Wainy316 Posted October 25, 2018 Share Posted October 25, 2018 15 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said: Then when you ask them where they've gone they make up some abuse so that they don't have to defend their dated opinions. As Stevo said, still yet to see a single benefit that we didn't already have while being in the EU. The pound being shit is good for sending money home if you're working abroad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wainy316 Posted October 25, 2018 Share Posted October 25, 2018 Stuff like this really pisses me off... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lapal_fan Posted October 25, 2018 Share Posted October 25, 2018 7 minutes ago, Wainy316 said: Stuff like this really pisses me off... The person who made that probably wasn't in either war either Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted October 25, 2018 Share Posted October 25, 2018 18 minutes ago, lapal_fan said: The Russian agent who made that failed many attempts to be elected as an MP and has a German wife 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PompeyVillan Posted October 25, 2018 Share Posted October 25, 2018 We probably owe Europe several billion pounds and we'll probably pay it too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted October 25, 2018 VT Supporter Share Posted October 25, 2018 58 minutes ago, Wainy316 said: Stuff like this really pisses me off... That's just peak brexit. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enda Posted October 25, 2018 Share Posted October 25, 2018 9 hours ago, Stevo985 said: But I've got my forms to get my Irish passport. 18 hours ago, peterms said: This week, I'm processing Irish citizenship for my kids, as a protection for them. Welcome to the gang! I'll PM you the official 64 page "History of the Black and Tans" guide later. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted October 25, 2018 Moderator Share Posted October 25, 2018 6 hours ago, Seat68 said: Would we be able to ditch GDPR and I would be able to view some american websites that are blocked to me without using a vpn? On the GDPR - nope. Firstly its already enshrined in UK Sovereign Law as the Data Protection Act 2018m the only differences between them is the DPA2018 adds a section on points of entry to the UK for immigration purposes, not only that but should we actually move away from it, any company still wishing to trade with the EU would still have to be compliant and also the UK in general would have to be added to the list of countries with which it would be ok to share data with, moving away from the GDPR would instantly take us off that list of accepted countries On the American websites, again I think no, as this is a region-specific copyright thing I'd imagine 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enda Posted October 25, 2018 Share Posted October 25, 2018 6 hours ago, Wainy316 said: Stuff like this really pisses me off... How the United Kingdom treated Ireland in 1918 is pages 57--59 on the official guide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted October 25, 2018 Moderator Share Posted October 25, 2018 2 minutes ago, Enda said: How the United Kingdom treated Ireland in 1918 is pages 57--59 on the official guide. You'll be back in the Empire soon enough 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enda Posted October 25, 2018 Share Posted October 25, 2018 1 minute ago, bickster said: You'll be back in the Empire soon enough Alright but this time we're running it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted October 25, 2018 Moderator Share Posted October 25, 2018 2 minutes ago, Enda said: Alright but this time we're running it. Deal! The leprechaun at the end of the rainbow could do a better job after this particular shower Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted October 25, 2018 Author Moderator Share Posted October 25, 2018 15 minutes ago, Enda said: Alright but this time we're running it. Yes please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted October 27, 2018 Share Posted October 27, 2018 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted October 28, 2018 Share Posted October 28, 2018 On 24/10/2018 at 19:13, snowychap said: Russia blocks UK's post-Brexit tariff proposal at WTO Some info on why this doesn't appear to be a big deal: Objections to the UK's WTO Schedule: What do they mean? Quote ... The WTO Director-General will only certify a schedule when there are no objections. Even a single objection is enough to prevent certification. Oh no, what does that mean? Not a lot. The UK can trade just fine on an uncertified schedule. Having an uncertified schedule just means at least one WTO Member doesn't think that schedule is an accurate representation of your commitments. At worst could signal objective Members plan to take a dispute against you in the WTO some time in the future, but even that is hardly fatal. Does it mean the UK can't negotiate Free Trade Agreements (FTA)? No. While having an uncertified schedule makes things a little bit more uncertain, it's unlikely to prevent the UK from entering into FTA negotiations. For those countries objecting to the UK's schedule, an FTA could even offer a way to resolve the issue. What does this schedule stuff mean for the 'WTO Option?' Apart from both having 'WTO' in their name, the two are completely unrelated. The so-called 'WTO Option' refers to the United Kingdom leaving the European Union without anything to replace all the legal frameworks and treaties which currently streamline trade relations within the bloc. It's called the 'WTO Option' because it means trade relations with the EU falling back to just the baseline WTO Rules. The certification (or not) of the UK's WTO schedule won't impact this. In fact, as described above, it impacts almost nothing. What’s really happening on tariff quotas and Britain’s WTO commitments? Quote Since autumn 2017, news has appeared every few months about the UK’s proposed World Trade Organization (WTO) commitments and the objections of other countries. Some have claimed this is a failure of London’s Brexit policy. The latest round of headlines spoke of plans “in tatters” or “hitting the buffers”, “protests” by other countries, and even a Kremlin plot. They are wrong, at least for now. What exactly has been happening? And what does it mean? RECAP A reminder: the UK is and will continue to be a WTO member But it will have to work with other countries on its WTO commitments (known as “schedules”) on tariff ceilings, minimum sizes and maximum tariffs for tariff quotas, limits on agricultural subsidies, and opening its markets for services and government procurement. Right now, these are part of a single set of commitments for the 28 present EU members. When the UK leaves the EU, it will need its own commitments, which will be separate from those of the EU–27. ... What happened in October 2018? Suddenly on October 9 and 25 (2018), the media woke up again, with those stories of plans “hitting the buffers” and “in tatters”, “protests” by other countries, and even a Kremlin plot. Because of their sporadic interest, they did not know that what really happened was already expected. After all, the reservations were first raised a year ago, and back in June the UK had conceded that negotiations were on the cards. What happened since then simply followed a well-trodden WTO procedural path, only slightly magnified by the special case of Brexit. There was one surprise — Russia’s involvement, but even then it might be a mistake to jump to conclusions. Might. One journalist who had followed this closely used the more circumspect “setback”. One expert was similarly cautious. Our headline at IEG Policy focused only on “entering into negotiations”. Briefly, after the UK and EU circulated their proposals on July 24, the deadlines for staking a claim expired after about three months: October 22 for the EU’s 90-day Article 28 process and October 24 for the UK’s 3-month “rectification” process. A few days before the deadline, on October 9, the WTO’s Market Access Committee met. This was an opportunity for countries to put their reservations on the record, and 15 countries did on the EU’s proposal, and 19 on the UK’s. At the last minute, just before the deadlines, a number of countries submitted their claims in writing. Who they were is thought to be roughly those who spoke in the WTO meeting. For the EU this meant negotiations on “modification” could begin. The UK would now be about three months behind the EU but both would now be negotiating “modification” under GATT Article 28 — the UK would have to formally launch the process with its 90-day period opened for comment. The UK needed a brief period to prepare to launch the process. Then the 90 days would kick in. Meanwhile on October 25, UK International Trade Secretary Liam Fox informed Parliament that the GATT Article 28 negotiations would kick in. The media woke up with a jolt, and produced those dramatic headlines. They were unaware that Greg Hands had already alerted Parliament back in June, although they were right that Fox had previously claimed this could all be done quickly. The talks are not with the entire WTO membership, only with those that have individual tariff quotas (such as New Zealand for its butter quota), or more generally, countries that are principle or substantial suppliers, or if they originally negotiated the commitment, in this case on tariff quotas. This is spelt out in GATT Article 28. WTO commitments are legally binding promises resulting from negotiations. If those promises change, key countries have a right to discuss the modifications. It’s standard WTO practice and it happens regularly. In this case the UK is a large economy, and because this is the first case of splitting tariff quotas the outcome would set a precedent if anyone else wants to follow suit (unlikely, but precedent counts in the legalistic WTO). Therefore, other countries are taking a close interest. So, this was not a blockage. It was a further delay that could take the negotiations right up to the day the UK leaves the EU or beyond. The implications are discussed above, including added time if the UK and EU have a customs union during the Brexit transition. What about the Kremlin? Russia surprised many by kicking off the comments on both the EU’s and the UK’s proposals in the October 9 WTO meeting. Russia’s concern is understood to be first of all to ensure it has the right to negotiate on the tariff quotas under GATT Article 28. Russia is also understood to be holding up certification of the modified goods schedule for the EU’s expansion from 25 to 28 members for the same reason. Russia joined the WTO in 2012. None of the EU’s tariff quotas, whose origins are much earlier, is specifically for Russia and that also applies to the proposed split UK and EU quotas. Clearly Russia is pursuing a commercial interest here. Whether it will succeed or not remains to be seen. China tried and failed to challenge the EU legally through the WTO’s dispute settlement process for a previous modification, a challenge that may have held up the certification of the schedule for its expansion to 25 members. Whether or not Russia is also politically motivated remains to be seen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted October 29, 2018 Moderator Share Posted October 29, 2018 **** NOT A JOKE ALERT **** There is going to be a new 50p coin next year to commemorate Brexit. Just let that sink in Let the mirth flow (it'll only be worth 36p in todays money etc) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post ml1dch Posted October 29, 2018 Popular Post Share Posted October 29, 2018 38 minutes ago, bickster said: **** NOT A JOKE ALERT **** There is going to be a new 50p coin next year to commemorate Brexit. Just let that sink in Let the mirth flow (it'll only be worth 36p in todays money etc) 5 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rodders Posted October 29, 2018 Share Posted October 29, 2018 Why's Paul Lambert on there? ffs Paul. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted October 29, 2018 Share Posted October 29, 2018 Shouldn't it be a 52p coin? 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ml1dch Posted October 29, 2018 Share Posted October 29, 2018 1 hour ago, StefanAVFC said: Shouldn't it be a 52p coin? Maybe a commemorative nine bob note would be most appropriate. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts