Current Affairs EU In or Out

[arminisgod]

Putting his time and learning as Foreign Secretary too good use.

Must be true that if a staunch Remainer tweets it. Literally bollocks on both sides.

Have the EU Blinked by the way? and offered an olive branch?

 

[Jebus_lives]

Must be true that if a staunch Remainer tweets it. Literally bollocks on both sides.

Have the EU Blinked by the way? and offered an olive branch?

I'm not sure a meeting between Ursula Von Der Leyen and Boris Johnson is best described as 'literally bollocks on both sides'

And no I don't think so, why do imagine they would and should?

 

[BirkenheadBlue]

“Absolutely nobody is talking about threatening our place in the single market”. Daniel Hannan, 12/5/15.

“The day after we vote to leave, we hold all the cards and we can choose the path we want”. Michael Gove, 9/4/16.

“British people will still be able to go and work in the EU; to live; to travel; to study; and buy homes and settle down. There will continue to be free trade and access to the single market”. Boris Johnson, 26/6/16.

“Getting out of the EU can be quick and easy - the UK holds most of the cards”. John Redwood, 17/7/16.

“There will be no downside to Brexit, only a considerable upside”. David Davis, 10/10/16.

“The free trade agreement that we will have to do with the European Union should be one of the easiest in human history”. Liam Fox, 20/7/17.

“Most of the EU states are very sympathetic to our view”. David Davis, 15/5/17.

“I believe that we can get a free trade and customs agreement concluded before March 2019”. David Davis, 18/1/17.

“Within two years, before the negotiation with the EU is likely to be complete, and therefore before anything material has changed, we can negotiate a free trade area massively larger than the EU … The new trade agreements will come into force at the point of exit, but they will be fully negotiated”. David Davis, 14/7/16.

“There is no plan for no deal, because we’re going to get a great deal”. Boris Johnson, 11/7/17.

“But we didn’t vote to leave without a deal. That wasn’t the message of the campaign I helped lead. During that campaign, we said we should do a deal with the EU and be part of the network of free trade deals that covers all Europe, from Iceland to Turkey. Leaving without a deal on March 29 would not honour that commitment. It would undoubtedly cause economic turbulence.” Michael Gove, 3/3/19.

“I’ve looked carefully at ‘no deal’. That outcome would be a failure of statecraft”, Boris Johnson, 9/9/19.

"I can indeed assure the hon. Lady that there will be no crashing out, because we will negotiate a great new friendship and partnership within the timescale. I know that hon. Members on both sides of the House have every confidence in the Government to do that. " Boris Johnson, 22/10/19.

“We have an ‘oven ready’ deal, let's put it in the microwave, as soon as we get back after the election on 12 December." Boris Johnson, 31/10/19.

“Our deal is the only one on the table. It is signed, sealed and ready. It puts the whole country on a path to a new free trade agreement with the EU. This will be a new relationship based on free trade and friendly cooperation” Conservative Party Manifesto, 24/11/19.

You missed:

"EU trade deal will be one of the easiest deals in human history" - Liam Fox 20/07/17

"The first calling point of the UK's negotiator immediately after #Brexit will not be Brussels, it will be Berlin, to strike a deal" David Davis 26/05/16

 

[orchard]

Must be true that if a staunch Remainer tweets it. Literally bollocks on both sides.

Have the EU Blinked by the way? and offered an olive branch?

Yeah mate, elect an absolute disgrace that can't be trusted, 'but they're all like that'.

Extracting the piss and removing the Great from Britain. Good job.

 

[arminisgod]

I'm not sure a meeting between Ursula Von Der Leyen and Boris Johnson is best described as 'literally bollocks on both sides'

And no I don't think so, why do imagine they would and should?

I meant the leaks from private meetings. Staged managed rubbish. Boris is an idiot so i can believe some of it.. but i also don't believe the EU

The EU have said we can keep our soverignity. Von der leyen said we don't have to stick to the rules if they change them

 

[Jebus_lives]

I meant the leaks from private meetings. Staged managed rubbish. Boris is an idiot so i can believe some of it.. but i also don't believe the EU

The EU have said we can keep our soverignity. Von der leyen said we don't have to stick to the rules if they change them

Wasn't that just rumour from Downing Street?

And it really is laughable using Sovereignty in this scenario, it's lost all meaning at this point. We always had our sovereignty, it's ridiculous to suggest otherwise.

 

[Billy Dean]

I voted for Brexit so we could stop non-Europeans coming into the UK. There's too many of 'em!

 

[ste d' indica]

I voted for Brexit so we could stop non-Europeans coming into the UK. There's too many of 'em!

Saw a gammon on telly say something along these lines after the referendum - "I voted to leave 'cos of immigrants, too many immigrants... don't mind the poles and that, they're alright.. its all them ovvers from Somalia and them places"
Topped only by another one tucking into his congealed fried egg and explaining what Brexit meant to him - "First English breakfast... in England mate"

 

[Barnfred 55]

I meant the leaks from private meetings. Staged managed rubbish. Boris is an idiot so i can believe some of it.. but i also don't believe the EU

The EU have said we can keep our soverignity. Von der leyen said we don't have to stick to the rules if they change them

This does seem to be a change in their stance but we don't really know for sure whether this was always the case. We've been led to believe that we had to follow suit if they moved the goalpost, but that may not necessarily have been the case.

However the wording of her statement was "we would simply adapt the conditions of access to our market" if we didn't follow suit. That is very vague and we need to know what the other "conditions" amount to. If it were a reversion to WTO terms for any products and services affected by the changes, then I think that would be perfectly acceptable.

What people need to understand is that a free trade deal doesn't necessarily have to cover ALL products and services. We can start off that way because at the moment the UK and EU standards are the same. But as either side improve their standards (or the opposite) without the other side following suit, then they have the right to remove aspects of the free trade agreement. I think that's fair.

 

[Barnfred 55]

Wasn't that just rumour from Downing Street?

And it really is laughable using Sovereignty in this scenario, it's lost all meaning at this point. We always had our sovereignty, it's ridiculous to suggest otherwise.

No. It's from her press conference this morning. The words she used were "Britain can keep their independence, sovereignty if you like". So yes, she did actually say the word, but the context was probably that she was using Johnson's words back at him.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

This does seem to be a change in their stance but we don't really know for sure whether this was always the case. We've been led to believe that we had to follow suit if they moved the goalpost, but that may not necessarily have been the case.

However the wording of her statement was "we would simply adapt the conditions of access to our market" if we didn't follow suit. That is very vague and we need to know what the other "conditions" amount to. If it were a reversion to WTO terms for any products and services affected by the changes, then I think that would be perfectly acceptable.

What people need to understand is that a free trade deal doesn't necessarily have to cover ALL products and services. We can start off that way because at the moment the UK and EU standards are the same. But as either side improve their standards (or the opposite) without the other side following suit, then they have the right to remove aspects of the free trade agreement. I think that's fair.

It's already covering very little as it is, and hardly any of the services that dominate our economy. That's why even with the deal that's largely on the table the estimates are still that the economy will shrink by 4%.

 

[Jebus_lives]

No. It's from her press conference this morning. The words she used were "Britain can keep their independence, sovereignty if you like". So yes, she did actually say the word, but the context was probably that she was using Johnson's words back at him.

I'm aware of that. Where was the rumour from that suggested the EU would expect the UK to align with the EU in perpetuity?

It was a release from Government, which the EU denied, as far as I'm aware.

And, on the point of Sovereignty, she almost mocked the use of the word - I'm not surprised given how devalued it has become.

 

[Barnfred 55]

I'm aware of that. Where was the rumour from that suggested the EU would expect the UK to align with the EU in perpetuity?

It was a release from Government, which the EU denied, as far as I'm aware.

And, on the point of Sovereignty, she almost mocked the use of the word - I'm not surprised given how devalued it has become.

That's not what you said in your post though. All I was trying to do was clarify for you. Wasn't trying to put any slant on it. Won't bother in future.

Most of you in here seem almost happy that the UK aren't getting a deal, just so you can be proved right. You're practically celebrating Johnson's failures. I don't get that personally but hey.

 

[roydo]

Most of you in here seem almost happy that the UK aren't getting a deal, just so you can be proved right. You're practically celebrating Johnson's failures. I don't get that personally but hey.

Oh I deffo want a deal.

The "celebrating" is absent though. Its just that absolute crap that was lapped up for years by some who enjoyed having their confirmation bias confirmed, has been exposed for what it was. Crap.

Lets see. Sommet might get sorted.

 

[Caolam]

This does seem to be a change in their stance but we don't really know for sure whether this was always the case. We've been led to believe that we had to follow suit if they moved the goalpost, but that may not necessarily have been the case.

However the wording of her statement was "we would simply adapt the conditions of access to our market" if we didn't follow suit. That is very vague and we need to know what the other "conditions" amount to. If it were a reversion to WTO terms for any products and services affected by the changes, then I think that would be perfectly acceptable.

What people need to understand is that a free trade deal doesn't necessarily have to cover ALL products and services. We can start off that way because at the moment the UK and EU standards are the same. But as either side improve their standards (or the opposite) without the other side following suit, then they have the right to remove aspects of the free trade agreement. I think that's fair.

Does anyone think the EU is concerned that Britain is going to set higher standards for food production or indeed any other production in the future.