Discussion
surveyor said:
No one could have done better.
She is facing negotiating against a combination of countries all wanting different things, and certainly the advantage.
On her side she has half a party, while the other half are back butting, bickering and generally being a right royal pain. There should also be an opposition, but they seem to have fixated on anti-senatksm and forgotten about Brexit. Don’t fool yourself that they would have been any different.
Put it in the business context. This sort of thing would be negotiated in private.behidn closed doors. Executives who did not agree would not go to the press, but would talk it through and would either agree, Shutup or move on..
It was always going to be a clusterf
k of giant proportions.
Not quite. She doesn't have half a party on her side. Half wanted to stay, half wanted to leave. None of them want the deal thats been negotiated. Whether or not thats the best anyone could achieve is by the by. i think that better might have been achieved had she not faced constant public criticism and demands of the answers before negotiations happened.She is facing negotiating against a combination of countries all wanting different things, and certainly the advantage.
On her side she has half a party, while the other half are back butting, bickering and generally being a right royal pain. There should also be an opposition, but they seem to have fixated on anti-senatksm and forgotten about Brexit. Don’t fool yourself that they would have been any different.
Put it in the business context. This sort of thing would be negotiated in private.behidn closed doors. Executives who did not agree would not go to the press, but would talk it through and would either agree, Shutup or move on..
It was always going to be a clusterf
k of giant proportions.As someone said above, would it have turned out different with anyone else at the wheel? I think she is a spineless leader and clearly didn't have the leverage that the rhetoric during the referendum said anyone negotiating would have. Boris et al jumped ship as they could see early on it wasn't going to end well and didn't want to go down with it - they wanted to keep themselves aligned with leave voters via spurious claims of how it should be done but without any fear that it would be tested at the negotiating table.
Is anyone surprised that a bloc with its huge leverage and negotiating expertise out-maneuvered the UK with its flimsy leadership and in house bickering?
What we haven't really seen in the press is the idea that the EU states come back and say they want more, its quite plausible some states will do that...
Is anyone surprised that a bloc with its huge leverage and negotiating expertise out-maneuvered the UK with its flimsy leadership and in house bickering?
What we haven't really seen in the press is the idea that the EU states come back and say they want more, its quite plausible some states will do that...
coldel said:
As someone said above, would it have turned out different with anyone else at the wheel? I think she is a spineless leader and clearly didn't have the leverage that the rhetoric during the referendum said anyone negotiating would have. Boris et al jumped ship as they could see early on it wasn't going to end well and didn't want to go down with it - they wanted to keep themselves aligned with leave voters via spurious claims of how it should be done but without any fear that it would be tested at the negotiating table.
Is anyone surprised that a bloc with its huge leverage and negotiating expertise out-maneuvered the UK with its flimsy leadership and in house bickering?
Cant see how you can say she is spinelessIs anyone surprised that a bloc with its huge leverage and negotiating expertise out-maneuvered the UK with its flimsy leadership and in house bickering?
With everyone else running around like chickens with no heads, surely shes the only one standing with a spine
Across the whole lot and all sides
saaby93 said:
Cant see how you can say she is spineless
With everyone else running around like chickens with no heads, surely shes the only one standing with a spine
Across the whole lot and all sides
More to do with her whole effort around the PM role as a whole. Bottling a number of challenges during the run up to the election, not facing into specific issues since then. Not dealing with ministers causing all sorts of havoc effectively. In her mind she believes she is toughing it out, some people might even observe that, but in any other age she would have been booted out long ago - its only the fact that making change this year with brexit was protecting her from that.With everyone else running around like chickens with no heads, surely shes the only one standing with a spine
Across the whole lot and all sides
I would agree that there are many others also spineless, but because the context is that there are a bunch of terrible politicians around at the moment doesn't take away from the fact that she is a weak leader.
Edited by coldel on Wednesday 14th November 15:13
Failure over the last two years to plan energetically for no deal, even if only for appearance's sake, seems a mistake to me.
Sitting at the negotiating table with no plan for no deal would seem to me to weaken one's position. You're the guy in the rain haggling over an umbrella.
If a no deal possibility had been embraced from day one, then it could have been brought up and down in prominence as and when it became 'useful' in the negotiations. Without a hint of a plan, that wasn't a card we could play.
Not sure why that decision was made - hopefully it'll crop up in someone's memoirs.
Sitting at the negotiating table with no plan for no deal would seem to me to weaken one's position. You're the guy in the rain haggling over an umbrella.
If a no deal possibility had been embraced from day one, then it could have been brought up and down in prominence as and when it became 'useful' in the negotiations. Without a hint of a plan, that wasn't a card we could play.
Not sure why that decision was made - hopefully it'll crop up in someone's memoirs.
coldel said:
As someone said above, would it have turned out different with anyone else at the wheel?
I think it would have. Had May not overturned DD (overruling a huge department dedicated to leaving the EU) and gone for the Canada+ approach (indicated as acceptable to Barnier and co) we would have had a deal, at least in draft form 10 months ago.s2art said:
I think it would have. Had May not overturned DD (overruling a huge department dedicated to leaving the EU) and gone for the Canada+ approach (indicated as acceptable to Barnier and co) we would have had a deal, at least in draft form 10 months ago.
Possibly (although Canada took 10 years to put together and it was a case of building something new rather than dismantling something in existence - also think the DUP were in play when any decision on canada+ is disucssed), but we will never know. Maybe we might have had a couple more concessions with a better approach but I dont think we would see anything radically different with leave voters cheering in the streets.SpeckledJim said:
Failure over the last two years to plan energetically for no deal, even if only for appearance's sake, seems a mistake to me.
Sitting at the negotiating table with no plan for no deal would seem to me to weaken one's position. You're the guy in the rain haggling over an umbrella.
If a no deal possibility had been embraced from day one, then it could have been brought up and down in prominence as and when it became 'useful' in the negotiations. Without a hint of a plan, that wasn't a card we could play.
Not sure why that decision was made - hopefully it'll crop up in someone's memoirs.
She could still change tack, turn off the Euro Clearing computers for a couple of hours and then call Barnier.Sitting at the negotiating table with no plan for no deal would seem to me to weaken one's position. You're the guy in the rain haggling over an umbrella.
If a no deal possibility had been embraced from day one, then it could have been brought up and down in prominence as and when it became 'useful' in the negotiations. Without a hint of a plan, that wasn't a card we could play.
Not sure why that decision was made - hopefully it'll crop up in someone's memoirs.
The Civil Service is far better prepared for No Deal than May will admit because No Deal means No May.
coldel said:
I would agree that there are many others also spineless, but because the context is that there are a bunch of terrible politicians around at the moment doesn't take away from the fact that she is a weak leader.
Sticking with a failed plan is not a sign of strength."When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?"
SpeckledJim said:
Failure over the last two years to plan energetically for no deal, even if only for appearance's sake, seems a mistake to me.
Sitting at the negotiating table with no plan for no deal would seem to me to weaken one's position. You're the guy in the rain haggling over an umbrella.
If a no deal possibility had been embraced from day one, then it could have been brought up and down in prominence as and when it became 'useful' in the negotiations. Without a hint of a plan, that wasn't a card we could play.
Not sure why that decision was made - hopefully it'll crop up in someone's memoirs.
Yes would agree - lack of action straight off the starting gun set the tone for the UKs approach to this. Lack of planning, bickering, tunnel vision on one outcome has left us walking away from negotiating tables too many times empty handed and panicking trying to push something soft through today.Sitting at the negotiating table with no plan for no deal would seem to me to weaken one's position. You're the guy in the rain haggling over an umbrella.
If a no deal possibility had been embraced from day one, then it could have been brought up and down in prominence as and when it became 'useful' in the negotiations. Without a hint of a plan, that wasn't a card we could play.
Not sure why that decision was made - hopefully it'll crop up in someone's memoirs.
JagLover said:
coldel said:
I would agree that there are many others also spineless, but because the context is that there are a bunch of terrible politicians around at the moment doesn't take away from the fact that she is a weak leader.
Sticking with a failed plan is not a sign of strength."When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?"
paulrockliffe said:
SpeckledJim said:
Failure over the last two years to plan energetically for no deal, even if only for appearance's sake, seems a mistake to me.
Sitting at the negotiating table with no plan for no deal would seem to me to weaken one's position. You're the guy in the rain haggling over an umbrella.
If a no deal possibility had been embraced from day one, then it could have been brought up and down in prominence as and when it became 'useful' in the negotiations. Without a hint of a plan, that wasn't a card we could play.
Not sure why that decision was made - hopefully it'll crop up in someone's memoirs.
She could still change tack, turn off the Euro Clearing computers for a couple of hours and then call Barnier.Sitting at the negotiating table with no plan for no deal would seem to me to weaken one's position. You're the guy in the rain haggling over an umbrella.
If a no deal possibility had been embraced from day one, then it could have been brought up and down in prominence as and when it became 'useful' in the negotiations. Without a hint of a plan, that wasn't a card we could play.
Not sure why that decision was made - hopefully it'll crop up in someone's memoirs.
The Civil Service is far better prepared for No Deal than May will admit because No Deal means No May.
I don't have an understanding of the scale of asset/problem the Euro clearing is. But it seems that as-yet, it's not a card that has been played. Is it too aggressive for this stage?
s2art said:
I think it would have. Had May not overturned DD (overruling a huge department dedicated to leaving the EU) and gone for the Canada+ approach (indicated as acceptable to Barnier and co) we would have had a deal, at least in draft form 10 months ago.
How would Canada+ (a) have worked for London-based financial services and (b) solved the Irish border issue? Genuine question. SpeckledJim said:
I'm hoping that this offer gets roundly defeated in parliament, so that May has to go back to the EU and say 'look, now you can see what I'm dealing with. If you and I don't make some big steps in my direction this week, we can both see this ends in No Deal'.
I don't have an understanding of the scale of asset/problem the Euro clearing is. But it seems that as-yet, it's not a card that has been played. Is it too aggressive for this stage?
Of course it is too aggressive, I only mention it as a reminder to the remainers that like to gleefully pronounce leverage as a one way street with the UK as some pauper of Europe, rather than one of their largest export markets and supplier of cheap finance and essential currency stuff.I don't have an understanding of the scale of asset/problem the Euro clearing is. But it seems that as-yet, it's not a card that has been played. Is it too aggressive for this stage?
I don't think May has use any of the UK's leverage and I doubt that is by accident.
It' snot big steps that are required, it's a rip-up and start again, but I don't think the politics is there for that. No deal is the best option from here now.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff