How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 11)
Discussion
Blue62 said:
There was a considerable degree of negotiation with May and her team and a deal was agreed, that it was rejected has nothing to do with an unwillingness to negotiate, as you seem to assert. We didn't get the deal we want or the one that we promised you, therefore it's the fault of the EU (and those damned remain folk) has been the battlecry since things started to go wrong, it's an insult to most people's intelligence.
The real issue is more complex than many would like to believe, I agree with Cummings that we triggered A50 too soon having made little effort to get our ducks in a row, putting us in a weak negotiating position. If you're looking for a scapegoat, look a little harder.
Good post Sir The real issue is more complex than many would like to believe, I agree with Cummings that we triggered A50 too soon having made little effort to get our ducks in a row, putting us in a weak negotiating position. If you're looking for a scapegoat, look a little harder.
Blue62 said:
jsf said:
Its been the obvious position since chequers, and confirmed by rejection 3 times in the HOC of the WA.
EU aren't interested in negotiating, so no deal it is.
The real issue is more complex than many would like to believe, I agree with Cummings that we triggered A50 too soon having made little effort to get our ducks in a row, putting us in a weak negotiating position. If you're looking for a scapegoat, look a little harder. EU aren't interested in negotiating, so no deal it is.
If A50 has not been triggered as it was, there is absolutely no way that the politicians would have ever allowed it to be triggered. It is the one single thing that May did right.
Blue62 said:
jsf said:
Its been the obvious position since chequers, and confirmed by rejection 3 times in the HOC of the WA.
EU aren't interested in negotiating, so no deal it is.
There was a considerable degree of negotiation with May and her team and a deal was agreed, that it was rejected has nothing to do with an unwillingness to negotiate, as you seem to assert. We didn't get the deal we want or the one that we promised you, therefore it's the fault of the EU (and those damned remain folk) has been the battlecry since things started to go wrong, it's an insult to most people's intelligence. EU aren't interested in negotiating, so no deal it is.
The real issue is more complex than many would like to believe, I agree with Cummings that we triggered A50 too soon having made little effort to get our ducks in a row, putting us in a weak negotiating position. If you're looking for a scapegoat, look a little harder.
The blocker to negotiation is the EU Council.
paulrockliffe said:
El stovey said:
The Labour war going on behind the scenes is ace isn't it. My view is that Corbyn is going to 'accidentally' f
k everything up so that we leave, otherwise he gets swamped by these morons.If you missed McDonnell this morning, the most amazing thing about the latest Labour 'policy' is that it is to fight the election agnostic on whether we leave or remain, but they are in favour of a referendum that will be remain vs something agreed with the Lib Dems and the SNP. Ie remain vs 'remain'. So the Labour manifesto policy on the EU is to be farmed out to other parties.
At least the Conservatives will have formed a settled view as those that don't support Boris lose the option of standing as conservatives in that election.
The is the first I’ve read about labour saying they’d have another referendum? Especially with remain as an option. I thought Corbyn was talking about not leaving without a deal and him being the man to negotiate it?
loafer123 said:
I disagree with this.
If A50 has not been triggered as it was, there is absolutely no way that the politicians would have ever allowed it to be triggered. It is the one single thing that May did right.
Except it was. And the fundamentals of firing the starting gun without knowing where the finish line, water jumps or anything else about the course are still fundamentals. It was the worst possible course of action that led directly to two years of Westminster arguing with itself to no one's profit.If A50 has not been triggered as it was, there is absolutely no way that the politicians would have ever allowed it to be triggered. It is the one single thing that May did right.
hutchst said:
loafer123 said:
Your analogy works well. Both parties in the divorce will have to sort out a settlement at some point.
It is worth pointing out that, deal or no deal, the uncertainty will remain until the permanent relationship is resolved. The WA does nothing except delay the likely timing of the permanent relationship being sorted out.
It does, but with the current deal on the table, if the divorcing couple can't reach an amicable agreement, it will be decided once and for all by the ex-wife's solicitor acting as judge, jury and executioner. Sounds fair enough to me.It is worth pointing out that, deal or no deal, the uncertainty will remain until the permanent relationship is resolved. The WA does nothing except delay the likely timing of the permanent relationship being sorted out.
El stovey said:
paulrockliffe said:
El stovey said:
The Labour war going on behind the scenes is ace isn't it. My view is that Corbyn is going to 'accidentally' fk everything up so that we leave, otherwise he gets swamped by these morons.If you missed McDonnell this morning, the most amazing thing about the latest Labour 'policy' is that it is to fight the election agnostic on whether we leave or remain, but they are in favour of a referendum that will be remain vs something agreed with the Lib Dems and the SNP. Ie remain vs 'remain'. So the Labour manifesto policy on the EU is to be farmed out to other parties.
At least the Conservatives will have formed a settled view as those that don't support Boris lose the option of standing as conservatives in that election.
The is the first I’ve read about labour saying they’d have another referendum? Especially with remain as an option. I thought Corbyn was talking about not leaving without a deal and him being the man to negotiate it?
Probably something else by now though.
El stovey said:
Is McDonnell randomly coming up with this stuff? Last thing he said about another having another indyref for Scotland seemed to blindside (and upset) Scottish labour.
The is the first I’ve read about labour saying they’d have another referendum? Especially with remain as an option. I thought Corbyn was talking about not leaving without a deal and him being the man to negotiate it?
You have to remember that many of the front line politicians are looking beyond Brexit now. They are far more interested in positioning themselves for the election they think is imminently coming down the road. They are more concerned about what they are perceived to have said and done rather than worrying about having to do any of it.The is the first I’ve read about labour saying they’d have another referendum? Especially with remain as an option. I thought Corbyn was talking about not leaving without a deal and him being the man to negotiate it?
In the case of Corbyn he almost certainly still wants to leave and ideally in a chaotic no deal way as he thinks it is his best route to power. However, he has to have looked to have tried. Hence all the letters etc. - he doesn't mean any of it and knows it is a non starter.
Labour would really prefer Brexit done and dusted before an election so they don't have to deal with it and can blame someone else for any issues afterwards.
There are a few, genuine, "must stop Brexit" people in the Commons but in reality they are no longer on the front benches because party politics and party lines and the battle for a GE will always win out in UK politics over Europe and that's what is happening now.
banjowilly said:
loafer123 said:
I disagree with this.
If A50 has not been triggered as it was, there is absolutely no way that the politicians would have ever allowed it to be triggered. It is the one single thing that May did right.
Except it was. And the fundamentals of firing the starting gun without knowing where the finish line, water jumps or anything else about the course are still fundamentals. It was the worst possible course of action that led directly to two years of Westminster arguing with itself to no one's profit.If A50 has not been triggered as it was, there is absolutely no way that the politicians would have ever allowed it to be triggered. It is the one single thing that May did right.
paulrockliffe said:
Putting aside that May did not have the authority to agree anything, it's odd that you don't recall that as things stand Barnier has no mandate to negotiate any further or that the EU insisted that the terms of the current extension prohibit us renegotiating.
The blocker to negotiation is the EU Council.
Putting aside the splitting of hairs, it's odd that you think a negotiation should be reopened just because one side has changed its demands but is unable to table anything new.The blocker to negotiation is the EU Council.
The EU have been willing to accommodate two extensions with nothing in return and will offer a third if we announce a GE, I think that's pretty reasonable.
loafer123 said:
I understand that you don’t like it because it meant the process actually started and the easiest route to avoiding Brexit was lost, but for those who voted to Leave, it actually started the process of delivering on their votes.
Why do you think Dominic Cummings, the architect of the Leave campaign and Boris's very own Rasputin, believes we triggered A50 too early?confused_buyer said:
You have to remember that many of the front line politicians are looking beyond Brexit now. They are far more interested in positioning themselves for the election they think is imminently coming down the road. They are more concerned about what they are perceived to have said and done rather than worrying about having to do any of it.
In the case of Corbyn he almost certainly still wants to leave and ideally in a chaotic no deal way as he thinks it is his best route to power. However, he has to have looked to have tried. Hence all the letters etc. - he doesn't mean any of it and knows it is a non starter.
Labour would really prefer Brexit done and dusted before an election so they don't have to deal with it and can blame someone else for any issues afterwards.
There are a few, genuine, "must stop Brexit" people in the Commons but in reality they are no longer on the front benches because party politics and party lines and the battle for a GE will always win out in UK politics over Europe and that's what is happening now.
Quite right. In the case of Corbyn he almost certainly still wants to leave and ideally in a chaotic no deal way as he thinks it is his best route to power. However, he has to have looked to have tried. Hence all the letters etc. - he doesn't mean any of it and knows it is a non starter.
Labour would really prefer Brexit done and dusted before an election so they don't have to deal with it and can blame someone else for any issues afterwards.
There are a few, genuine, "must stop Brexit" people in the Commons but in reality they are no longer on the front benches because party politics and party lines and the battle for a GE will always win out in UK politics over Europe and that's what is happening now.
I think it would be hard to argue that Boris Johnson's top priority right now is preservation of himself as PM and preservation of his Party. Delivering Brexit is a distant 2nd.....but to achieve that objective - he has to appear to have Brexit as his No1 objective....and he's not doing too bad a job of that at the moment.
Blue62 said:
paulrockliffe said:
Putting aside that May did not have the authority to agree anything, it's odd that you don't recall that as things stand Barnier has no mandate to negotiate any further or that the EU insisted that the terms of the current extension prohibit us renegotiating.
The blocker to negotiation is the EU Council.
Putting aside the splitting of hairs, it's odd that you think a negotiation should be reopened just because one side has changed its demands but is unable to table anything new.The blocker to negotiation is the EU Council.
The EU have been willing to accommodate two extensions with nothing in return and will offer a third if we announce a GE, I think that's pretty reasonable.
I don't think the negotiation should be reopened by the way, I was addressing your criticism of the Government for not doing something that they are treaty-bound not to do.
Blue62 said:
loafer123 said:
I understand that you don’t like it because it meant the process actually started and the easiest route to avoiding Brexit was lost, but for those who voted to Leave, it actually started the process of delivering on their votes.
Why do you think Dominic Cummings, the architect of the Leave campaign and Boris's very own Rasputin, believes we triggered A50 too early?Blue62 said:
Putting aside the splitting of hairs, it's odd that you think a negotiation should be reopened just because one side has changed its demands but is unable to table anything new.
The EU have been willing to accommodate two extensions with nothing in return and will offer a third if we announce a GE, I think that's pretty reasonable.
The EU gave extensions to make sure they get their money as no deal means no £39billionThe EU have been willing to accommodate two extensions with nothing in return and will offer a third if we announce a GE, I think that's pretty reasonable.
loafer123 said:
I understand that you don’t like it because it meant the process actually started and the easiest route to avoiding Brexit was lost, but for those who voted to Leave, it actually started the process of delivering on their votes.
That's conflating two separate issues. You're absolutely right I don't like it, it was done with no forethought beyond a photo-op to make May look decisive. Your contention it couldn't have happened unless it was done when it was is off the mark. It sailed through the commons by 384 votes. There is nothing to suggest it would have failed had the vote been held at any other point.banjowilly said:
loafer123 said:
I understand that you don’t like it because it meant the process actually started and the easiest route to avoiding Brexit was lost, but for those who voted to Leave, it actually started the process of delivering on their votes.
That's conflating two separate issues. You're absolutely right I don't like it, it was done with no forethought beyond a photo-op to make May look decisive. Your contention it couldn't have happened unless it was done when it was is off the mark. It sailed through the commons by 384 votes. There is nothing to suggest it would have failed had the vote been held at any other point.Only the triggering of the process locked in the delivery schedule of A50.
loafer123 said:
I have no idea but, more importantly, why do you think I have to agree with him?
You don't have to agree with him, I am asking you why you think the man behind Boris and the Leave campaign is wrong. So far your defence is that it wouldn't have happened otherwise, specious in the extreme. Even assuming you are right, it still put us in a weak position and has resulted in the current mayhem, it was a very poor tactical play.loafer123 said:
I see where you are coming from, but in my opinion, the longer it was left after the referendum, the more Parliament would have said “oh, things have changed” or “ that was then, this is now”.
Only the triggering of the process locked in the delivery schedule of A50.
Kind of like the implicit acknowledgment there Loafy that had MP's realised the chaos they were unleashing, they might have thought twice...Only the triggering of the process locked in the delivery schedule of A50.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff