Hard Brexit

[John Findlay]

1 minute ago, Ulysses said:

 

 

And it doesn't take account of the many territories and areas of EU member states that have either a special status within the EU or a special status within the member state.

 

You can read more here - it gets quite complicated.

 

When is the EU not complicated?

[Ulysses]

3 minutes ago, John Findlay said:

When is the EU not complicated?

 

Never.  That's why European diplomats are so good at this stuff.  They're used to complexity, variation, nuance and subtlety.  They have to be.

 

This Brexit stuff can be worked out easily enough, because the people who have to do it are pretty smart people.  But before they can sort it out they have to have a clear view of what they want and what they're prepared to do to get it.  And in order to sort it out the negotiators are going to have to use their imaginations, and devise solutions, agreements, protocols, procedures, mechanisms, processes, rules, regulations, guidance and practice notes that are loaded with creativity, nuance, complexity, variation, texture and subtlety.

 

Government is never simple.

[JamboX2]

7 hours ago, Francis Albert said:

So the EU proposal is incompatible with Article 50 of the eu/UK agreement?

And still no response to my question about the material differences between soft brexit and remain.

 

 

Soft Brexit- Benefits of membership, little to no say in rule making

Remain - All benefits and a say in rule making

 

I don't get your first point.

 

The EU have produced a paper based on previous UK/EU discussions. It states one option - seriously considered- is an internal border in the UK to trade and a special status for NI to maintain the GFA.

 

How about for all concerned and national unity we opt for a customs union for all the UK?

[JamboX2]

7 hours ago, Seymour M Hersh said:

 

Well the EU have caught you hook line and sinker with their Irish border red herring! 

 

How's it a red herring?

[JamboX2]

6 hours ago, Seymour M Hersh said:

 

What leavers were saying that?

 

Farage

Owen Paterson

Liam Fox

Bill Cash

Dan Hannan

David Davis

 

All said in the campaign we'd remain in the single market. That to leave that would be folly.

[jambo lodge]

11 hours ago, Ulysses said:

 

 

And it doesn't take account of the many territories and areas of EU member states that have either a special status within the EU or a special status within the member state.

 

You can read more here - it gets quite complicated.

 

 

Thanks for posting the complex structure, it proves that the EU can be flexible when it wants to be. What is happening at the moment is that all the noise being reported in the press is from Brussels. Corbyn jumps on the bandwagon favouring a form of Customs Union but doesn't give any detail......as usual. We would all be delighted to get an agreement with the EU for access to the single market and the customs union.    

[Boris]

15 hours ago, Lord BJ said:

 

Let me first of all say I think leaving is not the best course of action and I think it’s being handled terribly. Though most divorces/parting of the ways are. Generally no one comes away happy. 

 

However, I find this view point strange particularly from someone into politics, such as yourself.

 

The referendum was not a party defined referendum. For example our current pm was a remainer, as was the previous. All the major parties, with the possible exception of snp, let their members decide what way they wanted to go.

 

Therefore whatever leavers said was not a fact and destined to happen.  They were never forming in government. It was all cross party campaigns.

 

So whatever they promised was never guaranteed to happen not even close. Only someone lacking in basic understanding would think that. In much the same way if it was remain, a lot of the stuff ‘promised’ would never happen. 

 

Politicians (and their supporters) lie/bend the truth to get their end goal. It’s not knew or startling. 

 

This is Faux outrage imo.

 

People thinking the likes of Farrage had any power out with his soap box, is naive in the extreme and boarding on stupid imho. The guy wasn’t and never has been a member of parliament and has no power in real terms.

 

That said I do remember a pretty prominent poster claiming Farrage would likely being PM in event of brexit. Not sure how that happens when he’s not a MP or leader of a party with any MP’s!!! Maybe I’m the naive one in regards to people intellect :-(

 

People voted the way they choose for the reasons they choose (which were wide and varied). Democracy is a c unt when it doesn’t give you the result you want.

 

That why more extreme parties tend to take real democracy a way. 

 

As as an aside to this ramble I have wondered how coming out and saying we will remain in the EU would work for a party. I think the Lib Dem’s may have kind of went that route so probably make little difference lol.

 

I’ve all not really this read so if I have picked you wrong my bad.

 

 

 

Oh, I'm not outraged, and I get your points in the opening paragraphs of your reply and don't disagree regards the lack of political party support.  I suppose I was thinking that some people may have sided for leave, on the assumption single market etc would remain.  Naive on their part perhaps, but there you go.

[jake]

13 hours ago, Ulysses said:

 

 

The Commission draft is an attempt to put text on something that the UK has already committed to, and that the EU has acknowledged.  To fully understand the status of the draft, there are three things that have to be kept in mind.

 

1. The draft is for something that is a "backstop" that both sides agree should only happen in the event that the other options (an overall agreement or specific policy and operational proposals by the UK that are acceptable to the EU) don't work out. 

 

2. The draft is the Commission's view of how to put that "backstop" in place.  The Commission expects the UK to have its own view, and if those views are not in alignment they will have to be negotiated.

 

3. The draft deals with something that the UK committed to and that the EU acknowledged - i.e. that NI would not be a different regulatory space to the rest of this island.  It deals with that commitment fully and completely.

If there was one nag about my vote for brexit it was that it would feck up the Irish situation.

 

[Seymour M Hersh]

12 hours ago, JamboX2 said:

 

Farage

Owen Paterson

Liam Fox

Bill Cash

Dan Hannan

David Davis

 

All said in the campaign we'd remain in the single market. That to leave that would be folly.

 

Access to, not in.

[Seymour M Hersh]

17 hours ago, JamboX2 said:

 

How's it a red herring?

 

Well, the EU seem to making it out to be important but it's not really as there are already precedence where countries outwith the "bloc" but bordering countries in the bloc where EU compliance is met without any issues (Sweden-Norway and Switzerland-France). Then of course there is the EU's own "Smart-border" system and trusted trader system. Add to the fact that 95% of products crossing modern hard borders are not currently checked, meaning, stopping products and goods at a border is not the main method of imposing compliance and enforcement. Also don't forget there is already a border between NI and Eire which currently involves differences in taxation and regulation. Eire imposes a different rate of VAT to the UK in almost all products but these don't require stopping to enforce this. We even have various invisible regulatory and tax borders within the UK which do not require border checks (Scotland/England).

 

There is no reason differences in tax and regulation across the Irish border should mean a need for border checks. They don’t mean that now at the Irish border and they don’t mean that internally within the UK. The “Irish border problem” is simply a red herring.

[Ulysses]

54 minutes ago, Seymour M Hersh said:

 

The “Irish border problem” is simply a red herring.

 

No it isn't.  Your government and negotiators said so.  Therefore unless they were lying, the issue isn't a red herring.  And if they were lying, why should anyone negotiating with them trust what they say?

 

The UK and the EU agreed to do something, and the EU has set out a text saying how that can be done.  The UK said at the time that it had better ideas for doing it.  So far those better ideas have not materialised.  The EU has put down its draft text and invited the UK to expand on its better ideas.

 

The methods you described in your post for dealing with trade between the EU and non-EU countries all involve countries that have agreements with the EU for a close level of customs co-operation that is almost indistinguishable from a customs union.  The regime for dealing with imports from beyond those countries is more rigorous, more bureaucratic, and more likely to interrupt the flow of trade - something that the customs union and close customs co-operation are specifically designed to avoid.

[JamboX2]

1 hour ago, Ulysses said:

 

No it isn't.  Your government and negotiators said so.  Therefore unless they were lying, the issue isn't a red herring.  And if they were lying, why should anyone negotiating with them trust what they say?

 

The UK and the EU agreed to do something, and the EU has set out a text saying how that can be done.  The UK said at the time that it had better ideas for doing it.  So far those better ideas have not materialised.  The EU has put down its draft text and invited the UK to expand on its better ideas.

 

The methods you described in your post for dealing with trade between the EU and non-EU countries all involve countries that have agreements with the EU for a close level of customs co-operation that is almost indistinguishable from a customs union.  The regime for dealing with imports from beyond those countries is more rigorous, more bureaucratic, and more likely to interrupt the flow of trade - something that the customs union and close customs co-operation are specifically designed to avoid.

This!

 

Too much sense Uly.

Edited March 1, 2018 by JamboX2

[Francis Albert]

14 hours ago, jambo lodge said:

 

Thanks for posting the complex structure, it proves that the EU can be flexible when it wants to be. What is happening at the moment is that all the noise being reported in the press is from Brussels. Corbyn jumps on the bandwagon favouring a form of Customs Union but doesn't give any detail......as usual. We would all be delighted to get an agreement with the EU for access to the single market and the customs union.    

Of course we all would. But the Leave voters (of which I am not one) have the right to be concerned about on what terms.

 

[JamboX2]

14 hours ago, jambo lodge said:

 

Thanks for posting the complex structure, it proves that the EU can be flexible when it wants to be. What is happening at the moment is that all the noise being reported in the press is from Brussels. Corbyn jumps on the bandwagon favouring a form of Customs Union but doesn't give any detail......as usual. We would all be delighted to get an agreement with the EU for access to the single market and the customs union.    

 

So favouring that access should be good? 

 

We need to wake up to the fact that some form of meaningful alignment with the EU is needed to preserve the totality of the UK. If we betray our commitments to Northern Ireland's devolved settlement, the Good Friday Agreement and the strong relationship with the Republic then we are truly entering an utterly ludicrous position.

 

We've actually got people, in senior positions of power and influence, happily tearing up a key part of Britain's constitution. A wilful ignorance. Worrying from those I'd expect more of.

[John Findlay]

3 minutes ago, JamboX2 said:

 

So favouring that access should be good? 

 

We need to wake up to the fact that some form of meaningful alignment with the EU is needed to preserve the totality of the UK. If we betray our commitments to Northern Ireland's devolved settlement, the Good Friday Agreement and the strong relationship with the Republic then we are truly entering an utterly ludicrous position.

 

We've actually got people, in senior positions of power and influence, happily tearing up a key part of Britain's constitution. A wilful ignorance. Worrying from those I'd expect more of.

What constirution is that? As far as I am aware the UK does not have a written constitution. Unless you are meaning the Magna Carta. Which I believe only covers England.

[Francis Albert]

5 minutes ago, JamboX2 said:

 

So favouring that access should be good? 

 

We need to wake up to the fact that some form of meaningful alignment with the EU is needed to preserve the totality of the UK. If we betray our commitments to Northern Ireland's devolved settlement, the Good Friday Agreement and the strong relationship with the Republic then we are truly entering an utterly ludicrous position.

 

We've actually got people, in senior positions of power and influence, happily tearing up a key part of Britain's constitution. A wilful ignorance. Worrying from those I'd expect more of.

Why is the Good Friday agreement a key part of our constitution? Any more than our agreement to enter the EU and the various treaties that have gone with it? 

[Ulysses]

OK, I'll admit it.

 

I detest, truly, truly detest ****wits.

[Ulysses]

^^^^

 

Now that I've got that off my chest, here's one on a lighter note:

 

[JamboX2]

13 minutes ago, John Findlay said:

What constirution is that? As far as I am aware the UK does not have a written constitution. Unless you are meaning the Magna Carta. Which I believe only covers England.

 

The UK constitution is a real thing. Made up of parliamentary precedent but also made up of things like the Parliament Acts of 1911 and 1949, the electoral acts, the Human Rights Act, Scotland and Wales Acts, Acts affording devolution to English regions, the Supreme Court legislation and the Northern Ireland Act 1998. But also the European Communities Act 1973.

 

These acts together are a constitutional settlement. A hodge podge yes but all interrelated and all set out how we are government and what our human and civil rights are.

 

Magna Carta, the Bill of Rights and Claim of Right in Scotland are archaic to this debate. Supplemented, expanded and superseded.

 

The UK by playing loose with the GFA is undermining the Northern Ireland Act which is founded on that agreement. The agreement is dependent on our relationship with Ireland. If we undermine that and erect borders and customs posts we will do a lot of harm to the devolution settlement of NI - a part of our constitutional set up. 

 

If NI becomes a special zone then it cannot be freely open with the rUK. That also undermines the GFA and the territorial and constitutional integrity of the UK.

 

[Francis Albert]

4 minutes ago, JamboX2 said:

 

The UK constitution is a real thing. Made up of parliamentary precedent but also made up of things like the Parliament Acts of 1911 and 1949, the electoral acts, the Human Rights Act, Scotland and Wales Acts, Acts affording devolution to English regions, the Supreme Court legislation and the Northern Ireland Act 1998. But also the European Communities Act 1973.

 

These acts together are a constitutional settlement. A hodge podge yes but all interrelated and all set out how we are government and what our human and civil rights are.

 

Magna Carta, the Bill of Rights and Claim of Right in Scotland are archaic to this debate. Supplemented, expanded and superseded.

 

The UK by playing loose with the GFA is undermining the Northern Ireland Act which is founded on that agreement. The agreement is dependent on our relationship with Ireland. If we undermine that and erect borders and customs posts we will do a lot of harm to the devolution settlement of NI - a part of our constitutional set up. 

 

If NI becomes a special zone then it cannot be freely open with the rUK. That also undermines the GFA and the territorial and constitutional integrity of the UK.

 

0n your last paragraph doesn't that mean the EU "fallback" proposal undermines the territorial and constitutional integrity of the UK?

[JamboX2]

24 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

Why is the Good Friday agreement a key part of our constitution? Any more than our agreement to enter the EU and the various treaties that have gone with it? 

 

Because it governs our politics and how our government works and can act. It has an impact on what the territorial integrity of the UK is and how that works.

 

It's an incredibly important part of the modern United Kingdom. 

 

The GFA sets up intergovernmental structures to ensure peace in NI between Britain and Ireland. These are dependent on open borders and free trade as we have known in the EU. 

 

To maintain it, we need to replicate that relationship. So a Customs Union for example would permit this open and seemless border situation. 

 

To tear up these things will be detrimental to devolution in NI. Would most likely collapse the co-community governance power share and return us to two communities in stand-off again. The GFA is a monumental achievement of compromise, negotiation and diplomacy. It keeps a fragile peace. Is Brexit more important than peace now? 

[Francis Albert]

14 minutes ago, JamboX2 said:

 

Because it governs our politics and how our government works and can act. It has an impact on what the territorial integrity of the UK is and how that works.

 

It's an incredibly important part of the modern United Kingdom. 

 

The GFA sets up intergovernmental structures to ensure peace in NI between Britain and Ireland. These are dependent on open borders and free trade as we have known in the EU. 

 

To maintain it, we need to replicate that relationship. So a Customs Union for example would permit this open and seemless border situation. 

 

To tear up these things will be detrimental to devolution in NI. Would most likely collapse the co-community governance power share and return us to two communities in stand-off again. The GFA is a monumental achievement of compromise, negotiation and diplomacy. It keeps a fragile peace. Is Brexit more important than peace now? 

Of course Brexit is not more important than peace. But on the other hand the prevention of Irish people killing each other and  british people and british people killing irish people should not dictate the future relationship between the uk and the world. It is typical of eu arrogance to suggest that the solution to.the GFA issue should be to separate NI from.the UK by setting up custom.barriers between NI and the rest of the UK.

Tje GFA governs our politics and how our government works? I don't think so but if it did we should certainly ditch it.

Edited March 2, 2018 by Francis Albert

[JamboX2]

17 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

0n your last paragraph doesn't that mean the EU "fallback" proposal undermines the territorial and constitutional integrity of the UK?

 

Only as much as the government's negotiating position does.

 

This is a two way street.

 

What's interesting is the EU's fall back is closer to our government's preferred position. Simply put, the UK government is toying with fracturing the nation for Brexit. Whilst the EU has no interest in that. 

 

Why are we opting for a Brexit which has a high risk of fracturing the UK? Ignore the EU. They're not your concern. This government of ours is a shambles.

 

Tomorrow the PM is making a "definitive" speech on the EU. So definitive and final the cabinet are still split and by all reports bickering tonight.

 

The Foreign Secretary is claiming the Irish border issue is a minor quibble. Akin to a boundary between two London boroughs. Mind you, I don't recall Kensington bombing Chelsea...

 

The Trade Secretary is opposed to anything which may affect his makeshift and do nothing department were he jets off abroad for talks that go nowhere. A man who was sacked by Cameron for being effectively corrupt.

 

A divided and rudderless PM leading a pack of fighting dogs. Hence we have NO solid negotiating position. No wonder the EU sits agog at us. It is not good enough at a time of such importance to our future that we have such a weak, divided and idiotic government.

Edited March 2, 2018 by JamboX2

[JamboX2]

5 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

Of course Brexit is not more important than peace. But on the other hand the prevention of Irish people killing each other and  british people and british people killing irish people should not dictate the future relationship between the uk and the world. It is typical of eu arrogance to suggest that the solution to.the GFA issue should be to separate NI from.the UK by setting up custom.barriers between NI and the rest of the UK.

 

But this is about two sets of British citizens in Northern Ireland killing each other. That means a lot for the UK and it's relationship with the world. The Troubles wasn't a war with British tanks shelling Limerick. It was one group if people born in a part of Britain killing another group of people born in the same part of Britain.

 

It is sheer arrogance from a UK Government to think it is not of vital importance to protect that fragile peace in it's own backyard. As Uly keeps pointing out the UK is the one leaving and we need to be the ones proposing what type of relationship we want. As we just aren't the EU is within its rights to set out a fall back. 

 

We need to maybe propose a relationship which accounts for all the needs of the UK as a whole.

[Ulysses]

33 minutes ago, JamboX2 said:

 

Only as much as the government's negotiating position does.

 

This is a two way street.

 

What's interesting is the EU's fall back is closer to our government's preferred position. Simply put, the UK government is toying with fracturing the nation for Brexit. Whilst the EU has no interest in that. 

 

 

 

I hope I'm not taking issue with you, but it isn't really a two way street.

 

The UK Government said, with sovereignty and freely, that it would agree that after Brexit there would not be a divergence in regulation between NI and the rest of this island.

 

To achieve that, the UK Government said it would manage this in one of three ways.

 

1. The matter would be dealt with by way of a comprehensive post-Brexit agreement.

 

2. The matter would be dealt with by proposals brought forward by the UK Government that would be acceptable to the EU.

 

3. If neither 1 nor 2 happened, there would simply be no regulatory divergence between NI and the rest of the island.

 

Those were the commitments the UK Government freely gave, and the EU freely accepted.  Crucially, those represent the full range of commitments made by the UK and accepted by the EU in relation to Northern Ireland.

 

The EU has written a draft text that proposes how option 3 is to be carried out in the event that options 1 and 2 are not successful.  The EU has invited the UK to propose better ideas in respect of any of the three options if it wishes to propose them.

 

In doing that, the EU has drafted a text that fully and completely deals with the full range of commitments made by the UK and accepted by the EU in relation to Northern Ireland.  The UK may not agree with the text, and it is free to propose alternative text or to propose better solutions in terms of options 1 and 2.  But nonetheless the EU's text is in no way incomplete and, to use the movie-making expression, has left nothing on the cutting room floor.

Edited March 2, 2018 by Ulysses

[JamboX2]

12 hours ago, Ulysses said:

 

 

I hope I'm not taking issue with you, but it isn't really a two way street.

 

The UK Government said, with sovereignty and freely, that it would agree that after Brexit there would not be a divergence in regulation between NI and the rest of this island.

 

To achieve that, the UK Government said it would manage this in one of three ways.

 

1. The matter would be dealt with by way of a comprehensive post-Brexit agreement.

 

2. The matter would be dealt with by proposals brought forward by the UK Government that would be acceptable to the EU.

 

3. If neither 1 nor 2 happened, there would simply be no regulatory divergence between NI and the rest of the island.

 

Those were the commitments the UK Government freely gave, and the EU freely accepted.  Crucially, those represent the full range of commitments made by the UK and accepted by the EU in relation to Northern Ireland.

 

The EU has written a draft text that proposes how option 3 is to be carried out in the event that options 1 and 2 are not successful.  The EU has invited the UK to propose better ideas in respect of any of the three options if it wishes to propose them.

 

In doing that, the EU has drafted a text that fully and completely deals with the full range of commitments made by the UK and accepted by the EU in relation to Northern Ireland.  The UK may not agree with the text, and it is free to propose alternative text or to propose better solutions in terms of options 1 and 2.  But nonetheless the EU's text is in no way incomplete and, to use the movie-making expression, has left nothing on the cutting room floor.

 

Sorry Uly that's what I was getting at here. 2 way in that this text is based on the British governments statements.

 

In that the EU is coming one way in response to the UK's direction of travel.

[jambo lodge]

Thought Theresa's speech today was just what was needed. We would like bits of this, bits of that, and a relatively soft Brexit which would satisfy both the wings of her party. If we are able to have access to the single market and customs union ( probably at a price ) but still be able to do trade deals around the world then all will be well. Especially enjoyed the part about manufacturing standards...why would the UK want to have any less standards than we have at present within the EU? 

[Boris]

1 hour ago, jambo lodge said:

Thought Theresa's speech today was just what was needed. We would like bits of this, bits of that, and a relatively soft Brexit which would satisfy both the wings of her party. If we are able to have access to the single market and customs union ( probably at a price ) but still be able to do trade deals around the world then all will be well. Especially enjoyed the part about manufacturing standards...why would the UK want to have any less standards than we have at present within the EU? 

 

First bold part - it's about the country, not her party.

 

Second - I agree, but perhaps a shot across the bows of those who would de-regulate?  Hopefully puts chlorinated chicken from the USA to bed?

[Sraman]

1 hour ago, jambo lodge said:

Thought Theresa's speech today was just what was needed. We would like bits of this, bits of that, and a relatively soft Brexit which would satisfy both the wings of her party. If we are able to have access to the single market and customs union ( probably at a price ) but still be able to do trade deals around the world then all will be well. Especially enjoyed the part about manufacturing standards...why would the UK want to have any less standards than we have at present within the EU? 

 

 

Standards in manufacturing what?

 

Oh. and you don't manufacture chickens no matter what the Amerkins say.

 

Edited March 2, 2018 by Sraman

[Cade]

We learned nothing in that speech.

 

Still the same old meaningless soundbites, no detail on anything and glossing over the difficult bits (Irish border).

 

The EU has been ruling out cherry picking since day 1. They are not going to change tack. They're going to laugh us out of the negotiation room.

 

The UK is a laughing stock.

[The Mighty Thor]

1 hour ago, jambo lodge said:

Especially enjoyed the part about manufacturing standards...why would the UK want to have any less standards than we have at present within the EU? 

I'm sure most people would like to see manufacturing standards in line with European standards, however I'm quite sure there will be Tory party donors with companies that would love to 'smash EU red tape' and make that extra few sheckles profit. It's the whole purpose of the Brexiteers. 

 

It's a nothing speech trying to placate the rabid euro sceptics by laying down how it's all going to be according to the weakest PM in living memory.

 

I'm sure all 27 European countries are reaching for the biro to sign up.

[Ulysses]

5 hours ago, JamboX2 said:

 

Sorry Uly that's what I was getting at here. 2 way in that this text is based on the British governments statements.

 

In that the EU is coming one way in response to the UK's direction of travel.

 

Understood, thanks.

[Victorian]

It's just another muddling,  fudging pile of shite with the sole purpose of avoiding a knife in the back from her own 'party'.       Half-hearted tough talking towards the EU that will be laughed out of town.    "Reaching out" to all and sundry in the UK... yet arrogantly excluding parts of it from the process.

 

She's a control freak with no control.   Only still there as a sticking plaster against even more horrendous forces taking control.     The entire psychotic mob should be driven out of Westminster.

[Space Mackerel]

2 hours ago, jambo lodge said:

Thought Theresa's speech today was just what was needed. We would like bits of this, bits of that, and a relatively soft Brexit which would satisfy both the wings of her party. If we are able to have access to the single market and customs union ( probably at a price ) but still be able to do trade deals around the world then all will be well. Especially enjoyed the part about manufacturing standards...why would the UK want to have any less standards than we have at present within the EU? 

 

Yup, another load of waffle that bought her a few more weeks.

Its about time this Tory party started putting the "country" first before themselves.

[JamboX2]

38 minutes ago, Victorian said:

It's just another muddling,  fudging pile of shite with the sole purpose of avoiding a knife in the back from her own 'party'.       Half-hearted tough talking towards the EU that will be laughed out of town.    "Reaching out" to all and sundry in the UK... yet arrogantly excluding parts of it from the process.

 

She's a control freak with no control.   Only still there as a sticking plaster against even more horrendous forces taking control.     The entire psychotic mob should be driven out of Westminster.

 

Watch Gove on C4 news... jesus christ.

 

We're now talking about being associate members of bodies across the EU with no say but paying in.

 

He talked up the free trade deal they want being better than Canada's but it's worse than membership, massively worse.

 

We laugh at facists in Italy. Yet we have a press backing UKIP and Farage.

 

We denounce EU bureaucrats. We belittle the Civil Service. Mock experts.

 

We praise obstructions to government - Boris, Fox, Mogg, Davis, Gove. Give money to the DUP whilst Stormont lies empty 

 

This nation is descending into a farce.

[Space Mackerel]

Could someone explain Maybots position please? 

 

https://mobile.twitter.com/open_britain/status/969191104187953152?s=21

[jambo lodge]

1 hour ago, Boris said:

 

First bold part - it's about the country, not her party.

 

Second - I agree, but perhaps a shot across the bows of those who would de-regulate?  Hopefully puts chlorinated chicken from the USA to bed?

 Agreed but she has to bring her party with her otherwise the votes in parliament wont add up. Who knows where Corbyn will be when the vote comes.

 

As regards agricultural produce we have amongst the highest standards of food production in the world why would be change them.......same argument as for manufacturing.

[Space Mackerel]

6 minutes ago, JamboX2 said:

 

Watch Gove on C4 news... jesus christ.

 

We're now talking about being associate members of bodies across the EU with no say but paying in.

 

He talked up the free trade deal they want being better than Canada's but it's worse than membership, massively worse.

 

We laugh at facists in Italy. Yet we have a press backing UKIP and Farage.

 

We denounce EU bureaucrats. We belittle the Civil Service. Mock experts.

 

We praise obstructions to government - Boris, Fox, Mogg, Davis, Gove. Give money to the DUP whilst Stormont lies empty 

 

This nation is descending into a farce.

 

Coming over to our way of thinking eventually? What took you?

[jambo lodge]

1 hour ago, Sraman said:

1 hour ago, The Mighty Thor said:

I'm sure most people would like to see manufacturing standards in line with European standards, however I'm quite sure there will be Tory party donors with companies that would love to 'smash EU red tape' and make that extra few sheckles profit. It's the whole purpose of the Brexiteers. 

 

It's a nothing speech trying to placate the rabid euro sceptics by laying down how it's all going to be according to the weakest PM in living memory.

 

I'm sure all 27 European countries are reaching for the biro to sign up.

 

Standards in manufacturing what?

 

Oh. and you don't manufacture chickens no matter what the Amerkins say.

 

 

Barnier seems to have welcomed it.

[Space Mackerel]

1 minute ago, jambo lodge said:

 Agreed but she has to bring her party with her otherwise the votes in parliament wont add up. Who knows where Corbyn will be when the vote comes.

 

As regards agricultural produce we have amongst the highest standards of food production in the world why would be change them.......same argument as for manufacturing.

 

What about the trade deals we sign with Thailand in the future? Are their chickens alright? You do get how this works?

[jambo lodge]

13 minutes ago, Space Mackerel said:

 

Yup, another load of waffle that bought her a few more weeks.

Its about time this Tory party started putting the "country" first before themselves.

 

They are putting the whole country first unlike some parties I could mention who want Independence then sell out to the EU.

[Space Mackerel]

2 minutes ago, jambo lodge said:

 

Barnier seems to have welcomed it.

 

Hes being diplomatic. There was nothing in that speech today. A list of we want this and we want that. 

[jambo lodge]

3 minutes ago, Space Mackerel said:

 

What about the trade deals we sign with Thailand in the future? Are their chickens alright? You do get how this works?

 

Just now, Space Mackerel said:

 

Hes being diplomatic. There was nothing in that speech today. A list of we want this and we want that. 

 

SM with the inside track on UK trade deals well well !!

 

Barnier is not usually diplomatic, far from it. 

[Victorian]

9 minutes ago, JamboX2 said:

 

Watch Gove on C4 news... jesus christ.

 

We're now talking about being associate members of bodies across the EU with no say but paying in.

 

He talked up the free trade deal they want being better than Canada's but it's worse than membership, massively worse.

 

We laugh at facists in Italy. Yet we have a press backing UKIP and Farage.

 

We denounce EU bureaucrats. We belittle the Civil Service. Mock experts.

 

We praise obstructions to government - Boris, Fox, Mogg, Davis, Gove. Give money to the DUP whilst Stormont lies empty 

 

This nation is descending into a farce.

 

He let something slip in that interview.    Something about a position they've come to that should be acceptable to the EU and to the Tory Party.

 

**** the country.    Tory Party is happy.     Job done.    

[Victorian]

9 minutes ago, JamboX2 said:

 

Watch Gove on C4 news... jesus christ.

 

We're now talking about being associate members of bodies across the EU with no say but paying in.

 

He talked up the free trade deal they want being better than Canada's but it's worse than membership, massively worse.

 

We laugh at facists in Italy. Yet we have a press backing UKIP and Farage.

 

We denounce EU bureaucrats. We belittle the Civil Service. Mock experts.

 

We praise obstructions to government - Boris, Fox, Mogg, Davis, Gove. Give money to the DUP whilst Stormont lies empty 

 

This nation is descending into a farce.

 

He let something slip in that interview.    Something about a position they've come to that should be acceptable to the EU and to the Tory Party.

 

**** the country.    Tory Party is happy.     Job done.    

[Space Mackerel]

1 minute ago, jambo lodge said:

 

They are putting the whole country first unlike some parties I could mention who want Independence then sell out to the EU.

 

How come Maybot dodged the question from the Virgin Money reporter after when she asked about Newcastle and Scotland?

 

You did see that and arent taking pointers from the Daily Mail?

 

[Space Mackerel]

1 minute ago, jambo lodge said:

 

 

SM with the inside track on UK trade deals well well !!

 

Barnier is not usually diplomatic, far from it. 

 

Ahhhhh, so youre OK eating food from Thailand and El Salvador?

 

Barnier just let out a few more feet of Maybots leash to see where it all goes.

 

[jambo lodge]

1 minute ago, Space Mackerel said:

 

How come Maybot dodged the question from the Virgin Money reporter after when she asked about Newcastle and Scotland?

 

You did see that and arent taking pointers from the Daily Mail?

 

 

Her response to the lady was excellent, there is no prospect of even a 2nd referendum any time soon so nothing to worry about in living in Scotland and working in Newcastle.

[jambo lodge]

3 minutes ago, Space Mackerel said:

 

Ahhhhh, so youre OK eating food from Thailand and El Salvador?

 

Barnier just let out a few more feet of Maybots leash to see where it all goes.

 

 

haha. Think our agri - trade deals are more likely to be with new Zealand and Australia but you carry on the conspiracy theories

[Space Mackerel]

9 minutes ago, jambo lodge said:

 

haha. Think our agri - trade deals are more likely to be with new Zealand and Australia but you carry on the conspiracy theories

 

You can get New Zealand lamb and Ozzy red wine here.

What do you want? Cheap boomarangs?