Brexit Phase Two - Trade

Status
Not open for further replies.
European Union Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier said on Monday British Prime Minister Theresa May should endorse a permanent customs union with the bloc
'Something has to give,' EU's Barnier tells Brexit Britain | Reuters

Here is a better idea Barnier.

The UK leaves the EU in it's entirety on 29 March as per UK Law and the terms of Article 50. Over the course of the next year, whilst we watch more and more of the EU slip into recession, the fun and games over the next EU Budget and the potentially devastating MEP Elections, we can discuss an UK - EU FTA.

That FTA being a FTA that does not have the UK under the control of Brussels or under the jurisdiction of the ECJ and Ddes not cost £12 Billion a year gross.

As certain people like to herald loudly, it takes the EU between 5 - 10 years for the EU to strike an FTA, that will cover the period of 2025 nicely. Which is the year that 6 of the poorest Countries in Europe are scheduled to join the EU.

EU to map out membership for 6 western Balkan states
Subscribe to read | Financial Times
 
Last edited:
The UK is not in a currency union with the EU.
I do apologise for the typo. I hope you realise I meant customs union.

Yes customs union that means the EU get to decide what we do and don’t pay VAT in. The customs union that is harmonising take rates throughout Europe so member states lose the ability to even set the tax rates let alone the decisions about what to take.

I don’t a want customs union, as in the union of customs that means that the U.K. would be unable to negitatiate any of its trade deal.

You know, the customs union that saw us have to introduce VAT of domestic heating and sanitory products so encapsulated with the so called ‘tampon Tax.’

Don’t worry though, whilst part of the EU, HMG can be left with such economic levers as whether or not to charge a tax on whether or not you eat a your chicken slice stood up inside Greggs or outside on the street.
 
Last edited:
We are going over old ground.

That binary choice was not defined. What you believed it to be was what you believed it to be, nothing more.

It couldn't be defined because there was no plan. Wordsmith keeps reminding us of this, and the fact that there was no responsibility on the Leave campaign to formulate a plan.
You are deliberately going round in circles.

The Referendum choice was clear cut, vote to leave or vote to remain. The Referendum is now a moot point. It was superseded by a vote in Parliament in January 2017, where MP's voted by a margin of 4 - 1 to trigger Article 50.

It was the sitting Government's responsibility to have a plan for leaving, not the leave campaign.
 
That binary choice was not defined. What you believed it to be was what you believed it to be, nothing more...

That binary choice was very clearly defined. Remain or Leave. As a referendum question is was clear enough.

Had the result been 52% Remain would the losers be claiming that the choice had not been well defined? I think not somehow.



...and the fact that there was no responsibility on the Leave campaign to formulate a plan.
Strange thinking there and certainly not biased in any way. A bit like saying the local constituency chugger knocking on your door and trying to convince you to vote for their party is responsible for formulating government policy in the event their party wins the GE.

Those behind the Leave campaign could have formulated a dozen plans but at the end of it all, they were not the ones going to implement anything. The same as the Remain campaign who also had no responsibility for formulating plans.

The government... essentially the same government as that of today gave us the referendum choice. It is the government and nobody else that should have had plan A and plan B. It is the entirely the fault of the government for cynically offering the electorate a choice for which they considered planning unnecessary. Unnecessary because the stupid electorate wouldn't possibly vote to leave.

Twenty quids worth of basic market reasearch would have determined the likeliest outcome but no... the government chose to pay lip service to a 'vote for us and we'll give you a choice' manifesto carrot.

It is disingenuous to blame those promoting Leave or Remain for the gross misconduct of the government.
 
... and talking of Government misconduct:

The government is being sued for its decision to charter firms to run extra ferries, including one with no ships, in the event of a no-deal Brexit.
Government sued over no-deal ferry contracts


The decision to award a contract to Seaborne, a firm with no ships which the BBC found had never run a ferry service before[/URL], has been heavily criticised.​
After Seaborne's contract collapsed Mr Grayling faced calls for his resignation, with Labour accusing him of "rewriting the textbook on incompetence."​
But Prime Minister Theresa May has said she continues to have full confidence in him.

Doesn't 'I continue to have full confidence in him /her' generally mean quite the opposite. Still, I suppose lame duck PMTM has enough problems right now without having to find new ministers for her broken government.
 
Last edited:
... and talking of Government misconduct:

The government is being sued for its decision to charter firms to run extra ferries, including one with no ships, in the event of a no-deal Brexit.
Government sued over no-deal ferry contracts


The decision to award a contract to Seaborne, a firm with no ships which the BBC found had never run a ferry service before[/URL], has been heavily criticised.​
After Seaborne's contract collapsed Mr Grayling faced calls for his resignation, with Labour accusing him of "rewriting the textbook on incompetence."​
But Prime Minister Theresa May has said she continues to have full confidence in him.

Doesn't 'I continue to have full confidence in him /her' generally mean quite the opposite. Still, I suppose lane duck PMTM has enough problems right now without having to find new ministers for her broken government.
This one you mean ?

At a High Court hearing in London, Eurotunnel claimed the government contracts, announced on 29 December, were awarded without any public notice.
Which seems quite strange when

Three suppliers were awarded a total of £102.9m in late December, aimed at easing "severe congestion" at Dover, in the case of a no-deal Brexit:

  • £46.6m to the French company Brittany Ferries
  • £42.5m (€47.3m) to Danish shipping firm DFDS
  • £13.8m to British firm Seaborne Freight
Government sued over no-deal ferry contracts

It would appear that Eurotunnel are just being complete *********.
 
No matter how many times you are told, you still come up with the same crap about healthcare and the uniqueness of the NHS. Stop spouting things from inside your head because you are making yourself look like a fool.

The NHS is neither unique nor very good.
Please do feel free to name another EU country with the nhs model.
 
Last edited:
It would appear that Eurotunnel are just being complete *********
Not sure they are really... it is an expensive way to be complete **********

It appears to be more about the way in which these contracts were awarded rather than to whom.

Perhaps a touch of sour grapes but you'd have to say that Eurotunnel will not have brought the action without believing they have a valid case. Have you seen the price of high court cases these days... what, with Brexit uncertainties pushing costs up by the hour and all...
 

Robme

LE
Ok I know there has been a mention of this on another thread, but I think this is the correct place to post this.
Remember Borises claim that Turkey was about to join the E.U. and that would mean fasands and fasands of Mooslim Turks flooding Europe? Last night on BBC2 was the concluding part of a 3 parter called ‘Inside Europe Ten years of Toil’. In last nights epi, they mentioned a deal struck by Mutti, Mark Rutter (Dutch E.U. commissionaire) and the Turkish prime minister (not the president Erdowa*ker, him of the fake coup) whose name is to boring to remember, in which all 80million Turks would be given visa free access to the EU. This was 1 of 72 demands made by the Turks in order that they accept refugees crossing the med into Greece, including £6bn a year to look after them whilst settled in Turkey.
So whilst said B Johnson was not technically correct, he was on the right track. And let’s face Boris has never let the truth get in the way of a bit of scare mongering.
Best of all this deal was struck and finalised without the agreement of the E.U., or even them being aware that they were being sucker punched by the deviousness of Mutti and her free-spending of the E.U. budget (simply because btw she felt guilty about the division of East and west Germany ).
Moral of the story, roll on the 29/03 and an end to this sort of garbage .
 
Can we have the whole video?

Do you remember your tw*tter that you claimed showed an ambulance blocked by brexit supporters?

Then I posted the whole video...

It sort of made you look a little foolish.

Relive your idiocy here. Champ.
Was it you? Did they block the road? Did you see the **** throwing a smoke bomb at CX.

Always nice to see which twats applaud idiots slowing down emergency services though. Funnier to see who excuses it with "proof" mind.
 
There's no way the WA can be considered as leaving the EU in any form that would be seen as meaningful - far too many restrictions, caveats & outright demands.
We will have left though.
 
Was it you? Did they block the road? Did you see the **** throwing a smoke bomb at CX.

Always nice to see which twats applaud idiots slowing down emergency services though. Funnier to see who excuses it with "proof" mind.
Have you got the twitter
 
Ok I know there has been a mention of this on another thread, but I think this is the correct place to post this.
Remember Borises claim that Turkey was about to join the E.U. and that would mean fasands and fasands of Mooslim Turks flooding Europe? Last night on BBC2 was the concluding part of a 3 parter called ‘Inside Europe Ten years of Toil’. In last nights epi, they mentioned a deal struck by Mutti, Mark Rutter (Dutch E.U. commissionaire) and the Turkish prime minister (not the president Erdowa*ker, him of the fake coup) whose name is to boring to remember, in which all 80million Turks would be given visa free access to the EU. This was 1 of 72 demands made by the Turks in order that they accept refugees crossing the med into Greece, including £6bn a year to look after them whilst settled in Turkey.
So whilst said B Johnson was not technically correct, he was on the right track. And let’s face Boris has never let the truth get in the way of a bit of scare mongering.
Best of all this deal was struck and finalised without the agreement of the E.U., or even them being aware that they were being sucker punched by the deviousness of Mutti and her free-spending of the E.U. budget (simply because btw she felt guilty about the division of East and west Germany ).
Moral of the story, roll on the 29/03 and an end to this sort of garbage .

Having robbed all the accession states in the East for cheap labour to fund the EUs extravagant dreams avd fend off it’s falling birth rate, the E.U. needs another pool of cheap labour to pillage..... yes, they’re looking at you Mehmet.
 
The UK gov are also asking for PhDs to work as statisticians ... Starting on 25k a year in Edinburgh (and 28k for the next level up). One of my old lab mates left academia after his PhD and was on 50k after 9 months, crunching numbers for one of the gambling companies. A year or so after that he was contracting for 300 a day for banks and the like. Even the NHS pay 30-32k starting salary when recruiting PhDs for that role. No idea how they expect to recruit people when they are paying far below industry rates and even around 8-12k less than academia (and at least in academia you are free to set you own schedule, including where you work, and set your own projects etc).
Well so much for Govt Policy promoting a financial advantage to those who've been to university. What it boils down to is Government taking up the slack on over qualification, whilst a selected few within the system get the top bean counting jobs. And it's not as if we haven't been here before with the intern debate. Of course if they took a job at less than 21/22K they'd never have to pay back the loan. In the meantime people like me (ably supported [not] BY the unions:rolleyes:) were pushed to the back whilst the abler uni grads got the fast track only to be got out of the doodoo by people like me. That's not a moan, that's a fact.


Of course it shouldn't stop people going to universities if there is a percieved advantage, but that shouldn't be touted as earnings capability or job a satisfaction.
 
The new sock on the block seems to have picked up Tiresome Tech's habit of very early permasending with several nonsensical posts which have obviously kept him up all night.
Wonder if there's a hint there somewhere?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest Threads

Top