q1 figures!!
I agree with that in principle, but it's not ridiculous to and judgement of you are personally affected..Settling down to normal isn’t happening. There’s a new normal.
Question now (and has been for a while) which industries if any are the government tactically supporting, or are they just blustering over brexit being done. After all, they didn’t do a services agreement so it’s all about trade - isn’t it?
Finance
https://www.fnlondon.com/articles/uk-and-eu-agree-...
Also
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/providing-services-to-...
turbobloke said:
Not quite, but brexit was about far more than trade/services in any case. Naturally, the usual teething troubles (see EEC accession) meant that it's been the sole focus for ardent remainers trying and failing to score internet points.
Finance
https://www.fnlondon.com/articles/uk-and-eu-agree-...
Also
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/providing-services-to-...
I was joking, but I’ve been on these forums long enough to leave a joke with a jag (not Presott’s car, or the other one).Finance
https://www.fnlondon.com/articles/uk-and-eu-agree-...
Also
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/providing-services-to-...
Long term the most important thing isn’t trivial deals with the Aussies where they get to screw uk farmers but won’t due to the practicalities. They make Boris look good without achieving much.
Long term it’s about priorities. I’m as clueless as you on what the priorities are.
roger.mellie said:
turbobloke said:
Not quite, but brexit was about far more than trade/services in any case. Naturally, the usual teething troubles (see EEC accession) meant that it's been the sole focus for ardent remainers trying and failing to score internet points.
Finance
https://www.fnlondon.com/articles/uk-and-eu-agree-...
Also
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/providing-services-to-...
I was joking, but I’ve been on these forums long enough to leave a joke with a jag (not Presott’s car, or the other one).Finance
https://www.fnlondon.com/articles/uk-and-eu-agree-...
Also
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/providing-services-to-...
Long term the most important thing isn’t trivial deals with the Aussies where they get to screw uk farmers but won’t due to the practicalities. They make Boris look good without achieving much.
Long term it’s about priorities. I’m as clueless as you on what the priorities are.
The FTA with OZ is the opening of a door to other things. It is also what remainers fear the most and why they are so dead against it. The more FTAs we get the less likely we could ever re-join the EU as we would have to then give up those FTAs. Imagine a campaign to rejoin the EU ...'right people, we want to rejoin the EU but to do so we have to give up those 20 FTAs we have with most of the rest of the world. What do we get in return? well exporters have to fill in one less form to trade with the EU. Oh and we have to adopt the Euro and pay them billions every year and...
Vanden Saab said:
I find it amazing that anybody can think that Oz farmers are going to 'screw' UK farmers while ignoring the fact that we already have free trade with a huge trading block next door with the same weather and seasons which apparently is not a threat.
The FTA with OZ is the opening of a door to other things. It is also what remainers fear the most and why they are so dead against it. The more FTAs we get the less likely we could ever re-join the EU as we would have to then give up those FTAs. Imagine a campaign to rejoin the EU ...'right people, we want to rejoin the EU but to do so we have to give up those 20 FTAs we have with most of the rest of the world. What do we get in return? well exporters have to fill in one less form to trade with the EU. Oh and we have to adopt the Euro and pay them billions every year and...
“It is also what remainers fear”?!!The FTA with OZ is the opening of a door to other things. It is also what remainers fear the most and why they are so dead against it. The more FTAs we get the less likely we could ever re-join the EU as we would have to then give up those FTAs. Imagine a campaign to rejoin the EU ...'right people, we want to rejoin the EU but to do so we have to give up those 20 FTAs we have with most of the rest of the world. What do we get in return? well exporters have to fill in one less form to trade with the EU. Oh and we have to adopt the Euro and pay them billions every year and...
Dude, what I “fear” is uk divergence of standards from the EU as that will enforce my preference for a united ireland.
roger.mellie said:
Vanden Saab said:
I find it amazing that anybody can think that Oz farmers are going to 'screw' UK farmers while ignoring the fact that we already have free trade with a huge trading block next door with the same weather and seasons which apparently is not a threat.
The FTA with OZ is the opening of a door to other things. It is also what remainers fear the most and why they are so dead against it. The more FTAs we get the less likely we could ever re-join the EU as we would have to then give up those FTAs. Imagine a campaign to rejoin the EU ...'right people, we want to rejoin the EU but to do so we have to give up those 20 FTAs we have with most of the rest of the world. What do we get in return? well exporters have to fill in one less form to trade with the EU. Oh and we have to adopt the Euro and pay them billions every year and...
“It is also what remainers fear”?!!The FTA with OZ is the opening of a door to other things. It is also what remainers fear the most and why they are so dead against it. The more FTAs we get the less likely we could ever re-join the EU as we would have to then give up those FTAs. Imagine a campaign to rejoin the EU ...'right people, we want to rejoin the EU but to do so we have to give up those 20 FTAs we have with most of the rest of the world. What do we get in return? well exporters have to fill in one less form to trade with the EU. Oh and we have to adopt the Euro and pay them billions every year and...
Dude, what I “fear” is uk divergence of standards from the EU as that will enforce my preference for a united ireland.
roger.mellie said:
I don’t, it was sarcasm as I’m sure you know.
Uk divergence is an NI unionist’s nightmare until they come to terms with the current situation.
I suspect it's the organised crime gangs worst nightmare, no more cross border smuggling that both sides have ignored for decades.Uk divergence is an NI unionist’s nightmare until they come to terms with the current situation.
roger.mellie said:
Yip, and I’d shed no tears, I’d even make a low offer on their Mc mansions. Taking a step out, are you now pro getting rid of NI or just playing the contrarian card? There’s a mix on this thread.
I'm not playing any card and have not stated any position regarding Ireland/NI.What happens there is all laid out in the GFA and the WA, it's up to the people in NI and Ireland what happens in the future.
In the meantime the areas where the NI protocol requires clarification via the joint committee should be sorted in the most pragmatic way for the benefit of all on the island.
jsf said:
I'm not playing any card and have not stated any position regarding Ireland/NI.
What happens there is all laid out in the GFA and the WA, it's up to the people in NI and Ireland what happens in the future.
In the meantime the areas where the NI protocol requires clarification via the joint committee should be sorted in the most pragmatic way for the benefit of all on the island.
Fair enough, you’ve stated many a position on the IM bill and NI protocol. But it’s not a criticism to say our priorities were different.What happens there is all laid out in the GFA and the WA, it's up to the people in NI and Ireland what happens in the future.
In the meantime the areas where the NI protocol requires clarification via the joint committee should be sorted in the most pragmatic way for the benefit of all on the island.
The NI protocol doesn’t require clarification. It requires an understanding (or in reality admission) of what was agreed and how to move forward from there via the JC. I think that’s where we disagree, you don’t make an agreement in the expectation of changes, you stand over what you agreed and negotiate from there.
I've quoted the relevant bits until I'm bored.
There is no renegotiation - there is agreement on practical application which does not include banning goods from a region which is explicitly wholly within the UK domestic market.
That it is also in the Single Market does not circumvent that - and indeed by attempting to levy a ban, the EU is demonstrably ignoring that absolutely primary overarching principle.
Yes, it's a fudge. Yes, both sides (like any good negotiation outcome) will be equally pissed off with it.
That's what the EU signed up to, and it's hugely revisionist and ignoring the Protocol to suggest otherwise.
Meanwhile, posters supporting the EU's position have ignored they have caved - and pushed it down the road, amusingly and tellingly to the point in which we apply those same controls to all third nation imports.
Funny that, it's almost like I pointed out weeks ago the UK's leverage in this debate.
There is no renegotiation - there is agreement on practical application which does not include banning goods from a region which is explicitly wholly within the UK domestic market.
That it is also in the Single Market does not circumvent that - and indeed by attempting to levy a ban, the EU is demonstrably ignoring that absolutely primary overarching principle.
Yes, it's a fudge. Yes, both sides (like any good negotiation outcome) will be equally pissed off with it.
That's what the EU signed up to, and it's hugely revisionist and ignoring the Protocol to suggest otherwise.
Meanwhile, posters supporting the EU's position have ignored they have caved - and pushed it down the road, amusingly and tellingly to the point in which we apply those same controls to all third nation imports.
Funny that, it's almost like I pointed out weeks ago the UK's leverage in this debate.
Sway said:
I've quoted the relevant bits until I'm bored.
There is no renegotiation - there is agreement on practical application which does not include banning goods from a region which is explicitly wholly within the UK domestic market.
That it is also in the Single Market does not circumvent that - and indeed by attempting to levy a ban, the EU is demonstrably ignoring that absolutely primary overarching principle.
Yes, it's a fudge. Yes, both sides (like any good negotiation outcome) will be equally pissed off with it.
That's what the EU signed up to, and it's hugely revisionist and ignoring the Protocol to suggest otherwise.
Meanwhile, posters supporting the EU's position have ignored they have caved - and pushed it down the road, amusingly and tellingly to the point in which we apply those same controls to all third nation imports.
Funny that, it's almost like I pointed out weeks ago the UK's leverage in this debate.
NI deals are always a fudge, the granddaddy of them all, the GFA, was a fudge.There is no renegotiation - there is agreement on practical application which does not include banning goods from a region which is explicitly wholly within the UK domestic market.
That it is also in the Single Market does not circumvent that - and indeed by attempting to levy a ban, the EU is demonstrably ignoring that absolutely primary overarching principle.
Yes, it's a fudge. Yes, both sides (like any good negotiation outcome) will be equally pissed off with it.
That's what the EU signed up to, and it's hugely revisionist and ignoring the Protocol to suggest otherwise.
Meanwhile, posters supporting the EU's position have ignored they have caved - and pushed it down the road, amusingly and tellingly to the point in which we apply those same controls to all third nation imports.
Funny that, it's almost like I pointed out weeks ago the UK's leverage in this debate.
Now I’ve said nothing wrong in that last post.
Part of the current problem is the uk expected to fudge it and the eu aren’t playing the game. But that leaves the uk no leg to stand on. Negotiation failure? Not really as they got what they want W.r.t the rest of GB as DeejRc occasionally points out. But you’re correct in that the solution will be more fudge, hopefully with chocolate on top.
roger.mellie said:
NI deals are always a fudge, the granddaddy of them all, the GFA, was a fudge.
Now I’ve said nothing wrong in that last post.
Part of the current problem is the uk expected to fudge it and the eu aren’t playing the game. But that leaves the uk no leg to stand on. Negotiation failure? Not really as they got what they want W.r.t the rest of GB as DeejRc occasionally points out. But you’re correct in that the solution will be more fudge, hopefully with chocolate on top.
The incorrect bit was the determination that it is the UK seeking to renege on a deal which is very clear... Now I’ve said nothing wrong in that last post.
Part of the current problem is the uk expected to fudge it and the eu aren’t playing the game. But that leaves the uk no leg to stand on. Negotiation failure? Not really as they got what they want W.r.t the rest of GB as DeejRc occasionally points out. But you’re correct in that the solution will be more fudge, hopefully with chocolate on top.
Instead, the EU are 'interpreting' it so that it absolutely breaks the principle of NI being wholly within BOTH the single market and UK internal market - with the single market being primary when the NIP makes it clear both are equally applicable.
Yes, it's a fudge. As you say, NI always is due to the internal politics. Yes, the UK could 'afford' that fudge as NI is such a small element in terms of population and economy.
Which then reinforces my point about the UK's leverage.
Which the EU get - hence they've backed down. If they genuinely thought they were in the right, they would not have done.
roger.mellie said:
jsf said:
I'm not playing any card and have not stated any position regarding Ireland/NI.
What happens there is all laid out in the GFA and the WA, it's up to the people in NI and Ireland what happens in the future.
In the meantime the areas where the NI protocol requires clarification via the joint committee should be sorted in the most pragmatic way for the benefit of all on the island.
Fair enough, you’ve stated many a position on the IM bill and NI protocol. But it’s not a criticism to say our priorities were different.What happens there is all laid out in the GFA and the WA, it's up to the people in NI and Ireland what happens in the future.
In the meantime the areas where the NI protocol requires clarification via the joint committee should be sorted in the most pragmatic way for the benefit of all on the island.
The NI protocol doesn’t require clarification. It requires an understanding (or in reality admission) of what was agreed and how to move forward from there via the JC. I think that’s where we disagree, you don’t make an agreement in the expectation of changes, you stand over what you agreed and negotiate from there.
You are wrong about the implementation of the NI Protocol, it's specifically written in a way to allow pragmatic solutions and to protect NI place within the UK IM and there is still plenty to be finalised to facilitate that, it will be an ongoing process and is legislated to be such.
This paragraph makes it crystal clear the EU has to play ball and this will be in constant review.
Having regard to Northern Ireland's integral place in the United Kingdom's internal market, the
Union and the United Kingdom shall use their best endeavours to facilitate the trade between
Northern Ireland and other parts of the United Kingdom, in accordance with applicable
legislation and taking into account their respective regulatory regimes as well as the
implementation thereof. The Joint Committee shall keep the application of this paragraph
under constant review and shall adopt appropriate recommendations with a view to avoiding
controls at the ports and airports of Northern Ireland to the extent possible.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff