The now-enacted will of (some of) the people

[Awol]

14 minutes ago, Chindie said:

Lest we forget that the EU nearly lost 7 years of work over a deal because one region of Belgium didn't like one element of the proposal given.

Lest we forget Canada is a tiny market for EU exports compared to the UK. The incentives not to cock it up are far larger. 

[Chindie]

True. I'm not drawing a straight line between the two. I'm just using the example to show troubles the EU can have, even with generally fairly benign deals.

[ml1dch]

1 hour ago, Awol said:

It has! It enables a deal to be ratified between the U.K. and the EU while simultaneously allowing Spain to isolate Gibraltar if it so wishes.

So Spain can be as difficult as they like about Gibraltar without affecting the other 26 countries who want to conclude a deal with the UK.

That's what the fuss is about.

 

The EU is those 27 countries. The thing that would stop the deal being ratified would be a veto from one of those 27.

Spain being one of them. There is no scenario where "the EU ratifies it while Spain remains difficult". 

That scenario is one of the 27 members not ratifying it.

In the next two years there will almost certainly be things that mean that others amongst the 27 want to kick up a fuss. It's what we signed up for. Edit - and obviously I say "we" in the loosest sense imaginable.

Edited April 6, 2017 by ml1dch

[blandy]

1 hour ago, Awol said:

Spain can be as difficult as they like about Gibraltar without affecting the other 26 countries who want to conclude a deal with the UK.

A EU-UK trade deal can't be concluded unless all 27 of them, including Spain, agree to it - Spain can, even without this clause, scupper any trade deal between the EU and UK,

This clause gives Spain a "lever" to seperate out Gibraltar from the UK in terms of trade deals. As you quoted " “no agreement between the EU and the United Kingdom may apply to the territory of Gibraltar without the agreement between the Kingdom of Spain and the United Kingdom” - so it means they could go along with the other 26 and agree a trade deal between EU and UK, but prevent that deal from also covering Gib unless the UK gives them "a little something" to cover their concerns about Gib's low tax rates and/or Sovereignty. 

 

[Awol]

14 minutes ago, ml1dch said:

The EU is those 27 countries. The thing that would stop the deal being ratified would be a veto from one of those 27.

Spain being one of them. There is no scenario where "the EU ratifies it while Spain remains difficult". 

That scenario is one of the 27 members not ratifying it.

In the next two years there will almost certainly be things that mean that others amongst the 27 want to kick up a fuss. It's what we signed up for. Edit - and obviously I say "we" in the loosest sense imaginable.

For whatever reason you're clearly determined not to acknowledge the fact the EU is trying to treat Gibraltar as an issue apart from the main negotiation with the UK. 

If you're going to deny the actual facts of the situation there isn't much else to say.

[Awol]

3 minutes ago, blandy said:

A EU-UK trade deal can't be concluded unless all 27 of them, including Spain, agree to it - Spain can, even without this clause, scupper any trade deal between the EU and UK,

This clause gives Spain a "lever" to seperate out Gibraltar from the UK in terms of trade deals. As you quoted " “no agreement between the EU and the United Kingdom may apply to the territory of Gibraltar without the agreement between the Kingdom of Spain and the United Kingdom” - so it means they could go along with the other 26 and agree a trade deal between EU and UK, but prevent that deal from also covering Gib unless the UK gives them "a little something" to cover their concerns about Gib's low tax rates and/or Sovereignty. 

 

Which is precisely what I've said and M1dch has flatly denied is the case.

The point was that the UK doesn't have to accept that and can refuse to negotiate until Spain's separate veto over Gib is removed and the Rock is treated as part of UK for the purposes of the negotiation.

[LondonLax]

How could Spain's veto be removed?

[blandy]

34 minutes ago, Awol said:

The point was that the UK doesn't have to accept that and can refuse to negotiate until Spain's separate veto over Gib is removed and the Rock is treated as part of UK for the purposes of the negotiation.

How? I might be wrong, but I believe from following the news n'that, that the "veto" thing over Gib was included in the draft guidlelines for the structure of the negotiations, that the draft was then passed by an overwhelming vote in the EU parliament (various amendments were voted down) and it is now the formal structure. There is no opportunity for the UK to to have any say, to "refuse to accept".

The UK could refuse to negotiate on trade, though apart from a very few right wing mentalists, no one from any perspective wants that - the UK is desperate for a trade deal, UK Plc is desperate,. What sort of wingnut  would refuse to negotiate because they refuse to accept a fact? 

[blandy]

33 minutes ago, Awol said:

Which is precisely what I've said

Yes, agreed  sorry, on that bit I wasn't arguing, I was trying to post a "clarification".

[tonyh29]

 disruption around Gibraltar always seems to occur when the Spanish government needs a distraction from its own problems ...Gibraltar is a thriving territory near one of one of the poorest regions in Spain and provides vital jobs and income to its Spain  ... Spain needs a deal with the Uk over Gibraltar , its veto and subsequent sabre rattling from the likes of Howard is just part of the distraction

it's currently playing out like an episode of Yes Minister , only it's Gibraltar instead of sausages

[Awol]

6 minutes ago, LondonLax said:

How could Spain's veto be removed?

UK refuses to engage in substantive negotiations in the current format until EU drop demand that the UK and Spain must strike a bilateral agreement vis applicability of the UK's new deal to Gibraltar. 

Then we'll see if EU think indulging Spain is worth the cost. 

[blandy]

Just now, Awol said:

UK refuses to engage in substantive negotiations in the current format until EU drop demand that the UK and Spain must strike a bilateral agreement vis applicability of the UK's new deal to Gibraltar. 

Then we'll see if EU think indulging Spain is worth the cost. 

You mean, like point gun at our own head and threaten to pull the trigger if we don't get what we want over Gib?

mental.

[ml1dch]

29 minutes ago, Awol said:

For whatever reason you're clearly determined not to acknowledge the fact the EU is trying to treat Gibraltar as an issue apart from the main negotiation with the UK. 

If you're going to deny the actual facts of the situation there isn't much else to say.

It is an issue. How taxation and free movement is treated in Gibraltar is going to have an impact that directly impacts the surrounding Spanish economy in a way that the main negotiation doesn't. So you can postulate about us walking away from negotiations all you like, but it is an issue that needs to be addressed, like thousands of others.

So I'll just repeat back at yoy your dopey "if you're going to ignore the facts " nonsense.

Frankly I'm surprised that you're getting so flappy about the EU trying to get the most out of this for the remaining members. Surely you didn't expect anything different to happen?

 

[Awol]

7 minutes ago, blandy said:

The UK could refuse to negotiate on trade, though apart from a very few right wing mentalists, no one from any perspective wants that - the UK is desperate for a trade deal, UK Plc is desperate,. What sort of wingnut  would refuse to negotiate because they refuse to accept a fact? 

The same EU Parliament supported draft negotiation guidelines state no discussion on trade until the financial settlement agreed.

So, no compromise on removing this Spanish nonsense about Gib, then no discussion over how much money they want us to hand over. 

Again you seem to think we just meekly sit back and take whatever crap is thrown at us no questions asked. If Davis takes that view he shouldn't have the job. 

 

[blandy]

6 minutes ago, tonyh29 said:

 disruption around Gibraltar always seems to occur when the Spanish government needs a distraction from its own problems ...Gibraltar is a thriving territory near one of one of the poorest regions in Spain and provides vital jobs and income to its Spain  ... Spain needs a deal with the Uk over Gibraltar , its veto and subsequent sabre rattling from the likes of Howard is just part of the distraction

it's currently playing out like an episode of Yes Minister , only it's Gibraltar instead of sausages

Yeah, I think there's a lot of truth in that.

Spain's wanted 2 things for a long time - they want Gib "back", but that's as you say a distraction thing, I don't think they really think or believe it'll happen any timne soon.

The other thing they want is that Gib is due to it's low business taxes a bit of an offshore haven which they think draws business away from Spain - so they want Gib to play fair (as they see it) and to stop being (in their view) a bit of a rogue tax haven. The rest of the EU tends to agree with them (while not being all that bothered, really). This clause is pretty much a reflection of that situation, I think. It's not like anyone in the UK didn't know that Gib is a bit of an issue for Spain.

The people (politicians) on the UK side of the negotiations appear to be incompetent arsewits.

 

 

[Awol]

5 minutes ago, ml1dch said:

It is an issue. How taxation and free movement is treated in Gibraltar is going to have an impact that directly impacts the surrounding Spanish economy in a way that the main negotiation doesn't. So you can postulate about us walking away from negotiations all you like, but it is an issue that needs to be addressed, like thousands of others.

So I'll just repeat back at yoy your dopey "if you're going to ignore the facts " nonsense.

Frankly I'm surprised that you're getting so flappy about the EU trying to get the most out of this for the remaining members. Surely you didn't expect anything different to happen?

 

Okay so you're accepting that you were wrong about it not being a separate issue, that's a start. 

I'm not flappy at all, but unsurprised Remainers don't expect (or apparently want) the UK to fight for its own interests just as hard as the EU will. 

[Risso]

1 minute ago, blandy said:

Yeah, I think there's a lot of truth in that.

Spain's wanted 2 things for a long time - they want Gib "back", but that's as you say a distraction thing, I don't think they really think or believe it'll happen any timne soon.

The other thing they want is that Gib is due to it's low business taxes a bit of an offshore haven which they think draws business away from Spain - so they want Gib to play fair (as they see it) and to stop being (in their view) a bit of a rogue tax haven. The rest of the EU tends to agree with them (while not being all that bothered, really). This clause is pretty much a reflection of that situation, I think. It's not like anyone in the UK didn't know that Gib is a bit of an issue for Spain.

The people (politicians) on the UK side of the negotiations appear to be incompetent arsewits.

 

 

There are no shortage of "tax havens" in and around the EU.  Gibraltar isn't taking business away from Spain, any more than any other offshore centre is.  Any business going through Gib that isn't viable after the Brexit deal, will just go through Malta instead.

[Awol]

12 minutes ago, blandy said:

You mean, like point gun at our own head and threaten to pull the trigger if we don't get what we want over Gib?

mental.

So to extrapolate your point of view it's pretty much that the UK must do whatever the EU wants - with a decent bow and doffed cap while we're about it.

stroll on...

 

[ml1dch]

Just now, Awol said:

Okay so you're accepting that you were wrong about it not being a separate issue, that's a start. 

I'm not flappy at all, but unsurprised Remainers don't expect (or apparently want) the UK to fight for its own interests just as hard as the EU will. 

On point one, I've repeatedly said that it's one of thousands of issues that will be negotiated. I'm not sure where I've deviated from that.

On point two, I expect that we'll try, and I hope that we do. I also fully expect us to make a complete pig's ear out of it and blame everyone else for it.

It's not the last nine months points in any other direction, is it?

[Risso]

2 minutes ago, Awol said:

Okay so you're accepting that you were wrong about it not being a separate issue, that's a start. 

I'm not flappy at all, but unsurprised Remainers don't expect (or apparently want) the UK to fight for its own interests just as hard as the EU will. 

Indeed, and we're not the powerless little nobody on our uppers that people think.  They want the thick end of £60bn AND to keep selling us the vast amount of stuff that sell on an annual basis.  People need to stop thinking its all one way.  The reality of the situation for both parties will hopefully kick in once the real negotiating starts.