EXIT NEGOTIATIONS

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Forgot link my apoligies https://www.theguardian.com/politics...enny-say-lords

Thank you.

This is classic. Throw out a number that is generally guessed to be completely unreasonable but is not without some thin shred of support, so as to force the other bargainer to re-anchor their bargaining range.

Once you have re-anchored their bargaining range a bit, you can then "make concessions" from a different start point and generate a better haggling result.

It's the usual positional bargaining bullshit headgame -- but that is customary in international affairs anyway.


You will note that the positional paper already has a caveat built in to let the EU know it is a bargaining step. Moreover, as it has been officially authored by the Lords, whose position can be over-ridden, it is designed to backed away from as needed.

[Gilrandir]

If the one brother, let's call him Albion, is richer (than most).

Does this brother realize he has some aliens in him (let's call them Scottie and N. Iry) and they can break free if he tries to leave the house that suited them well?

[Greyblades]

Scottie's less interested since trying 3 years ago and N. Iry is likely to tear himself apart if he tries.

[Gilrandir]

Scottie's less interested since trying 3 years ago and N. Iry is likely to tear himself apart if he tries.

Scottie tried it under different circumstances and they voted to remain within the UK which was in the EU. Now that the conditions have changed Nicola is willing to try it again.

[Beskar]

@Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

I cannot remember which thread or where, but I remember saying that the UK is holding EU citizens as hostage and they should agree to an exchange of rights. You disagreed saying it is not happening because the EU won't return them and the government just wants it as a guarantee.

Here is a new latest comment from the chief EU negotiator Michael Barnier. Source
He demanded full protection of the rights of some 3.2 million EU citizens living in the UK and the 1.2 million Britons in other EU countries.
"I will not discuss our future relationship with the UK until the 27 member states are reassured that all citizens will be treated properly and humanely," he said.
Brexit should not alter people's daily lives, he went on, and there must be equal treatment between all EU and UK nationals in the UK, as well the inverse.

It is as I suggested it was. EU wants to do an equal exchange, Theresa May is holding EU citizens within the UK and UK citizens in the EU to ransom.

[Greyblades]

Yeah that's crap. If they wanted equivalent exchange why dont they agree to May's offer months ago?

Scottie tried it under different circumstances and they voted to remain within the UK which was in the EU. Now that the conditions have changed Nicola is willing to try it again.

Thier people seem less willing:Support for Scottish independence lower than at 2014 referendum, poll shows

[Beskar]

Yeah that's crap. If they wanted equivalent exchange why dont they agree to May's offer months ago?

What offer? News to me, she has been openly defiant of such an offer.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

What offer? News to me, she has been openly defiant of such an offer.

My response to you last time you raised this:

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showt...post2053745683

There's also the UK Citizens who wanted to sue Junker because he refused to agree to this months ago.

Also in response to you:

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showt...post2053746154

We've mentioned this several times over the last several pages, what have you been reading? Clearly not the mainstream media.

[Beskar]

My response to you last time you raised this:

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showt...post2053745683

There's also the UK Citizens who wanted to sue Junker because he refused to agree to this months ago.

Also in response to you:

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showt...post2053746154

We've mentioned this several times over the last several pages, what have you been reading? Clearly not the mainstream media.

Then it is bad form of the EU. It was probably the fact they were saying one thing publicly whilst saying something else privately.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Barnier is cunning, I'll give him that. Having refused to even countenance discussion of Citizens' Rights as recently as last week, and certainly not before the "Brexit Bill is settled" he now turns it around and makes a show of demanding exactly what the British Government has been asking for for over six months. However, he makes a deal contingent on us continuing to accept the rulings of the ECJ and links it to Freedom of Movement.

Contrast this with the UK saying, just last week, it wants to enshrine the Rights of resident EU Citizens in Primary Legislation, something it expects to be able to basically wave through given all parties in the UK are in agreement on the topic.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Then it is bad form of the EU. It was probably the fact they were saying one thing publicly whilst saying something else privately.

I think it has literally taken a month for you to recognise this.

May I suggest you chew more Telegraph and smoke more Gruniard? Just don't swallow or inhale.

[Sarmatian]

While I have no doubt that it fits the Evil EU narrative pro Brexit voters are so fond of, I'm pretty certain that's not the case.

A cursory check shows that EU feels UK's guarantees are not good enough, as the process would take more than a decade under current rules, and leave around a third (roughly a million people) EU nationals currently living in UK without resident rights. So, they want better guarantees.

Such guarantees must be effective, enforceable, non-discriminatory and comprehensive, including the right to acquire permanent residence after a continuous period of five years of legal residence. Citizens should be able to exercise their rights through smooth and simple administrative procedures.

As BBC analyst has said

This reflects concern among EU member states that the UK is underestimating the technical difficulties of reaching an agreement on the issue of citizens' rights. There have to be legal guarantees, one senior official said, not just a gentlemen's agreement. And, at the moment of course, the ultimate legal authority for EU citizens is the European Court of Justice. That makes this a tricky political problem in the UK, not least because some of these issues will still be relevant decades into the future. The EU is also concerned that the UK Home Office is placing and will continue to place bureaucratic obstacles in the path of EU citizens trying to secure their future - this is a warning shot across British bows.

They want real guarantees (legal obligations) that could be independently enforced.

There's a nice Financial Times article on it, which concludes

However, the UK and the EU do not seem far apart in principle, and both agree that the matter is urgent. There can be no serious doubt that an agreement can be made within two years, if Britain accepts the EU’s demands. But it cannot be done at speed or without the detail being worked out, and the UK does not seem to realise this yet.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

While I have no doubt that it fits the Evil EU narrative pro Brexit voters are so fond of, I'm pretty certain that's not the case.

A cursory check shows that EU feels UK's guarantees are not good enough, as the process would take more than a decade under current rules, and leave around a third (roughly a million people) EU nationals currently living in UK without resident rights. So, they want better guarantees.

The UK has expressed a willingness to pass legislation guaranteeing the rights of EU citizens, this does not constitute a "gentleman's agreement" but the same level of protection as enjoyed by British and Commonwealth Citizen for their own rights.

Britain has no Constitution by design, for the EU to demand that the UK be subject to the ECJ in this would give EU citizens greater theoretical protection that British Citizens whilst at the same time being totally unenforceable because we will no longer be part of the EU or Single Market.

There's a consensus, among Leave and Remain, that there's no point leaving the EU if Parliament is not Sovereign.

As BBC analyst has said

They want real guarantees (legal obligations) that could be independently enforced.

There's a nice Financial Times article on it, which concludes

The bit you didn't bold in your last quote was "if Britain accepts the EU’s demands." which is unlikely to happen.n It's also worth pointing out that for the average Brit, including all the Leave voters here this IS a simple question. One merely determines what rights EU Citizens are to be afforded and then one passes a law giving them those rights.

This is how we run our democracy, for the EU to demand more of us is rather illustrative of why we left.

Two final points -

One notes that less than a week ago the EU was unwilling to discuss this issue, so this sudden outrage feels more than a little manufactured given that we were previously told nothing else would be discussed before the Brexit bill.

Ironically, it's likely that regardless of the agreement with the EU that EU Citizens resident before Article 50 was triggered will be offered favourable rights of residency even if the EU does not reciprocate because theire is no alternative which would be conscionable to the British Public.

[Sarmatian]

The last time you spoke about this, you said EU wasn't interested in citizens rights. They consider it a priority, they just can not agree until they know what they are agreeing to. It is a fair point to argue whether that is acceptable to Britain, but your previous statements were completely false.

May I suggest reading less Telegraph?

[Fragony]

Seems like a draw at the moment. It's serious business but I can't help finding it entertaining, pure poker eyes (EU will lose). Eurocrats are so narcistic arrogant and dumb, what they really are is for everybody to see, they are no different from ordinary mobsters.

prediction, the UK is going to pay a reduced amount, and keep acces to the market. The EU is being the bully so no lose of face for the UK. The 'hostages' will have nothing to worry about.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

The last time you spoke about this, you said EU wasn't interested in citizens rights. They consider it a priority, they just can not agree until they know what they are agreeing to. It is a fair point to argue whether that is acceptable to Britain, but your previous statements were completely false.

May I suggest reading less Telegraph?

Actually, what I said was that the EU seemed more interested in the "Brexit Bill" than citizens' rights based on the fact they had added €40 Billion to the former and were unwilling to talk about the latter but, according to leaked documents, did not want to be seen to "block" a deal.

Now a week later the Chief Negotiator explodes in Gallic Outrage that we will not guarantee citizens' rights when we wanted to discuss this issue months ago.

I can't read your FT Article. Can you compare the date-stamps on the articles with the date-stamp on my last post on the issue?

This: https://www.theguardian.com/politics...sidency-rights is the first rumbling about the issue from the EU side, 26/04/17. I clearly missed that at the time but my last post on that topic was 02/05/17, six days later and most of the intervening time was taken up with the EU asking for a bigger slice of pie. Moreover, the EU negotiating position appears to refer to rights EU citizens should already have. What's more this looks like a case of EU Commission asnd EU Council of Ministers respectively playing bad cop/good cop on this issue.

[Husar]

It's already a typical divorce at this point.

[Fragony]

You are even in a better spot mia muca, the EU can't overrule deals that were already made under the EEC. I would lay my dick in their empty hands but that's just not my thing but to each their own. We have a saying here, cornered cats make odd jumps. Who do you think the cornered cat really is? Do you really think it's the UK? Beggars can't be choosers as you Eglish-native speakers like to say.

It's all kinda biblical even,what was it 'esperanto',a unversal language, ah yes it was the tower of Babel. Good jokes never get old

[Gilrandir]

Thier people seem less willing:Support for Scottish independence lower than at 2014 referendum, poll shows

Oh, really?

It puts backing for independence at 44 per cent, one point lower than when the question was put to Scotland two-and-a-half years ago, while a majority (56 per cent) would vote to remain in the United Kingdom.

Is it what we call "within statistical error margin"?

[Greyblades]

Perhaps, however;

The poll suggests a majority of Scots agree with the Prime Minister, with 51 per cent saying they do not want another referendum to take place in the next few years.

Almost a third (32 per cent) supported having a referendum in the next year or two while the Brexit negotiations are ongoing, while around 18% backed another ballot about two years from now when negotiations are complete.

However 44 per cent said they expected one to take place within the next five to 10 years, up six points since Panelbase asked the question in January, and nine points since last September.

The referendum of 2014 had support from both sides as the remainers wanted the issue put to rest. Now the amount who want another referendum has lost the majority.

[Sarmatian]

Actually, what I said was that the EU seemed more interested in the "Brexit Bill" than citizens' rights based on the fact they had added €40 Billion to the former and were unwilling to talk about the latter but, according to leaked documents, did not want to be seen to "block" a deal.

Don't want to be seen blocking a deal doesn't mean that they're actually blocking a deal.

Now a week later the Chief Negotiator explodes in Gallic Outrage that we will not guarantee citizens' rights when we wanted to discuss this issue months ago.

No negotiation before the Article 50 is triggered. Certainly that couldn't have caught anyone by surprise.

I can't read your FT Article. Can you compare the date-stamps on the articles with the date-stamp on my last post on the issue?

I can't read it now either. Asks for a subscription. Weird.

This: https://www.theguardian.com/politics...sidency-rights is the first rumbling about the issue from the EU side, 26/04/17. I clearly missed that at the time but my last post on that topic was 02/05/17, six days later and most of the intervening time was taken up with the EU asking for a bigger slice of pie. Moreover, the EU negotiating position appears to refer to rights EU citizens should already have. What's more this looks like a case of EU Commission asnd EU Council of Ministers respectively playing bad cop/good cop on this issue.

It's more like waiting for Article 50 to be triggered and then waiting for instructions from European Parliament.

No grand conspiracy. But Telegraph readers were happy that their prejudices had been reinforced.

[Fragony]

Don't tear threads apart Sams, you are smart enough to understand what's going on.

[Greyblades]

Junker's been a tad self destructive of late.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

"We must continue, we must forge ahead."

Forward in the service of Rome, Fratres, but without Consuls or an Augustus.

[Fragony]

Junker's been a tad self destructive of late.

A tad? That facelicker who is never sober has always been self-destructive, it's a disgusting guy. It's good that drunk people tend to speak the truth, so how the ultra-undemocratic Brussels thinks is for everybody to see

[Gilrandir]

Perhaps, however;The referendum of 2014 had support from both sides as the remainers wanted the issue put to rest. Now the amount who want another referendum has lost the majority.

Unfortunately (or fortunately, depends on your vantage point) the polled people don't decide whether to have a referendum or not. They delegated this responsibility to the current authorities (until the next elections). If Nicola decides on holding the referendum, she will do it (and imagine what arguments will be voiced by secessionists).

[Greyblades]

To call a referendum she would need both houses of parliament and lords' permission, and May would choose the date.

Without majority popular approval for a referendum to take place May would be justified in denying them a second referendum so close to the last.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Still true.

[Montmorency]

I identify my national self-interest as Apache attack helicopter.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Don't you mean "selling Apache Helicopter"?