How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 13)
Discussion
Ridgemont said:
Stay in Bed Instead said:
Ridgemont said:
As I said, the interpretation of alignment (that was in the PD) appears to have shifted. Dynamic alignment appears to be part of the EU proposals. Thus the kick off.
What's dynamic alignment?. Regulatory aspects
31. While preserving regulatory autonomy, the arrangements should include provisions to promote regulatory approaches that are transparent, efficient, compatible to the extent possible, and which promote avoidance of unnecessary regulatory requirements.
32. In this context, the Parties should agree disciplines on domestic regulation. These should include horizontal provisions such as on licensing procedures, and specific regulatory provisions in sectors of mutual interest such as telecommunication services, financial services, delivery services, and international maritime transport services. There should also be provisions on the development and adoption of domestic regulation that reflect good practice
https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-politic...
Edited by Earthdweller on Friday 21st February 08:15
Earthdweller said:
I don’t see anything where the PD is a living document
. Regulatory aspects
31. While preserving regulatory autonomy, the arrangements should include provisions to promote regulatory approaches that are transparent, efficient, compatible to the extent possible, and which promote avoidance of unnecessary regulatory requirements.
32. In this context, the Parties should agree disciplines on domestic regulation. These should include horizontal provisions such as on licensing procedures, and specific regulatory provisions in sectors of mutual interest such as telecommunication services, financial services, delivery services, and international maritime transport services. There should also be provisions on the development and adoption of domestic regulation that reflect good practice
Could it be referring to this (my bold):. Regulatory aspects
31. While preserving regulatory autonomy, the arrangements should include provisions to promote regulatory approaches that are transparent, efficient, compatible to the extent possible, and which promote avoidance of unnecessary regulatory requirements.
32. In this context, the Parties should agree disciplines on domestic regulation. These should include horizontal provisions such as on licensing procedures, and specific regulatory provisions in sectors of mutual interest such as telecommunication services, financial services, delivery services, and international maritime transport services. There should also be provisions on the development and adoption of domestic regulation that reflect good practice
"XIV. LEVEL PLAYING FIELD FOR OPEN AND FAIR COMPETITION
77. Given the Union and the United Kingdom's geographic proximity and economic
interdependence, the future relationship must ensure open and fair competition,
encompassing robust commitments to ensure a level playing field. The precise nature of
commitments should be commensurate with the scope and depth of the future relationship
and the economic connectedness of the Parties. These commitments should prevent
distortions of trade and unfair competitive advantages. To that end, the Parties should
uphold the common high standards applicable in the Union and the United Kingdom at the
end of the transition period in the areas of state aid, competition, social and employment
standards, environment, climate change, and relevant tax matters. The Parties should in
particular maintain a robust and comprehensive framework for competition and state aid
control that prevents undue distortion of trade and competition; commit to the principles of
good governance in the area of taxation and to the curbing of harmful tax practices; and
maintain environmental, social and employment standards at the current high levels
provided by the existing common standards. [b]In so doing, they should rely on appropriate and
relevant Union and international standards, and include appropriate mechanisms to ensure
effective implementation domestically, enforcement and dispute settlement.[/b] The future
relationship should also promote adherence to and effective implementation of relevant
internationally agreed principles and rules in these domains, including the Paris Agreement.
Stay in Bed Instead said:
Vanden Saab said:
The EU that has repeatedly said that an agreement cannot be sorted by December despite signing up to it in the PD. That EU?
What paragraph in the DP states that?135 said:
. In setting out the framework of the future relationship between the Union and the United Kingdom, this declaration confirms, as set out in the Withdrawal Agreement, that it is the clear intent of both Parties to develop in good faith agreements giving effect to this relationship and to begin the formal process of negotiations as soon as possible after the United Kingdom's withdrawal from the Union, such that they can come into force by the end of 2020.
139 said:
. This programme will be designed to deliver the Parties' shared intention to conclude agreements giving effect to the future relationship by the end of 2020 as set out in paragraph 135
What do you think those paragraphs mean?That essentially says the UK won't "roll back" on certain areas, and will adopt internationally typical regs regarding State aid, etc.
If they're relying on that for permanent adoption of changes to the AC, which by default is giving control over many areas ad infinitum, they can f
k right off - as they've been told.
If they're relying on that for permanent adoption of changes to the AC, which by default is giving control over many areas ad infinitum, they can f
k right off - as they've been told. Stay in Bed Instead said:
Could it be referring to this (my bold):
"XIV. LEVEL PLAYING FIELD FOR OPEN AND FAIR COMPETITION
77. Given the Union and the United Kingdom's geographic proximity and economic
interdependence, the future relationship must ensure open and fair competition,
encompassing robust commitments to ensure a level playing field. The precise nature of
commitments should be commensurate with the scope and depth of the future relationship
and the economic connectedness of the Parties. These commitments should prevent
distortions of trade and unfair competitive advantages. To that end, the Parties should
uphold the common high standards applicable in the Union and the United Kingdom at the
end of the transition period in the areas of state aid, competition, social and employment
standards, environment, climate change, and relevant tax matters. The Parties should in
particular maintain a robust and comprehensive framework for competition and state aid
control that prevents undue distortion of trade and competition; commit to the principles of
good governance in the area of taxation and to the curbing of harmful tax practices; and
maintain environmental, social and employment standards at the current high levels
provided by the existing common standards. [b]In so doing, they should rely on appropriate and
relevant Union and international standards, and include appropriate mechanisms to ensure
effective implementation domestically, enforcement and dispute settlement.[/b] The future
relationship should also promote adherence to and effective implementation of relevant
internationally agreed principles and rules in these domains, including the Paris Agreement.
Oh, like Irish Corporation tax at 12.5% or the rate the multinationals pay which is between 2 and 4%?"XIV. LEVEL PLAYING FIELD FOR OPEN AND FAIR COMPETITION
77. Given the Union and the United Kingdom's geographic proximity and economic
interdependence, the future relationship must ensure open and fair competition,
encompassing robust commitments to ensure a level playing field. The precise nature of
commitments should be commensurate with the scope and depth of the future relationship
and the economic connectedness of the Parties. These commitments should prevent
distortions of trade and unfair competitive advantages. To that end, the Parties should
uphold the common high standards applicable in the Union and the United Kingdom at the
end of the transition period in the areas of state aid, competition, social and employment
standards, environment, climate change, and relevant tax matters. The Parties should in
particular maintain a robust and comprehensive framework for competition and state aid
control that prevents undue distortion of trade and competition; commit to the principles of
good governance in the area of taxation and to the curbing of harmful tax practices; and
maintain environmental, social and employment standards at the current high levels
provided by the existing common standards. [b]In so doing, they should rely on appropriate and
relevant Union and international standards, and include appropriate mechanisms to ensure
effective implementation domestically, enforcement and dispute settlement.[/b] The future
relationship should also promote adherence to and effective implementation of relevant
internationally agreed principles and rules in these domains, including the Paris Agreement.
Or Airbus?
Or bank subsidies through Tiering?
Or non-adoption of BASEL3?
Illegal bank bail outs (MDP)
Errr, what side is the joker?
Stay in Bed Instead said:
Can't make bold work.
It doesn't work over multiple lines[b]asdf feafaf asdasd[/b]
Works
[ b]asdf feafaf asdas
asdf feafaf asdasd[ /b]]
Doesn't work
Like this -
Stay in Bed Instead said:
provided by the existing common standards. [b]In so doing, they should rely on appropriate and [/ b]
[ b]relevant Union and international standards, and include appropriate mechanisms to ensure[/ b]
[ b]effective implementation domestically, enforcement and dispute settlement.[/b]
[ b]relevant Union and international standards, and include appropriate mechanisms to ensure[/ b]
[ b]effective implementation domestically, enforcement and dispute settlement.[/b]
Stay in Bed Instead said:
Vanden Saab said:
What do you think those paragraphs mean?
It's an intention not a commitment.And that was originally made late 2018 where discussions would start April 2019.
Edited by Stay in Bed Instead on Friday 21st February 08:31
Vanden Saab said:
Which would make the UK position an intention not a commitment too... See how easy that was...
This is an interesting paragraph:
73. Within the context of the overall economic partnership the Parties should establish a new
fisheries agreement on, inter alia, access to waters and quota shares.
I think the Europeans have got bigger problems than negotiating with us.
They can't even agree on a new budget, with the northern countries wanting to reduce their exposure to the shortfall our leaving has created and the southern ones demanding they still get their cash whatever.
It's all going to fall apart because it's a silly idea to mesh together tightly such differently performing nations.
They can't even agree on a new budget, with the northern countries wanting to reduce their exposure to the shortfall our leaving has created and the southern ones demanding they still get their cash whatever.
It's all going to fall apart because it's a silly idea to mesh together tightly such differently performing nations.
Stay in Bed Instead said:
Vanden Saab said:
Which would make the UK position an intention not a commitment too... See how easy that was...
This is an interesting paragraph:
73. Within the context of the overall economic partnership the Parties should establish a new
fisheries agreement on, inter alia, access to waters and quota shares.
Review annually the fish stocks and the environmental impact of the harvesting
Decide based on a scientific basis whether any areas need to be excluded
Based on quotas ( reviewed annually ) decide who can access the waters
Quotas to be decided by the state holding the fish stocks based on sustainability and environmental impact
If the state owning the waters has sufficient capacity to utilise all the Quota itself then none would be offered to other nations, if there is an excess to the capacity that excess can be offered to foreign fishermen
What you cannot do is say things can carry on exactly as they are, destroying the fishing grounds and stocks for the next 25 years
Stay in Bed Instead said:
Vanden Saab said:
Which would make the UK position an intention not a commitment too... See how easy that was...
This is an interesting paragraph:
73. Within the context of the overall economic partnership the Parties should establish a new
fisheries agreement on, inter alia, access to waters and quota shares.
What they're demanding is a significant stretch on that...
janesmith1950 said:
I think the Europeans have got bigger problems than negotiating with us.
They can't even agree on a new budget, with the northern countries wanting to reduce their exposure to the shortfall our leaving has created and the southern ones demanding they still get their cash whatever.
It's all going to fall apart because it's a silly idea to mesh together tightly such differently performing nations.
No, you are projecting without understanding the processes of what is normal negotiation within the EU. They can't even agree on a new budget, with the northern countries wanting to reduce their exposure to the shortfall our leaving has created and the southern ones demanding they still get their cash whatever.
It's all going to fall apart because it's a silly idea to mesh together tightly such differently performing nations.
Do you think such haggles are unprecedented? Of course its always going to be challenge, but only quitters and those with limited ambition give up. Of course each member will want to protect its own interests as far as possible, this is to be expected. This isn't like going to Sainsbury's and accepting the prices as they are, this is a high level barter for the best deal with each country arguing its case in light of a new arrangement. In the end, an amicable solution will be found but this is a process that has to be followed. It also has nothing to do with you in the UK now, you wanted to leave, you have, so off you go and find something else to whinge about.
I'd love the EU to tell you the UK sod off now - it needs to learn that the EU does not need the UK nearly as much as it thinks it does.
Coolbananas said:
No, you are projecting without understanding the processes of what is normal negotiation within the EU. Do you think such haggles are unprecedented? Of course its always going to be challenge, but only quitters and those with limited ambition give up.
Of course each member will want to protect its own interests as far as possible, this is to be expected. This isn't like going to Sainsbury's and accepting the prices as they are, this is a high level barter for the best deal with each country arguing its case in light of a new arrangement. In the end, an amicable solution will be found but this is a process that has to be followed. It also has nothing to do with you in the UK now, you wanted to leave, you have, so off you go and find something else to whinge about.
I'd love the EU to tell you the UK sod off now - it needs to learn that the EU does not need the UK nearly as much as it thinks it does.
Do you think such haggles are unprecedented? Of course its always going to be challenge, but only quitters and those with limited ambition give up. Of course each member will want to protect its own interests as far as possible, this is to be expected. This isn't like going to Sainsbury's and accepting the prices as they are, this is a high level barter for the best deal with each country arguing its case in light of a new arrangement. In the end, an amicable solution will be found but this is a process that has to be followed. It also has nothing to do with you in the UK now, you wanted to leave, you have, so off you go and find something else to whinge about.
I'd love the EU to tell you the UK sod off now - it needs to learn that the EU does not need the UK nearly as much as it thinks it does.
Coolbananas said:
janesmith1950 said:
I think the Europeans have got bigger problems than negotiating with us.
They can't even agree on a new budget, with the northern countries wanting to reduce their exposure to the shortfall our leaving has created and the southern ones demanding they still get their cash whatever.
It's all going to fall apart because it's a silly idea to mesh together tightly such differently performing nations.
No, you are projecting without understanding the processes of what is normal negotiation within the EU. They can't even agree on a new budget, with the northern countries wanting to reduce their exposure to the shortfall our leaving has created and the southern ones demanding they still get their cash whatever.
It's all going to fall apart because it's a silly idea to mesh together tightly such differently performing nations.
Do you think such haggles are unprecedented? Of course its always going to be challenge, but only quitters and those with limited ambition give up. Of course each member will want to protect its own interests as far as possible, this is to be expected. This isn't like going to Sainsbury's and accepting the prices as they are, this is a high level barter for the best deal with each country arguing its case in light of a new arrangement. In the end, an amicable solution will be found but this is a process that has to be followed. It also has nothing to do with you in the UK now, you wanted to leave, you have, so off you go and find something else to whinge about.
I'd love the EU to tell you the UK sod off now - it needs to learn that the EU does not need the UK nearly as much as it thinks it does.
They've a clear motivation to show the remaining member nations how awful life is on the outside, so if you're right and they don't need us, then they're better to just let us sink.
So why haven't they done it? Why the negotiating?
(As per, don't listen to what people say. Just watch what they do.)
pgh said:
FiF said:
Well it matters not, I've been saved from coal painting duties by George Eustice. Environment minister to announce today coal and wood fires to be banned.
Off topic but no. Sales of small quantities of unseasoned wood banned. You wouldn’t burn this anyway unless you didn’t care about your chimney.
House coal also banned, instead manufactured smokeless coal to be used.
Yet a new deep coal mine to be opened. Coking metallurgical coal admittedly. Not sure if you have been near a coking plant, or similar process. Lovely places.
Also for the record the smokeless fuel has to have low sulphur, and almost all British coal is high sulphur as is the smokeless fuel manufactured from it.
So sales of unseasoned wood to be banned, does this mean an increase of kiln drying if you can't buy green wood and dry it yourself, which isn't difficult if you give it time. It might make sense to allow sales but with accompanying clear advice on methods of drying and time required etc.0
Plus Govt hasn't ruled out a complete ban on solid fuel and wood burning stoves which also has been discussed.
Maybe I should ask George about peat fires? Still doesn't affect city dwellers much, rural communities more so.
Further evidence of no joined up energy policy imo.
Anyway, miles off topic so going to leave it now.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff