How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 6)
Discussion
Robertj21a said:
Troubleatmill said:
Or how about...
1/ We fully embrace the EU - and lead the way at being the very best EU citizens
Which means....
We drop the pound and adopt the Euro.
We drop London and make Frankfurt the Economic financial capital of Europe.
We agree to close all our embassies in favour EU ones where present
We let the EU set foreign policy
We let the EU create and set all policy.
We fully embrace all EU rules and drop our vetos.
We fully fund the EU army including access to our nuclear weapons.
In short - we fulfil the EU dream of turning a local member country into a county parish.
2/ Fully Leave
We should be voting to be "All in" - or "All out"
I think the phrase is "we piss or get off the pot"
We've already voted All in or All out. It was called the Referendum !1/ We fully embrace the EU - and lead the way at being the very best EU citizens
Which means....
We drop the pound and adopt the Euro.
We drop London and make Frankfurt the Economic financial capital of Europe.
We agree to close all our embassies in favour EU ones where present
We let the EU set foreign policy
We let the EU create and set all policy.
We fully embrace all EU rules and drop our vetos.
We fully fund the EU army including access to our nuclear weapons.
In short - we fulfil the EU dream of turning a local member country into a county parish.
2/ Fully Leave
We should be voting to be "All in" - or "All out"
I think the phrase is "we piss or get off the pot"
Edited by Troubleatmill on Saturday 15th December 18:03
I am for - if there is a 2nd referendum - it is as i said
We give all control to EU - or we are independent.
toppstuff said:
Robertj21a said:
We've already voted All in or All out. It was called the Referendum !
Except that isn’t what happened. We voted out without explaining what out means. We have brexit. Just some people don’t like this flavour of brexit.
MrNoisy said:
There has been little interest in progressing forward by many on both sides in the hope of derailing Brexit and making Remain a default option. I suspect they may well succeed.
If on the other hand we were to ‘crash out’ I suspect the ability to move things forward would be increased.
When business starts actually losing money the pressure on the politicians will be rapidly ratcheted up.
It’s always been the case that if the only game in town was leaving it would spur everybody on to sort out there s
t.
Hats off to remain, they have understood this better and played a blinder. I think they have probably won by default now. I doubt though this will be the end of the matter.
Good post. If on the other hand we were to ‘crash out’ I suspect the ability to move things forward would be increased.
When business starts actually losing money the pressure on the politicians will be rapidly ratcheted up.
It’s always been the case that if the only game in town was leaving it would spur everybody on to sort out there s
t. Hats off to remain, they have understood this better and played a blinder. I think they have probably won by default now. I doubt though this will be the end of the matter.
The direction of travel now appears to be towards remain. The powers that be just have to herd the country that way. It seems odd to say it now but I think a second referendum is the only slim chance for Brexit to actually go ahead now.
saaby93 said:
king arthur said:
ash73 said:
Also one has to be careful when comparing EFTA to May's deal. The deal consists of two parts - the withdrawal agreement and political declaration. We would still need a WA with either option, EFTA replaces the PD with a boilerplate solution more closely coupled with the EU; which I think fits better with a 52/48 vote.
.
If the PD were changed to aim towards an EFTA/EEA outcome at the end of the transition period that wouldn't be the worst outcome we could have IMO..
It also has the ongoing club membership which again apparantly was a reason most people wanted out of EU
Both of which go in Mays deal
However since the electorate werent asked in the referendum what style of exit, maybe they would be happy with that
Nearly half (49%) of leave voters said the biggest single reason for wanting to leave the EU was “the principle that decisions about the UK should be taken in the UK”.
One third (33%) said the main reason was that leaving “offered the best chance for the UK to regain control over immigration and its own borders.”
Just over one in eight (13%) said remaining would mean having no choice “about how the EU expanded its membership or its powers in the years ahead.”
Only just over one in twenty (6%) said their main reason was that “when it comes to trade and the economy, the UK would benefit more from being outside the EU than from being part of it.”
Lord Ashcroft said:
The UK has voted to leave the European Union. On referendum day I surveyed 12,369 people after they had voted to help explain the result – who voted for which outcome, and what lay behind their decision.
https://lordashcroftpolls.com/2016/06/how-the-united-kingdom-voted-and-why/mx5nut said:
toppstuff said:
Robertj21a said:
We've already voted All in or All out. It was called the Referendum !
Except that isn’t what happened. We voted out without explaining what out means. We have brexit. Just some people don’t like this flavour of brexit.
272BHP said:
MrNoisy said:
There has been little interest in progressing forward by many on both sides in the hope of derailing Brexit and making Remain a default option. I suspect they may well succeed.
If on the other hand we were to ‘crash out’ I suspect the ability to move things forward would be increased.
When business starts actually losing money the pressure on the politicians will be rapidly ratcheted up.
It’s always been the case that if the only game in town was leaving it would spur everybody on to sort out there st.
Hats off to remain, they have understood this better and played a blinder. I think they have probably won by default now. I doubt though this will be the end of the matter.
Good post. If on the other hand we were to ‘crash out’ I suspect the ability to move things forward would be increased.
When business starts actually losing money the pressure on the politicians will be rapidly ratcheted up.
It’s always been the case that if the only game in town was leaving it would spur everybody on to sort out there s
t. Hats off to remain, they have understood this better and played a blinder. I think they have probably won by default now. I doubt though this will be the end of the matter.
The direction of travel now appears to be towards remain. The powers that be just have to herd the country that way. It seems odd to say it now but I think a second referendum is the only slim chance for Brexit to actually go ahead now.
You can check in but you can never leave.
V6 Pushfit said:
At this point if we stay we’re stuffed forever in in eternity and will never try leave in our lifetimes.
This is true. We had one chance to leave and it needed everyone to be strong and have a stomach for the long haul. I see all that early resolve ebbing away now.As I have said before - death of a thousand cuts.
desolate said:
Most Brexit MPs would get behind the May agreement if the backstop could be unilaterally ended by us.
As it is, it can't.
Most MPs from both sides won't allow that.
Even JRM has said if that's sorted he would support.
Why can't the backstop (the agreement) be unilaterally ended? Is the Agreement not subject to the UN's Vienna Convention?As it is, it can't.
Most MPs from both sides won't allow that.
Even JRM has said if that's sorted he would support.
Why would both so-called Brexit and Remain MPs (assuming this is the sides you are referring to, rather than along party political lines).
I don't recall Rees-Mogg asking about unilateral actions and the Vienna Convention. He has stated that the Vienna Convention terms we apparently don't owe the EU a penny; this is based on what a civil servant told him, rather than through his own interpretation of international law. He has no background in the study of law, as he read History at Oxford.
Edward Leigh had tabled a motion to amend the meaningful vote:
[quote][N]otes that the Northern Ireland backstop is intended to be temporary; notes that the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties makes it absolutely clear that a sovereign state can abrogate any part of a treaty with an international body in case of a fundamental change of circumstances since the Treaty was agreed; notes that making the Northern Ireland backstop permanent would constitute such a fundamental change of circumstances; and therefore calls for an assurance from the Government that, if it becomes clear by the end of 2021 that the European Union will not agree to remove the Northern Ireland backstop, the United Kingdom will treat the indefinite continuation of the backstop as a fundamental change of circumstances and will accordingly give notice on 1 January 2022 to terminate the Withdrawal Treaty so that the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland shall become an independent country once again
This wasn't a change to the Agreement, rather inserting words for the government to acknowledge to the House the rights it has under international law. That the Amendment didn't pass I don't thing abrogates those Rights.
The main argument I read is not that the government can't but that it mustn't because that would cast the UK as an untrustworthy pariah state. But in actuality, States unilaterally terminate agreements all the time; these aren't actions out side of international law, but states exercising their rights under international law. And life goes on, and states still sign treaties between each other. Normally these treaties would contain termination procedures, which are, in effect (I think) abrogating States' rights in favor of a more narrow set of circumstances. Not done here, whether out of deign or lack of oversight, I am not sure.
Of course terminating the Backstop means terminating the entire Withdrawal Agreement. But that doesn't mean we would be back in the EU, but instead, we would lose the tariff free access to the Single Market. But in effect that would be happening anyway; a future UK government unable to come to any kind of agreement with the European Union on the future relationship (which is not just trade), so I don't think losing that would make a great deal of difference.. The UK could announce during those talks that it is fully prepared to exercise those and any other rights, such as if the material facts change (ie. the issue with Northern Ireland) or there is a material breach of the best endeavour obligation.
The complication is that the 1969 Convention is between States, not International Organisations (ie. the EU). The Convention was amended in 1986, to include International Organisations, but 3 States have failed to ratify it. But it could be that the RU is expressing the will of 27 other states, and the agreement is between the UK and those other 27 countries.
This is worth a read before replying:
https://policyexchange.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2...
It's beginning to feel like a huge red herring
Back in 1973 Denmark, Ireland and Britain joined the EEC
Can you imagine all of this going on then?
For exiting there's have been a vote to exit, the poiticians would have decided whats best - we'd exit with a trade deal and border thingamy for Ireland and that would be it - job done
Us Joe Public would just get on with our lives and just take things as they come
Why is there this extra vote in Parliament? Is it because MPs dont really want to exit?
Why are the DUP so up in arms when everyone around them is saying its ok?
Why do there seem to be two sides in Parliament yet both seem to be against?
Who's being taken for a ride?
Back in 1973 Denmark, Ireland and Britain joined the EEC
Can you imagine all of this going on then?
For exiting there's have been a vote to exit, the poiticians would have decided whats best - we'd exit with a trade deal and border thingamy for Ireland and that would be it - job done
Us Joe Public would just get on with our lives and just take things as they come
Why is there this extra vote in Parliament? Is it because MPs dont really want to exit?
Why are the DUP so up in arms when everyone around them is saying its ok?
Why do there seem to be two sides in Parliament yet both seem to be against?
Who's being taken for a ride?
Troubleatmill said:
Or how about...
1/ We fully embrace the EU - and lead the way at being the very best EU citizens
Which means....
We drop the pound and adopt the Euro
We drop London and make Frankfurt the Economic financial capital of Europe.
We agree to close all our embassies in favour EU ones where present
We let the EU set foreign policy
We let the EU create and set all policy.
We fully embrace all EU rules and drop our vetos.
We fully fund the EU army including access to our nuclear weapons.
In short - we fulfil the EU dream of turning a local member country into a county parish.
2/ Fully Leave
We should be voting to be "All in" - or "All out"
I think the phrase is "we piss or get off the pot"
We drop the pound and adopt the Euro - not a bad shout given how weak the £ is1/ We fully embrace the EU - and lead the way at being the very best EU citizens
Which means....
We drop the pound and adopt the Euro
We drop London and make Frankfurt the Economic financial capital of Europe.
We agree to close all our embassies in favour EU ones where present
We let the EU set foreign policy
We let the EU create and set all policy.
We fully embrace all EU rules and drop our vetos.
We fully fund the EU army including access to our nuclear weapons.
In short - we fulfil the EU dream of turning a local member country into a county parish.
2/ Fully Leave
We should be voting to be "All in" - or "All out"
I think the phrase is "we piss or get off the pot"
Edited by Troubleatmill on Saturday 15th December 18:03
We drop London and make Frankfurt the Economic financial capital of Europe - just been happening over the last couple of years. wakey wakey!
We agree to close all our embassies in favour EU ones where present - be great if the FO actually did stuff for people when they are in trouble abroad.
We let the EU set foreign policy - not a bad shout given every time UK charges into a fight to support the USA it triggers a stream of refugees heading into Europe brexiteers then blame Europe for!
We let the EU create and set all policy - they will now we are leaving
We fully embrace all EU rules and drop our vetos - um, we've just lost the right to our vetos by leaving. And, a little trade lesson for you but if you want to export goods to the EU, your goods will have to meet their rule book.
We fully fund the EU army including access to our nuclear weapons - um, we practically do that one now given our membership of NATO.
toppstuff said:
Robertj21a said:
We've already voted All in or All out. It was called the Referendum !
Except that isn’t what happened. We voted out without explaining what out means. We have brexit. Just some people don’t like this flavour of brexit.
Jazzy Jag said:
toppstuff said:
Robertj21a said:
We've already voted All in or All out. It was called the Referendum !
Except that isn’t what happened. We voted out without explaining what out means. We have brexit. Just some people don’t like this flavour of brexit.
Robertj21a said:
Nobody needed to explain what it meant. The question was very straightforward - stay in or leave. For 52% of the electorate they needed nothing more, it was a glorious opportunity to get out. So they took it with both hands. Only Remainers are now trying to suggest it needed to be made more difficult. Given what has gone on since I reckon Leave would now be over 60%.
More like: took it with both hands, immediately dropped it, tripped over it, ripped their shorts and shat themselves.toppstuff said:
Robertj21a said:
We've already voted All in or All out. It was called the Referendum !
Except that isn’t what happened. We voted out without explaining what out means. te again , we were told we would leave every aspect of the EU .Remain told us and told us it would be terrible.
leave told us and told us we would be just fine .
Like fools we voted for a remain PM claiming to be a leaver and a government of spineless tossers and a pro remain civil
service did the wreck brexit negotiations ..... so here we are ....
Robertj21a said:
Nobody needed to explain what it meant. The question was very straightforward - stay in or leave. For 52% of the electorate they needed nothing more, it was a glorious opportunity to get out. So they took it with both hands. Only Remainers are now trying to suggest it needed to be made more difficult. Given what has gone on since I reckon Leave would now be over 60%.
Is that Leave Leave or just Leave ? WTO or stay in CM?In or out of the EFTA? What about N ireland?
Care to explain ? And will 17.4m people agree with your explanation ?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff