How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 7)

[PurpleMoonlight]

don'tbesilly said:

You should be able to give a list.

Why is that Sherlock?

Edited by PurpleMoonlight on Saturday 12th January 18:25

[Garvin]

PurpleMoonlight said:

Where have I claimed it is?

Back peddling much! Why make the statement then, in justification of your position, that “it’s not a backstop if it’s time limited”?

[loafer123]

PurpleMoonlight said:

loafer123 said:

I completely agree on their motivation, I just don’t believe that is acceptable to us. We are better to Leave and negotiate a Free trade deal just like any other 3rd country would.

Really?

You want to go from free trade, to tariff trade, to free trade?

What will that cost the UK tax payer?

What will that cost the UK to EU exporters?

The EU is requiring the interim step. Their negotiation principles [sic] refused to negotiate a FTA until after we left despite that being directly in contravention of A50.

I want to be a great free trade partner to the EU, just like Canada.

[davepoth]

PurpleMoonlight said:

Free and unfettered access to the SM.

For who? the EU already has it (since it's their SM) and the UK does not get anything like full and unfettered access to the SM.

[PurpleMoonlight]

Garvin said:

Back peddling much! Why make the statement then, in justification of your position, that “it’s not a backstop if it’s time limited”?

I was responding to your post regarding why have it.

[alfie2244]

steve_k said:

Lets just be honest Brexit is going to be a stitch up, we wont be leaving well not in any meaningful way, the can will be kicked down the road.

The next few general elections will be quite interesting as new parties form and existing ones disappear.

Unfortunately I don't think you are far off the truth.

[davepoth]

PurpleMoonlight said:

ITP said:

By making sure with the WA they can still stop us from implementing our own trade deals if they want.

The proposed UK:EU free trade area does not prohibit us effecting FTA's with the RoW.

No, but the only trade deals we could cut would be those where tariffs or goods were not part of the discussion; that would limit the scope somewhat.

[PurpleMoonlight]

loafer123 said:

The EU is requiring the interim step. Their negotiation principles [sic] refused to negotiate a FTA until after we left despite that being directly in contravention of A50.

I want to be a great free trade partner to the EU, just like Canada.

The EU cannot negotiate a trade agreement with a member state.

[Garvin]

PurpleMoonlight said:

Garvin said:

Back peddling much! Why make the statement then, in justification of your position, that “it’s not a backstop if it’s time limited”?

I was responding to your post regarding why have it.

Have you now resorted to mere trolling?

[PurpleMoonlight]

davepoth said:

For who? the EU already has it (since it's their SM) and the UK does not get anything like full and unfettered access to the SM.

It does in the backstop does it not?

[don'tbesilly]

alfie2244 said:

steve_k said:

Lets just be honest Brexit is going to be a stitch up, we wont be leaving well not in any meaningful way, the can will be kicked down the road.

The next few general elections will be quite interesting as new parties form and existing ones disappear.

Unfortunately I don't think you are far off the truth.

We can already see how this will turn out and it isn't going to do the country any good at all.

[PurpleMoonlight]

davepoth said:

No, but the only trade deals we could cut would be those where tariffs or goods were not part of the discussion; that would limit the scope somewhat.

Where is the evidence for that please?

[citizensm1th]

in......or out maybe

[loafer123]

PurpleMoonlight said:

loafer123 said:

The EU is requiring the interim step. Their negotiation principles [sic] refused to negotiate a FTA until after we left despite that being directly in contravention of A50.

I want to be a great free trade partner to the EU, just like Canada.

The EU cannot negotiate a trade agreement with a member state.

Why not? I am genuinely curious!

[anonymous-user]

Scrump said:

Please keep the discussion away from personal insults.

Boooorrrring!!! Way to suck the fun out of the party.

Besides, how is it an insult when it’s true? He really *was* a

[PurpleMoonlight]

loafer123 said:

Why not? I am genuinely curious!

Because the EU can only discuss trade agreements with third countries, and the UK is not a third country until we leave the EU.

This was always known.

[kurt535]

Could it be the final deal everyone will be happy with (before the loco's home towns up and down the country get ransacked and smashed up by their rioting) doesn't yet exist? Do any currently suggest paying say, 20bn p/y to trade in the club but also let 'the people' 'take back control', etc etc? Or, what about doing a Trump and just building a wall around those areas that voted remain and let them stay in the EU?

[ITP]

davepoth said:

PurpleMoonlight said:

ITP said:

By making sure with the WA they can still stop us from implementing our own trade deals if they want.

The proposed UK:EU free trade area does not prohibit us effecting FTA's with the RoW.

No, but the only trade deals we could cut would be those where tariffs or goods were not part of the discussion; that would limit the scope somewhat.

We cannot do trade deals without the interference of the EU. For example, we cannot set tariffs less than the EU charges.

[PurpleMoonlight]

ITP said:

We cannot do trade deals without the interference of the EU. For example, we cannot set tariffs less than the EU charges.

You mean WTO tariffs?

Does that prohibit us effecting a FTA's with the RoW?

[turbobloke]

Greg66 said:

Scrump said:

Please keep the discussion away from personal insults.

Boooorrrring!!! Way to suck the fun out of the party.

Besides, how is it an insult when it’s true? He really *was* a

Lecturing a mod, best of luck with that