How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 6)
Discussion
desolate said:
don'tbesilly said:
It's 7 Euros for 3 years pre-travel authorisation.
So at today's rates £2.10 per year.
Under 18's are free.
I'd cancel my vote to Leave on the back of that Brexit bombshell!
It's a busy thread and I tried to ask these questions beforeSo at today's rates £2.10 per year.
Under 18's are free.
I'd cancel my vote to Leave on the back of that Brexit bombshell!
1.Do you know if they will exclude people with a criminal record
2. and if there is a requirement for travel/health insurance?
3.Presumably if you spend more than 90 days you'll need a resident Visa?
2. Possibly, again don't know. I always buy it anyway for work on a yearly basis.
3. I would think so yes, although pre No Deal Brexit it was not much of an issue, that could of course change
Helicopter123 said:
PositronicRay said:
gadgetmac said:
So its £7 and we have to get preauthorisation to travel to the EU.
Another Brexiteer promise broken.
We could charge £200 per visit from an EU citizen to mitigate, and make them apply 3 months in advance. That'll show em. Another Brexiteer promise broken.
Mrr T said:
Digga said:
PositronicRay said:
Digga said:
Vanden Saab said:
Piha said:
ash73 said:
Some interesting details here:
https://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/...
Thanks for the link.https://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/...
The article makes grim reading.
There have been plans pushed through (i.e. there is no need for HMG to obtain planning permission in the first place) for additional vehicle parking at all cross channel ports. Measures like that, as just one example, would have been ongoing at the time of this report being complied.
There are plans to extend operation stack on the M20 and M26, which do not need planning permission.
Not sure having to plans to park lorries for long periods of time while they wait to cross the channel because the crossing are blocked by vehicle awaiting customs clearance is ideal.
If France kicks off, their vessels will be re-routed. (Please forgive the Sun link, it was merely the first one to a fact I already knew about.)
Pan Pan Pan said:
The irony of all of this is that if the EU had given the UK just a little of what Camoron was asking for back in 2015, the UK might have returned a majority remain vote in the 2016 referendum.
But being so smug and arrogant, and ignoring the fact that the UK is the EU`s second greatest net contributor of funds into its coffers whilst receiving not a single net positive penny of funding from the EU for all the time it has been a member. As well as being its biggest single market, and one which buys up 95 billion pounds worth of goods and services a year more than is sold into the EU from the UK. The EU just said No. just like they have repeated in answer to Mays requests for something to take back to the UK parliament to help get the chequers deal through.
Ultimately it would seem, that what would be deemed to be a good deal for the EU, is an awful deal for the UK, whilst what would be a good deal for the UK would be regarded as an awful deal for the EU
proving that all along, being in the EU is not, and never was a good deal for the UK.
But being so smug and arrogant, and ignoring the fact that the UK is the EU`s second greatest net contributor of funds into its coffers whilst receiving not a single net positive penny of funding from the EU for all the time it has been a member. As well as being its biggest single market, and one which buys up 95 billion pounds worth of goods and services a year more than is sold into the EU from the UK. The EU just said No. just like they have repeated in answer to Mays requests for something to take back to the UK parliament to help get the chequers deal through.
Ultimately it would seem, that what would be deemed to be a good deal for the EU, is an awful deal for the UK, whilst what would be a good deal for the UK would be regarded as an awful deal for the EU
proving that all along, being in the EU is not, and never was a good deal for the UK.
Are you suggesting the fact that we can't agree on a good deal for us leaving the EU is in some way proof that our membership of the EU was in some way not a good deal? That's just mental!
Half our exports go to the EU because it's so easy for us to trade with them. We buy a load of stuff from them because their pricing can be so competitive. That's no longer going to be the case if we leave.
Even though we will be much more royally f
ked than rEU if we leave, especially without a deal, the very fact of our leaving is not great news for rEU either. This means that of course they're going to try and fk us on the deal, and why wouldn't they? That doesn't in any way correlate to the notion that being in is or was a bad deal.Digga said:
Mrr T said:
Digga said:
PositronicRay said:
Digga said:
Vanden Saab said:
Piha said:
ash73 said:
Some interesting details here:
https://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/...
Thanks for the link.https://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/...
The article makes grim reading.
There have been plans pushed through (i.e. there is no need for HMG to obtain planning permission in the first place) for additional vehicle parking at all cross channel ports. Measures like that, as just one example, would have been ongoing at the time of this report being complied.
There are plans to extend operation stack on the M20 and M26, which do not need planning permission.
Not sure having to plans to park lorries for long periods of time while they wait to cross the channel because the crossing are blocked by vehicle awaiting customs clearance is ideal.
If France kicks off, their vessels will be re-routed.
Interesting reading Murph's assessment above of why a second referendum is unlikely and why Conservatives are saying No and Labour are flirting with it but not committing. The loudest voices for it are people with no skin in the game, Lib Dems, Greens, Blair, Alistair bloody Campbell etc
My take is that labour are pretending they might allow it because they know a significant number of their voters want it, but that neither party would go with a second referendum.
I am pretty sure that many people who voted leave in Ref1 would never vote again for the party which grants a second referendum. It would be seen as a betrayal and I don't think Labour or Conservatives want to lose that number of voters.
My take is that labour are pretending they might allow it because they know a significant number of their voters want it, but that neither party would go with a second referendum.
I am pretty sure that many people who voted leave in Ref1 would never vote again for the party which grants a second referendum. It would be seen as a betrayal and I don't think Labour or Conservatives want to lose that number of voters.
hutchst said:
Who could forget Joseph Muscat, the Maltese Prime Minister, standing in front of the cameras, telling us that the UK needs to remember when negotiating the exit that it's just a small country when dealing with big people like us.
And there, in a nutshell, is a big part of the value of EU membership. Even the likes of Malta get to benefit from being part of one of the world's three economic superpowers...don'tbesilly said:
1. No idea, it it's like America, I think it could depend on the crime?
2. Possibly, again don't know. I always buy it anyway for work on a yearly basis.
3. I would think so yes, although pre No Deal Brexit it was not much of an issue, that could of course change
Thanks.2. Possibly, again don't know. I always buy it anyway for work on a yearly basis.
3. I would think so yes, although pre No Deal Brexit it was not much of an issue, that could of course change
I have read conflicting reports.
If it's a requirement that people will need Travel Inusrance then it's the sort of apparently trivial matter that will affect a lot of people and cause alot of people issues.
Similar for those with holiday homes but you'd think they would have the resources to overcome.
Murph7355 said:
desolate said:
Murph7355 said:
The consequences of ignoring the majority in a referendum like 2016's will be far worse than a few smashed windows. And that applies to us all.
Can you clarify what you mean, please?Faith and trust in politicians was already on its arse.
Do you think them ignoring the outcome of a referendum as was held will improve or worsen that situation?
We all need an electorate that is properly engaged in the way this country is governed. We need a political class that knows its electorate is fully engaged. And the two need to trust each other.
Revoking article 50 would smash that to pieces.
Some Remain advocates (the likes of mx5nut, helicopter123 etc) would be over the moon about it. They'd cause themselves a mischief desperately trying to tell everyone how right they were etc etc... But think about the consequences.
This isn't OK because some ignoring of the electorate actually went in your favour. Next time it won't, and it will be no good bleating about it as the precedent will have been set.
king the country's economy. We need you to reconfirm for us in another referendum that that's really what you want us to do.Atomic12C said:
I think we're heading for a revocation of Article 50.
Parliament is not going to pass TM's deal, and they are not going to pass a 'no deal'.
Before time runs out in March 2019, government will be forced to revoke article 50.
Thing about no deal is nobody needs to 'pass' anything - it's what will happen if nobody can agree to do anything else.Parliament is not going to pass TM's deal, and they are not going to pass a 'no deal'.
Before time runs out in March 2019, government will be forced to revoke article 50.
Or to put it another way - in the event that our decision making bodies find themselves unable to agree a course action because, oh I don't know, let's imagine positions become so entrenched and all parties think they'll be able to find someone else to point the finger at and blame for the whole thing so we end up in a dysfunctional state of executive paralysis and as the cliff edge approaches we all just look at each other and ask "how the juddering f
k did we get here?", y'know something really unlikely like that - then we'll get no deal.Kermit power said:
That's a fair point, to an extent, but surely if we were going to trust our politicians, they we should be trusting them to come back to us and say "sorry, we've put two years into it, and can now confirm that it can't be done without fking the country's economy. We need you to reconfirm for us in another referendum that that's really what you want us to do.
That's the glorious paradox of this though.king the country's economy. We need you to reconfirm for us in another referendum that that's really what you want us to do.We want a parliamentary democracy so much that when our MP's follow their legal parliamentary process and do what they feel is right we'll just call them quislings, traitorous and "will of the people" etc.
I wouldn't do it for double the money they're on.
Watching the Daily Politics today I was starting to get a bit anxious that a second referendum idea might gain traction.
And then the Peoples vote team brought out Tony Blair to tell everyone it was time for a Peoples vote.
I think the reaction of the entire studio panel, Brexiteers, Remainers, Labour, Independent, Tory, Journalist etc basically every bit of the political spectrum, where they laughed at his interjection just summed up the Peoples vote threat.
Anytime Ref 2 looks close all the Brexiteers have to do is roll out a clip of Tony Blair saying "its time".
Cheers,
Tony
And then the Peoples vote team brought out Tony Blair to tell everyone it was time for a Peoples vote.
I think the reaction of the entire studio panel, Brexiteers, Remainers, Labour, Independent, Tory, Journalist etc basically every bit of the political spectrum, where they laughed at his interjection just summed up the Peoples vote threat.
Anytime Ref 2 looks close all the Brexiteers have to do is roll out a clip of Tony Blair saying "its time".
Cheers,
Tony
desolate said:
don'tbesilly said:
1. No idea, it it's like America, I think it could depend on the crime?
2. Possibly, again don't know. I always buy it anyway for work on a yearly basis.
3. I would think so yes, although pre No Deal Brexit it was not much of an issue, that could of course change
Thanks.2. Possibly, again don't know. I always buy it anyway for work on a yearly basis.
3. I would think so yes, although pre No Deal Brexit it was not much of an issue, that could of course change
I have read conflicting reports.
If it's a requirement that people will need Travel Inusrance then it's the sort of apparently trivial matter that will affect a lot of people and cause alot of people issues.
Similar for those with holiday homes but you'd think they would have the resources to overcome.
It could cause problems for holiday home owners too, and lots of other as yet unknown problems.
I guess if two sides can't come to a mutual and equitable agreement that could be a very unfortunate consequence
Robertj21a said:
Atomic12C said:
I think we're heading for a revocation of Article 50.
Parliament is not going to pass TM's deal, and they are not going to pass a 'no deal'.
Before time runs out in March 2019, government will be forced to revoke article 50.
Dream on.Parliament is not going to pass TM's deal, and they are not going to pass a 'no deal'.
Before time runs out in March 2019, government will be forced to revoke article 50.
TM was democratically voted in as leader of the tories, Then (narrowly) triumphed in the GE, and then crushed the recent duplicitous ERG inspired no confidence vote. Additionally, at no time did JRM, Bojo, DD or Farage challenge and then defeat TM.
Truly the greatest omnishambles by a western political party in modern history!
Tony427 said:
Watching the Daily Politics today I was starting to get a bit anxious that a second referendum idea might gain traction.
And then the Peoples vote team brought out Tony Blair to tell everyone it was time for a Peoples vote.
I think the reaction of the entire studio panel, Brexiteers, Remainers, Labour, Independent, Tory, Journalist etc basically every bit of the political spectrum, where they laughed at his interjection just summed up the Peoples vote threat.
Anytime Ref 2 looks close all the Brexiteers have to do is roll out a clip of Tony Blair saying "its time".
Cheers,
Tony
Cool story bro.And then the Peoples vote team brought out Tony Blair to tell everyone it was time for a Peoples vote.
I think the reaction of the entire studio panel, Brexiteers, Remainers, Labour, Independent, Tory, Journalist etc basically every bit of the political spectrum, where they laughed at his interjection just summed up the Peoples vote threat.
Anytime Ref 2 looks close all the Brexiteers have to do is roll out a clip of Tony Blair saying "its time".
Cheers,
Tony
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff