Brexit Phase Two - Trade

My but there are some angry people about today.
 
At last...something on trade...
 
Exactly, now do remind me is there a Hansard section for 2008 for Article 50 discussions prior to signing the Lisbon treaty recieved such scrutiny from the Brown Government. I don't recall specifics, but I do remember there was a lot of whataboutery regarding losing national sovereignty and that Labour said didn't matter.
What should have happened after Lisbon? Certainly.not what did.-Like Nothing changed because Brussels did not have the means to do what it said on the tin. So let me refresh your memory.
Brussels became responsible for
Foreign Policy
Defence
Immigration
Eurozone Policy

How we doing so far?
 

skid2

LE
Book Reviewer
So for you the inescapable fact is to remain in no matter what-it's falling apart man. Politicians have colluded against the wills of their electorate and all they can do is shout IGNORE THE FACTS, it's all a big lie.?
It’s the Express and W. Hague. Tie that up with a country which as of December 2016 had 65 governments since January 1946. It strikes me that they can promise whatever they like in an attempt to get one which lasts six months or so.

There are no facts it’s an aspiration from a couple of parties in a government famous for not lasting too long.
 

Wordsmith

LE
Book Reviewer
Looks like a busy week:
France set for new week of strike headaches as labour unrest continues - France 24
"
Latest update : 2018-05-21
France is due for a jam-packed week of labour turmoil, with striking railworkers and public servants leading the charge.
After a quiet Monday owing to the Pentecost holiday, the week’s agenda is chock full of discontent, starting Tuesday."
Marcon is trying to do a Maggie, cut back the state and tame the power of the unions. His problem is that the French economic is suffering from economic arthritis with low productivity, excessive state spending and debt at 100% of GDP - leading to a predicable financial crisis when the next recession rolls along.

The reforms are therefore necessary for the French economy but the vested interests are more powerful than the ones Maggie had to overcome and I suspect Marcon is not going to win his fight. The result will be significant short term damage to the French economy and the French economy falling further behind its competitors - both in Europe and in the rest of the world in the future.

Wordsmith
 
Yes, the manadate is to leave the EU, as defined by treaty.

You can't say:



But also claim



The only mandate is for leaving the EU, not whatever the process produces.

The mandate will be discharged, anything else is up for grabs.
The referendum produced the mandate to leave on the basis of Article 50 and with no other restrictions on the Government's freedom of action, ergo, and whether you like it or not, it has a mandate for every outcome achievable under the terms of Article 50, up to and including hard Brexit.
 

skid2

LE
Book Reviewer
Guess what- he's a crystal ball reader, My house hold has been down 5.5K a year since 2008 and the pension reforms that happened as a result in 2011-My wife's still waiting for her Pension. That wasn't the fault of Brexit
Apart from the fact he doesn’t mention pensions or house prices. He mentions that households will be down £900:more than previously forecast. He cites Brexit, I think he knows what he’s talking about.
 
The referendum produced the mandate to leave on the basis of Article 50 and with no other restrictions on the Government's freedom of action, ergo, and whether you like it or not, it has a mandate for every outcome achievable under the terms of Article 50, up to and including hard Brexit.
No, because “hard Brexit” is not a thing. “Hard Brexit” was not an option specified on the referendum.

Leaving the EU is a thing. It was an option specified in the referendum.

The EU is a legally defined entity.

That is the limit of the mandate, like it or not.
 
It’s the Express and W. Hague. Tie that up with a country which as of December 2016 had 65 governments since January 1946. It strikes me that they can promise whatever they like in an attempt to get one which lasts six months or so.

There are no facts it’s an aspiration from a couple of parties in a government famous for not lasting too long.
Let me impress on you the reallity which underlies Italy. It's called the Mafia and it has been since US pulled the strings to get Benito out in 43/44. Italy cannot have stable Government in the normal sense. Any one who thinks they can have a formal agreement that work at a European level with Italy is deluding themselves. Italy only allied itself to us in the first lot for money. The eternal city is eternally bankrupt, which is why we had Italian Bankers hanging about under Blackfriars. Berlusconi and his bunga bunga parties is exactly how the Eu operates and the Eurozone has been taken for a ride of it's own making. When Calvi was found I was in New Fetter Lane.
 
Marcon is trying to do a Maggie, cut back the state and tame the power of the unions. His problem is that the French economic is suffering from economic arthritis with low productivity, excessive state spending and debt at 100% of GDP - leading to a predicable financial crisis when the next recession rolls along.

The reforms are therefore necessary for the French economy but the vested interests are more powerful than the ones Maggie had to overcome and I suspect Marcon is not going to win his fight. The result will be significant short term damage to the French economy and the French economy falling further behind its competitors - both in Europe and in the rest of the world in the future.

Wordsmith
Even more than that, a very pro-EU Macron knows that the EU can't survive without the Euro and that, as we discussed at length with Alsacien several years ago, France can't survive in the Eurozone long term without addressing the productivity gap with Germany. That makes this a fight he can't avoid having and, as you rightly point out, he's up against some very deeply entrenched vested interests.
 
Apart from the fact he doesn’t mention pensions or house prices. He mentions that households will be down £900:more than previously forecast. He cites Brexit, I think he knows what he’s talking about.
Erm he's talking forecasts, forecasts are wrong and it's why the Treasury frequently have to revise their figures. That produces pantomime season in the HoC because it gives the failures the chance to blame the current incumbents for their own failures.
 

Wordsmith

LE
Book Reviewer
No, because “hard Brexit” is not a thing. “Hard Brexit” was not an option specified on the referendum. Leaving the EU is a thing. It was an option specified in the referendum.
The UK clearly desires a soft Brexit on acceptable terms. The EU is trying to impose a form of soft Brexit that would forever restrict the UK's freedom of action on things like the levels of tax we can set, the regulations we are required to retain and making us still subject to the judgement of the ECJ indefinitely after leaving the EU.

Sovereign nations have the right to set their own taxes, determine their own laws and remain only to international (as opposed to EU) law.

In those circumstances, which of the two sides will bear the greatest share of the blame should no agreement be reached and a hard Brexit result?

Wordsmith
 
The UK clearly desires a soft Brexit on acceptable terms. The EU is trying to impose a form of soft Brexit that would forever restrict the UK's freedom of action on things like the levels of tax we can set, the regulations we are required to retain and making us still subject to the judgement of the ECJ indefinitely after leaving the EU.

Sovereign nations have the right to set their own taxes, determine their own laws and remain only to international (as opposed to EU) law.

In those circumstances, which of the two sides will bear the greatest share of the blame should no agreement be reached and a hard Brexit result?

Wordsmith
The EU has a right to look after its interests. You never got that bit did you?
 

Latest Threads

Top