How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 8)

[PurpleMoonlight]

s2art said:

b) Nothing like enough. Just membership of the WTO provides that. What about stuff like security cooperation?

Says you. A50 does not define the extent to which the relationship has to be considered.

Anyway, the political declaration appears to cover it, no?

[HarryW]

wc98 said:

from the last iteration.
toppstuff said:
As for the idea that people want "freedom" from the EU, I have yet to find one single person who can point to something they want to do, that the EU prevents them from doing.

i don't know if you do any bass fishing, but last year they banned you from taking one for your tea for 6 months of the year,while commercials dumped tonnes overboard in discards. the common fisheries policy on its own was enough for me to vote leave.hundreds of thousands of tonnes of perfectly edible fish discarded every year in uk waters due to a combination of politics and incompetence.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VTBObPhFBhs

That makes my blood boil. All of those fish were of breeding age.
Off the Solent in Portsmouth, Langstone and Chicester Harbours they used to boil with young school Bass in the summer as they are some of the biggest breeding and nursery grounds for Bass. Now you barely see the surface broken by single fish, sad doesn't cover it.

[wc98]

Piha said:

The questionable claim is in bold and easy to see (answer?).

i would be willing to bet that less than 1% of bbc and guardian employees voted leave.

[crankedup]

bhstewie said:

crankedup said:

bhstewie said:

crankedup said:

By saying what he did he is basically suggesting that leave voters didn’t know what they were voting for.This tired worn line was trotted out ad nauseam for years by the remain camp. Suppose he thought it smart and clever to re-jig the line, instead showed himself to be a bigger dick than previously revealed.

He really wasn't.

Ask ten leave voters for "their plan" when they voted.

You won't have ten identical plans and the chances are none of them resembled May's plan (as it stands today as it will probably change).

Ergo, you didn't know what you were voting for, chiefly because the people selling the dream didn't tell you, and couldn't deliver it anyway because they aren't the Government.

People are taking great offence at being told facts which is odd.

Yes foolishly I have cast my vote at virtually all political elections over the past 45 years believing that somehow something that squares with my political beliefs and wishes would be
represented at the higher political level.
As has been stated b various posters previously, of course leave voters have differing thoughts and conclusions as to what outcome will be presented post referendum. I did know that the U.K. would leave the CU and SM which would mean the U.K. would be a stand alone Country making our own rules and regulations.
I expect, or rather demand that my vote being one of the 17.4 million cast to leave the EU is now delivered.

That's lovely, but it also kind of confirms his point, which is that you voted based on what you wanted to happen but you didn't know what would happen, which you couldn't because, nobody selling it knew.

It's two different things and people seem to get very irritated by the factual point behind it.

Jeez, having to explain why I wanted out of the EU at this stage is tedious. Nobody has a. rust all ball, do you accept that? I just like everybody else who wanted out of the EU preferred the risk of leaving compared to the prospect of being in an ever increasing EU Empire. The irritation I feel is that remainers like you seem to be infatuated by leavers considerations prior to the referendum. I am getting very irritated after two + years of this provocative bullst line
‘don’t know what you voted for’. I did and I have no regrets at all.
eta if you read my post earlier you may notice that I said that I vote for politics that are aligned with my political wishes. That does not mean or say that I expect all of my expectations to be met in a draconian way slavishly following my requirements, that would be daft.

Edited by crankedup on Friday 8th February 16:11

[chrispmartha]

crankedup said:

PurpleMoonlight said:

johnxjsc1985 said:

why is Tusk deliberately trying to ps off 17.4 million people , firstly condemning them to hell and now saying that nice Mr Corbyn has a good idea.

He didn't condemn them to hell. He condemned the leave leaders.

A CU is a method of resolving the NI/Ireland border issue whether you like it or not.

By saying what he did he is basically suggesting that leave voters didn’t know what they were voting for.This tired worn line was trotted out ad nauseam for years by the remain camp. Suppose he thought it smart and clever to re-jig the line, instead showed himself to be a bigger dick than previously revealed.

No he wasn't basically saying anything of the sort, some brexiteers do seem to have a persecution complex

[crankedup]

TTwiggy said:

Tuna said:

How many of the main media outlets are pro-Brexit?

The two biggest-selling newspapers for a start.

The D.M. has been anti brexit for six months or more now with the change of editor back then.

[johnxjsc1985]

chrispmartha said:

crankedup said:

PurpleMoonlight said:

johnxjsc1985 said:

why is Tusk deliberately trying to ps off 17.4 million people , firstly condemning them to hell and now saying that nice Mr Corbyn has a good idea.

He didn't condemn them to hell. He condemned the leave leaders.

A CU is a method of resolving the NI/Ireland border issue whether you like it or not.

By saying what he did he is basically suggesting that leave voters didn’t know what they were voting for.This tired worn line was trotted out ad nauseam for years by the remain camp. Suppose he thought it smart and clever to re-jig the line, instead showed himself to be a bigger dick than previously revealed.

No he wasn't basically saying anything of the sort, some brexiteers do seem to have a persecution complex

Oh yes he was...
He knew exactly what he was doing and how it would be received unless the man is a fool and I don't believe he is

[wiggy001]

PurpleMoonlight said:

s2art said:

Why did she rubbish a work in progress? Davis resigned over Chequers.

She rubbished a Canada Style deal from day one. Why did Davis work on it?

Chequers was about the post leaving relationship with the EU not the WA.

Maybe because he genuinely wanted to deliver Brexit, not BRINO?

If what we have heard from Baker is even half true then this is a massive scandal surely, and one that should be all over the Sunday papers?

The big question for me is: why was Canada+++ completely rubbished when it would probably have satisfied most?

[TTwiggy]

crankedup said:

TTwiggy said:

Tuna said:

How many of the main media outlets are pro-Brexit?

The two biggest-selling newspapers for a start.

The D.M. has been anti brexit for six months or more now with the change of editor back then.

Well, it's job done, isn't it? Now their target is to convert the younger people who use the website into readers of the paper.

[chrispmartha]

johnxjsc1985 said:

chrispmartha said:

crankedup said:

PurpleMoonlight said:

johnxjsc1985 said:

why is Tusk deliberately trying to ps off 17.4 million people , firstly condemning them to hell and now saying that nice Mr Corbyn has a good idea.

He didn't condemn them to hell. He condemned the leave leaders.

A CU is a method of resolving the NI/Ireland border issue whether you like it or not.

By saying what he did he is basically suggesting that leave voters didn’t know what they were voting for.This tired worn line was trotted out ad nauseam for years by the remain camp. Suppose he thought it smart and clever to re-jig the line, instead showed himself to be a bigger dick than previously revealed.

No he wasn't basically saying anything of the sort, some brexiteers do seem to have a persecution complex

Oh yes he was...
He knew exactly what he was doing and how it would be received unless the man is a fool and I don't believe he is

You can twist his words to fit whatever narrative you like, but then you are the one that looks foolish not Tusk

[crankedup]

chrispmartha said:

crankedup said:

PurpleMoonlight said:

johnxjsc1985 said:

why is Tusk deliberately trying to ps off 17.4 million people , firstly condemning them to hell and now saying that nice Mr Corbyn has a good idea.

He didn't condemn them to hell. He condemned the leave leaders.

A CU is a method of resolving the NI/Ireland border issue whether you like it or not.

By saying what he did he is basically suggesting that leave voters didn’t know what they were voting for.This tired worn line was trotted out ad nauseam for years by the remain camp. Suppose he thought it smart and clever to re-jig the line, instead showed himself to be a bigger dick than previously revealed.

No he wasn't basically saying anything of the sort, some brexiteers do seem to have a persecution complex

You are too late for this particular party, go back a few pages.

[wc98]

JNW1 said:

As a slight aside, I know some have suggested a "Canada Plus" type deal still wouldn't have addressed the Irish border/backstop issue and I'm just curious as to why they think that? Surely the backstop only comes into play if a satisfactory trade deal with associated customs agreements can't be reached; however, if we manage to conclude a suitable FTA (e.g. Canada Plus) isn't that job done with the backstop therefore becoming irrelevant?

that was my take on it as well. i accept i might be wrong and would be interested to hear from someone that understands the issue better than me why that is so.

[The Don of Croy]

Just checking in...still snipping at one another?

Do carry on...

[StevieBee]

crankedup said:

I am getting very irritated after two + years of this provocative bullst line
‘don’t know what you voted for’. I did and I have no regrets at all.

A genuine and I hope, a non provocative question....

I'm interested to know how you knew what you were voting for when those who were responsible delivering that vote did not know themselves - nor it seems did anyone else in authority. What insight did you have that they didn't?

I ask because it seems to me there's differing opinions and options on the exact the nature of leave that could have determined a different outcome of the vote had these been known / understood at the time. For example; there are many that would prefer to leave; but not at any costs and if it was a choice of that or remain, they'd have ticked remain. The same for those who thought we might get a Norway type arrangement (as promoted at the time), or a Canada Plus deal, or something else.

As I say, I am genuinely interested in this from a purely behavioural perspective so please don't read any agenda into the question.

[crankedup]

TTwiggy said:

crankedup said:

TTwiggy said:

Tuna said:

How many of the main media outlets are pro-Brexit?

The two biggest-selling newspapers for a start.

The D.M. has been anti brexit for six months or more now with the change of editor back then.

Well, it's job done, isn't it? Now their target is to convert the younger people who use the website into readers of the paper.

Not sure about that, the D.M. demographic certainly seems to be the mature reader. Given that those readers may have another twenty years in front of them that’s a huge readership to lose. Newsprint is already strugglingso perhaps the D.M. will join News of the World sooner than expected. Online I would expect to attract a younger readership to the newspaper, perhaps that’s all part of the business model?

[PurpleMoonlight]

wiggy001 said:

Maybe because he genuinely wanted to deliver Brexit, not BRINO?

If what we have heard from Baker is even half true then this is a massive scandal surely, and one that should be all over the Sunday papers?

The big question for me is: why was Canada+++ completely rubbished when it would probably have satisfied most?

It probably would have satisfied most.

But the fact that May wanted a better and unique deal with the EU was no secret, and which she appears to have got, and is why it's not all over the papers.

We may yet end up with a Canada +++ or May's UK:EU free trade area, all that comes after we leave with or without a Withdrawal Agreement.

Much as you may like it to be a scandal, it really isn't.

[wc98]

bhstewie said:

That's lovely, but it also kind of confirms his point, which is that you voted based on what you wanted to happen but you didn't know what would happen, which you couldn't because, nobody selling it knew.

It's two different things and people seem to get very irritated by the factual point behind it.

i don't get this pov. to be a member of the eu there is a set criteria a country must meet. leaving the eu means leaving the political construct and the set of rules membership entails.

even at the base level anyone that thought we would be maintaining any of the four freedoms was being disingenuous at best.

[PurpleMoonlight]

johnxjsc1985 said:

Oh yes he was...
He knew exactly what he was doing and how it would be received unless the man is a fool and I don't believe he is

He did.

You don't.

[Murph7355]

PurpleMoonlight said:

s2art said:

b) Nothing like enough. Just membership of the WTO provides that. What about stuff like security cooperation?

Says you. A50 does not define the extent to which the relationship has to be considered.

Anyway, the political declaration appears to cover it, no?

Article 50 doesn't say very much. There's a special place.....

[wiggy001]

PurpleMoonlight said:

wiggy001 said:

Maybe because he genuinely wanted to deliver Brexit, not BRINO?

If what we have heard from Baker is even half true then this is a massive scandal surely, and one that should be all over the Sunday papers?

The big question for me is: why was Canada+++ completely rubbished when it would probably have satisfied most?

It probably would have satisfied most.

But the fact that May wanted a better and unique deal with the EU was no secret, and which she appears to have got, and is why it's not all over the papers.

We may yet end up with a Canada +++ or May's UK:EU free trade area, all that comes after we leave with or without a Withdrawal Agreement.

Much as you may like it to be a scandal, it really isn't.

"Better" is obviously subjective. And May's deal is certainly unique, but that's not a compliment. I haven't heard anyone say May's BRINO is better than an FTA, Canada style deal. It's only better if you don't want to leave.

The press write about the mess that is Brexit on a daily basis. Had she followed the Canada style deal we wouldn't be in this mess. Isn't that point newsworthy?