How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 6)

[PRTVR]

otis criblecoblis said:

gadgetmac said:

So its £7 and we have to get preauthorisation to travel to the EU.

Another Brexiteer promise broken.

Where were you promised that the EU would not charge for this system ?

There is already charges for visiting various EU areas.
Balearic Islands for one.
https://www.abc-mallorca.com/balearic-tourist-tax-...

[johnxjsc1985]

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

Having Blair as the poster boy for Remain will be such an own goal he is toxic beyond belief.

[keith333]

Sorry for yet another Brexit thread, but everyone appears to be blaming Teresa May (although she really hasn't helped!), the Government, the Tories or those who voted to leave the EU for this Brexit mess. It's none of them, surely it was the EU civil servants that wrote Article 50 and did such a st job?!

If the process for leaving the EU was clearly explained then

1. Governments and the population would know exactly what they're letting themselves in for should they decide to leave
2. Any amounts of money to be paid/received would be able to be calculated
3. Thousands of man hours wouldn't be wasted trying to work out how to do it now

I'm not a lawyer, but don't all agreements explain how parties leave the agreement in the future? Why oh why didn't the EU follow standard legal practise?

I sincerely hope that as a result of the UK (hopefully) leaving the EU, they update Article 50 so the next country that wishes to leave has a smoother transition. They can insert in Article 50 that any country wishing to leave has to pay 100 squillion Euros, but any changes should be agreed and then all parties to the agreement will know the exact consequences of leaving.

In the future, if the EU dream up a new type of integration/standardisation/co-operation between member countries, then Article 50 should be updated to explain how a country leaves that component.

Juncker says "Our UK friends need to say what they want, instead of asking us to say what we want". Why? Its up to both parties not just one to do all the running and if Article 50 explained the process we wouldn't be having these negotations now.

Maybe the EU beaurocrats thought they were being clever, but we're paying for their deviousness and lack of transparency now. Brexit is driving a wedge between us and our European friends and that is a real shame.

[don'tbesilly]

Piha said:

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.

One you didn't like clearly

[Mrr T]

Digga said:

he government have underwritten the cross channel ferry industry: https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/7595031/uks-secret-7...

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.)

I saw the story. I also saw the response which was, does anyone know where the UK can find 10 RoRo ferries no one is using? there is limited RoRo usable capacity outside Calais and Dunkirk, bring old facilities back into use will be costly and take time.

[Tuna]

Looks like we're getting to the weekend "no new news" stage, so I'll let the weekend warriors take over.

Bingo points for

1) It's extra democracy
2) We didn't know what we're voting for
3) We have new information
4) Leavers are racist
5) The only way out is <X> (insert plan of your choice - A50, GE, 2nd Ref, becoming a republic of China etc.)
6) But what about the Irish Border?
7) Someone is a quisling
8) The other side all think <Y> (insert ridiculous generalisation of your choice)
9) Big red bus
10) Why aren't you doing <Z> - it's what you voted for? (insert choice of action that is plainly not what they voted for)
11) Obviously this meets the definition of Leaving
12) You're a sockpuppet / stooge / previously banned poster
13) Good post

[AJL308]

Kermit power said:

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?

Sure.

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.

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.

Even if that were a fair point (which it isn't, imo) why should anyone trust them or believe it? We were told in no uncertain terms, loudly and repeatedly by such people as the chancellor of the exchequer and the gov of the Bank of England that merely voting Leave would cause the economy to crash, jobs to be lost, the pound to crumble and house prices to plunge within mere weeks of the vote let alone after we'd left yet none of that ever happened nor did it come remotely close to happening.

[Piha]

Tuna said:

Looks like we're getting to the weekend "no new news" stage, so I'll let the weekend warriors take over.

Bingo points for

1) It's extra democracy
2) We didn't know what we're voting for
3) We have new information
4) Leavers are racist
5) The only way out is <X> (insert plan of your choice - A50, GE, 2nd Ref, becoming a republic of China etc.)
6) But what about the Irish Border?
7) Someone is a quisling
8) The other side all think <Y> (insert ridiculous generalisation of your choice)
9) Big red bus
10) Why aren't you doing <Z> - it's what you voted for? (insert choice of action that is plainly not what they voted for)
11) Obviously this meets the definition of Leaving
12) You're a sockpuppet / stooge / previously banned poster
13) Good post

Good post.


But didn't you forget......



My friends, "There are only glorious positives to Brexit"

[don'tbesilly]

Tuna said:

Looks like we're getting to the weekend "no new news" stage, so I'll let the weekend warriors take over.

Bingo points for

1) It's extra democracy
2) We didn't know what we're voting for
3) We have new information
4) Leavers are racist
5) The only way out is <X> (insert plan of your choice - A50, GE, 2nd Ref, becoming a republic of China etc.)
6) But what about the Irish Border?
7) Someone is a quisling
8) The other side all think <Y> (insert ridiculous generalisation of your choice)
9) Big red bus
10) Why aren't you doing <Z> - it's what you voted for? (insert choice of action that is plainly not what they voted for)
11) Obviously this meets the definition of Leaving
12) You're a sockpuppet / stooge / previously banned poster
13) Good post

[gadgetmac]

otis criblecoblis said:

gadgetmac said:

So its £7 and we have to get preauthorisation to travel to the EU.

Another Brexiteer promise broken.

Where were you promised that the EU would not charge for this system ?

To quote...

“There had been some hopes privately in government and publicly from Conservative Brexit supporting MPs that the UK could negotiate an exemption from the new US-style preregistration and payment requirement.

Previous suggestions that this scheme would apply had been dismissed as "Project Fear" by Brexiters.”

https://news.sky.com/story/revealed-how-much-it-wi...

Do you not remember this? How about the £350m for the NHS? Or that the EU will be desperate to do a deal with us?

[bitchstewie]

AJL308 said:

Even if that were a fair point (which it isn't, imo) why should anyone trust them or believe it? We were told in no uncertain terms, loudly and repeatedly by such people as the chancellor of the exchequer and the gov of the Bank of England that merely voting Leave would cause the economy to crash, jobs to be lost, the pound to crumble and house prices to plunge within mere weeks of the vote let alone after we'd left yet none of that ever happened nor did it come remotely close to happening.

As I've said before you shouldn't trust or believe it, but you shouldn't discount it either.

I fully accept that past performance may influence your opinion but that's totally different from actual results.

[Piha]

gadgetmac said:

otis criblecoblis said:

gadgetmac said:

So its £7 and we have to get preauthorisation to travel to the EU.

Another Brexiteer promise broken.

Where were you promised that the EU would not charge for this system ?

To quote...

“There had been some hopes privately in government and publicly from Conservative Brexit supporting MPs that the UK could negotiate an exemption from the new US-style preregistration and payment requirement.

Previous suggestions that this scheme would apply had been dismissed as "Project Fear" by Brexiters.”

https://news.sky.com/story/revealed-how-much-it-wi...

Do you not remember this? How about the £350m for the NHS? Or that the EU will be desperate to do a deal with us?

Don't forget that the Leavers insisted the EU need the UK more than we need the EU.......

[davey68]

Tuna, don't forget 'the demographics have changed and lots of old Brexit voters have died'

[Jonesy23]

gadgetmac said:

So its £7 and we have to get preauthorisation to travel to the EU.

Another Brexiteer promise broken.

So keeping the open border in Ireland is really important to the EU when it comes to keeping the UK in a customs union, but is zero hindrance to introducing a paid visa scheme.

Interesting.

[anonymous-user]

Fullook said:

I have no knowledge of international law and should therefore probably disqualify myself from answering this question.

But our credibility as a counterparty that honours its commitments, particularly its legal commitments, would be immeasurably and very publicly damaged if we 'ripped up' an agreement that was entered into in good faith.

Why would anybody enter into any other agreement with us in the future, whether a trading agreement or anything else if we have form for backing out of commitments when it later suits us to do so?

I remember being slightly perplexed as to why the UK honoured its commitment to hand back Hong Kong when its lease expired, when it was clearly against our immediate economic benefit to do so. I guess that the risk of seriously pissing off China was one very good reason, but actually it would have been unthinkable (and politically and economically suicidal) for the UK to brand itself as untrustworthy by doing anything other than honouring the agreement.

I believe the same principle applies here - albeit the specifics are very different.

Edited by Fullook on Friday 14th December 15:16

Technically, only the New Territories were leased. But strategically, Hong Kong island was indefensible without that.

As for rendering the UK untrustworthy; I don't think so, because these would be unrelated agreements. And if we were to do it, its probably in a situation where relations with the EU have soured so much, we would likely not trus the EU at that point.

Examples are:
US Anti-Apartheid Act; Congress instructed the Secretary of State to terminate an Air Services Agreement with South Africa.
US terminating Treaty of Friendship, Commerce, and Navigation with Nicaragua
US terminating mutual defence pact with Taiwan
US terminating Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty
South Africa terminating bilateral investment treaties with he United Kingdom, Germany, Italy, Spain, The Netherlands, Belgium and Luxembourg (with no notification).
Bolivia, Ecuador and Venezuela terminating participatiomn in the International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes
Indonesia terminating investment treaty with the Netherlands, ustralia, China, Singapore, and the United Kingdom.
India terminating BITs with 58 states
Finland unilaterally canceled the Paris Peace Treaty (effectively the final event of WW2) to alow its military to expand in 1990; Finland was considered as an Axis Power.
Danish unilateral termination of tax treaties with France and Spain

etc

One MP was thinking about this:
https://www.edwardleigh.org.uk/news/full-stop-back...


So unilaterally terminating an agreement or treaty (some interpretations would say the WA is less than a treaty, and just a political agreement) in itself would not make the UK a pariah state. I suspect no party would hold it particularly against us if we chose to exit an agreement in this way; the conditions for us to do so would have a partular rancour. The EU might not be particularly happy, but, as I said, if it were the case we were doing this, I suspect relations with the EU would be non-existant.

[anonymous-user]

Jonesy23 said:

So keeping the open border in Ireland is really important to the EU when it comes to keeping the UK in a customs union, but is zero hindrance to introducing a paid visa scheme.

Interesting.

It's a schengen thing so won't apply to Ireland.
And this is for a Visa waiver.
It will be more onerous and more expensive for an Visa.

[boxedin]

davey68 said:

Tuna, don't forget 'the demographics have changed and lots of old Brexit voters have died'

There was a Lord 'someone or t'other' being interviewed on CNN on his desire for Ref2. Because, 'the people who couldn't vote in 2016 would be eligible this time around and are more likely to vote Remain'.

Where's that Guy Fawkes chap when you need him.

[otis criblecoblis]

gadgetmac said:

otis criblecoblis said:

gadgetmac said:

So its £7 and we have to get preauthorisation to travel to the EU.

Another Brexiteer promise broken.

Where were you promised that the EU would not charge for this system ?

To quote...

“There had been some hopes privately in government and publicly from Conservative Brexit supporting MPs that the UK could negotiate an exemption from the new US-style preregistration and payment requirement.

Previous suggestions that this scheme would apply had been dismissed as "Project Fear" by Brexiters.”

https://news.sky.com/story/revealed-how-much-it-wi...

Do you not remember this? How about the £350m for the NHS? Or that the EU will be desperate to do a deal with us?

The link doesn't include an example.

[rdjohn]

The problem is being caused by the fact that UK, Ireland and multiple NI groups signed up to a UN treaty guaranteeing that everyone would ensure there would be an open border.

The backstop recognises this reality, but it makes a huge problem for anyone wanting to negotiate an equitable deal. Of course, it is not in the EUs interest to offer us one, so it will become our whipping post for anything contentious - French fishing rights, Gibraltar, just for starters.

Perhaps a Northern Ireland referendum to see if they would now prefer to be ruled from Dublin, rather than London, as there is clearly no consensus for Stormont having any future role in its governance. NI voted Remain, perhaps that needs to be respected, but that only kicks-off another referendum for the SNP.

Sometime soon, we will all realise that the guy who wrote A50 knew exactly what he was doing.

[The Dangerous Elk]

gadgetmac said:

To quote...

“There had been some hopes privately in government and publicly from Conservative Brexit supporting MPs that the UK could negotiate an exemption from the new US-style preregistration and payment requirement.

Previous suggestions that this scheme would apply had been dismissed as "Project Fear" by Brexiters.”

https://news.sky.com/story/revealed-how-much-it-wi...

Do you not remember this? How about the £350m for the NHS? Or that the EU will be desperate to do a deal with us?

BING-GO....that was quick

£350million/Big bus ref: