How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 5)
Discussion
jsf said:
They haven't seen the tex, until last night. Foster hasn't seen it either, neither has anyone outside the cabinet.
Show me the online text that was finalised, all of it minus the backstop changes.
Is it not that multi-coloured thing available on the EU's web site?Show me the online text that was finalised, all of it minus the backstop changes.
If no, my mistake, sorry.
PurpleMoonlight said:
You mean they can't trust the UK negotiating team if they advise nothing else has changed?
If you sign something you agree to it entirely.Therefore you read every word and understand the whole text.
If you don't do that you aren't doing your job.
Not rocket science is it?
SeeFive said:
Whilst it may turn out that the negotiation has resulted in a poor deal, it still smacks of project fear saying that they will vote it down before they have even seen it.
This is typical of the entire negotiation process, with certain vested interests being used to diminish any negotiation position by expressing fears and doubts before the team has had chance to discuss it with the EU. Essentially, all this blabber and bluster has just loaded the EU negotiating team’s gun throughout the entire farce, and weakened our bargaining power.
We should have walked away from the table long ago. We appear desperate for any kind of deal, and therefore weak in a negotiating position, which is pointless. The blame for this (if it turns out to be) weak draft agreement does not lie solely with the negotiating team.
The blame for this is squarely with people that voted tory at the last election and voted Leave. This is typical of the entire negotiation process, with certain vested interests being used to diminish any negotiation position by expressing fears and doubts before the team has had chance to discuss it with the EU. Essentially, all this blabber and bluster has just loaded the EU negotiating team’s gun throughout the entire farce, and weakened our bargaining power.
We should have walked away from the table long ago. We appear desperate for any kind of deal, and therefore weak in a negotiating position, which is pointless. The blame for this (if it turns out to be) weak draft agreement does not lie solely with the negotiating team.
The deal we have right now with the EU is better than any other country has and Leave/tory voters decided to throw it away. There was no detailed post ref' plan on the table to make an informed judgement regarding post EU Britain.
John145 said:
If you sign something you agree to it entirely.
Therefore you read every word and understand the whole text.
If you don't do that you aren't doing your job.
Not rocket science is it?
They aren't signing anything yet.Therefore you read every word and understand the whole text.
If you don't do that you aren't doing your job.
Not rocket science is it?
This is just the Cabinet approval. It then goes to Parliament before signing.
PurpleMoonlight said:
Is it not that multi-coloured thing available on the EU's web site?
If no, my mistake, sorry.
No, that's just the outline of the agreed areas, mostly on citizens rights and recognition of qualifications. There is very little detail in those documents. They haven't been updated since Davis resigned either.If no, my mistake, sorry.
Piha said:
SeeFive said:
Whilst it may turn out that the negotiation has resulted in a poor deal, it still smacks of project fear saying that they will vote it down before they have even seen it.
This is typical of the entire negotiation process, with certain vested interests being used to diminish any negotiation position by expressing fears and doubts before the team has had chance to discuss it with the EU. Essentially, all this blabber and bluster has just loaded the EU negotiating team’s gun throughout the entire farce, and weakened our bargaining power.
We should have walked away from the table long ago. We appear desperate for any kind of deal, and therefore weak in a negotiating position, which is pointless. The blame for this (if it turns out to be) weak draft agreement does not lie solely with the negotiating team.
The blame for this is squarely with people that voted tory at the last election and voted Leave. This is typical of the entire negotiation process, with certain vested interests being used to diminish any negotiation position by expressing fears and doubts before the team has had chance to discuss it with the EU. Essentially, all this blabber and bluster has just loaded the EU negotiating team’s gun throughout the entire farce, and weakened our bargaining power.
We should have walked away from the table long ago. We appear desperate for any kind of deal, and therefore weak in a negotiating position, which is pointless. The blame for this (if it turns out to be) weak draft agreement does not lie solely with the negotiating team.
The deal we have right now with the EU is better than any other country has and Leave/tory voters decided to throw it away. There was no detailed post ref' plan on the table to make an informed judgement regarding post EU Britain.
It is absolutely arguable that if these negotiations were conducted without outside influence from those vested in either getting another undemocratic referendum, or raising their political profile for alternative selfish reasons, the outcome should be very different.
It is not absolutely arguable that if a well or poorly conducted election or referendum campaign provides an outcome ina democratic vote, those that lose should go for a rerun at all costs. And those people have cost us dearly in this negotiation.
Piha said:
SeeFive said:
Whilst it may turn out that the negotiation has resulted in a poor deal, it still smacks of project fear saying that they will vote it down before they have even seen it.
This is typical of the entire negotiation process, with certain vested interests being used to diminish any negotiation position by expressing fears and doubts before the team has had chance to discuss it with the EU. Essentially, all this blabber and bluster has just loaded the EU negotiating team’s gun throughout the entire farce, and weakened our bargaining power.
We should have walked away from the table long ago. We appear desperate for any kind of deal, and therefore weak in a negotiating position, which is pointless. The blame for this (if it turns out to be) weak draft agreement does not lie solely with the negotiating team.
The blame for this is squarely with people that voted tory at the last election and voted Leave. This is typical of the entire negotiation process, with certain vested interests being used to diminish any negotiation position by expressing fears and doubts before the team has had chance to discuss it with the EU. Essentially, all this blabber and bluster has just loaded the EU negotiating team’s gun throughout the entire farce, and weakened our bargaining power.
We should have walked away from the table long ago. We appear desperate for any kind of deal, and therefore weak in a negotiating position, which is pointless. The blame for this (if it turns out to be) weak draft agreement does not lie solely with the negotiating team.
The deal we have right now with the EU is better than any other country has and Leave/tory voters decided to throw it away. There was no detailed post ref' plan on the table to make an informed judgement regarding post EU Britain.
What I find properly mad is MPs saying "let's put this to the people and see if it's what they wanted".
Err, no.
That really did not work well last time (not quibbling with the result; the point is that the whole thing was mired in misinformation and a chunk of people on both sides voting to make a point rather than to achieve the result that their voted sought; then there has been an ongoing fallout over what the "leave" vote actually means).
Who could possibly think that individual members of the public would immerse themselves in the detail of the proposal, and the alternatives, sufficiently to make an informed decision? I consider myself to be reasonably inquisitive about this sort of thing and I can't see me doing it.
It is precisely for things like this that we have an elected representative democracy: MPs who are supposed to do the heavy intellectual lifting on things like this and make the hard decisions for us.
Err, no.
That really did not work well last time (not quibbling with the result; the point is that the whole thing was mired in misinformation and a chunk of people on both sides voting to make a point rather than to achieve the result that their voted sought; then there has been an ongoing fallout over what the "leave" vote actually means).
Who could possibly think that individual members of the public would immerse themselves in the detail of the proposal, and the alternatives, sufficiently to make an informed decision? I consider myself to be reasonably inquisitive about this sort of thing and I can't see me doing it.
It is precisely for things like this that we have an elected representative democracy: MPs who are supposed to do the heavy intellectual lifting on things like this and make the hard decisions for us.
andymadmak said:
Ghibli said:
Please explain how non EU citizens enter the UK visa free.
By entering Ireland and then crossing to Northern Ireland. It is tougher for them to then get to the UK mainland after that because it involves either a sea or an air crossing, and thus the provision of ID/passport etc being shown. But from Eire to NI (a part of the UK) has not been a problem ever since the CTA was put in place donkeys years ago.
I assume that there will be no way of knowing when EU citizens have entered NI or the Uk without a border to check passports just as the ROI won't know when UK citizens have entered the ROI although they will have a record when they leave via the channel.
Anyone could easily stay for longer than 90 days,years even. If they got caught they could say that they arrived via NI. Unless they turn that route into a border with border checks.
PurpleMoonlight said:
To our knowledge, has she ever lied about it?
Hark back to the origins of Chequers.As is now well-known, the Tory chief whip, Julian Smith, told members of the ERG that there was no truth in the reports, fed by leaks from Downing Street, that May would present a completely new set of “Brexit” proposals at Chequers only two days beforehand. May herself gave the then Secretary of State for exiting the European Union, David Davis, the same assurance at a personal meeting in Downing Street.
And, of course, these new definitions of Brexit (to mean its opposite) were formulated by a small group of ministers and civil servants in Downing Street behind the cover of the DexEU department that was writing the official white paper on it as constitutionally instructed by the cabinet.
These lies did no more than buy the prime minister and the chief whip three days before the storm broke.
Why imagine, when the stakes are higher, that she won't lie again?
Have you also forgotten the lie behind the breach of parliamentary conventions when Jo Swinson was assured that she was paired and then found that her pair had voted?
Greg66 said:
MPs who are supposed to do the heavy intellectual lifting on things like this and make the hard decisions for us.
Have you ever met an MP?Even if they are assumed to be intellectual giants (and in my experience they are the type who probably watched Magpie instead of Blue Peter). They made a decision to hold a referendum which you say they shouldn't.
Should we only allow them to make decisions you agree with?
Dr Jekyll said:
Greg66 said:
MPs who are supposed to do the heavy intellectual lifting on things like this and make the hard decisions for us.
Have you ever met an MP?Even if they are assumed to be intellectual giants (and in my experience they are the type who probably watched Magpie instead of Blue Peter). They made a decision to hold a referendum which you say they shouldn't.
Should we only allow them to make decisions you agree with?
Hence here we apparently are with some sort of fudged deal for now.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff