Brexit Deal agreed ( updated )

[WorldChampions1902]

“The Spectator”, now ripping into the Brexit lies. Who would’ve thunk it?

 

The answer can only be that the allure of fiction convinced Unionists to back Brexit and then to undermine Theresa May and back a hard Brexit. Then they woke up shocked to discover that they had weakened the Union they swore to protect by putting a border in the Irish Sea. Not that Johnson’s government admitted it. The story was ‘there is no Irish Sea border'. Only later did it admit to the border’s existence but insist it didn’t want it and it wasn’t its fault. By yesterday the narrative arc had developed, and the government was pretending it could tear up the agreement it had signed as if it had not signed it.

 

‘So many nights. So many stories. As the audience looks back down the years, they will remember the story of Johnson saying ‘there will be no non-tariff barriers to trade’. His deal would ‘allow our companies and our exporters to do even more business with our European friends.’ (Exporters order books have collapsed.)

‘They will remember Johnson harrumphing to the House of Commons that ‘there is no threat to the Erasmus scheme,’ and any MP suggesting otherwise was ‘talking through the back of his neck'. (Erasmus has now gone.)

‘And they will remember Johnson’s story to the fishing industry that Brexit would allow it to catch ‘quite prodigious quantities of extra fish.’ (It hasn’t.)

 

‘Older readers will remember Johnson warning in 2016 that Turkey would join the EU if they did not support Brexit and 77 million Turks could be coming here ‘without any checks at all’. (Five years on and there still isn’t the smallest possibility that Turkey will join the EU.) They may even remember Johnson saying, ‘I didn’t say anything about Turkey in the referendum’. (He did.)

 

‘Back we go until we reach the founding myth of the Brexit campaign that all warnings about the dangers of believing a word Johnson said were ‘Project Fear’. He would make ‘this country the greatest place on earth’. We would overtake France and Germany and our children and grandchildren would live ‘longer, happier, healthier, wealthier lives’.

 

‘Perhaps Conservative voters start each day afresh willing to believe today’s story even as yesterday’s is discredited; perhaps the audience at the Conservative party conference will listen as eagerly as the Sultan listened to Scheherazade and never want the web of fantasy to snap. As their country sinks around them, they will applaud their unreliable narrator and prove the wisdom of the words of One Thousand and One Nights: ‘People need stories more than bread itself’.

 

‘Or petrol, or fish, or exports or an honest prime minister.’

[Ulysses]

6 hours ago, WorldChampions1902 said:

The article opens with the line, “The boss of Intel says the US chipmaker is no longer considering building a factory in the UK because of Brexit”.

The market for semi-conductors will double to $800 billion over the next 7 years. Never mind. Think of those extra shipments of hormone-injected lamb we will get from Oz, worth two bob (relatively speaking).

 

Looking forward to the usual suspects explaining how it’s nothing to do with Brexit.

 

 

Intel propose to increase their workforce here from just under 5,000 to just over 15,000.  They are seeking to expand their existing facilities in Kildare and also looking at two other locations in Ireland.  That's only a fraction of their proposed €80 billion investment to build chip fabrication plants in Europe. They are looking at sites for new plants in 5 different countries on the continent.

[WorldChampions1902]

9 minutes ago, Ulysses said:

 

Intel propose to increase their workforce here from just under 5,000 to just over 15,000.  They are seeking to expand their existing facilities in Kildare and also looking at two other locations in Ireland.  That's only a fraction of their proposed €80 billion investment to build chip fabrication plants in Europe. They are looking at sites for new plants in 5 different countries on the continent.

I’m genuinely delighted for Ireland. As for the U.K., where’s Jim Bowen when you need him?

[WorldChampions1902]

1 minute ago, jonnothejambo said:

When the pigs have to be culled wouldn't it be appropriate to dump the corpses of these animals onto the doorstep of 10 Downing Street. 

 

Maybe then that feckin bombscare and his arseholes might take some action.

 

I am aware Downing Street is sealed off but I'm sure you get my drift.

There’s already enough pigs with their snouts in the trough @ No. 10.

[Ulysses]

 

 

 

 

[jack D and coke]

10 minutes ago, jonnothejambo said:

When the pigs have to be culled wouldn't it be appropriate to dump the corpses of these animals onto the doorstep of 10 Downing Street. 

 

Maybe then that feckin bombscare and his arseholes might take some action.

 

I am aware Downing Street is sealed off but I'm sure you get my drift.

They might shag them. 

[WorldChampions1902]

11 minutes ago, Ulysses said:

 

 

 

 

Somehow, I doubt that Richard Tice will be squeezing a threepenny bit and satsuma into her stocking at Christmas. Thick as mince. Both of them.

[NANOJAMBO]

This is just pricless, I tell ya !!!! 

[jack D and coke]

I used to think Jeremy Vine was quite intelligent. 
Jesus Christ man this isn’t the Afghan mountains 🤣

[WorldChampions1902]

Courtesy of “The Daily Show”.

 

Trevor Noah: “So basically what happened, is the UK passed Brexit because they were all sick of the ‘dirty foreigners’ coming in and taking their jobs and now there’s a fuel crisis - partly because ‘dirty foreigners’ are the ones driving all the dirty gasoline trucks. Which really shows you how everyone hates the idea of immigrants way more than the actual immigrants or what the immigrants do.”

The host then decides to perform an impression of what British Brexiteers will be saying about the crisis in relation to immigrants and put his best cockney accent on for viewers.

“This always happens, it’s always like:

[British accent] ‘THE IMMIGRANTS ARE TAKING OUR JOBS.’

‘Okay, all the immigrants are gone... do you want the jobs now?’”

British Noah replies: “‘Well, I mean not me personally no, but I’m sure Nigel will love that, wouldn’t you? No? Well not Nigel either. But I mean I’m sure they’ll be somebody that wants the job. What about Oliver? What do you mean he’s in America? Doing what? A TV show? They understand him? About News? Why would anyone do that? So he doesn’t want the job either?’”

…

Yup.

Nailed it.

That’s what they did with the fruit picking, the lorry driving and the other so-called ‘low skilled jobs’ (not low skilled at all)- they didn’t want foreigners doing them, but weren’t prepared to take the jobs themselves either.

Presumably what these xenophobic idiots want is for somebody to grow a Clone-Wars style army of mild-mannered Aryan Englishman who will quietly assume all the shit paid, low-standards jobs which have been left behind by the immigrants who they helped chase away.

Good luck with that lads.

#MachDieKlone

[Cade]

Expect chain gangs of prison slave labour to be working the fields from next year.

 

Arsehole Patel will be soaking at the thought of that.

[Grumpy]

1 hour ago, Cade said:

Expect chain gangs of prison slave labour to be working the fields from next year.

 

Arsehole Patel will be soaking at the thought of that.

The Modern Slavery Act being shown up as meaningless. Any business getting involved with this nonsense in their supply chain will be jeopardising future international sales. Sadly, we may not be able to afford to be so principled in the UK. Another Brexit benefit - or maybe not

[Cade]

Aaron Banks loses court case against HMRC.

Political donations are subject to inheritance tax unless that party gains 2 MPs in Parliament, or 1 MP and more than 150,000 votes.

Banks donated about a million quid to UKIP, who failed to win any MPs in the election.

So HMRC billed him for £160,000 IHT.

 

Banks went to court under the European Convention on Human Rights, claiming that his right to free expression and UKIP's freedom of assembly was being harmed.

 

The court told him to bolt and pay up.

 

Major UKIP supporter tries to use EU law to save on a UK tax bill.

[Francis Albert]

15 hours ago, WorldChampions1902 said:

I’m genuinely delighted for Ireland. As for the U.K., where’s Jim Bowen when you need him?

Ireland has now agreed after pressure from the US and EU to raise its headline  Corporation Tax rate from 12.5% to 15%. 

Ireland has been hugely successful in attracting global multinationals particularly "technology" companies with effective CT rates as low as 2% to 4% through some very innovative and complex tax treatments. Ireland has been one of the world's biggest tax havens in recent times.

Of course Brexit Britain's as yet modest attempts to use low tax to attract investment (free ports and the like) outrages the rejoiners.

But yes well done to Ireland, an even smaller and remoter offsore island with limited natural resources, for taking full advantage of EU membership.

 

[WorldChampions1902]

1 hour ago, Francis Albert said:

Of course Brexit Britain's as yet modest attempts to use low tax to attract investment (free ports and the like) outrages the rejoiners.

Welcome back to the debate.

 

Free Ports we’re introduced to the U.K. by Thatcher in the 1980’s. That tells you that the EU did not and does not prevent a member state from having Free Ports I.e. Brexit did NOT provide us with new powers to do this as we already had those powers as a member of the EU!

 

The Tory government in 2012 took the decision to prevent the licence renewals of its U.K. free port operators. I suggest you do some research into the sleazy nature of those free port arrangements. Steeped in tax avoidance, facilitating the movement of contraband including drugs and with negligible benefit to our economy. Not even large numbers of jobs created, relative to the monetary value of the goods flowing into those ports.

 

Absolutely nothing has changed as regards the pros and cons of Free Ports and our rationale for the Tory decision in 2012 abandoning the failed Free Port concept. Until of course, Brexit came along and it became a convenient fallacy to promote Free Ports as something the U.K. could now do, free from nasty Brussels.  Yet more bollocks that the hard of thinking were willing to swallow in their desperate attempts to justify the unjustifiable.

 

In essence, Free Ports are yet another epic Brexit fail.

 

Evidence of the Tory lies on this below…….

 

Edited October 9, 2021 by WorldChampions1902

[NANOJAMBO]

3 hours ago, Francis Albert said:

Ireland has now agreed after pressure from the US and EU to raise its headline  Corporation Tax rate from 12.5% to 15%. 

Ireland has been hugely successful in attracting global multinationals particularly "technology" companies with effective CT rates as low as 2% to 4% through some very innovative and complex tax treatments. Ireland has been one of the world's biggest tax havens in recent times.

Of course Brexit Britain's as yet modest attempts to use low tax to attract investment (free ports and the like) outrages the rejoiners.

But yes well done to Ireland, an even smaller and remoter offsore island with limited natural resources, for taking full advantage of EU membership.

 

Can you explain/clarify what free ports have to do with brexit ? Did the UK have freeports BEFORE brexit ?

 

Your final para , unless it's purely a dig at Ireland makes no sense : Ireland has signed up to a GLOBAL OECD agreement (you're clrearly implyinhg it's a bilateral agreement when it's nothing of the sort). In fact, not ALL EU member states have yet signed up to the deal . And what has Irelands CT status got to do with EU membership ? I thought you brexiters were always moaning that the EU was taking primacy over sovereign states and yet here we have an example of a country (Ireland) who proves that idea is total rubbish. 

[WorldChampions1902]

The Finnish now urging the EU to send aid to the country that’s finished (Global Britain).

 

 

[The Mighty Thor]

Just now, WorldChampions1902 said:

The Finnish now urging the EU to send aid to the country that’s finished (Global Britain).

 

 

Top trolling by the Finnish 👍

[Francis Albert]

6 hours ago, WorldChampions1902 said:

Welcome back to the debate.

 

Free Ports we’re introduced to the U.K. by Thatcher in the 1980’s. That tells you that the EU did not and does not prevent a member state from having Free Ports I.e. Brexit did NOT provide us with new powers to do this as we already had those powers as a member of the EU!

 

The Tory government in 2012 took the decision to prevent the licence renewals of its U.K. free port operators. I suggest you do some research into the sleazy nature of those free port arrangements. Steeped in tax avoidance, facilitating the movement of contraband including drugs and with negligible benefit to our economy. Not even large numbers of jobs created, relative to the monetary value of the goods flowing into those ports.

 

Absolutely nothing has changed as regards the pros and cons of Free Ports and our rationale for the Tory decision in 2012 abandoning the failed Free Port concept. Until of course, Brexit came along and it became a convenient fallacy to promote Free Ports as something the U.K. could now do, free from nasty Brussels.  Yet more bollocks that the hard of thinking were willing to swallow in their desperate attempts to justify the unjustifiable.

 

In essence, Free Ports are yet another epic Brexit fail.

 

Evidence of the Tory lies on this below…….

 

I don't disagree with anything there none of which contradicts my post.  So quite what its relevance to the post you replied to puzzles me.

[Francis Albert]

3 hours ago, NANOJAMBO said:

Can you explain/clarify what free ports have to do with brexit ? Did the UK have freeports BEFORE brexit ?

 

Your final para , unless it's purely a dig at Ireland makes no sense : Ireland has signed up to a GLOBAL OECD agreement (you're clrearly implyinhg it's a bilateral agreement when it's nothing of the sort). In fact, not ALL EU member states have yet signed up to the deal . And what has Irelands CT status got to do with EU membership ? I thought you brexiters were always moaning that the EU was taking primacy over sovereign states and yet here we have an example of a country (Ireland) who proves that idea is total rubbish. 

Where did I imply a bilateral agrreement? Ireland has conceded to pressure on CT rates and agreed a common approach to minimum rates. Whethere it makes much difference to global companies ability to evade tax is another matter. Or indeed on individual countries ability to get round it whether or not in the EU.

Ireland's access to the EU market cerainly benefitted Ireland in running a very low corporate tax regime for some of the world's biggest corporations.

As I said well done Ireland for taking advantage. I agree the UK could have been a lot cleverer in taking advantage off EU membership.

 

Oh and my passing parenthetical reference to free ports was just an example of how rejoiners get excited, even outraged,  about the UK adopting a low tax and freemarket economy. "Singapore on the Thames" is another example that riles them. I don't approve of such a policy. No more than I do  of Ireland's low tax policy as far as Google and the rest are concerned.

Edited October 9, 2021 by Francis Albert

[Ulysses]

1 hour ago, The Mighty Thor said:

Top trolling by the Finnish 👍

 

I always associate Finland with trolls.  But maybe that's Norway, I can't be exactly sure. 

[Ulysses]

3 hours ago, NANOJAMBO said:

Can you explain/clarify what free ports have to do with brexit ? Did the UK have freeports BEFORE brexit ?

 

Your final para , unless it's purely a dig at Ireland makes no sense : Ireland has signed up to a GLOBAL OECD agreement (you're clrearly implyinhg it's a bilateral agreement when it's nothing of the sort). In fact, not ALL EU member states have yet signed up to the deal . And what has Irelands CT status got to do with EU membership ? I thought you brexiters were always moaning that the EU was taking primacy over sovereign states and yet here we have an example of a country (Ireland) who proves that idea is total rubbish. 

 

The OECD didn't announce the partnership until it reached agreement of a number of key paragraphs with Ireland, and it looks like a good deal all round.  British right-wingers are fond of the "Ireland submitting to Brussels" trope.  I think it helps make up for their sense of surprise at how unified the EU has been in its support for Ireland in its dealings with an unreliable and untrustworthy British government.  A limited amount of that support was the result of persistent and effective Irish diplomacy, but most of it was boring old self-interest; in the context of Brexit, it just happens that Ireland's best interests and those of the 27 as a group are more or less identical. 

 

There will of course be other days, and Ireland's interests won't always be quite as aligned with other member countries.  But that's the way it's been since 1973, and the mechanisms and constitutional provisions of the EU will come into play to help manage those issues as they have done in the past.  It's frequently been a headache, but it hasn't yet proved unmanageable.  That's what pooled sovereignty is about.

[Ulysses]

23 hours ago, WorldChampions1902 said:

I’m genuinely delighted for Ireland. As for the U.K., where’s Jim Bowen when you need him?

 

Intel have said they won't build in the UK.  That's a pity, because a UK integrated into the Single Market would be a leader in attracting leading-edge tech investment from companies like Intel.  The UK wouldn't grab all of that type of investment, but it would simply have to be at the top of everyone's list when considering where to operate.  You'd be crazy not to at least give it serious consideration.  But outside the Single Market, unless you have really cast-iron guarantees about the stability of the trading, customs and tariff relationship you have to put EU locations at the top of your list.

[redjambo]

8 minutes ago, Ulysses said:

 

Intel have said they won't build in the UK.  That's a pity, because a UK integrated into the Single Market would be a leader in attracting leading-edge tech investment from companies like Intel.  The UK wouldn't grab all of that type of investment, but it would simply have to be at the top of everyone's list when considering where to operate.  You'd be crazy not to at least give it serious consideration.  But outside the Single Market, unless you have really cast-iron guarantees about the stability of the trading, customs and tariff relationship you have to put EU locations at the top of your list.

 

Indeed. In a nutshell.

[WorldChampions1902]

1 hour ago, Francis Albert said:

I don't disagree with anything there none of which contradicts my post.  So quite what its relevance to the post you replied to puzzles me.

Your OP made mention of Free Ports and you suggested that these quote, “enrage Rejoiners”, without explaining why. I have now made that abundantly clear, should anyone be harbouring any misconceptions about the subject matter. 

[WorldChampions1902]

32 minutes ago, Ulysses said:

 

Intel have said they won't build in the UK.  That's a pity, because a UK integrated into the Single Market would be a leader in attracting leading-edge tech investment from companies like Intel.  The UK wouldn't grab all of that type of investment, but it would simply have to be at the top of everyone's list when considering where to operate.  You'd be crazy not to at least give it serious consideration.  But outside the Single Market, unless you have really cast-iron guarantees about the stability of the trading, customs and tariff relationship you have to put EU locations at the top of your list.

The bit in bold is true of all manner of industries that the U.K. will miss out on. It reinforces the statement that Brexit was and is the biggest self-imposed trading handicap ever in the history of world trade.

 

But sovereignty…………and brown people though.

[periodictabledancer]

1 hour ago, Francis Albert said:

Where did I imply a bilateral agrreement? Ireland has conceded to pressure on CT rates and agreed a common approach to minimum rates. Whethere it makes much difference to global companies ability to evade tax is another matter. Or indeed on individual countries ability to get round it whether or not in the EU.

Ireland's access to the EU market cerainly benefitted Ireland in running a very low corporate tax regime for some of the world's biggest corporations.

As I said well done Ireland for taking advantage. I agree the UK could have been a lot cleverer in taking advantage off EU membership.

 

Oh and my passing parenthetical reference to free ports was just an example of how rejoiners get excited, even outraged,  about the UK adopting a low tax and freemarket economy. "Singapore on the Thames" is another example that riles them. I don't approve of such a policy. No more than I do  of Ireland's low tax policy as far as Google and the rest are concerned.

Freeports - I asked you two simple questions which you declined to answer because it undermines your disingenuous claims. Brexit had zilch to do with it. 

 Ireland signed a global OECD led agreement but you persist in insisting Ireland were forced into the del even though there are at least two other EU countries who've not agreed. 

 

All the words in the world can't hide your bias. 

As for " rejoiners" , you need to sell your brexit better. 

[Francis Albert]

32 minutes ago, WorldChampions1902 said:

Your OP made mention of Free Ports and you suggested that these quote, “enrage Rejoiners”, without explaining why. I have now made that abundantly clear, should anyone be harbouring any misconceptions about the subject matter. 

I made a passing reference to free ports. In context i was clearly contrasting the UK's so far  failed and much criticised attempts at using them as a low tax boost to the economy, unlike Ireland's hugely successful use of low company tax to boost, indeed transform, its economy over the last decade and more.  

You will need to explain why free ports, "Singapore on Thames", etc seem to enrage the opponents of Brexit.

[WorldChampions1902]

20 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

I made a passing reference to free ports. In context i was clearly contrasting the UK's so far  failed and much criticised attempts at using them as a low tax boost to the economy, unlike Ireland's hugely successful use of low company tax to boost, indeed transform, its economy over the last decade and more.  

You will need to explain why free ports, "Singapore on Thames", etc seem to enrage the opponents of Brexit.

I’m disappointed that you are asking me to explain why Free Ports “enrage the opponents of Brexit”, given how comprehensive my response to your original post was. Can I respectfully request you peruse my original post before coming back to this response and hopefully you will have a better understanding?

 

1. Any arrangements that allow the unmolested flow of contraband, including drugs and armaments should be condemned, not just by Rejoiners, but by all decent law-abiding citizens.

2. Any arrangements that allow and promote tax-avoidance, particularly in these straitened times should be comprehensively condemned by all decent citizens - not just Rejoiners.

3. Any government initiative that purports to be a massive benefit of choosing a political direction (I.e. Brexit) should stand scrutiny and actually provide those benefits - Free Ports fail on every measure.

4. Suggesting that the U.K. is now able to introduce Free Ports because it voted for Brexit is a blatant lie. It always could when we were EU members and indeed did.

5. To suggest that there are massive economic and social benefits accruing from the introduction of Free Ports is a lie.

6. Any Tory politician that speaks to the national media and proclaims that a particular Free Port will create  ten’s of thousands of jobs which is a number greater than the population of the port concerned is a blatant liar. (That actually happened).

 

You have now introduced “Singapore on Thames” into your posit. You know perfectly well why that enrages Rejoiners - see some of the above points for example. In addition, an economy that is based on a sweat-shop labour force is not a particularly attractive proposition, unless of course you are retired? Thankfully, given recent Tory pronouncements (I.e. yet more lies) that we are aiming for a high-wage economy (much to the chagrin of the ERG within the Tory ranks), that won’t be a problem. Except that it will. Because the “high wage” pronouncement is purely expedient to hide the fact that they are a consequence of this Clown car governments economic illiteracy which will be reversed in the very near future IMHO.

 

If you have any more queries on these matters, please feel free to make use of the quite extensive credible data sources that are widely available. That of course excludes any data source that promotes Brexit.

 

 

[periodictabledancer]

46 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

I made a passing reference to free ports. In context i was clearly contrasting the UK's so far  failed and much criticised attempts at using them as a low tax boost to the economy, unlike Ireland's hugely successful use of low company tax to boost, indeed transform, its economy over the last decade and more.  

You will need to explain why free ports, "Singapore on Thames", etc seem to enrage the opponents of Brexit.

You didn't make a " passing reference".   No one ever cared about freeports : not pre brexit and not now but it's always brexiters who mention it. 

 

You still refuse to acknowledge Ireland signed a global  OECD agreement. It had bugger all to do with US / EU pressure. 

 

We see your bias. 

 

 

[NANOJAMBO]

5 hours ago, WorldChampions1902 said:

The Finnish now urging the EU to send aid to the country that’s finished (Global Britain).

 

 

 

At last ! We have found it, the brexit "dividend". 

[NANOJAMBO]

No problem, Clownshoes has the BoE blank cheque as part of  his "levelling up". 

[NANOJAMBO]

Anyone remember "that" bus ?

 

[Francis Albert]

2 hours ago, periodictabledancer said:

You didn't make a " passing reference".   No one ever cared about freeports : not pre brexit and not now but it's always brexiters who mention it. 

 

You still refuse to acknowledge Ireland signed a global  OECD agreement. It had bugger all to do with US / EU pressure. 

 

We see your bias. 

 

 

I don't think the "global agreement" has yet been signed but as of Thursday this week Ireland has become one of the last of 136 countries out of 140 to agree to it. 

No pressure from Joe "I'm Irish" Biden the major proponent of the agreement  or the EU of course. 

[Francis Albert]

34 minutes ago, NANOJAMBO said:

No problem, Clownshoes has the BoE blank cheque as part of  his "levelling up". 

No update since June 2016?

Edited October 9, 2021 by Francis Albert

[Francis Albert]

3 hours ago, WorldChampions1902 said:

I’m disappointed that you are asking me to explain why Free Ports “enrage the opponents of Brexit”, given how comprehensive my response to your original post was. Can I respectfully request you peruse my original post before coming back to this response and hopefully you will have a better understanding?

 

1. Any arrangements that allow the unmolested flow of contraband, including drugs and armaments should be condemned, not just by Rejoiners, but by all decent law-abiding citizens.

2. Any arrangements that allow and promote tax-avoidance, particularly in these straitened times should be comprehensively condemned by all decent citizens - not just Rejoiners.

3. Any government initiative that purports to be a massive benefit of choosing a political direction (I.e. Brexit) should stand scrutiny and actually provide those benefits - Free Ports fail on every measure.

4. Suggesting that the U.K. is now able to introduce Free Ports because it voted for Brexit is a blatant lie. It always could when we were EU members and indeed did.

5. To suggest that there are massive economic and social benefits accruing from the introduction of Free Ports is a lie.

6. Any Tory politician that speaks to the national media and proclaims that a particular Free Port will create  ten’s of thousands of jobs which is a number greater than the population of the port concerned is a blatant liar. (That actually happened).

 

You have now introduced “Singapore on Thames” into your posit. You know perfectly well why that enrages Rejoiners - see some of the above points for example. In addition, an economy that is based on a sweat-shop labour force is not a particularly attractive proposition, unless of course you are retired? Thankfully, given recent Tory pronouncements (I.e. yet more lies) that we are aiming for a high-wage economy (much to the chagrin of the ERG within the Tory ranks), that won’t be a problem. Except that it will. Because the “high wage” pronouncement is purely expedient to hide the fact that they are a consequence of this Clown car governments economic illiteracy which will be reversed in the very near future IMHO.

 

If you have any more queries on these matters, please feel free to make use of the quite extensive credible data sources that are widely available. That of course excludes any data source that promotes Brexit.

 

 

I don't need to respond to your attempt at cross examination. Your last sentence perfectly illustrates how open your mind is.

[NANOJAMBO]

5 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

No update since June 2016?

point ?

[NANOJAMBO]

2 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

I don't need to respond to your attempt at cross examination. Your last sentence perfectly illustrates how open your mind is.

I asked two simple questions : you wouldn't answer. It was an opportunity to bolster your mention of freeports. Your pomposity does not reinforce your false claims for freeports - or your nonsense about Ireland. 

 

[Francis Albert]

1 minute ago, NANOJAMBO said:

point ?

Thought there might be something more recent in the over 5 years since that article. For better or worse.p

[NANOJAMBO]

5 hours ago, Ulysses said:

 

The OECD didn't announce the partnership until it reached agreement of a number of key paragraphs with Ireland, and it looks like a good deal all round.  British right-wingers are fond of the "Ireland submitting to Brussels" trope.  I think it helps make up for their sense of surprise at how unified the EU has been in its support for Ireland in its dealings with an unreliable and untrustworthy British government.  A limited amount of that support was the result of persistent and effective Irish diplomacy, but most of it was boring old self-interest; in the context of Brexit, it just happens that Ireland's best interests and those of the 27 as a group are more or less identical. 

 

There will of course be other days, and Ireland's interests won't always be quite as aligned with other member countries.  But that's the way it's been since 1973, and the mechanisms and constitutional provisions of the EU will come into play to help manage those issues as they have done in the past.  It's frequently been a headache, but it hasn't yet proved unmanageable.  That's what pooled sovereignty is about.

Indeed. 

 

I await another sermon on  Mt Brexit from the usual suspects. 

[NANOJAMBO]

3 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

Thought there might be something more recent in the over 5 years since that article. For better or worse.p

There has been but you won't be reading it. It's on social media now. 

[Francis Albert]

Just now, NANOJAMBO said:

I asked two simple questions : you wouldn't answer. It was an opportunity to bolster your mention of freeports. Your pomposity does not reinforce your false claims for freeports - or your nonsense about Ireland. 

 

What false claims have I made about freeports that I should "bolster"? What  nonsense/inaccuracies about Ireland? 

 

 

[NANOJAMBO]

Just now, Francis Albert said:

What false claims have I made about freeports that I should "bolster"? What  nonsense/inaccuracies about Ireland? 

 

 

 

Ulysses replied to your mention of Ireland 5 hours ago - you've ignored it . 

As for your questions : you don't want to be "cross examined" so I'll respond likewise. 

[WorldChampions1902]

36 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

I don't need to respond to your attempt at cross examination. Your last sentence perfectly illustrates how open your mind is.

The final sentence in your penultimate reply to me was quote, “You will need to explain why free ports, "Singapore on Thames", etc seem to enrage the opponents of Brexit.
 

I subsequently do so in great detail. Factually, clinically and accurately. You don’t like it. Then……..

Your latest reply (see above) declares, quote, “I don't need to respond to your attempt at cross examination”.

 

Take a bow. Pro-Brexit protraginists in a nutshell.

Edited October 9, 2021 by WorldChampions1902

[jack D and coke]

19 hours ago, WorldChampions1902 said:

The Finnish now urging the EU to send aid to the country that’s finished (Global Britain).

 

 

Enzo will be along to rubbish this man shortly. I mean what does he know. 

[Enzo Chiefo]

Our Polish friends could be next...tick tock

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-58840076

[Konrad von Carstein]

32 minutes ago, Enzo Chiefo said:

Our Polish friends could be next...tick tock

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-58840076

Doubtful, I was reading that a recent polling result showed 80+% of Poles being happy with EU membership and the main man (nut job right enough) saying in your quoted article that Poland wants to stay in the EU.

 

However,  BJ was once a remainer so,  meh.

[Enzo Chiefo]

50 minutes ago, Konrad von Carstein said:

Doubtful, I was reading that a recent polling result showed 80+% of Poles being happy with EU membership and the main man (nut job right enough) saying in your quoted article that Poland wants to stay in the EU.

 

However,  BJ was once a remainer so,  meh.

Yes, you could be right KvC. It mentions public opinion in the article too. But they do seem on a collision course with the EU politburo. 

Johnson had 2 speeches prepared both for Remain and Leave iirc, before deciding at the last minute which way to go.

Not that he was working out which suited his prime ministerial bid best😎

[Cade]

Poland will be brought to heel and the rule of Law will be preserved.

The last two major surveys of Polish feeling towards the EU had something like 86-89% in favour.

 

There is absolutely no support for Poland leaving the EU.

The weak government is just playing the prick in a pathetic attempt to gather more support and to look the hard man.

 

As soon as all the industries in Poland that rely on EU money start going bust, the government will be out on their ear.

[Don Dan]

7 minutes ago, Cade said:

rely on EU money start going bust, the government will be out on their ear.

I hope this applies to the Tory Liars too.