EXIT NEGOTIATIONS

[Idaho]

Yet another Brexit hypocrite. Gets Britain out of Europe, then moves his business into Europe. Brexit is a good thing, as long as the costs are paid by others.

Mega lol.

Honestly, what do people expect. "Wealth creators" only create wealth for anyone else as an unfortunate side effect. If they could engineer it so they got all the money and everyone else was sold into chattel slavery they would do it in a shot and give us some platitude about "market realities".

[Pannonian]

Ah, I see. I was talking about Sovereignty as the ability to impose laws on the UK. You were... choosing to cross talk on something barely related. You've not managed to point out one entity that controls our government - unless you are trying to stretch this to include almost every form of soft power and then claim that this is also the same as what the EU does. Is this the case?

The "concrete principle" is simple - EU Regulations. A system where rules can be added to the UK from outside of the UK. And I've specifically chosen not to include EU Directives where countries are forced to draft and pass a law that the EU requires since I'm sure you'd say that as this was drafted and passed in the UK it was our "choice"

But please, do tell - what other bodies have the same control over the UK - laws or otherwise - as the EU.

So which EU regulations do you want us to drop?

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Mega lol.

Honestly, what do people expect. "Wealth creators" only create wealth for anyone else as an unfortunate side effect. If they could engineer it so they got all the money and everyone else was sold into chattel slavery they would do it in a shot and give us some platitude about "market realities".

Only the short-sighted ones. Longer-term exploiters know that you have to share a tad of the wealth in order to keep the pump primed so that you can bilk them for more and more over the long haul. As with Henry Ford improving the wages of his workers by a good notch (and putting a Model T of their own 'just' within reach...)

[Seamus Fermanagh]

So which EU regulations do you want us to drop?

The Express seems to believe that some of the regulations are annoying for the UK. Link lol'd on the banana curvature one.

[rory_20_uk]

So which EU regulations do you want us to drop?

So as long as there are no current EU regulations that are problematic, then we should remain in the EU...?

First one - whichever means we have to follow the CJEU.

And guess what? I'm not going to read every EU rule, past or present and compare to UK law.

[Pannonian]

So as long as there are no current EU regulations that are problematic, then we should remain in the EU...?

First one - whichever means we have to follow the CJEU.

And guess what? I'm not going to read every EU rule, past or present and compare to UK law.

And that is why I changed tack and asked you whether you'd stand by the consequences of Brexit. You put forth an argument of principle without giving specifics. You hold the CJEU as a bone of contention, even though the the CJEU favours British companies the vast majority of the time. You refuse to cite any specific EU regulations even though you say that the fact that there are EU regulations is your decisive argument. So I didn't ask you for specifics, or that you should apply your principles evenly. I asked instead whether you're prepared to stand by the consequences of Brexit. Are you prepared to say that you agree with Brexit and all its consequences?

[Pannonian]

The Express seems to believe that some of the regulations are annoying for the UK. Link lol'd on the banana curvature one.

Boris Johnson says EU laws about vacuum cleaners and bananas are ‘crazy’. We take a look at whether he is right

He's not. And the costs of Brexit estimated in the article have now been further quantified, starting with disruptions to food supply now a certainty (the head of the group dealing with the UK's food supply said that any clarifications are now too late).

You may remember PFH rubbishing me on the results of no deal Brexit, saying that there will be a deal and that I should stop worrying. The PM now says that there is a substantial chance of no deal (less than 3 weeks to go), the results of no deal have been estimated to be even worse than previously predicted, and the heads of various groups dealing with the UK's food supply and other logistics have said that any deal the UK government is likely to agree to won't make a substantial difference given the fundamental problems.

[rory_20_uk]

And that is why I changed tack and asked you whether you'd stand by the consequences of Brexit. You put forth an argument of principle without giving specifics. You hold the CJEU as a bone of contention, even though the the CJEU favours British companies the vast majority of the time. You refuse to cite any specific EU regulations even though you say that the fact that there are EU regulations is your decisive argument. So I didn't ask you for specifics, or that you should apply your principles evenly. I asked instead whether you're prepared to stand by the consequences of Brexit. Are you prepared to say that you agree with Brexit and all its consequences?

We've gone over that before. Now you've accepted that both your assertation that all reasons have been discredited and the statement that are other organisations with similar effects on sovereignty as the EU is false, I'm not going to repeat myself.

[Pannonian]

We've gone over that before. Now you've accepted that both your assertation that all reasons have been discredited and the statement that are other organisations with similar effects on sovereignty as the EU is false, I'm not going to repeat myself.

So you won't admit evidence or concrete examples into your sovereignty argument, and you won't admit responsibility for the consequences of Brexit either.

From Jonathan Freedland in the Guardian today, a much more eloquent analyst than me.

Much of this is rooted, as it always was, in the sovereignty fetish that devoured first the Tory’s Eurosceptic wing, then the Tory party and, soon, the entire British economy. It obsesses over the abstract noun of sovereignty, claiming that an EU deal with binding rules would violate that sacred principle. But every trade deal contains binding rules – a deal with the US would be no different. It’s true even of the WTO rules that will govern our relationship with the EU from next month, and which Johnson now rebrands as “Australian”, hailing them as the very incarnation of national freedom.

Perhaps, then, this is not really about the trimming of sovereignty – a compromise Brexiters are happy to make with everyone else in the world. “It’s because it’s Europe,” says trade analyst Sam Lowe of the Centre for European Reform. Ultimately, he’s concluded, this isn’t about tariffs and barriers, but something far more visceral. “They’re annoyed we’re in Europe’s vicinity.” If they could move Britain physically further away from the continent, they would. They long to be free of its taint.

Do you think the sovereignty argument should be applied to other trade deals too? Do you think that the UK should divest itself of all trade deals, on the grounds that they impinge on our sovereignty? Or do you only apply this argument to the EU?

[rory_20_uk]

So you won't admit evidence or concrete examples into your sovereignty argument, and you won't admit responsibility for the consequences of Brexit either.

From Jonathan Freedland in the Guardian today, a much more eloquent analyst than me.



Do you think the sovereignty argument should be applied to other trade deals too? Do you think that the UK should divest itself of all trade deals, on the grounds that they impinge on our sovereignty? Or do you only apply this argument to the EU?

Still desperately trying to square the circle. Never letting clear evidence sway you from your narrative.

I gave clear concrete examples -but you choose to ignore them.
I have - as I said - given a long exchange on the consequences of Brexit. Or more specifically the damage done from joining from the EEC.

Trade deals do not impinge on Sovereignty, as I have repeatedly said. Again, name me one other supra national organisation that can add to UK laws. So far you've managed to desperately mumble about how these other things (NATO, no wait, the WTO... erm UNICEF? Uh... aha! All other trade agreements) might alter how the UK acts - ignoring how the same can be said of anything.

Try to deal with the specifics rather than endless straw men.

[Pannonian]

Still desperately trying to square the circle. Never letting clear evidence sway you from your narrative.

I gave clear concrete examples -but you choose to ignore them.
I have - as I said - given a long exchange on the consequences of Brexit. Or more specifically the damage done from joining from the EEC.

Trade deals do not impinge on Sovereignty, as I have repeatedly said. Again, name me one other supra national organisation that can add to UK laws. So far you've managed to desperately mumble about how these other things (NATO, no wait, the WTO... erm UNICEF? Uh... aha! All other trade agreements) might alter how the UK acts - ignoring how the same can be said of anything.

Try to deal with the specifics rather than endless straw men.

I may have missed it. Can you point me to it, so I can read for myself? I've been reading other material, which I deem to be knowledgable and unbiased on the subject, given that they cite specific regulations and effects and are not inclined to be pro-EU. In the recent exchange, all you've cited is the CJEU, excepting the principle of sovereignty and laws which you refuse to specify, and which you indeed have said that you do not want to specify. Which EU laws do you want us to drop? Or do you want us to drop all EU laws?

BTW, are you planning on flying into EU countries any time soon?

[Pannonian]

"British ministers have warned supermarkets to stockpile food amid possibilities of a no-deal Brexit, with shortages feared as talks with the European Union remain deadlocked, The Sunday Times newspaper reported.

UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson is set to take control of planning if Britain opts for no deal and will chair an exit operations committee to prepare the response, the newspaper reported.

Ministers have told suppliers of medicines, medical devices and vaccines to stockpile six weeks’ worth at secure locations in the United Kingdom, the report added."

https://uk.reuters.com/article/brita...-idUKFWN2IS08H

Project Fear, they called it. Will the Brexiteers try to solve these problems, or will they just seek to direct blame?

[InsaneApache]

Morning all, what's new?

[Pannonian]

Morning all, what's new?

Trucks queue down the M20 for mile upon mile at the entrance of the Eurotunnel in Folkestone, as companies rush to stockpile as the deadline for a Brexit trade deal looms.

https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1339851685666144258

Bags of faeces and bottles of urine reported, with gardens of nearby properties said to be unworkable due to the overwhelming smell.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Morning all, what's new?

This is the opposite of new, while listening to a History of Economics lecture I paid attention to the lesson on the precursors to the EU.
Didn't know that GB was an original invitee to the EEC which they declined out of fear of a supranational organization dictating economic policy. Various free trade deals was made creating the EFTA, but only 10 years later GB wanted into the common market after mismanaging their own empire. France vetoed GB's application until de Gaulle was out of office and then GB enjoyed the common market until two weeks from now.

I'm guessing the turn around time from Brexit to reapplication will be faster, but it would be a fun rhyme that Macron vetoes any re-application just to teach GB a lesson in being so flippant about supranational organizations.

[Pannonian]

This is the opposite of new, while listening to a History of Economics lecture I paid attention to the lesson on the precursors to the EU.
Didn't know that GB was an original invitee to the EEC which they declined out of fear of a supranational organization dictating economic policy. Various free trade deals was made creating the EFTA, but only 10 years later GB wanted into the common market after mismanaging their own empire. France vetoed GB's application until de Gaulle was out of office and then GB enjoyed the common market until two weeks from now.

I'm guessing the turn around time from Brexit to reapplication will be faster, but it would be a fun rhyme that Macron vetoes any re-application just to teach GB a lesson in being so flippant about supranational organizations.

What makes you think there will be an application to rejoin? There will be no chance of it being accepted without a referendum in favour, probably with a more decisive result than the last one. And there will always be a section of the UK population willing to blame the EU for everything, whatever the evidence or logic or lack of. Nebulous arguments like sovereignty that cannot have any concrete basis, combined with resentment of foreigners.

[a completely inoffensive name]

What makes you think there will be an application to rejoin? There will be no chance of it being accepted without a referendum in favour, probably with a more decisive result than the last one. And there will always be a section of the UK population willing to blame the EU for everything, whatever the evidence or logic or lack of. Nebulous arguments like sovereignty that cannot have any concrete basis, combined with resentment of foreigners.

The UK will slip behind the continent economically and will be forced to join for geopolitical survival. It's literally why you joined the EEC in the first place.
Sovereignty is cool and all, but you haven't even left yet. After 5-10 years of economic pain, it will be a different story.

Political environments in the 21st century seem to change more quickly compared to the latter half of the 20th.

I mean, the UK could be a powerhouse again if managed correctly. Plenty of other European states do fine outside the EU, the EFTA is still around. Rory, Frun and well every other UK poster besides you are hoping for a better economic future because the potential is there for smart reforms and a more dynamic/responsive state. Problem is, I just don't see that potential being unlocked by the current government.

Maybe the other UK posters know more about what the Tory party is actually planning on doing to reform internal markets cause we seem to be stuck on the issue of trade balances which is only one aspect of a nation's economy.

In short: internal mismanagement by UK politicians will erode the sovereignty argument as people begin to feel like they would rather just have the higher standard of living. As of now, there is still the potential for both, so I can't really see why you insist on verbally haranguing your fellow countrymen so much.

[Pannonian]

The UK will slip behind the continent economically and will be forced to join for geopolitical survival. It's literally why you joined the EEC in the first place.
Sovereignty is cool and all, but you haven't even left yet. After 5-10 years of economic pain, it will be a different story.

Political environments in the 21st century seem to change more quickly compared to the latter half of the 20th.

I mean, the UK could be a powerhouse again if managed correctly. Plenty of other European states do fine outside the EU, the EFTA is still around. Rory, Frun and well every other UK poster besides you are hoping for a better economic future because the potential is there for smart reforms and a more dynamic/responsive state. Problem is, I just don't see that potential being unlocked by the current government.

Maybe the other UK posters know more about what the Tory party is actually planning on doing to reform internal markets cause we seem to be stuck on the issue of trade balances which is only one aspect of a nation's economy.

In short: internal mismanagement by UK politicians will erode the sovereignty argument as people begin to feel like they would rather just have the higher standard of living. As of now, there is still the potential for both, so I can't really see why you insist on verbally haranguing your fellow countrymen so much.

Compare what I said would happen with what they said would happen, with what is happening. Also I don't just rely on this forum for evidence of what Brexiteers say. There are also the Brexiteer politicians, and their supporters. Brexiteers and Trumpists are from the same alt right stable, gaming the electoral system.

[rory_20_uk]

Compare what I said would happen with what they said would happen, with what is happening. Also I don't just rely on this forum for evidence of what Brexiteers say. There are also the Brexiteer politicians, and their supporters. Brexiteers and Trumpists are from the same alt right stable, gaming the electoral system.

This is the latest example why there is no point in bothering to directly respond: a zealot who only repeats himself and never, ever bothers to learn.

If anything, the ranting is getting worse.

[drone]

I'm guessing the turn around time from Brexit to reapplication will be faster, but it would be a fun rhyme that Macron vetoes any re-application just to teach GB a lesson in being so flippant about supranational organizations.

If the UK (or whatever is left of it in a few years) is to be allowed back in, they will definitely be forced to adopt the Euro. So they will lose not only their "sovereignty", but also control of their monetary policy. So Brexit may have been a French/German plot all along...

[a completely inoffensive name]

This is the latest example why there is no point in bothering to directly respond: a zealot who only repeats himself and never, ever bothers to learn.

If anything, the ranting is getting worse.

Yeah, I think I am done responding unless I get a direct response that addresses..you know...what I said.

If the UK (or whatever is left of it in a few years) is to be allowed back in, they will definitely be forced to adopt the Euro. So they will lose not only their "sovereignty", but also control of their monetary policy. So Brexit may have been a French/German plot all along...

I'm still very under-educated on all the unique perks the UK held within the EU. But I would imagine a re-negotiation into the Union would still have leverage on both sides. The EU bringing the UK back into the organization alone would be a strong indicator that the org is flexible and enduring and, most of all, better suited in the world economy than what individual sovereignty can bring. If the opportunity is there, the EU would need to be careful not to press too hard and lose the option.

Wikipedia has a brief article on UK opt outs which seems to be:
* UK retained control over immigration.
* UK retained control over monetary policy.
* UK retained control over labor laws
* UK retained control over criminal laws.

The question in such a hypothetical would be, how desperate is the UK to enter back in. I doubt even under the worst circumstances that the UK would give on all four to re-enter but if given the choice, let's say pick one and align with the EU on the other three... which one would they pick?

[Pannonian]

This is the latest example why there is no point in bothering to directly respond: a zealot who only repeats himself and never, ever bothers to learn.

If anything, the ranting is getting worse.

Is there anything to be learned from this?

Lorries queue for miles along M20 in Kent as Brexit trade deal deadline draws near

Lorries have once again been pictured queuing for miles along the M20 motorway in Kent with long delays leading up to the end of the Brexit transition period.

Four days of congestion have riddled the county's roads due to the sheer weight of traffic and freight trying to make its way into Europe.

From 1 January, those leaving Britain for France will face stricter checks at ports and will need their passports stamping as the Brexit transition period expires at midnight on 31 December.

These measures have prompted concern over delays at the border and have already caused chaos for the towns of Dover, Folkestone and Hythe as businesses rush to stockpile goods in fear of a No Deal Brexit.

Do the queues get shorter if Remoaners are less zealous about their beliefs?

[Pannonian]

If the UK (or whatever is left of it in a few years) is to be allowed back in, they will definitely be forced to adopt the Euro. So they will lose not only their "sovereignty", but also control of their monetary policy. So Brexit may have been a French/German plot all along...

More significantly, for any new member to be allowed in, every other member needs its government to vote to allow them in. Any failure by any one member means overall failure. That's sovereignty for you. If Malta decides that the UK needs to be taught a lesson, it can wield this effective veto to block any UK application, it has the power to do so.

[Gilrandir]

Wikipedia has a brief article on UK opt outs which seems to be:
* UK retained control over immigration.
* UK retained control over monetary policy.
* UK retained control over labor laws
* UK retained control over criminal laws.

The question in such a hypothetical would be, how desperate is the UK to enter back in. I doubt even under the worst circumstances that the UK would give on all four to re-enter but if given the choice, let's say pick one and align with the EU on the other three... which one would they pick?

Being in control doesn't spell being adequate to handle. No evil EU interfered into the UK fighting COVID, yet the government totally botched the initial steps of the pandemic spread prevention.

[Pannonian]

Being in control doesn't spell being adequate to handle. No evil EU interfered into the UK fighting COVID, yet the government totally botched the initial steps of the pandemic spread prevention.

There's overlap between Brexit and the UK government's handling of Covid. The key issue obstructing any agreement between the EU and the UK is the latter's freedom to subsidise its industries however it sees fit.

The New York Times has put into writing something that's already well known here; the UK government has put a staggering amount of funding into Covid-related businesses that under normal circumstances wouldn't come close to passing scrutiny. 22bn funding for PPE and other Covid-related businesses, 11bn of them in businesses that are run by friends and family of Tory MPs, businesses that have no track record in what they were being paid for, or businesses that have a track record of incompetence, human rights violations, etc.

Brexit is basically a carte blanche for the Tories to enrich friends and family and those who will do them favours.

[Greyblades]

I mean, the UK could be a powerhouse again if managed correctly. Plenty of other European states do fine outside the EU, the EFTA is still around. Rory, Frun and well every other UK poster besides you are hoping for a better economic future because the potential is there for smart reforms and a more dynamic/responsive state. Problem is, I just don't see that potential being unlocked by the current government.

Maybe the other UK posters know more about what the Tory party is actually planning on doing to reform internal markets cause we seem to be stuck on the issue of trade balances which is only one aspect of a nation's economy.

In short: internal mismanagement by UK politicians will erode the sovereignty argument as people begin to feel like they would rather just have the higher standard of living.

I think a major factor going forward will be that much of the UK's population has been primed to interpret hardship as being caused by sabotage from pro EU MPs; another reason to thank Theresa May for being so blatant in her Quisiling-ing.

[edyzmedieval]

The odds of a no-deal Brexit are particularly solid right now.

And regardless what you think of the EU and UK, that's not a good deal for anyone.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

The odds of a no-deal Brexit are particularly solid right now.

And regardless what you think of the EU and UK, that's not a good deal for anyone.

True. But with all the folderol, I wonder if it might not be better to simply take the hit and move forward. Hanging on tenterhooks cannot be pleasant.

[Greyblades]

No, it f-ing hasnt. Four f-ing years of it.

And they will blame us for the repurcussions of thier own f-ing stubborness.

[Pannonian]

No, it f-ing hasnt. Four f-ing years of it.

And they will blame us for the repurcussions of thier own f-ing stubborness.

So the results of Leaving will be the fault of the Remainers. And thus the blame-spreading begins. Anyway, there shouldn't be blame, should there? You said it was all going to be a riproaring success, so youse should be queueing up to take credit for the brilliant success that Brexit will be.