The Brexit Thread

[Bimbowomxn]

But I also agree with Sir Ivan Rogers, that if the UK acts in bad faith at any stage, e.g. invoking anything in the Internal markets bill; the EU will withdraw any side deals unilaterally, & the UK will end up with a North Korea deal, not an Australian deal !

They cannot do that by any legal measure. Unless you’re saying that the EU will enter a war like status.


Wishful thinking maybe .

I’m sure they can pass a Bill in parliament to break the law in a very specific way. I’ve heard that’s alright to do these days.

They can, they’ll then understand what a trade deficit looks like.

[ScarfaceClaw]

They cannot do that by any legal measure. Unless you’re saying that the EU will enter a war like status.


Wishful thinking maybe .

I’m sure they can pass a Bill in parliament to break the law in a very specific way. I’ve heard that’s alright to do these days.

They can, they’ll then understand what a trade deficit looks like.

There is still time for them to negotiate a face saving trade deal with the Ivory Coast. That should soften the blow.

[fishfoodie]

But I also agree with Sir Ivan Rogers, that if the UK acts in bad faith at any stage, e.g. invoking anything in the Internal markets bill; the EU will withdraw any side deals unilaterally, & the UK will end up with a North Korea deal, not an Australian deal !

They cannot do that by any legal measure. Unless you’re saying that the EU will enter a war like status.


Wishful thinking maybe .

I’m sure they can pass a Bill in parliament to break the law in a very specific way. I’ve heard that’s alright to do these days.

Needless to say; the bimbot is spouting undiluted horseshit as usual.

The EU giveth, the EU taketh away.

Boris Johnson’s claims that crashing out of the EU with no deal would be less painful because of a series of “side deals” that the UK has already done with Brussels have been dismissed as “rubbish” by the EU.

Johnson made the assertion several times during his campaign to be the new leader of the Conservative party and EU officials are concerned this was being spun as a new post-Theresa May “truth” after the claims were repeated by supporters in recent days.

Iain Duncan Smith referred to 17 side deals on the table while the former chancellor Norman Lamont told Sky News hours after Johnson won the Tory leadership contest that “there is no such thing as no deal” as there were “all sorts of side deals that were done”.

A senior EU official described the claims of side deals as “pure rubbish”, pointing out that the so-called deals are unilateral positions taken by the EU alone to keep the basics functioning on their side of the border.

“We have said a million times that they are unilateral and temporary and that they don’t amount to side deals,” said the official.

The UK has no legal recourse.

[Bimbowomxn]

They cannot do that by any legal measure. Unless you’re saying that the EU will enter a war like status.


Wishful thinking maybe .

I’m sure they can pass a Bill in parliament to break the law in a very specific way. I’ve heard that’s alright to do these days.

Needless to say; the bimbot is spouting undiluted horseshit as usual.

The EU giveth, the EU taketh away.

Boris Johnson’s claims that crashing out of the EU with no deal would be less painful because of a series of “side deals” that the UK has already done with Brussels have been dismissed as “rubbish” by the EU.

Johnson made the assertion several times during his campaign to be the new leader of the Conservative party and EU officials are concerned this was being spun as a new post-Theresa May “truth” after the claims were repeated by supporters in recent days.

Iain Duncan Smith referred to 17 side deals on the table while the former chancellor Norman Lamont told Sky News hours after Johnson won the Tory leadership contest that “there is no such thing as no deal” as there were “all sorts of side deals that were done”.

A senior EU official described the claims of side deals as “pure rubbish”, pointing out that the so-called deals are unilateral positions taken by the EU alone to keep the basics functioning on their side of the border.

“We have said a million times that they are unilateral and temporary and that they don’t amount to side deals,” said the official.

The UK has no legal recourse.

I’ve said nothing of the sort you seem to think I’ve said,

The EU cannot use tarrifs nor quotas to politically punish the UK under law. It would break EU law as well as international law,


The EU cannot “taketh” anything illegally.

[Tichtheid]

Does anyone still think this is a good idea?

[ASMO]

I’m sure they can pass a Bill in parliament to break the law in a very specific way. I’ve heard that’s alright to do these days.

Needless to say; the bimbot is spouting undiluted horseshit as usual.

The EU giveth, the EU taketh away.

Boris Johnson’s claims that crashing out of the EU with no deal would be less painful because of a series of “side deals” that the UK has already done with Brussels have been dismissed as “rubbish” by the EU.

Johnson made the assertion several times during his campaign to be the new leader of the Conservative party and EU officials are concerned this was being spun as a new post-Theresa May “truth” after the claims were repeated by supporters in recent days.

Iain Duncan Smith referred to 17 side deals on the table while the former chancellor Norman Lamont told Sky News hours after Johnson won the Tory leadership contest that “there is no such thing as no deal” as there were “all sorts of side deals that were done”.

A senior EU official described the claims of side deals as “pure rubbish”, pointing out that the so-called deals are unilateral positions taken by the EU alone to keep the basics functioning on their side of the border.

“We have said a million times that they are unilateral and temporary and that they don’t amount to side deals,” said the official.

The UK has no legal recourse.

I’ve said nothing of the sort you seem to think I’ve said,

The EU cannot use tarrifs nor quotas to politically punish the UK under law. It would break EU law as well as international law,


The EU cannot “taketh” anything illegally.

They can simply impose WTO terms and the UK will be a significant loser in that scenario, the EU can absorb it far better than little England

[Sandstorm]

Does anyone still think this is a good idea?

Nope

[Bimbowomxn]

They can simply impose WTO terms and the UK will be a significant loser in that scenario, the EU can absorb it far better than little England

They send us 90bln more in Goods than we send them and will on average pay 3% plus more in tariffs on those goods under WTO.

[Tichtheid]

They can simply impose WTO terms and the UK will be a significant loser in that scenario, the EU can absorb it far better than little England

They send us 90bln more in Goods than we send them and will on average pay 3% plus more in tariffs on those goods under WTO.

Premium products like the Scotch Whisky industry will still sell, especially since they are not subject to nearly so much vat in big markets like France as they are in the UK, but other UK producers who are competing with like for like products from elsewhere could see themselves sitting on unsold stock.

[fishfoodie]

Needless to say; the bimbot is spouting undiluted horseshit as usual.

The EU giveth, the EU taketh away.



The UK has no legal recourse.

I’ve said nothing of the sort you seem to think I’ve said,

The EU cannot use tarrifs nor quotas to politically punish the UK under law. It would break EU law as well as international law,


The EU cannot “taketh” anything illegally.

They can simply impose WTO terms and the UK will be a significant loser in that scenario, the EU can absorb it far better than little England

It's not about the EU, "imposing", WTO terms; the EU is under no obligation to give the UK a FTA. WTO terms are the inevitable outcome for the UK, if there is no FTA agreement between the UK & the EU.

But I was specifically talking about the mythical, "side deals".

If there are to be any side deals, they are also in the gift of the EU, & as such the EU is perfectly entitled to withdraw those deals, if they feel they UK isn't acting in good faith.

If I give a tenner to a homeless person; they aren't entitled to sue me for not giving them more. It's a gift !

I never mentioned tariffs or anything else, because they are spelt out by the WTO. The side deals cover stuff like recognition of professional qualifications, & the air space, the ability of HGV drivers to drive in the EU, etc, etc, etc

[Bimbowomxn]

They can simply impose WTO terms and the UK will be a significant loser in that scenario, the EU can absorb it far better than little England

They send us 90bln more in Goods than we send them and will on average pay 3% plus more in tariffs on those goods under WTO.

Premium products like the Scotch Whisky industry will still sell, especially since they are not subject to nearly so much vat in big markets like France as they are in the UK, but other UK producers who are competing with like for like products from elsewhere could see themselves sitting on unsold stock.

I’m still not sure why the above only applies to the UK.

[Tichtheid]

They send us 90bln more in Goods than we send them and will on average pay 3% plus more in tariffs on those goods under WTO.

Premium products like the Scotch Whisky industry will still sell, especially since they are not subject to nearly so much vat in big markets like France as they are in the UK, but other UK producers who are competing with like for like products from elsewhere could see themselves sitting on unsold stock.

I’m still not sure why the above only applies to the UK.

Because the EU has an internal market comprised of something in the region of 400m people, plus others whose producers are not subject to WTO tariffs

[Bimbowomxn]

Premium products like the Scotch Whisky industry will still sell, especially since they are not subject to nearly so much vat in big markets like France as they are in the UK, but other UK producers who are competing with like for like products from elsewhere could see themselves sitting on unsold stock.

I’m still not sure why the above only applies to the UK.

Because the EU has an internal market comprised of something in the region of 400m people, plus others whose producers are not subject to WTO tariffs

So the 90 billion in sales will just be absorbed internally ?

Cool.

[Sandstorm]

[Zig]

At least the Americans get to change their minds after 4 years of chaos.

[fishfoodie]

At least the Americans get to change their minds after 4 years of chaos.

The UK got two opportunities to change direction, & they doubled down.

[Tichtheid]

At least the Americans get to change their minds after 4 years of chaos.

The UK got two opportunities to change direction, & they doubled down.

I'd quite happily let anyone who voted for Brexit to piss off and let the rest of us get on with it

[Bimbowomxn]

At least the Americans get to change their minds after 4 years of chaos.

The UK got two opportunities to change direction, & they doubled down.

I'd quite happily let anyone who voted for Brexit to piss off and let the rest of us get on with it

Years in and we have another Democrat.

[Tichtheid]

The UK got two opportunities to change direction, & they doubled down.

I'd quite happily let anyone who voted for Brexit to piss off and let the rest of us get on with it

Years in and we have another Democrat.

In every possible way Brexit represents the worst of political, economic and social views and I want nothing to do with it.

I don’t get another vote on this in four or five years time, when it has hit the fan, that would be some semblance of democracy

[ASMO]

I’m still not sure why the above only applies to the UK.

Because the EU has an internal market comprised of something in the region of 400m people, plus others whose producers are not subject to WTO tariffs

So the 90 billion in sales will just be absorbed internally ?

Cool.

Thats not what was said, i said they are better placed to absorb it. As for the 90 billion, do you really think that other EU companies wont step into the breach to replace the more expensive UK imports? You are utterly deluded.

[Bimbowomxn]

I'd quite happily let anyone who voted for Brexit to piss off and let the rest of us get on with it

Years in and we have another Democrat.

In every possible way Brexit represents the worst of political, economic and social views and I want nothing to do with it.

I don’t get another vote on this in four or five years time, when it has hit the fan, that would be some semblance of democracy

Hey I think we should be ruled by the people who are “right” as well.

[Bimbowomxn]

Because the EU has an internal market comprised of something in the region of 400m people, plus others whose producers are not subject to WTO tariffs

So the 90 billion in sales will just be absorbed internally ?

Cool.

Thats not what was said, i said they are better placed to absorb it. As for the 90 billion, do you really think that other EU companies wont step into the breach to replace the more expensive UK imports? You are utterly deluded.

Erm, that’s the 90billion in goods they send us not the other way round.

[Tichtheid]

Hey I think we should be ruled by the people who are “right” as well.

no one should rule anyone, we elect representatives, or that is the idea, I’m not sure the current government actually represent the population

[Ovals]

I’ve said nothing of the sort you seem to think I’ve said,

The EU cannot use tarrifs nor quotas to politically punish the UK under law. It would break EU law as well as international law,


The EU cannot “taketh” anything illegally.

They can simply impose WTO terms and the UK will be a significant loser in that scenario, the EU can absorb it far better than little England

It's not about the EU, "imposing", WTO terms; the EU is under no obligation to give the UK a FTA. WTO terms are the inevitable outcome for the UK, if there is no FTA agreement between the UK & the EU.

But I was specifically talking about the mythical, "side deals".

If there are to be any side deals, they are also in the gift of the EU, & as such the EU is perfectly entitled to withdraw those deals, if they feel they UK isn't acting in good faith.

If I give a tenner to a homeless person; they aren't entitled to sue me for not giving them more. It's a gift !

I never mentioned tariffs or anything else, because they are spelt out by the WTO. The side deals cover stuff like recognition of professional qualifications, & the air space, the ability of HGV drivers to drive in the EU, etc, etc, etc

Side deals - in fact, any deals, are not a gift from the EU - that's just absurd and nonsensical. Any deal the EU do with the UK will involve some working concessions from both sides - such as both recognising HGV licences.

[Bimbowomxn]

Hey I think we should be ruled by the people who are “right” as well.

no one should rule anyone, we elect representatives, or that is the idea, I’m not sure the current government actually represent the population

You realise how much democracy there was getting to the leave vote ? It has a genuine mandate. The only place that has a genuine gripe is Scotland.

[Bimbowomxn]

I never mentioned tariffs or anything else, because they are spelt out by the WTO. The side deals cover stuff like recognition of professional qualifications, & the air space, the ability of HGV drivers to drive in the EU, etc, etc, etc

Great, however far more EU professionals come to the UK and want their qualifications recognised, and if there’s genuinely some attempt to restrict “airspace” we are back in massively aggressive actions which very unlikely to be taken.

The response would be the city, and as expensive as anything the other way.

[fishfoodie]

They can simply impose WTO terms and the UK will be a significant loser in that scenario, the EU can absorb it far better than little England

It's not about the EU, "imposing", WTO terms; the EU is under no obligation to give the UK a FTA. WTO terms are the inevitable outcome for the UK, if there is no FTA agreement between the UK & the EU.

But I was specifically talking about the mythical, "side deals".

If there are to be any side deals, they are also in the gift of the EU, & as such the EU is perfectly entitled to withdraw those deals, if they feel they UK isn't acting in good faith.

If I give a tenner to a homeless person; they aren't entitled to sue me for not giving them more. It's a gift !

I never mentioned tariffs or anything else, because they are spelt out by the WTO. The side deals cover stuff like recognition of professional qualifications, & the air space, the ability of HGV drivers to drive in the EU, etc, etc, etc

Side deals - in fact, any deals, are not a gift from the EU - that's just absurd and nonsensical. Any deal the EU do with the UK will involve some working concessions from both sides - such as both recognising HGV licences.

The EU isn't looking for any side deals; the UK is, ergo, any side deals are in the EUs gift. There is no obligation on the EU to give the UK anything other that that required by International law.

[Tichtheid]

Hey I think we should be ruled by the people who are “right” as well.

no one should rule anyone, we elect representatives, or that is the idea, I’m not sure the current government actually represent the population

You realise how much democracy there was getting to the leave vote ? It has a genuine mandate.

Yeah, if you are a simpleton who refuses to look at external factors which led to the result of the referendum.

Everything from “two world wars and one world cup”, through Euro problems to a hostile press, who were funded by those who would lose out to strengthening European laws on taxation and workplace legislation, to blaming the impact of austerity on immigration, to blatant lies on the side of a bus...I could go on

[Sandstorm]

Don’t go on, TH. He’s relentless and never quits. Bot-stylee.

[Tichtheid]

Don’t go on, TH. He’s relentless and never quits. Bot-stylee.

Yeah, I just get so frustrated that anyone can think this is not going to be fucking awful, and not “just” economically, though that is so very important, it’s a step back into exceptionalism and xenophobia, small mindedness and distrust, and all for the sake of the pocket of Rees Mogg, Owen Paterson and awful people like that, who in fact are little more than useful idiots.

[Bimbowomxn]

Yeah, if you are a simpleton who refuses to look at external factors which led to the result of the referendum.

Everything from “two world wars and one world cup”, through Euro problems to a hostile press, who were funded by those who would lose out to strengthening European laws on taxation and workplace legislation, to blaming the impact of austerity on immigration, to blatant lies on the side of a bus...I could go on

The mandate was in the manifesto before the vote it was conservative policy for a decade, no “external” anything that got us to the vote.


The rest is exactly as I pointed out, you don’t want other people with conflicting opinions having their say.

As for the conspiracy about tax legislation our Irish cohorts will inform you there’s no threat on domestic taxation policy or rates so I’m confused.

Austerity was 30 billion of spending over a decade or less than a week of the NHS per year. That’s just another slogan that bears no scrutiny .

You could go on but all you’ll actually be saying is “it’s not fair”.

[Sandstorm]

Don’t go on, TH. He’s relentless and never quits. Bot-stylee.

Yeah, I just get so frustrated that anyone can think this is not going to be fucking awful, and not “just” economically, though that is so very important, it’s a step back into exceptionalism and xenophobia, small mindedness and distrust, and all for the sake of the pocket of Rees Mogg, Owen Paterson and awful people like that, who in fact are little more than useful idiots.

Amen brother

[Bimbowomxn]

Don’t go on, TH. He’s relentless and never quits. Bot-stylee.

Yeah, I just get so frustrated that anyone can think this is not going to be fucking awful, and not “just” economically, though that is so very important, it’s a step back into exceptionalism and xenophobia, small mindedness and distrust, and all for the sake of the pocket of Rees Mogg, Owen Paterson and awful people like that, who in fact are little more than useful idiots.

It’s going to be unnoticeable when compared to the 400 billion of borrowing in 7 months we’ve just done, literally a factor of 10 less.

And of course we’re back to people being “awful” and therefore they shouldn’t have a mandate.

[ASMO]

Bimbo have you ever actually posted anything rugby related on what is primarily a rugby forum? Just asking like.

[Tichtheid]

The mandate was in the manifesto before the vote it was conservative policy for a decade, no “external” anything that got us to the vote.

I’ve not long joined this bored, and I’ve read a little bit of the PR forum.


I see a business opportunity, if anyone needs medication or plasters etc as a result of smacking their own foreheads off their desks, just PM me, I’ll sort you out.

[Zig]

Don’t go on, TH. He’s relentless and never quits. Bot-stylee.

Yeah, I just get so frustrated that anyone can think this is not going to be fucking awful, and not “just” economically, though that is so very important, it’s a step back into exceptionalism and xenophobia, small mindedness and distrust, and all for the sake of the pocket of Rees Mogg, Owen Paterson and awful people like that, who in fact are little more than useful idiots.

You can't run an empire covering a fifth of the world without having instilled some superiority in your own people. Administering it required certain belief that you know better.

That education system was highly successful in the era of empire, it produces deluded idiots in the 21st century.

[Bimbowomxn]

Bimbo have you ever actually posted anything rugby related on what is primarily a rugby forum? Just asking like.

Unfortunately I’ve no irrational hatred of Saracens and think that the current scrum situation is fine.

I could pretend if you like, the team I like least is probably Sale due to its leadership.

[Rhubarb & Custard]

Bimbo have you ever actually posted anything rugby related on what is primarily a rugby forum? Just asking like.

Unfortunately I’ve no irrational hatred of Saracens and think that the current scrum situation is fine.

I could pretend if you like, the team I like least is probably Sale due to its leadership.

Wait, you like the feed into the scrum by the 9 and all the resets?

[Biffer]

Bimbo have you ever actually posted anything rugby related on what is primarily a rugby forum? Just asking like.

Unfortunately I’ve no irrational hatred of Saracens and think that the current scrum situation is fine.

I could pretend if you like, the team I like least is probably Sale due to its leadership.

Wait, you like the feed into the scrum by the 9 and all the resets?

Explains a lot.

[Ovals]

It's not about the EU, "imposing", WTO terms; the EU is under no obligation to give the UK a FTA. WTO terms are the inevitable outcome for the UK, if there is no FTA agreement between the UK & the EU.

But I was specifically talking about the mythical, "side deals".

If there are to be any side deals, they are also in the gift of the EU, & as such the EU is perfectly entitled to withdraw those deals, if they feel they UK isn't acting in good faith.

If I give a tenner to a homeless person; they aren't entitled to sue me for not giving them more. It's a gift !

I never mentioned tariffs or anything else, because they are spelt out by the WTO. The side deals cover stuff like recognition of professional qualifications, & the air space, the ability of HGV drivers to drive in the EU, etc, etc, etc

Side deals - in fact, any deals, are not a gift from the EU - that's just absurd and nonsensical. Any deal the EU do with the UK will involve some working concessions from both sides - such as both recognising HGV licences.

The EU isn't looking for any side deals; the UK is, ergo, any side deals are in the EUs gift. There is no obligation on the EU to give the UK anything other that that required by International law.

You've no idea whether the EU will want some individual agreements on certain issues - so I'll call bollox on that. However, even if they didn't 'need' them, but decided to agree to them (which they wouldn't), it wouldn't be a gift - it would be a two way agreement - to think otherwise is really bizarre.