Brexit Deal agreed ( updated )

[ri Alban]

Liam Fox it's Scots like him...

[ri Alban]

Seems the Tories are at it. Why have negotiations and agreements, then renege and deny.

[Boris]

44 minutes ago, ri Alban said:

Seems the Tories are at it. Why have negotiations and agreements, then renege and deny.

 

Its the Tory way! Complete shysters.

[ri Alban]

45 minutes ago, Boris said:

 

Its the Tory way! Complete shysters.

Shysters???? Is that code for f..... ....... ........ .........?

[Cade]

House of Lords systematically ripping up all the gobshite brexit bills handed to them by the schoolkids in Parliament.

[ri Alban]

Banks moving to Scotland 

 

They must know something we don't. 

[Pans Jambo]

6 hours ago, ri Alban said:

Banks moving to Scotland 

 

They must know something we don't. 

Where we seeing this news?

[RobboM]

4 minutes ago, Pans Jambo said:

Where we seeing this news?

Announced earlier today, Barclays setting up in Glasgow
 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-44910560

 

 

[ri Alban]

8 minutes ago, Pans Jambo said:

Where we seeing this news?

Barclay moving to Glasgow, 2500 Jobs. Brand new campus to be built at the Finnieston Bridge. 

Edited July 23, 2018 by ri Alban

[Pans Jambo]

Just now, RobboM said:

Announced earlier today, Barclays setting up in Glasgow
 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-44910560

 

 

Good stuff.

Unfortunately the good ole' BBC Scotland MUST put their negative stamp on it:

 

"The prospect of up to 2,500 more Barclays jobs in Glasgow is very good news for the city in several ways, but it should also be treated with some caution:"

 

Do a wee experiment. Watch the BBC Scotland evening news and with every story, mark it down as positive, negative or positive with a negative spin.

 

You WONT see ANY Positive stories. NONE!

 

They are honestly a bunch of negative shitehawks!

[Pans Jambo]

Just now, ri Alban said:

Barclay moving to Glasgow, 2500 Jobs. Brand new campus to be built at the Finnieston Bridge. 

[The Real Maroonblood]

2 hours ago, Pans Jambo said:

Good stuff.

Unfortunately the good ole' BBC Scotland MUST put their negative stamp on it:

 

"The prospect of up to 2,500 more Barclays jobs in Glasgow is very good news for the city in several ways, but it should also be treated with some caution:"

 

Do a wee experiment. Watch the BBC Scotland evening news and with every story, mark it down as positive, negative or positive with a negative spin.

 

You WONT see ANY Positive stories. NONE!

 

They are honestly a bunch of negative shitehawks!

Correct.

[jambo lodge]

4 hours ago, ri Alban said:

Barclay moving to Glasgow, 2500 Jobs. Brand new campus to be built at the Finnieston Bridge. 

Will be interesting to hear in due course how much Regional Selective Assistance/Grants Barclays are receiving from the Scottish Government to make this happen.

[ri Alban]

27 minutes ago, jambo lodge said:

Will be interesting to hear in due course how much Regional Selective Assistance/Grants Barclays are receiving from the Scottish Government to make this happen.

£12.75m Grant from Scottish enterprise. 

 

I'm actually pleasantly surprised at this news. 40+% of the 2500 Jobs are high value. 

 

Edited July 23, 2018 by ri Alban

[jambo lodge]

Just now, ri Alban said:

£12.75 Grant from Scottish enterprise. 

 

I'm actually pleasantly surprised at this news. 40+% of the 2500 Jobs are high value. 

 

Who is building the campus, SE or Barclays?

[ri Alban]

9 minutes ago, jambo lodge said:

Who is building the campus, SE or Barclays?

Barclay. I've seen the computer design. It looks the dug's baws. 

Edited July 23, 2018 by ri Alban

[ri Alban]

Tories now trying to convince the everyone that it's all the EU's fault. 

 

No, this is your fault. 

[jambo lodge]

9 minutes ago, ri Alban said:

Barclay. I've seen the computer design. It looks the dug's baws. 

Well done Scottish Enterprise, I'm sure they would have faced competition from Wales and Northern Ireland.

[ri Alban]

5 hours ago, Pans Jambo said:

Good stuff.

Unfortunately the good ole' BBC Scotland MUST put their negative stamp on it:

 

"The prospect of up to 2,500 more Barclays jobs in Glasgow is very good news for the city in several ways, but it should also be treated with some caution:"

 

Do a wee experiment. Watch the BBC Scotland evening news and with every story, mark it down as positive, negative or positive with a negative spin.

 

You WONT see ANY Positive stories. NONE!

 

They are honestly a bunch of negative shitehawks!

What's the lotto numbers? 

[Cade]

Euroskeptics have been wanting out ever since we joined in the 1970s.

They've had 40 years to plan this.

 

The EU has been consistent all down the line, setting out that the 4 Freedoms is a concept that is whole and undivisable. Goods, Services, Peoples and Capital must either all be given free movement or none of them do.

The UK has been going to the EU with proposals to break up the 4 Freedoms and then having that plan rejected every few months since the referendum result was announced.

 

The cabinet has a meeting, decides that it wants 3 of the 4 Freedoms, gets told no, has another wee civil war, has another meeting, decides it wants 3 of the 4 Freedoms, has that plan rejected and so on and so on.

The most recent white paper is, again, asking the EU to split up the 4 Freedoms.

They laughed it off.

Raab is now asking the EU to be "flexible and creative" in the next round of negotiations (i.e. to split the 4 Freedoms)

 

You can imagine how that'll go down with the EU 27.

 

It's a total shambles.

[Victorian]

The UK government has no settled, agreed, workable strategy.    It has been flip-flopping, twisting and turning, U-turning and hiding under the bed.    Desperately trying to avoid the wrath of both extremes of the Tory party and satisfying nobody.

 

Raab and May have no position to offer to the EU.     The only option left is to hope and beg that the EU takes the initiative and offers a flying pigs / magic moonbeams solution.

[Boris]

1 hour ago, ri Alban said:

Tories now trying to convince the everyone that it's all the EU's fault. 

 

No, this is your fault. 

I said a few weeks ago that the EU would be blamed. Sad thing is, a lot of people will lap it up. This narrative has been the end game from the off. 

 

We are being run by a cabal of right wing arse wits. 

 

It's a complete car crash

[ri Alban]

7 hours ago, Lord BJ said:

 

 

Its a negotiation, no one comes out with everything they want. Particularly when the split is a tad acrimonious.

 

This is a ***** of thing to make work for so many reasons. Do people really believe that divorcing from a political and economical union would be straight forward. 

No, noone believes it is easy, but the UK was part of this for years, they know what is up for negotiation and what is not. The 4 freedoms being the not. 

If I was the EU I'd say to the UK just leave and gies all peace and if you want access to our markets you know what's required. 

 

Oh and the UK government don't seem to give a shit about N.I. I get the impression they'd cut them adrift at the drop of a hat. 

Edited July 24, 2018 by ri Alban

[Boris]

11 hours ago, Lord BJ said:

I’ll go against the grain on this a bit.

 

The argument that ‘Eurosceptics’ have been preparing this 40 years is a nonsense. Eurosceptism is a cross party and not unique to any party. Whilst Eurosceptic don’t actually form any party (maybe UKIP but that pretty much non existent) never mind a government. 

 

It was a cross party issue and not unique to any single political party.

 

The prime minister and huge chunks of the government, despite what some claim, were not in favour of this decision and are trying to carry out something they don’t necessarily agree with. They are dealing with a shit storm the ‘joe bloggs’ voted for. The voters decided this not anyone else.

 

I sort of agree with that.  Had the Eurosceptics been preparing for it then you would think there would be a plan ready to go!

 

That said, I think that the hardcore Brexiteers (Rees-Mogg et al.) would be quite happy with a no deal scenario, revert to WTO regulations and start from there.  That is their plan, IMO.  They just weren't up front about it, and the consequences of it.

 

Those huge chunks of the government should grow a pair and put the country first, not their party.

 

11 hours ago, Lord BJ said:

 

Whilst this narrative being it’s all EU fault is ja bullshit narrative others are creating to support their poliutical prejudice imo. It’s pretty  much the same as it’s all the ‘right wing’ fault is a bullshit narrative and supporting their political prejudice. Neither are reality and only people who have a severe lack of nuance of thinking would believe so.

 

So why did the Foreign Secretary say as much?  We are the ones leaving, why should the EU threaten the integrity of the single market just for the UK's sake?

 

11 hours ago, Lord BJ said:

 

FFS the PM has come up with a plan which is a soft a brexit as you can get! It’s a starting point for negotiations, not the end point.

 

Its a negotiation, no one comes out with everything they want. Particularly when the split is a tad acrimonious. 

 

Yes, you are quite right, the PM has come up with a plan that allows some form of customs union, but, and of course we shall see, the EU have their "red lines", namely the four freedoms, and I don't think they will budge on those, and we knew that from the off.

 

11 hours ago, Lord BJ said:

 

I also agree the government should be preparing for a hard brexit as a contingency. I don’t think it will come to that, common sense will take over at some point imo. That said it would be negligent not to prepare for it.

 

Agree with you on this.

 

11 hours ago, Lord BJ said:

 

This is a ***** of thing to make work for so many reasons. Do people really believe that divorcing from a political and economical union would be straight forward. 

 

Agree here too!  It's a complete mess, IMO.  It's been poorly handled by the Government, with the PM seeming to be more concerned about limiting the fracture in her own party, than thinking about the good of the country.  

 

Absolutely not a straightforward matter to leave the EU, but it's a pity that over the last two years instead of trying to make sense of the mess, we have had petty posturing.  IMO, of course.

[Boris]

1 hour ago, Lord BJ said:

It’s a negotiation everything up for grabs. Politicians are the same all around the world what they say and what happens are very different things.

 

Your second paragraphs is how you would do something but not how the EU will. This in everyone’s interest to get a workable agreement.  

 

Do you seriously believe the uk govt who currently are  Conservative and Unionist  and who are propped by a NI party don’t give a feck about NI? I think your very wide of the mark.

 

Thoigh cutting NI loose would weirdly solve the NI question!!! I have often wondered what the fall out would be of a united ireland would come to fruition. Would we see a return to violence etc. 

 

I would imagine the Loyalist groups would mobilise, whether it would be sustained would have to be seen.

[Boris]

2 hours ago, Lord BJ said:

 

Im not sure I’m doing this multi quote thing right anyway.

 

Eurosceptics have never really been a co-ordinated entity/party which is the issue. You could argue UKIP was the closest thing to that. However, they never got any power. So it’s been impossible to formulate a plan in reality. 

 

Contrast with the something like the snp who while not the whole yes movement. They are a single issue party and have had political power and therefore abilities to formulate a plan. 

 

I disagree with you on your last para of quote. I think a deal that works would be prefered. 

 

I agree that, until UKIP, there was no Eurosceptic entity/party, however the likes of Gove, Johnson et al all campaigned to leave the EU.  One would have thought that they would have had a plan/contingency?

 

I think that a deal that works would be preferred by most, including the PM.  I don't think the Rees-Mogg's of this world do.  They want out, full stop, no concessions, and that's what is making things difficult.  Instead of pandering to them, the PM should be working to something that would have cross party support and so the parliamentary arithmetic becomes a formality.

 

2 hours ago, Lord BJ said:

 

 

You mean a PM who has pissed off elements of her party to try and negotiate it.

 

Whilst those people you say are putting themselves first, just actually believe there is a better way to go about things. Should they not fight to try and get the best deal?  

 

Despite the narrative you like to create left= good and right = Bad. Everyone believes there is the best way and has honest intentions.

 

See last sentence above.  Yes, I agree that the PM should fight to get the best deal, however rather than create a parliamentary coalition to deliver this, she is pandering to those that would prefer no deal, imo.  And that is putting party before nation, again imo.

 

I really don't think I'm trying to create a left/right narrative here at all.  Many on the left are happy to leave the EU, but for different reasons to those on the right.  But it is the right that are negotiating and calling the shots.  I think what you, and I to an extent, are advocating is a concensus within parliament to get the best deal, irrespective of party loyalty.

 

2 hours ago, Lord BJ said:

 

 

 

It’s in their interests to reach a deal with uk. Pretty much anything can be achieved when a will. Pragmatism is important quality in politicians particularly in changing environments.

 

 

As I said it’s a negoiation everything is up for grabs. Things can be adapted if it’s people best interests.

 

If the PM believes believes a custom Union is best for uk, should the govt not try and achieve it? 

 

I don't disagree with you, that is after all what negotiating is all about.  I'm not so sure we have a strong hand though.  Your last point I totally agree with in respect of a customs union.  

 

2 hours ago, Lord BJ said:

 

 

 

Yeah it’s a ****ing mess that’s for sure. I agree the government have handled it miserably, I also think EU has. 

 

I don’t agree the PM is more concerned with limiting the fracture in party. I think these issues are much a by product of differing views on how brexit should happens and she doesn’t have a majority. Everything she wants to get through will be marginal. Unless labour or someone else support the government. I see no reason why they shouldn’t if in best interest to country. Though I fear political point scoring will take over. 

 

i not sure on this thread or another but when this was announced. I predicted that **** all would happen for the first 18 months and deal would be achieved in last 3-6 month as common sense has to kick in. Sadly I think my prediction was right.

 

I'm not sure how the EU could have handled things differently, after all, we are the ones leaving, we need to put something to them to start the process, however the intransigence shown so far has been horrific.  And I'd lay that at the door of the government - a cabinet divided, pissing about instead of working to get the best deal for the UK.  And, as stated earlier, instead of this minority government doing its "best" to get things through (Henry VIII clauses!) they should have been looking at building parliamentary concensus on a matter so important to the future of this country.

 

I hope your prediction is right, in that some common sense does kick in.

[Boris]

22 minutes ago, Lord BJ said:

 

The issue of bojo or whoever developing a plan was it would be a personal plan. It wouldn’t have been endorsed by any government or any political party. It would have been a plan that wouldn’t be worth the papers or written on. 

 

I also suspect bojo and the likes have put out a plan to May. However, there plans are unpalatable to larger group. I think the majority of mp’s all would favour a soft as possible exit/no exit!

 

Your last point re a soft exit/no exit I agree iwith fully.

 

I also agree that Davis, Gove, Johnson et al probably did raise a plan that was no doubt dismissed.  

 

22 minutes ago, Lord BJ said:

 

Also a plan when it’s a negoiation is not really a plan other than a plan to negotiate. A bit like with independence the white paper would have been worthless without uk agreement. 

 

Think everyone would have agreed a cross party and a consensus deal should have happened. Not sure why may or likes didn’t go for. If nothing else it would have protected the tories a bit by enabling them not to take full blame for deal and provided a element of political protection imo. 

 

The tories weirdly having their majority reduced has made this harder. They might have want strong and stable what we got was weak and wobbly. 

 

Just because we are the ones choosing to leave, shouldn’t mean the EU should get everything they want. Doesn’t happen in any divorce in the world. 

 

Again, I agree that any plan is a starting point, an invitation to treat if you like.  Thing about the EU is, and the UK govt would be aware, is that it would be unlikely for the EU to carve out a deal that gave the UK preferential treatment - all the good bits, with none of the responsibilities.  Hence why the 4 freedoms is so important to them and the integrity of the single market.  On the UK side, something like the EEA or EFTA gives too muke "sovereignty" to the EU, so doesn't fit the UK position.

 

22 minutes ago, Lord BJ said:

 

I find it a weird logic and one I doubt you would not be taking if UK was going **** you to Scotland. You would be moaning about how the right wing government was screwing Scotland over and probably saying **** rUK. You do have a narrative you like to push after all ;-)

 

Hahaha, me and my narrative...

 

That aside, Scotland seperating from the Uk is a wee bit different from the UK leaving the EU.  The UK is saying we don't want to be in this club anymore, but we want the benefits of membership.  Scotland leaving the UK would be more akin to the divorce metaphor, imo.

 

22 minutes ago, Lord BJ said:

 

The EU could have handled things better. They could recipiricate the right of nationals. They could have been more flexible in preventing this happen. Whilst being hard nosed isn’t going to help anyone. If the EU wants to rid itself of some of perceptions around it should be a bit more adaptive to changing needs.

 

In my experience what brings negotiations to a close is time restriction. I still hope for another vote on this.

 

 

 

Fair point regards reciprocal agreements for nationals, and also regards time being a good way for minds to concentrate.  I just wonder if Johnson thought he could get away with usurping May, but that has fizzled out.

 

Another vote would be good, but I can't see it tbh.  More pessimism than hope on my part.

[ri Alban]

No deal. Never!

 

Anyway 

Indyref2!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 

 

Tick Tock!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 

[Pans Jambo]

Enger landerz need a visa to go to Magaluf next summer?

Thats the big issue here!

[John Findlay]

Where's Francis Urquhart or Frank Underwood when you need them?

[maroonlegions]

On 11/01/2018 at 19:19, Lord BJ said:

 

Link that should play, though not sure anyone will thank me for it!

 

[ri Alban]

So 37% of the population is now the will of the people. Funny how the 40% rule doesn't count outside of Scotland. 

Edited September 22, 2018 by ri Alban

[ri Alban]

And why are politicians anywhere near these negotiations. Over privileged millionaires who live in a fantasy land should have been banned.  

A heavy team of expert negotiators from all fields should have been in there from the start, taking no shite from anyone. 

Edited September 22, 2018 by ri Alban

[Jambo-Jimbo]

2 hours ago, ri Alban said:

And why are politicians anywhere near these negotiations. Over privileged millionaires who live in a fantasy land should have been banned.  

A heavy team of expert negotiators from all fields should have been in there from the start, taking no shite from anyone. 

 

I think you'll find that it's civil servants who are doing all the negotiating, Barnier/Rabb & co only meet for an hour or two every few weeks so that they can get wheeled out for the photo shoots, it's the civil servants who are meeting day in day out, well away from the cameras.

[ri Alban]

5 hours ago, Jambo-Jimbo said:

 

I think you'll find that it's civil servants who are doing all the negotiating, Barnier/Rabb & co only meet for an hour or two every few weeks so that they can get wheeled out for the photo shoots, it's the civil servants who are meeting day in day out, well away from the cameras.

There not exactly competent either. 

[AlphonseCapone]

4 hours ago, ri Alban said:

There not exactly competent either. 

 

That's a pretty ignorant and very untrue comment Aussie. 

[ri Alban]

9 minutes ago, AlphonseCapone said:

 

That's a pretty ignorant and very untrue comment Aussie. 

I know, They're, not there. 

[Seymour M Hersh]

29 minutes ago, AlphonseCapone said:

 

That's a pretty ignorant and very untrue comment Aussie. 

 

Really? 

[AlphonseCapone]

7 minutes ago, Seymour M Hersh said:

 

Really? 

 

Yes. As easy as it is to slag off the Civil service they are the reason this country runs, not politicians. 

[Seymour M Hersh]

Olly Robbins is a died in the wool Europhile. He has been utterly pathetic in the negotiations by design would be my guess. Davis was sidelined by him & May. So yes I find it easy to slag off (a you say) the civil serpents.

[Ulysses]

5 hours ago, AlphonseCapone said:

 

That's a pretty ignorant and very untrue comment Aussie. 

 

I suspect that if you told the politicians to **** off to the pub and let the civil servants get on with it they'd produce something decent.  Imperfect, probably, but they'd figure out ways of resolving a lot of the thorny issues in ways that would keep people happy.

[jake]

On 23/09/2018 at 00:40, Ulysses said:

 

I suspect that if you told the politicians to **** off to the pub and let the civil servants get on with it they'd produce something decent.  Imperfect, probably, but they'd figure out ways of resolving a lot of the thorny issues in ways that would keep people happy.

Nothing is perfect and democracy certainly Isn't.

But civil servants producing something decent sounds like the former Soviet and current Chinese way of doing things.

Not that you are suggesting that.

 

 

[Ulysses]

5 minutes ago, jake said:

Nothing is perfect and democracy certainly Isn't.

But civil servants producing something decent sounds like the former Soviet and current Chinese way of doing things.

Not that you are suggesting that.

 

 

 

I'm not suggesting that civil servants should set directions - that's what elected politicians are for.

 

I am also not suggesting that politicians should negotiate or micro-manage - that's what professional civil servants are for.

 

Anyway, I can't understand why people would even want to characterise the Brexit negotiations as a failure, or for that matter a success.  First of all, they aren't finished.  Secondly, negotiations don't fail or succeed; they just end.  All disagreements and conflicts eventually reach an end, whether by negotiation or not.

[jake]

11 minutes ago, Ulysses said:

 

I'm not suggesting that civil servants should set directions - that's what elected politicians are for.

 

I am also not suggesting that politicians should negotiate or micro-manage - that's what professional civil servants are for.

 

Anyway, I can't understand why people would even want to characterise the Brexit negotiations as a failure, or for that matter a success.  First of all, they aren't finished.  Secondly, negotiations don't fail or succeed; they just end.  All disagreements and conflicts eventually reach an end, whether by negotiation or not.

I know you were not suggesting that.

 

[ri Alban]

On 22/09/2018 at 19:16, AlphonseCapone said:

 

Yes. As easy as it is to slag off the Civil service they are the reason this country runs, not politicians. 

The people are the reason these countries run. If we wanted we could bring the whole place down. 

[frankblack]

1 hour ago, ri Alban said:

The people are the reason these countries run. If we wanted we could bring the whole place down. 

 

Go on then.  Don't let me stop you.

 

[ri Alban]

2 hours ago, frankblack said:

 

Go on then.  Don't let me stop you.

 

We? You just have to look at France, but this place is full of shitebags. 

[ri Alban]

2 hours ago, frankblack said:

 

Go on then.  Don't let me stop you.

 

Do u think the Yanks would put up with the price of petrol/Diesel. Would tf. 

[frankblack]

2 minutes ago, ri Alban said:

Do u think the Yanks would put up with the price of petrol/Diesel. Would tf. 

 

I don't work in Oil and Gas, but do we have the facilities to get the oil and gas direct from source to the customer without going through the current cartel?

 

If your argument is about taxation, and you plan on cutting the tax, where would you raise the shortfall to cover government spending priorities?

[ri Alban]

Just now, frankblack said:

 

I don't work in Oil and Gas, but do we have the facilities to get the oil and gas direct from source to the customer without going through the current cartel?

 

If your argument is about taxation, and you plan on cutting the tax, where would you raise the shortfall to cover government spending priorities?

I'd reverse the tax, higher at source and lesser at pumps. I wouldn't be giving it away to these companies and then hammering the public to make up for it. If they don’t want to pay more tax, nationalise it for the good of the population.

It's scandalous how the oil and gas of Scotland has and is beening exploited. A future problem for the UK when Scotland gets to see how much it has been ripped off.