How do we think EU negotiations will go?

[SantaBarbara]

Eddie Strohacker said:

I'm not making a suggestion? I'm commenting on the subject of this thread. However, Robraver above answers your query. In short, there is no option that can make Brexit a trade success with Europe above & beyond what exists today. None whatsoever. You either remain & enjoy the benefits of the single market & customs union or you leave & you don't.

They're not in la la land, there will be an arrangement. Eventually. But it will not & cannot be superior to what we enjoy now. Unless that is you Brexit boys are willing to suck up the ECJ & all that jazz. Are you?

Nonsense

[confused_buyer]

Eddie Strohacker said:

We should remain. Simple as that. We're leaving. Also simple as that. HTH.

As you appear to have no opinion on any aspect of it apart from "we should remain" why are you engaging in a discussion group about it?

[Eddie Strohacker]

SantaBarbara said:

Nonsense

This is good. You've gone from one liners to single words. Hopefully, you'll have evaporated all together by Thursday.

[Eddie Strohacker]

confused_buyer said:

Eddie Strohacker said:

We should remain. Simple as that. We're leaving. Also simple as that. HTH.

As you appear to have no opinion on any aspect of it apart from "we should remain" why are you engaging in a discussion group about it?

You've literally quoted my opinion on it.

[anonymous-user]

Eddie Strohacker said:

jsf said:

Just a point of note, we are leaving the customs union in March, assuming the negotiations aren't extended beyond the initial timescale, that is what happens when you leave the EU.

What is being discussed is what system will be used at the point we leave the Customs Union.

What do you propose when we leave the Customs Union Eddie? Because we are leaving it as a matter of treaty fact. Staying in the EU isn't an option, so what is it you suggest?

I'm not making a suggestion? I'm commenting on the subject of this thread. However, Robraver above answers your query. In short, there is no option that can make Brexit a trade success with Europe above & beyond what exists today. None whatsoever. You either remain & enjoy the benefits of the single market & customs union or you leave & you don't.

They're not in la la land, there will be an arrangement. Eventually. But it will not & cannot be superior to what we enjoy now. Unless that is you Brexit boys are willing to suck up the ECJ & all that jazz. Are you?

The most sensible approach is the one that is being pursued, which is to arrange a transition period where both parties can use to come up with a longer term solution that works for both parties. Its not just the UK saying this, the EU wants this too.

The obvious goal is to eventually have a Trade Agreement between the UK and EU, but whilst that discussion is on-going it would be sensible to have in place an arrangement that is least disruptive to both sides.

The WTO is a fall back position that would impact both sides compared to the current arrangement, but it's not the end of the world if our politicians cant agree a deal that works for both parties.

Robraver is talking out of his arse, hopefully now he sees the UK will not have any issue using a WTO regime he can relax a little.

[don'tbesilly]

Eddie Strohacker said:

jsf said:

Just a point of note, we are leaving the customs union in March, assuming the negotiations aren't extended beyond the initial timescale, that is what happens when you leave the EU.

What is being discussed is what system will be used at the point we leave the Customs Union.

What do you propose when we leave the Customs Union Eddie? Because we are leaving it as a matter of treaty fact. Staying in the EU isn't an option, so what is it you suggest?

I'm not making a suggestion? I'm commenting on the subject of this thread. However, Robraver above answers your query. In short, there is no option that can make Brexit a trade success with Europe above & beyond what exists today. None whatsoever. You either remain & enjoy the benefits of the single market & customs union or you leave & you don't.

They're not in la la land, there will be an arrangement. Eventually. But it will not & cannot be superior to what we enjoy now. Unless that is you Brexit boys are willing to suck up the ECJ & all that jazz. Are you?

I'm not sure anyone has ever suggested a deal going forward with the EU would be superior to what currently exists, and for the record Robraver would be better off sticking to raving, as he's incorrect in regards WTO, as many have pointed out.

Jazz I can just about tolerate, but sticking with the ECJ is not an option that would be palatable to most Leave voters, no.

[Carl_Manchester]

One observation thus far is that the EU team do appear to have tunnel vision and do not seem to be doing much 'negotiation', it appears to be very much a take-it-or-leave-it set of vocabulary being used.

A bit like a jilted long term ex-girlfriend who is keeping your stuff hostage in a vain attempt to obtain some sort of hollow victory. In doing so it just re-enforces why you left her in the first place.

Keep the stuff sweetheart, I will go and buy some more speakers.

[SantaBarbara]

Carl_Manchester said:

One observation thus far is that the EU team do appear to have tunnel vision and do not seem to be doing much 'negotiation', it appears to be very much a take-it-or-leave-it set of vocabulary being used.

A bit like a jilted long term ex-girlfriend who is keeping your stuff hostage in a vain attempt to obtain some sort of hollow victory. In doing so it just re-enforces why you left her in the first place.

Keep the stuff sweetheart, I will go and buy some more speakers.

Euro Tunnel Vision. Very droll

[Eddie Strohacker]

jsf said:

The most sensible approach is the one that is being pursued, which is to arrange a transition period where both parties can use to come up with a longer term solution that works for both parties. Its not just the UK saying this, the EU wants this too.

The obvious goal is to eventually have a Trade Agreement between the UK and EU, but whilst that discussion is on-going it would be sensible to have in place an arrangement that is least disruptive to both sides.

The WTO is a fall back position that would impact both sides compared to the current arrangement, but it's not the end of the world if our politicians cant agree a deal that works for both parties.

Robraver is talking out of his arse, hopefully now he sees the UK will not have any issue using a WTO regime he can relax a little.

You're talking about a different thing to me. A transitional arrangement is the only way to stave off the madness of the top Brexit boot boys like Nige & headbanger redwood. Interesting though how it's a recent concession from the PM & even now the implications of her cliff edge vision are only just sinking in with this shiny new realisation that transition is the driftwood we have to cling to.

Instead, pulling the conversation back to my point & its title, I'm talking about today's developments. I get why you want to run off on tangents, today's news is nothing short of embarrassing. The pointlessness of it all, masses of bureaucracy, red tape, cost & negotiation & for what? To replicate what we have now but worse. Nothing more than a political dead end taking up months of time & effort that could be better used elsewhere.We'll have two regulatory systems at the border operating simultaneously, it's madness. We're witnessing the elevation of ideology over economic reality almost to the point of Soviet Russia. fk it, why not just collectivise the farms & be done with it?

[Sway]

Roboraver said:

Eddie Strohacker said:

Sorry, you lost me after that point. I was on the floor rolling around laughing.

Sorry but I had to laught as well, what a cluster fk !

Then you missed the point.

It doesn't matter what we do, it is not in the EU's interest to deem the progress 'sufficient' to talk future trade...

[PurpleMoonlight]

Carl_Manchester said:

One observation thus far is that the EU team do appear to have tunnel vision and do not seem to be doing much 'negotiation', it appears to be very much a take-it-or-leave-it set of vocabulary being used.

A bit like a jilted long term ex-girlfriend who is keeping your stuff hostage in a vain attempt to obtain some sort of hollow victory. In doing so it just re-enforces why you left her in the first place.

Keep the stuff sweetheart, I will go and buy some more speakers.

Perhaps not that surprising, they want to maintain the integrity of the EU and are prepared to suffer a little pain for that by not giving the UK special treatment.

[Eddie Strohacker]

Last two posts at least inject a little realpolitik into things. If you think the big boys in the EU are prepared to put trade above politics, you're very mistaken.

[PurpleMoonlight]

Eddie Strohacker said:

Last two posts at least inject a little realpolitik into things. If you think the big boys in the EU are prepared to put trade above politics, you're very mistaken.

Neither did the UK though.

Nobody voted leave because they thought it would increase trade with the EU.

[SantaBarbara]

Eddie Strohacker said:

Last two posts at least inject a little realpolitik into things. If you think the big boys in the EU are prepared to put trade above politics, you're very mistaken.

Eddie have you got a degree in creative writing?

[don'tbesilly]

PurpleMoonlight said:

Carl_Manchester said:

One observation thus far is that the EU team do appear to have tunnel vision and do not seem to be doing much 'negotiation', it appears to be very much a take-it-or-leave-it set of vocabulary being used.

A bit like a jilted long term ex-girlfriend who is keeping your stuff hostage in a vain attempt to obtain some sort of hollow victory. In doing so it just re-enforces why you left her in the first place.

Keep the stuff sweetheart, I will go and buy some more speakers.

Perhaps not that surprising, they want to maintain the integrity of the EU and are prepared to suffer a little pain for that by not giving the UK special treatment.

The pain you mention is at the expense of the countries the EU are supposed to represent, it will be interesting to see just how long the countries tolerate this inactivity and intransigence on the part of the EU.

It's amazing you didn't vote to Remain, you seem very supportive of the EU's stance to date, and you not voting to Leave makes even more sense.

[Eddie Strohacker]

PurpleMoonlight said:

Neither did the UK though.

Nobody voted leave because they thought it would increase trade with the EU.

I strongly suspect that thought was nowhere near the front of most Brexiteers minds. Today's paper is clearly a naked attempt to talk the EU into an early transition arrangement in October, which is ironic considering until today, no transition required was the official position, despite what JSF will tell you - it was all about .striking a quick trade deal, totally unrealistic to all but the most convinced observers.

I love that squads of Brexiteers on here moan that they only wanted to join the common market & now that's the first thing they insist on leaving!!

[PurpleMoonlight]

Eddie Strohacker said:

I strongly suspect that thought was nowhere near the front of most Brexiteers minds. Today's paper is clearly a naked attempt to talk the EU into an early transition arrangement in October, which is ironic considering until today, no transition required was the official position, despite what JSF will tell you - it was all about .striking a quick trade deal, totally unrealistic to all but the most convinced observers.

I love that squads of Brexiteers on here moan that they only wanted to join the common market & now that's the first thing they insist on leaving!!

Perhaps team UK were hoping for a quick FTA which would have negated the need for a transitional agreement. Possibly that was over optimistic and/or they didn't initially appreciate the complexity of the exit.

[anonymous-user]

Eddie Strohacker said:

jsf said:

The most sensible approach is the one that is being pursued, which is to arrange a transition period where both parties can use to come up with a longer term solution that works for both parties. Its not just the UK saying this, the EU wants this too.

The obvious goal is to eventually have a Trade Agreement between the UK and EU, but whilst that discussion is on-going it would be sensible to have in place an arrangement that is least disruptive to both sides.

The WTO is a fall back position that would impact both sides compared to the current arrangement, but it's not the end of the world if our politicians cant agree a deal that works for both parties.

Robraver is talking out of his arse, hopefully now he sees the UK will not have any issue using a WTO regime he can relax a little.

You're talking about a different thing to me. A transitional arrangement is the only way to stave off the madness of the top Brexit boot boys like Nige & headbanger redwood. Interesting though how it's a recent concession from the PM & even now the implications of her cliff edge vision are only just sinking in with this shiny new realisation that transition is the driftwood we have to cling to.

Instead, pulling the conversation back to my point & its title, I'm talking about today's developments. I get why you want to run off on tangents, today's news is nothing short of embarrassing. The pointlessness of it all, masses of bureaucracy, red tape, cost & negotiation & for what? To replicate what we have now but worse. Nothing more than a political dead end taking up months of time & effort that could be better used elsewhere.We'll have two regulatory systems at the border operating simultaneously, it's madness. We're witnessing the elevation of ideology over economic reality almost to the point of Soviet Russia. fk it, why not just collectivise the farms & be done with it?

The transition deal scenario has been on the cards from day one, we have discussed this many times on here.

We already have two systems in place at our borders, one for the customs union members, one for the rest of the world.

We are leaving Eddie, so things are going to change, what's currently under discussion is how that happens whilst causing the least disruption. Any change of substance has implementation periods and short term costs, that doesn't mean you should stick to what you have forever. Sticking to what we have isn't an option open to us now we have decided to leave the EU.

[Eddie Strohacker]

PurpleMoonlight said:

Perhaps team UK were hoping for a quick FTA which would have negated the need for a transitional agreement. Possibly that was over optimistic and/or they didn't initially appreciate the complexity of the exit.

Yes & clearly, that realisation is dawning slowly on people in general & incredibly, the highly paid team charged with carrying this stuff out. It's literally the news before our eye and yet I await all the usuals here telling me I'm wrong/stupid/whining/don't know what I'm on about.

[Ean218]

Eddie Strohacker said:

PurpleMoonlight said:

Neither did the UK though.

Nobody voted leave because they thought it would increase trade with the EU.

I strongly suspect that thought was nowhere near the front of most Brexiteers minds.

I've not commented on this thread before but I am struck how you seem to think anyone who voted out is ignorant and cannot think for themselves.

I and most of my friends voted to leave the EU in the full knowledge that trade with the EU would suffer, we voted out because we also believe that trade with the rest of the world would increase markedly. Nothing that has happened so far has shaken that view. In fact I am surprised how quickly non EU trade is increasing already.