[EU] Brexit negotiations at a standstill

[Pann]

Actually I answered it multiple times, the additional analogy about how favour works was simply included because of how much difficulty you were having with the concept.

You did not, once again, I asked you if thought the proposal favoured the UK to which waffled about on and on and on about the proposal being favourable. This is different.

I did, in fact it was alluded too in the post of mine that you initially replied too.

No, it wasn't. Your initial post implied that the deal favoured the UK hence why I asked.

You've made this clear, however as myself and others have pointed out, your disbelief in the fact doesn't stop it being correct.

Hmm, in fairness you've said that this deal is favourable to the UK because everyone thought that the UK would get a worse deal and then said that everyone is complaining because the deal is not good enough. And you described the UK as a pissy little island in the north sea which only has any relevance on the world stage due to its EU membership. And described Canada as considerably more important than the UK to the EU.

So it is quite clear that what you would describe as a fact is not the same as what the rest of world would. Perhaps you could elaborate on this point and provide some actual facts or evidence.

No it is not, it is showing it favourable treatment in negotiations, hence why it gets more favourable treatment than more important countries.

Where's your evidence to support these assertions that the UK is receiving more favourable treatment than more important nations?

Yes, because the UK is in that position DUE TO BEING A MEMBER OF THE EU, once it leaves the EU it will no longer have the increased privelege/importance and negotiating power that being an EU member gives.

Prior to joining the then EEC the UK's GDP was approximately 40% greater than Canada's, I've not heard of any sort of mass extinction of Canadians so I think it is fair to say that the UK's population, thus potential market, was, as it is today, larger than Canada's and I am pretty sure that the UK and Canada were geographically in the same places as they are today prior to the UK joining the EEC.

What evidence to have to support all of this?

- - - Updated - - -

You jest, but this was the Treasury's prediction for a vote to leave:



Either they're just that damn incompetent (in which case why believe anything they say?), or they were lying to try and scare people away from voting to leave (in which case why believe anything they say?).

In fairness this seems to result of stress testing the UK economy models and is the very worst case scenario which is pretty much the same as the figures recently released by the BofE which Carney is going to great lengths to explain that they are not predictions of what will happen.

I think it was a mistake to paint these figures as prediction of what will happen if leave won the referendum, which I don't doubt was driven by the government, and I think by taking this approach it has become more difficult to educate the public (us) to the potential impact from Brexit.

- - - Updated - - -

Worth noting that employment is only up on paper due to figures being inflated by shady companies misuse of zero hour contracts. It has fallen in real terms.

Zero hour contracts are still jobs, however you could have just read the link provided and you would have seen that your statement is wrong; "Not only is employment up, but most of the growth has been in full-time jobs. The number of people in part-time jobs and in self-employment is now falling gently and more than offset by the rise in full-time work, reducing concerns that people are underemployed."

[Teleros]

Psssst... GDP per capita is different from raw GDP...

Yes. Go to your link, and the 3.2% figure there is from the per capita GDP table.

2.67 trillion in 2016
2.63 trillion in 2017
That's a 1.5% drop

And yet, go to their "real GDP growth" section and there's no shrinking there at all. What I think is happening with these figures is that they're showing it in terms of billions of current US dollars, but due to the £ dropping after Brexit, this is making it look like GDP went down even though the IMF's GDP growth figures show an increase.

Keep in mind that forecasts always use static currencies to present their numbers, therefore Teleros is misrepresenting them by using current values for the pound.

Again, see the IMF stuff about GDP growth.

IMF: GDP went down: https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/NGDPD@WEO/GBR (current $ prices)
IMF: GDP grew: https://www.imf.org/external/datamap...P_RPCH@WEO/GBR (growth rate)
IMF: GDP grew: https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/PPPGDP@WEO/GBR (purchasing power parity)

Perhaps the IMF is in thrall to a secret Brexiteer cabal?

I think it was a mistake to paint these figures as prediction of what will happen if leave won the referendum, which I don't doubt was driven by the government, and I think by taking this approach it has become more difficult to educate the public (us) to the potential impact from Brexit.

Exactly.

[Dizzeeyooo]

I think it was a mistake to paint these figures as prediction of what will happen if leave won the referendum

their main mistake was not properly anticipating that worst case predictions based on a worst case scenario (that rational people took action to mitigate after the vote) would not then be endlessly shouted about by scum like Farage and the TPA (who understand completely what the predictions were based on) as further public gaslighting tools to encourage the view that economic forecasts are always worthless and always biased

[Pann]

Tusk has echoed May's comments that it is her deal, no deal or no Brexit; European Council President Donald Tusk, meanwhile, has stressed that the deal the EU struck with Theresa May was the "only possible one".

He said: "If this deal is rejected in the Commons, we are left with, as was stressed a few weeks ago from Prime Minister May, an alternative - no deal or no Brexit at all."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46394431

There is absolutely no way that parliament will allow no deal so we're essentially left with May's deal or no Brexit but regardless of which way this goes there is going to be a lot of annoyed people in the UK.

[dribbles]

Isn't it possible you'd get to a no deal result by parliamentary incompetence? People vote down May's deal hoping for any number of different things, nothing however happens fast enough and you end with no deal.

Shhhhhh, please don't tell the little bit dim remainers and other eurofanatics that our parliament is incompetent, they still believe we can get the Maybot brexit or no brexit. Pretty much one in the same thing anyway unless you want to split hairs. Bwahahahaaaa

[Pann]

Isn't it possible you'd get to a no deal result by parliamentary incompetence? People vote down May's deal hoping for any number of different things, nothing however happens fast enough and you end with no deal.

That's a possibility but I would say a remote one. In the result of a deadlock I think it is more likely that parliament will request an extension of A50, which due to the damaging nature of no-deal to both the EU and UK I reckon will be accepted, the danger is that there is no consensus by the end of the extension period at which point I think there will either be a GE or another referendum.

[dribbles]

That's a possibility but I would say a remote one. In the result of a deadlock I think it is more likely that parliament will request an extension of A50, which due to the damaging nature of no-deal to both the EU and UK I reckon will be accepted, the danger is that there is no consensus by the end of the extension period at which point I think there will either be a GE or another referendum.

You are optimistic that the EU27 out of the goodness of their hearts will hang around for a day that might come in 6 months or years or never? Or don't they get a say in whether or not Article 50 shall be extended, it's just a UK decision right?

To go beyond March 2019 requires a parliamentary majority in the UK to enact a new law or change the existing one. A majority that no longer exists.

To go beyond March 2019 requires a treaty change to Article 50 in the EU with any one of the EU27 able to veto it. Hell just for shits and giggles right now even the UK could veto it!

Not a chance, but shhhh don't tell anyone.... Let the Maybot enjoy her holiday in Argentina, she hasn't got anything better to be doing.

[Deleted]

Exactly. Merely voting for Brexit would cause all that. They were wrong then, and yet they're going to be right this time because...?

You know when you crop a sentence to ignore the second part of the sentence, it doesn't remove it from my post which is directly above yours, you absolute retard.

[Pann]

You are optimistic that the EU27 out of the goodness of their hearts will hang around for a day that might come in 6 months or years or never? Or don't they get a say in whether or not Article 50 shall be extended, it's just a UK decision right?

To go beyond March 2019 requires a parliamentary majority in the UK to enact a new law or change the existing one. A majority that no longer exists.

To go beyond March 2019 requires a treaty change to Article 50 in the EU with any one of the EU27 able to veto it. Hell just for shits and giggles right now even the UK could veto it!

Not a chance, but shhhh don't tell anyone.... Let the Maybot enjoy her holiday in Argentina, she hasn't got anything better to be doing.

It won't be out of the goodness of the EU27 hearts, it will be entirely a result of their own self interests and not wishing to suffer the results of no-deal.

May does not have a majority but make no mistake the majority of the house is not and has never been in favour of Brexit.

No it doesn't require a treaty change, it simply requires agreement from the UK and EU member states to continue talks.

----

Hopefully this disproves that we are one and the same person... or does it???

[Kallisto]

Hopefully this disproves that we are one and the same person... or does it???

Who knows maybe we're all one body with 50 different personalities like that guy in split?

[dribbles]

It won't be out of the goodness of the EU27 hearts, it will be entirely a result of their own self interests and not wishing to suffer the results of no-deal.

May does not have a majority but make no mistake the majority of the house is not and has never been in favour of Brexit.

No it doesn't require a treaty change, it simply requires agreement from the UK and EU member states to continue talks.

----

Hopefully this disproves that we are one and the same person... or does it???

I think you are mistaken.

The Lisbon treaty can only be changed (treaty changed) if the UK and all the EU27 and the various factions within it agree terms unanimously, and don't forget those troublesome Walloons and their veto.

However it won't come about over an informal cosy cup of coffee and a chat after lunch one day in Brussels, or would that be Strasburg, depending on the day. I would suggest remainers are clutching at straws if they think otherwise and that something so complex can happen before March, it really needed to have happened yesterday or last year and it didn't. You even quoted their top man Tusk earlier, no deal or no brexit. Perhaps he is lying, more straws, but what he didn't say was "Oh we'll just rewrite a treaty over the next few days to accommodate the whims of the UK, that won't be a problem"

There are some nations in the EU that require their own national referendum any time a treaty is changed. The tearing up of articles and rewriting of the Lisbon Treaty would require this.

The EU are out of time, they have had long enough.

[Pann]

I think you are mistaken.

The Lisbon treaty can only be changed (treaty changed) if the UK and all the EU27 and the various factions within it agree terms unanimously, and don't forget those troublesome Walloons and their veto.

However it won't come about over an informal cosy cup of coffee and a chat after lunch one day in Brussels, or would that be Strasburg, depending on the day. I would suggest remainers are clutching at straws if they think otherwise and that something so complex can happen before March, it really needed to have happened yesterday or last year and it didn't. You even quoted their top man Tusk earlier, no deal or no brexit. Perhaps he is lying, more straws, but what he didn't say was "Oh we'll just rewrite a treaty over the next few days to accommodate the whims of the UK, that won't be a problem"

There are some nations in the EU that require their own national referendum any time a treaty is changed. The tearing up of articles and rewriting of the Lisbon Treaty would require this.

The EU are out of time, they have had long enough.

They don't need to agree to change any treaty terms however they do need to all agree to a continuation of talks.

Well we'll have to wait and see what happens.

-----

They're all falling in line; https://www.theguardian.com/politics...y-commons-vote

[Vankrys]

I think you are mistaken.

The Lisbon treaty can only be changed (treaty changed) if the UK and all the EU27 and the various factions within it agree terms unanimously, and don't forget those troublesome Walloons and their veto.

However it won't come about over an informal cosy cup of coffee and a chat after lunch one day in Brussels, or would that be Strasburg, depending on the day. I would suggest remainers are clutching at straws if they think otherwise and that something so complex can happen before March, it really needed to have happened yesterday or last year and it didn't. You even quoted their top man Tusk earlier, no deal or no brexit. Perhaps he is lying, more straws, but what he didn't say was "Oh we'll just rewrite a treaty over the next few days to accommodate the whims of the UK, that won't be a problem"

There are some nations in the EU that require their own national referendum any time a treaty is changed. The tearing up of articles and rewriting of the Lisbon Treaty would require this.

The EU are out of time, they have had long enough.

so leaving the EU is not enough, you also want the EU to collapse. In other word, you can only win if others lose in the same process.

Now that i think about it, it kinda make sense. Having a massive political and economical block next to the UK will be extremely prejudicial to UK economy. So anything that weaken the EU favors your agenda.

[padie]

I think you are mistaken.

The Lisbon treaty can only be changed (treaty changed) if the UK and all the EU27 and the various factions within it agree terms unanimously, and don't forget those troublesome Walloons and their veto.

However it won't come about over an informal cosy cup of coffee and a chat after lunch one day in Brussels, or would that be Strasburg, depending on the day. I would suggest remainers are clutching at straws if they think otherwise and that something so complex can happen before March, it really needed to have happened yesterday or last year and it didn't. You even quoted their top man Tusk earlier, no deal or no brexit. Perhaps he is lying, more straws, but what he didn't say was "Oh we'll just rewrite a treaty over the next few days to accommodate the whims of the UK, that won't be a problem"

There are some nations in the EU that require their own national referendum any time a treaty is changed. The tearing up of articles and rewriting of the Lisbon Treaty would require this.

The EU are out of time, they have had long enough.

The EU is out of time? The EU was/is waiting for the UK. EU trade laws havent changed, the uk ones are unknown at this point.

Can't make a deal if one party(the UK) doesn't even know what point of view to take.

[dribbles]

The EU is out of time? The EU was/is waiting for the UK. EU trade laws havent changed, the uk ones are unknown at this point.

Can't make a deal if one party(the UK) doesn't even know what point of view to take.

WTO rules have been in place for how long? And now helpfully this week the WTO says its rules would not force EU or UK to erect hard Irish border the last brick falls into place.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/irel...rder-1.3710136

What are the EU waiting for? The writing is on the wall and should know already.

[padie]

WTO rules have been in place for how long? And now helpfully this week the WTO says its rules would not force EU or UK to erect hard Irish border the last brick falls into place.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/irel...rder-1.3710136

What are the EU waiting for? The writing is on the wall and should know already.

The UK knows the eu rules. As far as I know the UK havent told the EU what part of the rules they want/don't want to change. Has the UK even revised all the laws voted in the EU?

It is not possible to negotiate with someone if they dont even know what they want.

And wasnt the "loss of sovereignty" one of the reason you voted for brexit? If you dont have a border between the EU and the UK i think you can say you dont have any sovereignty? How would you be able to mark it?(this has nothing to do with WTO)
If you want open borders... you need to make deals with your neigbours(aka the EU)

[Demolitia]

WTO rules have been in place for how long? And now helpfully this week the WTO says its rules would not force EU or UK to erect hard Irish border the last brick falls into place.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/irel...rder-1.3710136

What are the EU waiting for? The writing is on the wall and should know already.

Of course it doesn't. How countries enforce necessary controls and tariffs is up to them. We can go on a trust basis for the time being but that's only based on good will. God knows how long this would last.
What everybody wants is mechanisms and legal agreements to ensure there will NEVER be one.

Trust and goodwill is all nice and fine, but we talked about this hundreds of pages back, and told you then, as I will now, that this kind of shit doesn't inspire all that much trust in your capacity to keep your word on a gentleman's agreement:
https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-w...na-fraud-bill/
If you can't control the few borders you have right now when you are bound by EU laws, why should the EU trust you to once you're out?

[dribbles]

Eh yes. The rules do not directly require it. But as soon as someone complaints you need to prove you have a secure trade border. So you'd need an alternative suggestion to hard borders to do that, which is what the Brexiteers keep touting. Tic Toc on finding the magic unicorn of open secure borders that no one else in the history of humanity has devised You are staying vassals till then

Actually you will find that we become sovereign in March because of this.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/...tion/1/enacted

There is not enough parliamentary time for new legislation or amendments prior to exit date, if there was even a majority in the house to introduce and pass it. We might follow that well used EU example and just chill out for a bit without a working government for a few months, you know how its done EU stylee.

Not a vassal in sight.

Tick tock eurochums!

Of course it doesn't. How countries enforce necessary controls and tariffs is up to them. We can go on a trust basis for the time being but that's only based on good will. God knows how long this would last.
What everybody wants is mechanisms and legal agreements to ensure there will NEVER be one.

Trust and goodwill is all nice and fine, but we talked about this hundreds of pages back, and told you then, as I will now, that this kind of shit doesn't inspire all that much trust in your capacity to keep your word on a gentleman's agreement:
https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-w...na-fraud-bill/
If you can't control the few borders you have right now when you are bound by EU laws, why should the EU trust you to once you're out?

That's a bit rich. How is the EU doing controlling its borders in the Mediterranean? Last I heard they ignored their responsibilities and left it up to the British. With Russian tanks massing on the Ukrainian border it'll be nice to sit back and watch how the EU controls its Eastern borders as well as those in the South.

As a spectator this time.

Do you think those tanks will stop trundling when they get into Ukraine or will and where will they push further?

What a summer 2019 will bring.

[padie]

Actually you will find that we become sovereign in March because of this.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/...tion/1/enacted

There is not enough parliamentary time for new legislation or amendments prior to exit date, if there was even a majority in the house to introduce and pass it. We might follow that well used EU example and just chill out for a bit without a working government for a few months, you know how its done EU stylee.

Not a vassal in sight.

Tick tock eurochums!



That's a bit rich. How is the EU doing controlling its borders in the Mediterranean? Last I heard they ignored their responsibilities and left it up to the British. With Russian tanks massing on the Ukrainian border it'll be nice to sit back and watch how the EU controls its Eastern borders as well as those in the South.

As a spectator this time.

Do you think those tanks will stop trundling when they get into Ukraine or will and where will they push further?

What a summer 2019 will bring.

How are you gonna protect your border without a hard border? We can take a plane from anywhere in the EU to Ireland and walk into the uk...

[dribbles]

How are you gonna protect your border without a hard border? We can take a plane from anywhere in the EU to Ireland and walk into the uk...

And live where exactly? In a cardboard box under Tower Bridge? Nice. You know even now property Landlords are obliged to check right to reside status of potential tenants on penalty of property seizure should they fail to do so...