How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 3)
Discussion
jjlynn27 said:
There is a proposal for a withdrawal agreement, which will be followed by an implementation agreement. The legal position is, by people who are much better qualified than few random, angry blokes on a car forum, that 39bn is payable regardless of the trade agreement.
To use the text you quoted previously:"NAO chief: The UK will have to pay its Brexit “divorce bill” of up to £39bn even if no agreement is reached on a future trade deal with the EU, the head of Whitehall’s spending watchdog has said. The head of the National Audit Office (NAO), Sir Amyas Morse, said on Tuesday that if parliament approves the withdrawal agreement in a vote in the autumn, it will become a legally binding treaty regardless of the success of separate trade talks."
Surely the text in bold is quite important?
jjlynn27 said:
Vanden Saab said:
Ghibli said:
Anyone would think that the EU knows a thing or two about negotiating.
I'm sure we will be better when it comes to the rest of the world.
I am sure you are right...Lets compare how many FTAs the EU have compared to Australia...I'm sure we will be better when it comes to the rest of the world.
Australia has ten FTAs currently in force with China, Japan, Republic of Korea, New Zealand, Singapore, Thailand, US, Chile, the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) (with New Zealand) and Malaysia.
Now the EU …
South Korea,
Oh....
PurpleMoonlight said:
Are you substituting for sidicks today by any chance?
Are you substituting for mx5nut by making nonsense claims by any chance?No doubt you'll respond by making a claim that 'other people' are spoiling the forum. Then you'll go on to make some nonsense comments about 'cake'.
Edited by sidicks on Saturday 21st July 15:27
jjlynn27 said:
There is a proposal for a withdrawal agreement, which will be followed by an implementation agreement. The legal position is, by people who are much better qualified than few random, angry blokes on a car forum, that 39bn is payable regardless of the trade agreement.
I think there is another withdrawal agreement knocking about that says the Irish border is not a problem, the EU are punishing us and our trade deal will be decided before we sign anything.
Ghibli said:
jjlynn27 said:
There is a proposal for a withdrawal agreement, which will be followed by an implementation agreement. The legal position is, by people who are much better qualified than few random, angry blokes on a car forum, that 39bn is payable regardless of the trade agreement.
I think there is another withdrawal agreement knocking about that says the Irish border is not a problem, the EU are punishing us and our trade deal will be decided before we sign anything.sidicks said:
To use the text you quoted previously:
"NAO chief: The UK will have to pay its Brexit “divorce bill” of up to £39bn even if no agreement is reached on a future trade deal with the EU, the head of Whitehall’s spending watchdog has said. The head of the National Audit Office (NAO), Sir Amyas Morse, said on Tuesday that if parliament approves the withdrawal agreement in a vote in the autumn, it will become a legally binding treaty regardless of the success of separate trade talks."
Surely the text in bold is quite important?
It is important. It's very important. What's also important is to understand what withdrawal agreement means. Do you think that there is a chance that it won't be signed?"NAO chief: The UK will have to pay its Brexit “divorce bill” of up to £39bn even if no agreement is reached on a future trade deal with the EU, the head of Whitehall’s spending watchdog has said. The head of the National Audit Office (NAO), Sir Amyas Morse, said on Tuesday that if parliament approves the withdrawal agreement in a vote in the autumn, it will become a legally binding treaty regardless of the success of separate trade talks."
Surely the text in bold is quite important?
The point still stands; 39bn is nothing whatsoever to do with the trade agreement.
(Personally, the idea of Farage being told 'nope, no pension, gfy' is mildly entertaining)
jjlynn27 said:
It is important. It's very important. What's also important is to understand what withdrawal agreement means. Do you think that there is a chance that it won't be signed?
The point still stands; 39bn is nothing whatsoever to do with the trade agreement.
The point stands that , as yet, we are not legally liable for anything. The point still stands; 39bn is nothing whatsoever to do with the trade agreement.
And even then, it might not be for the full £39bn. Ironically, I'd imagine that pensions already earned would be one of the things that would get paid.
sidicks said:
The point stands that , as yet, we are not legally liable for anything.
Quite true, 'We haven't left yet'. Once again, same question, do you think that there is a chance of withdrawal agreement not being signed?sidicks said:
And even that, it might not be for the full £39bn. Ironically, I'd imagine that pensions already earned would be one of the things that would get paid.
jjlynn27 said:
Vanden Saab said:
You think there are other FTAs? feel free to name them... That is FTAs not EPAs or AAs or CPAs or CETAs....or customs unions.....just FTAs....
I thought that you can't out-stupid your balance of trade post. I was wrong. jjlynn27 said:
Or it could be more than 39bn.
It could? The text you quoted said 'up to'.Do you know more than the NAO Chief....?!
jjlynn27 said:
IIRC NAO was in charge of assessing the "reasonableness" of the figure. The other point that still stands is that it's still nothing to do with the future trade agreement and that NAO Chief is infinitely more qualified that, pretty much everyone on this forum.
No disagreement there.Vanden Saab said:
No long list of other FTAs then, are you admitting there is only one?...…. but it seems I am the stupid one.... for someone who is as pernickety as you I would have thought what an agreement is called is important.....
Here, as you are to lazy to look for yourself.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_free_...
PurpleMoonlight said:
But presumably not too lazy to vote...jjlynn27 said:
sidicks said:
To use the text you quoted previously:
"NAO chief: The UK will have to pay its Brexit “divorce bill” of up to £39bn even if no agreement is reached on a future trade deal with the EU, the head of Whitehall’s spending watchdog has said. The head of the National Audit Office (NAO), Sir Amyas Morse, said on Tuesday that if parliament approves the withdrawal agreement in a vote in the autumn, it will become a legally binding treaty regardless of the success of separate trade talks."
Surely the text in bold is quite important?
It is important. It's very important. What's also important is to understand what withdrawal agreement means. Do you think that there is a chance that it won't be signed?"NAO chief: The UK will have to pay its Brexit “divorce bill” of up to £39bn even if no agreement is reached on a future trade deal with the EU, the head of Whitehall’s spending watchdog has said. The head of the National Audit Office (NAO), Sir Amyas Morse, said on Tuesday that if parliament approves the withdrawal agreement in a vote in the autumn, it will become a legally binding treaty regardless of the success of separate trade talks."
Surely the text in bold is quite important?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff