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

[Awol]

30 minutes ago, Enda said:

Your suggestion was that the UK don't engage in negotiations until the EU removes reference to a veto that Spain will retain anyway... cool, let's not get into that again.

Ok I don't think you do get it so I will say it again.

The EU is proposing Spain gets a double veto. One over the main negotiation with the UK and a second on the applicability of the final deal to Gibraltar, discussed bilaterally with the UK.

It's the second one that needs to go, recognising the indivisibilty of the UK's membership which includes Gibraltar.

I hope that's clearer.

[blandy]

49 minutes ago, TrentVilla said:

Thanks.

It certainly doesn't say what it was proported to have said.

I can access the FT site linked above and it gives Junkers view that commitments we'll be walking away from when we leave the EU have to be scientifically calculated to get a figure for the bill.

Quote

Jean-Claude Juncker, president of the European Commission, has said Britain’s EU exit bill will have to be “calculated scientifically” as the bloc gears up start official Brexit negotiations next month.

Speaking to the BBC on the eve of this weekend’s 60th anniversary of the EU’s founding Treaty of Rome, he said the EU would not seek to punish the UK or impose sanctions, noting that he is “not in a hostile mood”, but a bill will have to be paid. He said the amount would be “around” £50bn.

“There will be no sanctions no punishment. Nothing of that kind. But Britain has to know – and I suppose that the government does know it – we have to calculate scientifically what the British commitments were and then the bill has to be paid.”

i.e. the confusiuon between posters is maybe over "commitments"  - Chindie and politicians talking about we will have no commitments to the EU once we've left (having paid a bill) and others thinking about not having commitments to pay money we owe because we're leaving, but before we leave.

you're welcome.

Oh, isn't it? I tried, at least

 

[Awol]

Still it's good to know they won't impose sanctions on us for rescinding our voluntary membership of a political club.  

What an absolute deluded tube that old drunkard is to even mention the word. 

[Risso]

It's going to be interesting, and not nearly as one sided as your average Remainer thinks.  If that £60bn is based on anything like reality, it isn't going to pay itself.

[Enda]

30 minutes ago, Awol said:

Ok I don't think you do get it so I will say it again.

The EU is proposing Spain gets a double veto. One over the main negotiation with the UK and a second on the applicability of the final deal to Gibraltar, discussed bilaterally with the UK.

It's the second one that needs to go, recognising the indivisibilty of the UK's membership which includes Gibraltar.

I hope that's clearer.

You're upset about Spain's handgun, but have no problem with their tanks. Clear as day.

[Awol]

23 minutes ago, Enda said:

You're upset about Spain's handgun, but have no problem with their tanks. Clear as day.

A handgun is easier to use than a tank - much less likely to upset the neighbours 

[blandy]

58 minutes ago, Risso said:

If that £60bn is based on anything like reality, it isn't going to pay itself.

Agreed. You wonder if there aren't an awful lot of assets which the UK people might (try and) claim as counter weights - the value of land or buildings or money in bank accounts etc. It'll probably all end up in some legal court, somewhere.

[blandy]

1 hour ago, Awol said:

It's going to be ugly and bad tempered but there is no reason to think we can't get a decent result in the end. 

I think the first part is right, because of the reasons I've already mentioned, and I think the second is only possible if the first doesn't happen. I think negotiating in a friendly but clear and firm manner is likely to benefit all sides and threats to walk away/impose huge bills/etc. will end up badly.

I'm concerned that by and large "our lot" are making a lot of noise about all kinds of stuff, while being ill prepared to actually enter detailed discussions and negotiations.

[TrentVilla]

28 minutes ago, Awol said:

A handgun is easier to use than a tank - much less likely to upset the neighbours 

Unless you are Oscar Pistorius

[Chindie]

We've been prepped to accept no deal.

[blandy]

6 minutes ago, Chindie said:

We've been prepped to accept no deal.

Who's the "we" Chindie? I know a few nobbers have said they want no deal - UKIP clowns and a few nutty tories, but most/all of the more reasoned folk and media (on both sides of the in/out thing) have said it would be a flipping nightmare for the UK and its trade and services. For me that's not "prepping" that's a few people dreaming of Mermaids and Unicorns and everyone else knowing it's a terrible idea.

[Chindie]

There's been a few comments from the government about no deal not being a disaster. I expect that to continue.

Of course it would be a disaster. As said i recently saw some newer prediction figures that gave no deal outcomes as horrendous (down from 'bad' and 'not good' for the other options). No deal is unacceptable. But the government has had a few comments that make it seem any way alright.

[TrentVilla]

17 minutes ago, Chindie said:

There's been a few comments from the government about no deal not being a disaster. I expect that to continue.

Of course it would be a disaster. As said i recently saw some newer prediction figures that gave no deal outcomes as horrendous (down from 'bad' and 'not good' for the other options). No deal is unacceptable. But the government has had a few comments that make it seem any way alright.

What do you expect them to say? They are entering into negotiations, they have to say that.

[Enda]

The nationalistic frenzy that the UK has worked itself into will make "no deal" more likely.

Here's a sketch of what I think everyone here would agree would be a reasonable deal: (i) UK to pay the amount that they've previously committed to the EU; (ii) remain in the customs union; (iii) retain financial passporting rights under ECB financial rules; and (iv) get a FTA with free movement of labour (not people, labour).

How's the Mail going to spin that? "EU rip off; a hindrance to the exciting new trade deals with Cambodia; bloody European bureaucracy for the banks; and loss of sovereignty".

There are plenty of naive Brexiteers, the extent of whose thought processes so far have been "sovereignty, blue passports, and little Union Jacks." They will rather inflict economic self-harm than accept a fair compromise. As the EU will inevitably demand some oversight over any trading agreement, there's not going to be a deal that will please these hardline/naive Brexiteers. Thus for for a deal that actually suits both the EU and the UK to pass, you will need forward-thinking politicians who will take the electoral thumping that will follow. Will Theresa and Boris be those forward-thinking politicians? Maybe, but I'm starting to doubt it.

[Chindie]

Just now, TrentVilla said:

What do you expect them to say? They are entering into negotiations, they have to say that.

Nothing.

There's no secrets in this negotiation. Everyone at the table knows no deal is awful. They aren't buying a car and low balling with a few hundred extra in their back pocket. The EU has the same figures we do, they know the impact either way. 

IMO talking about no deal is making it palatable. Either to temper the weak deal we get ('We were willing to take no deal if needs be but this deal is hard won and good for the UK') or, if they really do put silly red lines in or the lunatic elements of the Tories hold sway over a feeble Government (or that Government wants to feather it's ego playing hardball), it's to make out it's no bad thing.

The talk is largely not for the benefit of the negotiating table IMO. It's marketing, propaganda.

[Awol]

@Enda What you're pitching is the now titled 'soft Brexit' or 'non-Brexit' as it should really be called. 

ECJ oversight means no judicial independence - don't take back control of our laws.

Customs Union means no ability to make our own trade deals - You say Cambodia and Brexiteers say 85% of the global economy. 

Free movement of Labour - don't take back control of immigration.

Bacisally you could have just said "I've got a plan boys, forget Brexit" and saved yourself the rest of the post.

 

[Enda]

Just now, Awol said:

Bacisally you could have just said "I've got a plan boys, forget Brexit" and saved yourself the rest of the post.

Thanks for proving my point.

[villaglint]

It's going to be a loooong two years isn't it. 

Would I be right to think that the reality will be blurry and both sides will claim they were right after all? 

 

[Awol]

2 minutes ago, Enda said:

Thanks for proving my point.

 

[Genie]

39 minutes ago, villaglint said:

It's going to be a loooong two years isn't it. 

Would I be right to think that the reality will be blurry and both sides will claim they were right after all? 

 

Lots of posturing for 23 months then lots of action for the last 4 weeks.