|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Nov 19, 2020 12:45:32 GMT
Either you've replied to the wrong person or you clearly didn't read my last posts since I'm not talking at all about trade deals and am in agreement that we should have been out years ago. Take a chill pill. Edit: By saying Farage would have delivered on it by now you're contradicting your point about Remainers causing the hold up. If it could have been done by now (as Farage would have done according to you), then the incumbent party could have done it by now also, and thus they are to blame. I'm chilled enough Pal, believeme. Just responding to your point about not keeping promises....the only real promise that there has been attempts not to keep is the of the referendum result ( bollox to Brexit). Indeed the deceitful May government was part of the problem....all the major political parties were in cahoots with the EU. The jury is still out on Johnson. Indeed if an actual genuine leaver such as Farage had been in charge, the "promise" of the referendum would have Indeed been delivered. The very fact that many still want to rerun the arguments indicates that some still cannot come to terms with the result. I think it would have been totally different if Remain had won.A total disregard for the electorate. www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36306681"In a 52-48 referendum this would be unfinished business by a long way. If the Remain campaign win two-thirds to one-third that ends it." so said Saint Nigel of Farage...! But of course, only Remainers aren't allowed to carry on any unfinished business! Nigel is, but if Remainers do it, they're just not accepting the result of the referendum!
|
|
|
Post by foster on Nov 19, 2020 12:45:51 GMT
Either you've replied to the wrong person or you clearly didn't read my last posts since I'm not talking at all about trade deals and am in agreement that we should have been out years ago. Take a chill pill. Edit: By saying Farage would have delivered on it by now you're contradicting your point about Remainers causing the hold up. If it could have been done by now (as Farage would have done according to you), then the incumbent party could have done it by now also, and thus they are to blame. I'm chilled enough Pal, believeme. Just responding to your point about not keeping promises....the only real promise that there has been attempts not to keep is the of the referendum result ( bollox to Brexit). Indeed the deceitful May government was part of the problem....all the major political parties were in cahoots with the EU. The jury is still out on Johnson. Indeed if an actual genuine leaver such as Farage had been in charge, the "promise" of the referendum would have Indeed been delivered. The very fact that many still want to rerun the arguments indicates that some still cannot come to terms with the result. I think it would have been totally different if Remain had won.A total disregard for the electorate. All the time we've wasted leaving is time we could have already used rejoining.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Nov 19, 2020 12:47:56 GMT
I'm chilled enough Pal, believeme. Just responding to your point about not keeping promises....the only real promise that there has been attempts not to keep is the of the referendum result ( bollox to Brexit). Indeed the deceitful May government was part of the problem....all the major political parties were in cahoots with the EU. The jury is still out on Johnson. Indeed if an actual genuine leaver such as Farage had been in charge, the "promise" of the referendum would have Indeed been delivered. The very fact that many still want to rerun the arguments indicates that some still cannot come to terms with the result. I think it would have been totally different if Remain had won.A total disregard for the electorate. www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36306681"In a 52-48 referendum this would be unfinished business by a long way. If the Remain campaign win two-thirds to one-third that ends it." Acceptance of the result ie " no need to change, as you were, conform, come to heel"
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Nov 19, 2020 12:49:33 GMT
Acceptance of the result ie " no need to change, as you were, conform, come to heel" Just pointing out the bollocks you said about it being totally different if Remain had won!
|
|
|
Post by Kilo on Nov 19, 2020 12:51:19 GMT
Internal markets bill. It goes against the withdrawal agreement. It is not yet law, but it will be soon. Total bad faith. I negotiate for a living. I know the single must destructive thing you can do in a complex negotiation is to unilaterally break an agreement already reached. It damages trust and is in bad faith. What law have the EU breached in negotiations? How have they negotiated in bad faith? They have been consistent from day 1. We have flip-flopped, mostly because our leaders have said we can have our cake and eat it, which we obviously can’t. Our position has always been detached from reality. Negotiating and agreeing the withdrawal agreement and then subsequently legislating to break it is the perfect example. It also has tarnished our reputation in the world as being honest and it has made a US trade deal much harder So actually we haven’t broken the law The internal markets bill doesn’t break the law It only breaks the law if it is used Therefore it’s in the EU interest not to put us in the position to have to break it Just out of interest when you set out to negotiate do you have lines you can’t cross And do you have a plan in place if you fail Because all the internal markets bill is a plan in case the negotiations fail I doubt Oggy's negotiations ever get concluded. Once they get near to the end he'll go back to argue the point on the first day when he suggested biscuits should be provided with the coffees.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Nov 19, 2020 12:51:31 GMT
I'm chilled enough Pal, believeme. Just responding to your point about not keeping promises....the only real promise that there has been attempts not to keep is the of the referendum result ( bollox to Brexit). Indeed the deceitful May government was part of the problem....all the major political parties were in cahoots with the EU. The jury is still out on Johnson. Indeed if an actual genuine leaver such as Farage had been in charge, the "promise" of the referendum would have Indeed been delivered. The very fact that many still want to rerun the arguments indicates that some still cannot come to terms with the result. I think it would have been totally different if Remain had won.A total disregard for the electorate. All the time we've wasted leaving is time we could have already used rejoining. No mandate to rejoin. We voted leave and have not fully managed that yet. Mind you , I agree the Remainers did waste time. I agree with Iain Duncan Smith on this Remainers' overwhelming allegiance to the EU cause has created our political crisis www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/09/16/remainers-overwhelming-allegiance-eu-cause-has-created-political/,...... Eurocrats still don’t get it. They still don’t get Brexit. They still don’t understand that us Brits didn’t vote for some kind of trial separation from the EU. No, we voted for a full and everlasting divorce. There’s no going back. We’re out (or will be soon) and we’re staying out Dream on, Guy Verhofstadt: Brexit won't be reversed | The Spectator www.spectator.co.uk/article/dream-on-guy-verhofstadt-brexit-won-t-be-reversed
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Nov 19, 2020 12:53:55 GMT
Acceptance of the result ie " no need to change, as you were, conform, come to heel" Just pointing out the bollocks you said about it being totally different if Remain had won! It would have been. Your establishment would have closed things down and it would be " business as usual"
|
|
|
Post by foster on Nov 19, 2020 12:56:47 GMT
Clearly, there's no such thing in this instance as a 'full and everlasting divorce'. No one can predict the future and it would be daft to really believe something like this is 'everlasting'. Anyway, it was the government wasting time with their finger pointing and lack of actual 'leaving', as Farage would have done. The boys in charge haven't done anyone any favours with their dilly dallying. Just get Brexit done FFS. As for Guy, well... He's not Mystic Meg. edit: You shouldn't believe everything you read BJR....and in the case of Politicians, you should pretty much never believe what they say.
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Nov 19, 2020 12:57:51 GMT
Just pointing out the bollocks you said about it being totally different if Remain had won! It would have been. Your establishment would have closed things down and it would be " business as usual" Saint Nigel of Farage disagrees with you, John, what are you going to do now?! Who do you think is in "my" Establishment, just for amusement's sake
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Nov 19, 2020 13:05:00 GMT
Acceptance of the result ie " no need to change, as you were, conform, come to heel" Just pointing out the bollocks you said about it being totally different if Remain had won! It was different in the first referendum in the 70s. The vote was to remain and the nation accepted got on with it. What is different now is the establishment, big business, banks, etc. wanted to remain and despite all their propaganda prior to the 2016 referendum the people voted to leave. There is no going back. We have left. If the country was mad enough to reapply to join the EU, there would be no rebate, so membership would cost £20 billion per annum and there would be no £ because the UK would have to join the Euro. There is no chance the EU would allow a situation where the UK could choose to leave again at the next general election. They would ensure the end of British democracy.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Nov 19, 2020 13:05:50 GMT
It would have been. Your establishment would have closed things down and it would be " business as usual" Saint Nigel of Farage disagrees with you, John, what are you going to do now?! Who do you think is in "my" Establishment, just for amusement's sake From your clip, Farage was pointing out the unfairness of the campaign, as agreed by Cameron......... But Mr Cameron has defended the leaflets, saying the government is "not neutral" in the campaign and it was "money well spent". He said the government had a duty to give voters the "facts". Speaking to the BBC, Mr Farage denied that his suggestion he would fight for a second referendum would further stoke tensions in the Leave campaign. "I'm not putting it on the agenda, I don't want a second referendum - I want to win this one," he said. As it happens Leave won , so we don't really need to rerun everything as you Remainers ( although I think you like to be seen as a changed leaver,) seem to want to. I'm not particularly interested in Farage as a person, but he dies speak for millions, I know that you do like to bring it down to personalities, whether politicians or Oatcake posters, when you lose the argument. Your establishment includes Cameron, George, Heseltine, Blair etc , don't be ashamed of it.
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Nov 19, 2020 13:12:02 GMT
Saint Nigel of Farage disagrees with you, John, what are you going to do now?! Who do you think is in "my" Establishment, just for amusement's sake From your clip, Farage was pointing out the unfairness of the campaign, as agreed by Cameron......... But Mr Cameron has defended the leaflets, saying the government is "not neutral" in the campaign and it was "money well spent". He said the government had a duty to give voters the "facts". Speaking to the BBC, Mr Farage denied that his suggestion he would fight for a second referendum would further stoke tensions in the Leave campaign. "I'm not putting it on the agenda, I don't want a second referendum - I want to win this one," he said. As it happens Leave won , so we don't really need to rerun everything as you Remainers ( although I think you like to be seen as a changed leaver,) seem to want to. I'm not particularly interested in Farage as a person, but he dies speak for millions, I know that you do like to bring it down to personalities, whether politicians or Oatcake posters, when you lose the argument. Your establishment includes Cameron, George, Heseltine, Blair etc , don't be ashamed of it. So, Saint Nige says it wouldn't have been business as usual if Remain had won 52/48! At least we got that clear! Straight from the horses mouth and total bollocks to suggest otherwise. It's not about me, John, remember, no need to get personal, again! We're talking about whether Farage would have quietly accepted the result if it had been 52/48 - the answer is quite obviously not! You brought up the Establishment, who constitutes the Establishment in your eyes?
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Nov 19, 2020 13:13:13 GMT
Clearly, there's no such thing in this instance as a 'full and everlasting divorce'. No one can predict the future and it would be daft to really believe something like this is 'everlasting'. Anyway, it was the government wasting time with their finger pointing and lack of actual 'leaving', as Farage would have done. The boys in charge haven't done anyone any favours with their dilly dallying. Just get Brexit done FFS. As for Guy, well... He's not Mystic Meg. edit: You shouldn't believe everything you read BJR....and in the case of Politicians, you should pretty much never believe what they say. "Don't believe everything you Read Foster, take a chill pill".....you Remainers, even those in disguise, love to make it simplistically personal, and still don’t get it. Yes the Remainer May government did try to deceive the electorate, aided and abetted by the EU, Miller ( and her associates), other political parties, Labour, via Starmer.....that's why the Establishment STILL can't let it go,....they can't believe how it could have happened....?
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Nov 19, 2020 13:14:58 GMT
From your clip, Farage was pointing out the unfairness of the campaign, as agreed by Cameron......... But Mr Cameron has defended the leaflets, saying the government is "not neutral" in the campaign and it was "money well spent". He said the government had a duty to give voters the "facts". Speaking to the BBC, Mr Farage denied that his suggestion he would fight for a second referendum would further stoke tensions in the Leave campaign. "I'm not putting it on the agenda, I don't want a second referendum - I want to win this one," he said. As it happens Leave won , so we don't really need to rerun everything as you Remainers ( although I think you like to be seen as a changed leaver,) seem to want to. I'm not particularly interested in Farage as a person, but he dies speak for millions, I know that you do like to bring it down to personalities, whether politicians or Oatcake posters, when you lose the argument. Your establishment includes Cameron, George, Heseltine, Blair etc , don't be ashamed of it. So, Saint Nige says it wouldn't have been business as usual if Remain had won 52/48! At least we got that clear! Straight from the horses mouth and total bollocks to suggest otherwise. It's not about me, John, remember, no need to get personal, again! We're talking about whether Farage would have quietly accepted the result if it had been 52/48 - the answer is quite obviously not! You brought up the Establishment, who constitutes the Establishment in your eyes? I've given you examples of the Establishment. There's no real shame in being part of it. Of course the battle to leave would have continued, but the result of the referendum would have not been undermined.
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Nov 19, 2020 13:26:49 GMT
So, Saint Nige says it wouldn't have been business as usual if Remain had won 52/48! At least we got that clear! Straight from the horses mouth and total bollocks to suggest otherwise. It's not about me, John, remember, no need to get personal, again! We're talking about whether Farage would have quietly accepted the result if it had been 52/48 - the answer is quite obviously not! You brought up the Establishment, who constitutes the Establishment in your eyes? I've given you examples of the Establishment. There's no real shame in being part of it. Of course the battle to leave would have continued, but the result of the referendum would have not been undermined. Thank you for elevating me into the Establishment, must try and maximise my contacts Those are just weasel words, John, which mean precisely the same in relation to the referendum as what the Remain side actually did, we both know it, even if you won't admit it! I'll spell it out for you. If Remain had won 52/48, exactly the same arguments would have arisen on both sides as did this time around, except with the positions reversed. Farage et al would have continued to agitate and argue that the EU was undemocratic, corrupt, bullying the UK etc etc. Euro-sceptic Conservative politicians would have had to make a decision on whether to join UKIP and be a huge threat to the Tories or they would have stayed put and carried on buggering up the Conservatives on Europe from within. Either way, to pretend it would all have quietly gone away is, as Farage correctly pointed out, nonsense I'm afraid!
|
|
|
Post by foster on Nov 19, 2020 13:30:10 GMT
Clearly, there's no such thing in this instance as a 'full and everlasting divorce'. No one can predict the future and it would be daft to really believe something like this is 'everlasting'. Anyway, it was the government wasting time with their finger pointing and lack of actual 'leaving', as Farage would have done. The boys in charge haven't done anyone any favours with their dilly dallying. Just get Brexit done FFS. As for Guy, well... He's not Mystic Meg. edit: You shouldn't believe everything you read BJR....and in the case of Politicians, you should pretty much never believe what they say. "Don't believe everything you Read Foster, take a chill pill".....you Remainers, even those in disguise, love to make it simplistically personal, and still don’t get it. Yes the Remainer May government did try to deceive the electorate, aided and abetted by the EU, Miller ( and her associates), other political parties, Labour, via Starmer.....that's why the Establishment STILL can't let it go,....they can't believe how it could have happened....? Honestly don't get what you're moaning about BJR. If there's someone here who doesn't seem to be able to let something go it's you.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Nov 19, 2020 13:32:59 GMT
I've given you examples of the Establishment. There's no real shame in being part of it. Of course the battle to leave would have continued, but the result of the referendum would have not been undermined. Thank you for elevating me into the Establishment, must try and maximise my contacts Those are just weasel words, John, which mean precisely the same in relation to the referendum as what the Remain side actually did, we both know it, even if you won't admit it! I'll spell it out for you. If Remain had won 52/48, exactly the same arguments would have arisen on both sides as did this time around, except with the positions reversed. Farage et al would have continued to agitate and argue that the EU was undemocratic, corrupt, bullying the UK etc etc. Euro-sceptic Conservative politicians would have had to make a decision on whether to join UKIP and be a huge threat to the Tories or they would have stayed put and carried on buggering up the Conservatives on Europe from within. Either way, to pretend it would all have quietly gone away is, as Farage correctly pointed out, nonsense I'm afraid! I don't agree with you.( " we both know it,Weasel words won't admit it" just hot air when losing an argument). There's nothing wrong with being in line with the Cameron government of the time, many people were. They just happened to be wrong on Brexit and did not reflect those who voted Anyway the important thing now is to leave properly and hopefully get a good trade deal. I'll leave you to investigate what is meant by the Establishment and the relevance of Farage's past statements ( He does seem a relevant politician doesn't he, compared to May and Corbyn?)
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Nov 19, 2020 13:34:31 GMT
"Don't believe everything you Read Foster, take a chill pill".....you Remainers, even those in disguise, love to make it simplistically personal, and still don’t get it. Yes the Remainer May government did try to deceive the electorate, aided and abetted by the EU, Miller ( and her associates), other political parties, Labour, via Starmer.....that's why the Establishment STILL can't let it go,....they can't believe how it could have happened....? Honestly don't get what you're moaning about BJR. If there's someone here who doesn't seem to be able to let something go it's you. I'm all for implementing the referendum result, leaving the EU and moving on....seems like we are in agreement.
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Nov 19, 2020 14:09:34 GMT
Thank you for elevating me into the Establishment, must try and maximise my contacts Those are just weasel words, John, which mean precisely the same in relation to the referendum as what the Remain side actually did, we both know it, even if you won't admit it! I'll spell it out for you. If Remain had won 52/48, exactly the same arguments would have arisen on both sides as did this time around, except with the positions reversed. Farage et al would have continued to agitate and argue that the EU was undemocratic, corrupt, bullying the UK etc etc. Euro-sceptic Conservative politicians would have had to make a decision on whether to join UKIP and be a huge threat to the Tories or they would have stayed put and carried on buggering up the Conservatives on Europe from within. Either way, to pretend it would all have quietly gone away is, as Farage correctly pointed out, nonsense I'm afraid! I don't agree with you.( " we both know it,Weasel words won't admit it" just hot air when losing an argument). There's nothing wrong with being in line with the Cameron government of the time, many people were. They just happened to be wrong on Brexit and did not reflect those who voted Anyway the important thing now is to leave properly and hopefully get a good trade deal. I'll leave you to investigate what is meant by the Establishment and the relevance of Farage's past statements ( He does seem a relevant politician doesn't he, compared to May and Corbyn?) Always happy to agree to disagree and leave it there. You think it would have been totally different if Remain had won 52/48. Farage and, I suspect, almost everyone else disagrees. I see the 'Establishment' banded around a fair bit, usually as a means of trying to prove a point - although no-one ever says quite what the Establishment is!
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Nov 19, 2020 14:12:44 GMT
"Don't believe everything you Read Foster, take a chill pill".....you Remainers, even those in disguise, love to make it simplistically personal, and still don’t get it. Yes the Remainer May government did try to deceive the electorate, aided and abetted by the EU, Miller ( and her associates), other political parties, Labour, via Starmer.....that's why the Establishment STILL can't let it go,....they can't believe how it could have happened....? Honestly don't get what you're moaning about BJR. If there's someone here who doesn't seem to be able to let something go it's you. Just the usual - doesn't like the way the discussion is going, plays the "personal" card...standard BJR.
|
|
|
Post by foghornsgleghorn on Nov 19, 2020 18:18:06 GMT
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Nov 19, 2020 18:26:49 GMT
From your link( see below) "the UK had wanted to maintain the same access to shared databases that it has now, but the EU says that is not on offer to non-members"..........perhaps the EU should make it on offer to allies in the fight against terrorism? Neil Basu told the BBC's Newscast podcast a deal was "incredibly important for the safety and security of our country". He said he was hopeful of a better security and law enforcement agreement than the UK currently has. The government said the safety and security of citizens was a priority. Talks between the UK and EU are ongoing ahead of the 31 December deadline for a deal. The UK left the EU on 31 January, but continues to follow current EU rules until the end of the year while negotiations take place. Any deal would need to be ratified by parliaments on both sides. On security, the UK had wanted to maintain the same access to shared databases that it has now, but the EU says that is not on offer to non-members.
|
|
|
Post by foghornsgleghorn on Nov 19, 2020 18:35:16 GMT
It was the Leave side pre-referendum arguing that the UK economy would thrive outside the EU. I smile at being termed a Europhile as I have no undying love for the EU , but when I see leavers banging on about the brave new future for fishing when key people in the industry are saying the new trading terms (deal or no) are a threat , or saying the car industry is going great guns when really it's a link to a post which says the investment in electric technology is being made in Bavaria, I do not consider it to be talking down the UK to put the other side. The examples given of the positive investment you mention are to be welcomed - there will be many others, I am still waiting to see the real positives which are as a result of Brexit. Apologies if I presumed you are a Europhile and you felt insulted. I don't know the detail of the BMW investment, but I would be surprised if there is not financial assistance from the Bavarian state and/or the German Federal government, on the grounds of for example environmental improvement as I have experienced in The Netherlands. For me the major positive of leaving the EU is sovereignty. The UK is governed by UK government who can sign up or terminate treaties, unions, or organisation rules, and not be subject to EU laws. We are entitled to the same , or better, trade deal than Canada, but struggling even to be treated like an independant country. Democracy is voting for the people who govern you and the ability, even if only once every 5 years, to remove government. The America war of independance was fought on the principle of "no taxation without representation". In the EU representation is via the Council of Ministers, and European Parliament. But the real power is with the European Commission who draft all legislation that is all in one direction towards ever greater union towards a United States of Europe with no regard to individual peoples apart from doling out regional and state aid to keep them "on side". The economic positive from leaving the EU is I accept a longer term issue. I have freely admitted there will be problems leaving after 40 years of integration. But if you look at world trends, UK trade trends, EU growth, the Euro (God help Greece and Italy), world demographics, etc. the EU might have been the place for the UK to be in the 1970s, but not in the 21st century. (See my previous posts.) 95% of future world economic growth will be outside of the EU which , apart from Germany, is stagnant. The majority of our exports are to the rest of the world and growing rapidly (pre-pandemic) compared to just 1% growth to the EU this millennium. It will take time to turn the UK "economic tanker" round, but it by far the best for the UK in the long term. One of the first real positives will be trade deals with countries the EU does not have deals with. That will take time to set up but the benefits will be massive in the long term. The are "doubting Thomases" but our history tells us we are uniquely placed with our geographical location, language, climate, and above all the talents of the British period to enjoy a bountiful future. No need to worry about me feeling offended but thanks anyway. As regards the new Trade Deals we're basically talking China, who you have previously said we're getting too close to, and the US. Time and again Brexiters talk about our negative trade balance with the EU, but we have a negative balance with China and the US , and even Kenya , a recently-signed deal held up as a triumph for Brexit.
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Nov 19, 2020 19:51:30 GMT
Apologies if I presumed you are a Europhile and you felt insulted. I don't know the detail of the BMW investment, but I would be surprised if there is not financial assistance from the Bavarian state and/or the German Federal government, on the grounds of for example environmental improvement as I have experienced in The Netherlands. For me the major positive of leaving the EU is sovereignty. The UK is governed by UK government who can sign up or terminate treaties, unions, or organisation rules, and not be subject to EU laws. We are entitled to the same , or better, trade deal than Canada, but struggling even to be treated like an independant country. Democracy is voting for the people who govern you and the ability, even if only once every 5 years, to remove government. The America war of independance was fought on the principle of "no taxation without representation". In the EU representation is via the Council of Ministers, and European Parliament. But the real power is with the European Commission who draft all legislation that is all in one direction towards ever greater union towards a United States of Europe with no regard to individual peoples apart from doling out regional and state aid to keep them "on side". The economic positive from leaving the EU is I accept a longer term issue. I have freely admitted there will be problems leaving after 40 years of integration. But if you look at world trends, UK trade trends, EU growth, the Euro (God help Greece and Italy), world demographics, etc. the EU might have been the place for the UK to be in the 1970s, but not in the 21st century. (See my previous posts.) 95% of future world economic growth will be outside of the EU which , apart from Germany, is stagnant. The majority of our exports are to the rest of the world and growing rapidly (pre-pandemic) compared to just 1% growth to the EU this millennium. It will take time to turn the UK "economic tanker" round, but it by far the best for the UK in the long term. One of the first real positives will be trade deals with countries the EU does not have deals with. That will take time to set up but the benefits will be massive in the long term. The are "doubting Thomases" but our history tells us we are uniquely placed with our geographical location, language, climate, and above all the talents of the British period to enjoy a bountiful future. No need to worry about me feeling offended but thanks anyway. As regards the new Trade Deals we're basically talking China, who you have previously said we're getting too close to, and the US. Time and again Brexiters talk about our negative trade balance with the EU, but we have a negative balance with China and the US , and even Kenya , a recently-signed deal held up as a triumph for Brexit. I fully agree. None EU exports have been growing much faster than exports to the EU though are that is the market we need to be in in the future as it is forcast to grow much faster by the EU' s own reports. Everyone is in deficit trading with China and worryingly China is buying up a lot of businesses, which some people welcome as inward investment! I think there is huge potential for us to grow our trade with the USA but currently we are too dependant on them for IT, etc. Africa is interesting. The fastest growing economies are now in Africa, but they are still small of course. Nevertheless there is a huge opportunity to grow our trade with them, particularly importing cheaper food and reducing our dependence on the EU (France notably). India is the main country IMO we will have long term opportunity to grow our trade with.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Nov 19, 2020 19:58:32 GMT
No need to worry about me feeling offended but thanks anyway. As regards the new Trade Deals we're basically talking China, who you have previously said we're getting too close to, and the US. Time and again Brexiters talk about our negative trade balance with the EU, but we have a negative balance with China and the US , and even Kenya , a recently-signed deal held up as a triumph for Brexit. I fully agree. None EU exports have been growing much faster than exports to the EU though are that is the market we need to be in in the future as it is forcast to grow much faster by the EU' s own reports. Everyone is in deficit trading with China and worryingly China is buying up a lot of businesses, which some people welcome as inward investment! I think there is huge potential for us to grow our trade with the USA but currently we are too dependant on them for IT, etc. Africa is interesting. The fastest growing economies are now in Africa, but they are still small of course. Nevertheless there is a huge opportunity to grow our trade with them, particularly importing cheaper food and reducing our dependence on the EU (France notably). India is the main country IMO we will have long term opportunity to grow our trade with. I think that we should also revitalise our relationship with Australia and New Zealand ( and Canada...we never seem to have had a very close relationship?), develop relationships through the Commonwealth and also with specific developing countries.....it would be good to use trade rather than aid to help them.....hasn't someone ( Andrew Mitchell?)recently proposed that for every Medic that we recruit( poach/ pinch?) from a developing country, we should find 2 health workers in that country?
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Nov 19, 2020 20:09:06 GMT
From your link( see below) "the UK had wanted to maintain the same access to shared databases that it has now, but the EU says that is not on offer to non-members"..........perhaps the EU should make it on offer to allies in the fight against terrorism? Neil Basu told the BBC's Newscast podcast a deal was "incredibly important for the safety and security of our country". He said he was hopeful of a better security and law enforcement agreement than the UK currently has. The government said the safety and security of citizens was a priority. Talks between the UK and EU are ongoing ahead of the 31 December deadline for a deal. The UK left the EU on 31 January, but continues to follow current EU rules until the end of the year while negotiations take place. Any deal would need to be ratified by parliaments on both sides. On security, the UK had wanted to maintain the same access to shared databases that it has now, but the EU says that is not on offer to non-members. I am not an expert on security but I struggle to see why an agreement cannot be struck between all nations in the fight against international crime and terrorism through organisations like Interpol. There are other countries in Europe not in the EU are there no measures and agreements in place with them? I appreciate this is a complex subject particularly when you have countries like Russia engaged in crime and French authorities assisting illegal immigrants across the Channel.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Nov 19, 2020 20:10:11 GMT
I don’t know anyone who hates their country. A negotiation is not about being better than the other side. It’s about what you each have to offer and how much each side wants it. Every individual actually involved in the negotiations on both sides will be supremely competent. You've a funny way of showing the love of your country. Don't you think Lord Kerr is wrong in talking about one party" coming to heel"? Hardly shows mutual respect....and he's a British Lord. So by your reckoning if the two sides of this current negotiation, being supremely competent, cannot agree, it is best , regrettably, to end in no-deal and move on. It is better than either side relinquishing their integrity. No. The very competent people are hampered by idiots in the cabinet
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Nov 19, 2020 20:10:53 GMT
I don’t know anyone who hates their country. A negotiation is not about being better than the other side. It’s about what you each have to offer and how much each side wants it. Every individual actually involved in the negotiations on both sides will be supremely competent. Erm, you do know David Davis was our lead negotiator for some time, I take it?! Do you think he was doing any negotiating!? It’s lawyers negotiating
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Nov 19, 2020 20:13:22 GMT
So new investment in poor parts of the country couldn’t have happened without leaving the eu!?!? Why is that exactly? blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2019/05/21/long-read-does-the-eu-stop-britain-from-using-state-aid-to-help-its-economy/Meanwhile many countries in the EU turn a blind eye to state aid and rules. I have given countless examples in previous posts of German cartel, ignoring CE marking rules, lower standards on safety of guarding and electrical regulations across the EU, funding of environmental projects in The Netherlands, government loans to Italian and Irish steel, environment laws ignored by Italian steelworks. I have posted countless links to examples of these. I used to Chair a European committee and the Germans had the largest representation, because they had the largest industry. What the German said was what happened, and all their neighbouring countries towed the line. Or maybe that should be "came to heel". The post on German car investment initiated this latest discussion. Some of us haven't forgotten "dieselgate". en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_emissions_scandalSo the only way to invest in jobs and industry in the uk is by direct state aid!? Also we often haven’t used as much state aid as available to us. So, again, why would state aid suddenly increase when it could have during our time within the eu?
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Nov 19, 2020 20:15:25 GMT
Internal markets bill. It goes against the withdrawal agreement. It is not yet law, but it will be soon. Total bad faith. I negotiate for a living. I know the single must destructive thing you can do in a complex negotiation is to unilaterally break an agreement already reached. It damages trust and is in bad faith. What law have the EU breached in negotiations? How have they negotiated in bad faith? They have been consistent from day 1. We have flip-flopped, mostly because our leaders have said we can have our cake and eat it, which we obviously can’t. Our position has always been detached from reality. Negotiating and agreeing the withdrawal agreement and then subsequently legislating to break it is the perfect example. It also has tarnished our reputation in the world as being honest and it has made a US trade deal much harder Most of the reason for uncertainty on our part is because of Remainers being unable to accept the fact that most people who voted in the UK wanted to leave and they have done( and still are doing) everything they can to prevent us from leaving ( Hard/ soft Brexit, Miller, deceitful Remainer May, Confirmatory referendums/ Bollox to Brexit). From the Spectator: I have always loved the story of Hiroo Onoda, a Japanese soldier who refused to believe the Second World War was over and stayed hiding in the Philippines until his former commanding officer was brought out of retirement and ordered him to surrender. That was in, 1974, 29 years after the end of hostilities. But I wouldn’t bet on the final Remainer holdouts giving up their struggle so quickly. If Lord Kerr of Kinlochard can be gently persuaded out from behind one of the red benches in the House of Lords before 2049 – when he’ll be 106 – I would consider it a triumph of negotiation. It would be an even greater wonder if Lords Adonis and Heseltine could be tempted out by the same date. www.spectator.co.uk/article/lord-kerr-s-stupid-brexit-jibe-shows-some-remainers-have-learned-nothingRubbish. It’s the brexiteers who have caused the uncertainty. Boris johnson promising to have the cake and eat it. The leave campaign saying we will have the benefits of eu membership with none of the downsides etc. All the lies have come home to roost.
|
|