Brexit, for once some facts.

[oldgroaner]

you are so engrossed in your own argument that you don't see the simple logic.
The EU has decided the timetable, that is they will only talk about future relationship after we have left.
It won't be long, by the end of the year, we'll know for sure how long we will have to explore those options, the period so-called transitional arrangements.
I think 2-3 years should be enough for Mr Fox to work his wonders or eat humble pie.
You can't stop the cost of brexit, 52% voted for it, we expect to pay until either we succeed or have another referendum.

52% of the fraction of the population who bothered to vote in a non legally binding vote, which fell very far short of the normal victory level required in a referendum.
Sorry this is only the will of a small faction of the population , and simply isn't the "will of the people" only some of them.
Never mind it is doomed to failure anyway.

Sent from my XT1032 using Tapatalk

 

[Danidl]

there is no reason to assume that is the outcome.
our position is clear, if you want to bother checking it out, we want a transition period during which, it won't be hard brexit.
If the conservative government lasts well into 2019, and Mr Fox can show that we will be able to offset the loss in EU trade with new trade then, yes, it will be hard brexit.
If, like many economists expected, the new trade can't replace the loss in EU trade, then Mr Fox won't last long.

... Woosh, we have been over this before, Brexit is not a rehearsal, it's the big deal. Now article 50 has been triggered and negotiations have commenced, it will continue remorselessly. The UK does not get a second chance, this is it the real deal.
The notion that the UK parliament can somhow renegotiate or set aside the final deal and another will result is a fanciful figleaf. Where is that legal? . The legal authority is the treaty and there is no such path open, notwithstanding the blatter spoken in your house of lords.

If the UK persists, which it will, and eventually leaves, which it may, and then seeks to repent and re-enter, which it could , it will be on less favourable terms than it currently enjoys , and to a colder reception.

Now I could understand any pressure group in the UK seeking an injunction , in your high court against proceeding with the negotiations as being "ultra vires ". Beyond the power of the current executive. You have had an election, and the next order of business in any democracy is to elect the prime minister and the cabinet.


So whether it is your Mr fox, or any other politician is irrelevant.

 

[Woosh]

What is your take on their reasons?

The tories make a big deal about lower direct taxes compared to Labour.
I don't think they want to eliminate the welfare state, they need the vote of the pensioners.

Sorry this is only the will of a small faction of the population , and simply isn't the "will of the people" only some of them.

I don't pay any attention to that kind of arguments. There will be always votes, only the last one really counts though.

 

[oldgroaner]

you are so engrossed in your own argument that you don't see the simple logic.
The EU has decided the timetable, that is they will only talk about future relationship after we have left.
It won't be long, by the end of the year, we'll know for sure how long we will have to explore those options, the period so-called transitional arrangements.
I think 2-3 years should be enough for Mr Fox to work his wonders or eat humble pie.
You can't stop the cost of brexit, 52% voted for it, we expect to pay until either we succeed or have another referendum.

You are the one missing the simple logic Davis stated we would determine the sequence of events not the EU please stick to facts

Sent from my XT1032 using Tapatalk

 

[Woosh]

The notion that the UK parliament can somhow renegotiate or set aside the final deal and another will result is a fanciful figleaf. Where is that legal?

I think you got me wrong here.
The key objective for the UK is not would we stay in the single market or the customs union but the transitional arrangement.
This is important because not only it gives us an extension beyond March 2019 but it also allows time for a rational debate on the future of our relationship with the EU (and to unite the country), including the possibility of rejoining.
I think 2 years would be good, we'll then have up to 2021 to make up our mind.

 

[Woosh]

You are the one missing the simple logic Davis stated we would determine the sequence of events not the EU please stick to facts

Sent from my XT1032 using Tapatalk

yes, we would be in the driving seat if and when the EU agrees to a transitional period.

 

[Danidl]

I think you got me wrong here.
The key objective for the UK is not would we stay in the single market or the customs union but the transitional arrangement.
This is important because not only it gives us an extension beyond March 2019 but it also allows time for a rational debate on the future of our relationship with the EU (and to unite the country), including the possibility of rejoining.
I think 2 years would be good, we'll then have up to 2021 to make up our mind.

... No not legal.... It is not the possibility of rejoining it is the possibility of joining. You need to read the other articles surrounding article 50 . All previous arrangements are sundered. The UK would then be a supplicant nation similar to Turkey, ( although it would have I suspect an easier passage)
It would not be within the power of the EU negotiatiors to offer the UK a path back in as part of the divorce settlement.

 

[Woosh]

No not legal..

it does not change the time table though.
The UK is leaving the EU by March 2019.
At that time, we hopefully won't be out of the single market thanks to the transitional arrangements.
By the end of the transitional period, I hope we would have largely solved all outstanding issues or called a second referendum.

 

[Danidl]

it does not change the time table though.
The UK is leaving the EU by March 2019.
At that time, we hopefully won't be out of the single market thanks to the transitional arrangements.
By the end of the transitional period, I hope we would have largely solved all outstanding issues or called a second referendum.

. I agree that The timetable will not change unless
1. Either the EU or the UK petition the ECJ to set aside the letter for article 50
or
2. There is a legal injunction in the UK courts forbidding the current executive, which is in a caretaker capacity from making decisions.

Remember a second or subsequent referendum would have no validity outside the UK, so lengthy accession talks might then result.

 

[tommie]

Alls not well in Downing street....lol!

A senior DUP source said the party could not be "taken for granted" - adding that if the PM could not reach a deal, "what does that mean for bigger negotiations she is involved in?"

No deal has been reached after 10 days of talks between the parties.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-40339330

Not used to the tail wagging the dog Theresa?!!

 

[oldgroaner]

The reality of the first day appears to be this
"
Britain caved in to the EU on the opening day of the Brexit talks, when it agreed to settle its “divorce” before trying to negotiate a future trade deal.

In a major defeat, Brexit Secretary David Davis was forced to drop his central demand for the two strands of the negotiations to be staged in parallel, within hours of arriving in Brussels.

Last month, Mr Davis vowed to wage the “row of the summer” to secure immediate talks on a free trade agreement – predicting an early collapse if the EU refused to give way.

• 
  Read more

First day of Brexit talks are 'window dressing', say EU officials
But both sides have now agreed to set up working groups on EU citizens’ rights, the size of Britain’s “divorce bill” and borders – but not, crucially, future trade.

At a press conference, Mr Davis was forced to concede that the talks would only move on to trade when the EU decided “enough progress” had been made on its three priorities. Asked if the “weakness of your negotiating position” had been exposed, Mr Davis put on a brave face, claiming: “It’s not when it starts but how it finishes that matters.”

 

[Danidl]

Alls not well in Downing street....lol!

A senior DUP source said the party could not be "taken for granted" - adding that if the PM could not reach a deal, "what does that mean for bigger negotiations she is involved in?"

No deal has been reached after 10 days of talks between the parties.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-40339330

Not used to the tail wagging the dog Theresa?!!

.. we can agree on this point also Tommie. I think the English Tory party thought they were dealing with the old unionist party , if they thought at all, with which they would have had an established relationship , the DUP is a different kettle of fish.
Any deal that the DUP might accept could well run foul of the demands of a cohort of hard brexiteers in her own party.

 

[Danidl]

The reality of the first day appears to be this
"
Britain caved in to the EU on the opening day of the Brexit talks, when it agreed to settle its “divorce” before trying to negotiate a future trade deal.

In a major defeat, Brexit Secretary David Davis was forced to drop his central demand for the two strands of the negotiations to be staged in parallel, within hours of arriving in Brussels.

Last month, Mr Davis vowed to wage the “row of the summer” to secure immediate talks on a free trade agreement – predicting an early collapse if the EU refused to give way.

• 
  Read more

First day of Brexit talks are 'window dressing', say EU officials
But both sides have now agreed to set up working groups on EU citizens’ rights, the size of Britain’s “divorce bill” and borders – but not, crucially, future trade.

At a press conference, Mr Davis was forced to concede that the talks would only move on to trade when the EU decided “enough progress” had been made on its three priorities. Asked if the “weakness of your negotiating position” had been exposed, Mr Davis put on a brave face, claiming: “It’s not when it starts but how it finishes that matters.”

.... You would almost feel sorry for him. He is trying to bat , in a game, where he has no idea what a good score will be. He does not know whether he will be in a job , when parliament next meets, whether he has a leader, or what principles he should be demanding . On one level it's delicious!

 

[Croxden]

I'm glad you said almost, never feel sorry for politicians. They don't seem to give a damm for us, it's just a game to them.

 

[oldtom]

I am not worried about the costs of brexit

Is that because you are one of the few with ample funds and have no need to worry about the difficulties which will impact most heavily on the many, thanks to 'Brexit'?

Tom

 

[Kudoscycles]

What will be the response in the UK if Davis agrees to a £60 billion or more divorce bill? It was very good that the EU insisted on transparency because May and Davis would I am sure liked to keep that secret.
It would be a good idea to have interim votes on the Brexit stages rather than wait for the vote at the end when it is likely that the commons vote down the deal.
KudosDave

 

[Woosh]

What will be the response in the UK if Davis agrees to a £60 billion or more divorce bill?

60 billions divorce bill: it's OK if we can have a good deal afterward.

 

[oldgroaner]

60 billions divorce bill: it's OK if we can have a good deal afterward.

The only possible Good deal would be to stop wasting time and ask the EU to forget we ever mentioned Brexit, it was all a Ghastly mistake.
I note that there is very little coverage in the Daily Rags this morning.

 

[oldgroaner]

What will be the response in the UK if Davis agrees to a £60 billion or more divorce bill? It was very good that the EU insisted on transparency because May and Davis would I am sure liked to keep that secret.
It would be a good idea to have interim votes on the Brexit stages rather than wait for the vote at the end when it is likely that the commons vote down the deal.
KudosDave

The natives will be restless regarding any payment after what was promised.

 

[Woosh]

The only possible Good deal would be to stop wasting time and ask the EU to forget we ever mentioned Brexit, it was all a Ghastly mistake.
I note that there is very little coverage in the Daily Rags this morning

just examine the impact of a £60 billion bill.
If it gives us a reasonably good deal that allows us to keep most of the EU trade and get some new trade elsewhere, then it will pay for itself within a few years. As the EU negotiators already know, it is 'chicken feed' if it's the price for a comprehensive FTA.