|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Jun 15, 2020 16:43:36 GMT
Let's hope we get a deal then. I wonder if they'll forgive the EU if we don't get a deal? We are now not part of the EU. ( we've done this before, mind you. The referendum wasn't about deals. It was about whether we wanted to remain or leave the EU. The electorste decided to leave. Irrespective of what any subsequent poll says or any attempt to thwart the result.
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Jun 15, 2020 19:04:35 GMT
It would of been better if they had asked If the eu refuse to give us a deal should we A) leave on wto terms B) apply to rejoin the eu and accept the euro I wonder what the alleged ex red wall would answer to that That's the trouble with any poll that involves a question it can be worded in a way that gives the answer you required
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Jun 15, 2020 21:20:03 GMT
The red wall opinion poll means nothing.
Everyone wants a trade deal with the EU, the question is how and what.
Do we
1. Capitulate and agree to whatever the EU "offer" such as let the French take 90% of the cod in the English Channel, dictate all our employment legislation, impose legislation that we obey and they flout, etc.
2. Come to a reasonable compromise where both sides have to give and take such as allow the EU to take a reasonable amount of fish from our waters, meet EU standards for supplying products into the EU but dictate our own standards for what we do in the UK or trade with none EU countries.
3. Take the pain and leave the EU without a trade agreement. Then start a serious negotiation where the pressure is on both sides to limit economic damage and make a rapid deal.
To me 1 is totally unacceptable. Option 2 is preferred but I have serious doubts that the EU are capable of agreeing between themselves to compromise. They would see their vision of a united states of Europe ruled by a Brussels bureaucracy crumble. Option 3 would be highly unpopular but not impossible. I think people will be amazed how fast differences would be resolved with German cars backing up at the ports, French fishermen vandalising lorries, and Irish goods unable to get across England to Europe.
|
|
|
Post by RipRoaringPotter on Jun 15, 2020 21:23:40 GMT
The red wall opinion poll means nothing. Everyone wants a trade deal with the EU, the question is how and what. Do we 1. Capitulate and agree to whatever the EU "offer" such as let the French take 90% of the cod in the English Channel, dictate all our employment legislation, impose legislation that we obey and they flout, etc. 2. Come to a reasonable compromise where both sides have to give and take such as allow the EU to take a reasonable amount of fish from our waters, meet EU standards for supplying products into the EU but dictate our own standards for what we do in the UK or trade with none EU countries. 3. Take the pain and leave the EU without a trade agreement. Then start a serious negotiation where the pressure is on both sides to limit economic damage and make a rapid deal. To me 1 is totally unacceptable. Option 2 is preferred but I have serious doubts that the EU are capable of agreeing between themselves to compromise. They would see their vision of a united states of Europe ruled by a Brussels bureaucracy crumble. Option 3 would be highly unpopular but not impossible. I think people will be amazed how fast differences would be resolved with German cars backing up at the ports, French fishermen vandalising lorries, and Irish goods unable to get across England to Europe. What about option 1, but with the added bonus of Boris Johnson patting us all on the head and telling us what a great deal it is. Does that swing it for you?
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Jun 15, 2020 21:28:05 GMT
To be fair to Coke, he's already said he fears that is precisely what will happen.
And the Bluffer's got form in pretending to deliver one thing while actually delivering something else eg the selling of May's deal as something different that he'd negotiated!
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Jun 16, 2020 5:38:27 GMT
The red wall opinion poll means nothing. Everyone wants a trade deal with the EU, the question is how and what. Do we 1. Capitulate and agree to whatever the EU "offer" such as let the French take 90% of the cod in the English Channel, dictate all our employment legislation, impose legislation that we obey and they flout, etc. 2. Come to a reasonable compromise where both sides have to give and take such as allow the EU to take a reasonable amount of fish from our waters, meet EU standards for supplying products into the EU but dictate our own standards for what we do in the UK or trade with none EU countries. 3. Take the pain and leave the EU without a trade agreement. Then start a serious negotiation where the pressure is on both sides to limit economic damage and make a rapid deal. To me 1 is totally unacceptable. Option 2 is preferred but I have serious doubts that the EU are capable of agreeing between themselves to compromise. They would see their vision of a united states of Europe ruled by a Brussels bureaucracy crumble. Option 3 would be highly unpopular but not impossible. I think people will be amazed how fast differences would be resolved with German cars backing up at the ports, French fishermen vandalising lorries, and Irish goods unable to get across England to Europe. What about option 1, but with the added bonus of Boris Johnson patting us all on the head and telling us what a great deal it is. Does that swing it for you? No and I'll be the first to call for his head
|
|
|
Post by backintheday on Jun 16, 2020 6:43:17 GMT
The red wall opinion poll means nothing. Everyone wants a trade deal with the EU, the question is how and what. Do we 1. Capitulate and agree to whatever the EU "offer" such as let the French take 90% of the cod in the English Channel, dictate all our employment legislation, impose legislation that we obey and they flout, etc. 2. Come to a reasonable compromise where both sides have to give and take such as allow the EU to take a reasonable amount of fish from our waters, meet EU standards for supplying products into the EU but dictate our own standards for what we do in the UK or trade with none EU countries. 3. Take the pain and leave the EU without a trade agreement. Then start a serious negotiation where the pressure is on both sides to limit economic damage and make a rapid deal. To me 1 is totally unacceptable. Option 2 is preferred but I have serious doubts that the EU are capable of agreeing between themselves to compromise. They would see their vision of a united states of Europe ruled by a Brussels bureaucracy crumble. Option 3 would be highly unpopular but not impossible. I think people will be amazed how fast differences would be resolved with German cars backing up at the ports, French fishermen vandalising lorries, and Irish goods unable to get across England to Europe. What about option 1, but with the added bonus of Boris Johnson patting us all on the head and telling us what a great deal it is. Does that swing it for you? Personally I would take version three and let the clamour for a realistic deal from business all over the EU to circumvent the idealists in Brussels
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Jun 16, 2020 7:14:47 GMT
Interesting article from the Spectator Global Britain’ should learn from New Zealand’s mistakesIt basically argues against protectionism citing how New Zealand’s economy has boomed after abandoning a series of protectionist tariffs: “New Zealand learned the hard way that protectionist measures damage industries. It is competition that drives higher quality and more sustainable production methods, at least in developed countries”.
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Jun 16, 2020 8:12:49 GMT
Interesting article from the Spectator Global Britain’ should learn from New Zealand’s mistakesIt basically argues against protectionism citing how New Zealand’s economy has boomed after abandoning a series of protectionist tariffs: “New Zealand learned the hard way that protectionist measures damage industries. It is competition that drives higher quality and more sustainable production methods, at least in developed countries”. I've heard it said before that British farming will thrive if given it's head and a fair market place to operate in. Whereas many fear the loss of CAP could damage our farming. What really annoys our farmers is the unfair treatment by the huge supermarket chains who collectively drive down prices for commodities like milk. www.theguardian.com/business/2015/aug/06/dairy-farmers-call-for-supermarkets-boycott-as-milk-price-falls
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Jun 16, 2020 13:36:37 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Jun 16, 2020 15:10:33 GMT
Interesting article from the Spectator Global Britain’ should learn from New Zealand’s mistakesIt basically argues against protectionism citing how New Zealand’s economy has boomed after abandoning a series of protectionist tariffs: “New Zealand learned the hard way that protectionist measures damage industries. It is competition that drives higher quality and more sustainable production methods, at least in developed countries”. I've heard it said before that British farming will thrive if given it's head and a fair market place to operate in. Whereas many fear the loss of CAP could damage our farming. What really annoys our farmers is the unfair treatment by the huge supermarket chains who collectively drive down prices for commodities like milk. www.theguardian.com/business/2015/aug/06/dairy-farmers-call-for-supermarkets-boycott-as-milk-price-fallsMaybe. I suspect a lot of farmers will go to the wall, leaving behind those which are able to manage and compete in a modern non-CAP marketplace. Given that the average age of a farmer is about 60, you wonder how well they'll be able to cope with newer practices and the likely competition from countries which will be eyeing up our agriculture market as part of any trade deal. The supermarkets aspect is right, but that's just capitalism isn't it?
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Jun 16, 2020 15:36:41 GMT
Its amazing how the eu become more willing when faced with a no deal that is meant
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Jun 17, 2020 11:04:32 GMT
A link with our colonial past and/ or a modern democratic nation.
|
|
|
Post by xchpotter on Jun 17, 2020 13:56:57 GMT
A link with our colonial past and/ or a modern democratic nation. Rather trade with the Aussies, Canadians, New Zealander’s any day of the week compared to some of the lot we are currently and may potentially be in bed with.
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Jun 17, 2020 14:02:27 GMT
A link with our colonial past and/ or a modern democratic nation. Rather trade with the Aussies, Canadians, New Zealander’s any day of the week compared to some of the lot we are currently and may potentially be in bed with. We should never of shit on them in the first place
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Jun 17, 2020 16:35:06 GMT
Rather trade with the Aussies, Canadians, New Zealander’s any day of the week compared to some of the lot we are currently and may potentially be in bed with. We should never of shit on them in the first place I agree. The irony is they didn't always suffer as a consequence. The West Indies lost a lot of cane sugar exports to the UK when we joined the EU, but then found a very lucrative market in North America. New Zealand agriculture has thrived in the world market, particularly wine production, despite the loss of butter sales to the UK who turned to Denmark. Australia have grown their trade massively with China and Pacific rim countries since losing exports to the UK. It all goes to show that you can thrive outside the EU. According to the EU there will be very little future growth in the next 30 years within the EU relative to outside the EU, which is why they are so keep to make trade agreements with countries like Japan and Canada and they are very concerned about the UK doing our own thing, with our own laws, tax regime, and currency. English will still be the universal language in the EU, and the language they will use dealing with the rest of the world.
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Jun 20, 2020 9:03:22 GMT
Britain’s plan for a new sovereign satellite navigation system — pushed by the government as a symbol of post-Brexit independence — has been delayed for at least six months amid disagreements about the scope and costs of the multibillion-pound space project. A feasibility study for the programme was launched in 2018 after the UK was shut out of the EU’s £10bn Galileo programme because it voted to leave the EU. That study was due to be published this month, sketching out the shape of the project and paving the way for work to begin. However, several industry and official sources say the project has now been put on hold amid wrangling between ministers and officials over what the final system should look like. Until now industry and the UK Space Agency have been working closely only with the Ministry of Defence on a potential design that would be similar to the EU’s Galileo. The EU system aims to have 24 satellites in medium-earth orbit to provide both an openly available navigation service as well as a highly encrypted positioning platform designed for public service authorities or the military. However, the costs of such a system are now expected to run to £5bn, substantially higher than the initial expectations of £3bn-£4bn when the programme was launched. Now a Cabinet Office review across ministries has questioned whether a full global system is necessary, according to several industry sources with knowledge of the subject. “The problem is that this programme was launched in the political environment of Brexit, but there has been no discussion among stakeholders about what the requirement is,” said a space industry executive with knowledge of the situation. “We are having a pause.” One alternative is a slimmer and less costly version that would use openly available signals from US or European satellites to deliver the positioning, while a smaller subset of British satellites would refine and encrypt the data. In the meantime, work on the feasibility study has come to a standstill. “In recent months there has been delay after delay,” said one industry figure. “It seems the UK lacks the expertise to judge the industry proposals so everything is taking much longer.” The hold-up has dismayed many in the industry, which has already been locked out of EU space projects since the referendum. Britain has set a target to snare 10 per cent of the commercial space market — covering a range of commercial applications from broadcast satellites to earth observations — by 2030, which will be difficult to meet without access to EU space programmes. However, some suggested that the pause offered an opportunity to do something radically different from Galileo, given the advances in technology since the system was designed nearly two decades ago. “This is an opportunity to do something that goes well beyond Galileo,” said Stuart Martin, chief executive of the Satellite Applications Catapult and a member of the UK Space Council. “If we do this it will give us an immediate export opportunity and we would be adding to the systems already there.”
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Jun 20, 2020 10:06:37 GMT
Britain’s plan for a new sovereign satellite navigation system — pushed by the government as a symbol of post-Brexit independence — has been delayed for at least six months amid disagreements about the scope and costs of the multibillion-pound space project. A feasibility study for the programme was launched in 2018 after the UK was shut out of the EU’s £10bn Galileo programme because it voted to leave the EU. That study was due to be published this month, sketching out the shape of the project and paving the way for work to begin. However, several industry and official sources say the project has now been put on hold amid wrangling between ministers and officials over what the final system should look like. Until now industry and the UK Space Agency have been working closely only with the Ministry of Defence on a potential design that would be similar to the EU’s Galileo. The EU system aims to have 24 satellites in medium-earth orbit to provide both an openly available navigation service as well as a highly encrypted positioning platform designed for public service authorities or the military. However, the costs of such a system are now expected to run to £5bn, substantially higher than the initial expectations of £3bn-£4bn when the programme was launched. Now a Cabinet Office review across ministries has questioned whether a full global system is necessary, according to several industry sources with knowledge of the subject. “The problem is that this programme was launched in the political environment of Brexit, but there has been no discussion among stakeholders about what the requirement is,” said a space industry executive with knowledge of the situation. “We are having a pause.” One alternative is a slimmer and less costly version that would use openly available signals from US or European satellites to deliver the positioning, while a smaller subset of British satellites would refine and encrypt the data. In the meantime, work on the feasibility study has come to a standstill. “In recent months there has been delay after delay,” said one industry figure. “It seems the UK lacks the expertise to judge the industry proposals so everything is taking much longer.” The hold-up has dismayed many in the industry, which has already been locked out of EU space projects since the referendum. Britain has set a target to snare 10 per cent of the commercial space market — covering a range of commercial applications from broadcast satellites to earth observations — by 2030, which will be difficult to meet without access to EU space programmes. However, some suggested that the pause offered an opportunity to do something radically different from Galileo, given the advances in technology since the system was designed nearly two decades ago. “This is an opportunity to do something that goes well beyond Galileo,” said Stuart Martin, chief executive of the Satellite Applications Catapult and a member of the UK Space Council. “If we do this it will give us an immediate export opportunity and we would be adding to the systems already there.” I think the delay is totally down to the virus nothing to do with Brexit Money is going to be tight for a while
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Jun 20, 2020 11:37:31 GMT
British beef and lamb face EU tariffs if trade guarantees are breached
The Daily Telegraph20 Jun 2020By James Crisp
BEEF and lamb will be among the products targeted by tariffs if the UK refuses to stick to level playing field guarantees in an EU trade deal, the European Parliament has said.
The warning to the nation’s farmers emerged as France’s Europe minister said yesterday that Britain could not afford a “no trade deal” exit because of the economic impact of coronavirus.
“Those who need the deal the most are the British, they cannot withstand a second shock after the epidemic,” said Amélie de Montchalin.
The level playing field guarantees are a major obstacle to agreeing a UK-EU trade deal before the end of the transition period at the end of the year.
Reports have fuelled speculation that the two sides could agree that the UK could reserve the right to walk away from the commitments but only at the price of EU tariffs on its imports.
A European Parliament report, passed on Thursday, said any EU tariffs would target agricultural products such as Welsh lamb as well as calling for any breach of a future fishing agreement to be punished with tariffs.
Michael Gove suggested Britain could accept some tariffs to have the freedom to diverge, moving away from the goal of a zero-tariff trade deal. But Michel Barnier, the EU chief negotiatior, said there was not enough time for line-by-line negotiations.
The European Commission wants the guarantees to prevent the UK undercutting EU standards to gain an unfair competitive advantage. Britain rejects the demand because the guarantees are more stringent than those in EU trade deals with Canada and Japan.
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Jun 20, 2020 12:24:06 GMT
British beef and lamb face EU tariffs if trade guarantees are breached The Daily Telegraph20 Jun 2020By James Crisp BEEF and lamb will be among the products targeted by tariffs if the UK refuses to stick to level playing field guarantees in an EU trade deal, the European Parliament has said. The warning to the nation’s farmers emerged as France’s Europe minister said yesterday that Britain could not afford a “no trade deal” exit because of the economic impact of coronavirus. “Those who need the deal the most are the British, they cannot withstand a second shock after the epidemic,” said Amélie de Montchalin. The level playing field guarantees are a major obstacle to agreeing a UK-EU trade deal before the end of the transition period at the end of the year. Reports have fuelled speculation that the two sides could agree that the UK could reserve the right to walk away from the commitments but only at the price of EU tariffs on its imports. A European Parliament report, passed on Thursday, said any EU tariffs would target agricultural products such as Welsh lamb as well as calling for any breach of a future fishing agreement to be punished with tariffs. Michael Gove suggested Britain could accept some tariffs to have the freedom to diverge, moving away from the goal of a zero-tariff trade deal. But Michel Barnier, the EU chief negotiatior, said there was not enough time for line-by-line negotiations. The European Commission wants the guarantees to prevent the UK undercutting EU standards to gain an unfair competitive advantage. Britain rejects the demand because the guarantees are more stringent than those in EU trade deals with Canada and Japan. That's fine I'm sure the tariffs on wine and cheese will be more than enough to Compensate beef and sheep farmers
|
|
|
Post by walstoke on Jun 22, 2020 10:03:37 GMT
British beef and lamb face EU tariffs if trade guarantees are breached The Daily Telegraph20 Jun 2020By James Crisp BEEF and lamb will be among the products targeted by tariffs if the UK refuses to stick to level playing field guarantees in an EU trade deal, the European Parliament has said. The warning to the nation’s farmers emerged as France’s Europe minister said yesterday that Britain could not afford a “no trade deal” exit because of the economic impact of coronavirus. “Those who need the deal the most are the British, they cannot withstand a second shock after the epidemic,” said Amélie de Montchalin. The level playing field guarantees are a major obstacle to agreeing a UK-EU trade deal before the end of the transition period at the end of the year. Reports have fuelled speculation that the two sides could agree that the UK could reserve the right to walk away from the commitments but only at the price of EU tariffs on its imports. A European Parliament report, passed on Thursday, said any EU tariffs would target agricultural products such as Welsh lamb as well as calling for any breach of a future fishing agreement to be punished with tariffs. Michael Gove suggested Britain could accept some tariffs to have the freedom to diverge, moving away from the goal of a zero-tariff trade deal. But Michel Barnier, the EU chief negotiatior, said there was not enough time for line-by-line negotiations. The European Commission wants the guarantees to prevent the UK undercutting EU standards to gain an unfair competitive advantage. Britain rejects the demand because the guarantees are more stringent than those in EU trade deals with Canada and Japan. That's fine I'm sure the tariffs on wine and cheese will be more than enough to Compensate beef and sheep farmers Agreed mate, neither side can afford childish tit for tat tariffs.
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Jun 22, 2020 10:07:43 GMT
That's fine I'm sure the tariffs on wine and cheese will be more than enough to Compensate beef and sheep farmers Agreed mate, neither side can afford childish tit for tat tariffs. Well as we import far more from the European Union than we export Then the eu had better start being reasonable sharpish
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Jun 22, 2020 10:27:31 GMT
They need us more than we need them, right?
And yet, they are the 'bullies' being unreasonable...possibly the only time in history it's worked that way around, but you might be onto a first?
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Jun 23, 2020 9:02:08 GMT
The referendum was four years ago today.
It has been a struggle to leave.
|
|
|
Post by The Drunken Communist on Jun 23, 2020 9:31:54 GMT
God bless the brave Brexiteers for fighting for a better future for the country. Heroes, each & every one of you.
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Jun 23, 2020 9:49:09 GMT
|
|
|
Post by yeokel on Jun 23, 2020 9:51:35 GMT
The referendum was four years ago today. It has been a struggle to leave. I think that struggle has largely been down to British incompetance, and a reluctance on all sides of the parliamentary divide to accept the result of the referendum which resulted in us having a PM who did her utmost to keep us attached to the EU by stealth. And I fear the current incumbent may well turn out to be similar once his bluster is cleared out of the way.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Jun 23, 2020 9:57:55 GMT
The referendum was four years ago today. It has been a struggle to leave. I think that struggle has largely been down to British incompetance, and a reluctance on all sides of the parliamentary divide to accept the result of the referendum which resulted in us having a PM who did her utmost to keep us attached to the EU by stealth. And I fear the current incumbent may well turn out to be similar once his bluster is cleared out of the way. Or British political class/ media/ EU/ establishment collusion. I an still hopeful that Boris sees throughout his commitment and continues with his battle with the self entitled press but the outcome remains to be seen.
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Jun 23, 2020 10:15:01 GMT
I wouldn't trust Boris to deliver on Brexit. The guy is an opportunist.
The only hope I still have is that he knows his time is running out due to the mess made of managing the pandemic and that shortly before the next election the 1922 committee will go for a new more electable Tory leader. That being the case (purely supposition on my part), he might as well go full steam ahead with Brexit negotiations threatening no deal to the wire.
He can then go down in history as the man who lead Britain through one of it's toughest periods in history, like his hero Churchill and Lloyd George who are also despised by large sections of our society, for the things they damaged.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Jun 23, 2020 10:28:09 GMT
I wouldn't trust Boris to deliver on Brexit. The guy is an opportunist. The only hope I still have is that he knows his time is running out due to the mess made of managing the pandemic and that shortly before the next election the 1922 committee will go for a new more electable Tory leader. That being the case (purely supposition on my part), he might as well go full steam ahead with Brexit negotiations threatening no deal to the wire. He can then go down in history as the man who led Britain through one of it's toughest periods in history, like his hero Churchill and Lloyd George who are also despised by large sections of our society, for the things they damaged. I think it is hard to get to the bottom of what Boris is all about, despite the " evidence" Things change quickly in politics. He might be seen as the PM who has stood strong against the onslaught on 3 fronts, standing up to the media, who think they run the show, the backlash and critics because of the handling of the pandemic, and Brexit
|
|