Chindie Posted September 22, 2017 VT Supporter Share Posted September 22, 2017 This speech is dreadful, empty rhetoric as expected. The EU will be sat their shaking it's head. And probably exasperated that we appear to think it's partly their responsibility to make this work. No, no it isn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted September 22, 2017 VT Supporter Share Posted September 22, 2017 This is painful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted September 22, 2017 VT Supporter Share Posted September 22, 2017 Hard Brexit it is ladies and gents. As if we ever thought different. Morons. **** imbeciles. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ml1dch Posted September 22, 2017 Share Posted September 22, 2017 No physical border controls in Ireland apparently. I wonder which one of EEA membership or Irish reunification we're going for? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted September 22, 2017 Share Posted September 22, 2017 Vile woman. Awful leader. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted September 22, 2017 VT Supporter Share Posted September 22, 2017 Well, no response from the EU. Presumably Barnier hasn't composed himself and got back on his chair yet. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted September 22, 2017 Share Posted September 22, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, Chindie said: This speech is dreadful, empty rhetoric as expected. The EU will be sat their shaking it's head. And probably exasperated that we appear to think it's partly their responsibility to make this work. No, no it isn't. I see she managed to shoehorn in a 'control the internet' comment within a couple of minutes. I gave up about twenty minutes in when she was still waffling on with 'as I said in my Lancaster House speech' and crapping on in vacuous terms about closest of friends and allies. Then claiming that they've made concrete progress on a number of things, that all the citizen stuff is not a problem and no EU citizen should worry about the government changing rules, the Home Office implementing them as they see fit or the Home Secretary being useless or ignoring the judges and that everything was about being creative. I gather I didn't miss much. I know she's suggesting a two year transitional period but to what end? Is it just another two years to not really have an idea about what we want when we leave - other than something 'creative'? The bit that I actually watched made me embarrassed that she's our PM. The bit that I missed but I've read about just has me asking, "What the hell do you want, then, and when are you going to tell us or the EU?" Edit: And whichever cockwomble thought it appropriate to reuse the old 'leaving the European Union, but we're not leaving Europe' line deserves to be shot. Edited September 22, 2017 by snowychap 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted September 22, 2017 Share Posted September 22, 2017 (edited) Statement by Michel Barnier Quote Brussels, 22 September 2017 In her speech in Florence, Prime Minister Theresa May has expressed a constructive spirit which is also the spirit of the European Union during this unique negotiation. The speech shows a willingness to move forward, as time is of the essence. We need to reach an agreement by autumn 2018 on the conditions of the United Kingdom's orderly withdrawal from the European Union. The UK will become a third country on 30 March 2019. Our priority is to protect the rights of citizens. EU27 citizens in the United Kingdom must have the same rights as British citizens today in the European Union. These rights must be implemented effectively and safeguarded in the same way in the United Kingdom as in the European Union, as recalled by the European Council and European Parliament. Prime Minister May's statements are a step forward but they must now be translated into a precise negotiating position of the UK government. With regard to Ireland, the United Kingdom is the co-guarantor of the Good Friday Agreement. Today's speech does not clarify how the UK intends to honour its special responsibility for the consequences of its withdrawal for Ireland. Our objective is to preserve the Good Friday Agreement in all its dimensions, as well as the integrity of the Single Market and the Customs Union. The United Kingdom recognises that no Member State will have to pay more or receive less because of Brexit. We stand ready to discuss the concrete implications of this pledge. We shall assess, on the basis of the commitments taken by the 28 Member States, whether this assurance covers all commitments made by the United Kingdom as a Member State of the European Union. Today, for the first time, the United Kingdom government has requested to continue to benefit from access to the Single Market, on current terms, and to continue to benefit from existing cooperation in security. This is for a limited period of up to two years, beyond its withdrawal date, and therefore beyond its departure from the EU institutions. If the European Union so wishes, this new request could be taken into account by the EU and examined in light of the European Council stated in its guidelines of 29 April 2017: "Should a time-limited prolongation of Union acquis be considered, this would require existing Union regulatory, budgetary, supervisory, judiciary and enforcement instruments and structures to apply." The sooner we reach an agreement on the principles of the orderly withdrawal in the different areas – and on the conditions of a possible transition period requested by the United Kingdom – the sooner we will be ready to engage in a constructive discussion on our future relationship. The EU shares the goal of establishing an ambitious partnership for the future. The fact that the government of the United Kingdom recognises that leaving the European Union means that it cannot keep all the benefits of membership with fewer obligations than the other Member States is welcome. In any case, the future relationship will need to be based on a balance of rights and obligations. It will need to respect the integrity of the Union's legal order and the autonomy of its decision-making. The EU will continue to insist on sufficient progress in the key areas of the orderly withdrawal of the United Kingdom before opening discussions on the future relationship. Agreeing on the essential principles in these areas will create the trust that is needed for us to build a future relationship together. David Davis and I will meet in Brussels next Monday to begin the fourth round of the negotiations. As always, we are preparing the upcoming round with the 27 Member States and the European Parliament. On Monday I will have a discussion with the European Parliament in its Brexit Steering Group, as well as with all Member States in the General Affairs Council. We look forward to the United Kingdom's negotiators explaining the concrete implications of Prime Minister Theresa May's speech. Our ambition is to find a rapid agreement on the conditions of the United Kingdom's orderly withdrawal, as well as on a possible transition period. We look forward to the United Kingdom's negotiators explaining the concrete implications of Prime Minister Theresa May's speech. Edited September 22, 2017 by snowychap Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rodders Posted September 22, 2017 Share Posted September 22, 2017 reading back the questions after: Q: What do you say to those people who think we should have left already, and stopped paying the EU? They have a right to feel pissed off, don’t they? Who the **** asked that question? Why, oh why are pedestals being given to criminally **** stupid people? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted September 22, 2017 VT Supporter Share Posted September 22, 2017 Apparently the Heil asked that question. She also completely avoided a couple of pertinent questions as per. Hopeless. At least the lunatics will have their ire raised, should raise a chuckle from the impotent bluster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted September 22, 2017 Share Posted September 22, 2017 14 minutes ago, Rodders said: Who the **** asked that question? Why, oh why are pedestals being given to criminally **** stupid people? I thought for a second that was May's actual response been a long day ... 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rodders Posted September 22, 2017 Share Posted September 22, 2017 My respect for her would have skyrocketed if she'd said that. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted September 22, 2017 Moderator Share Posted September 22, 2017 There seems to be an almost ideological difference in the importance of elements up for debate - with the EU focused on protection of rights for citizens as a priority and the UK government focused on access to trade markets - I think inherently, the EU still thinks of itself as a socio-political organisation, intent on social change with economy as one of the arms of that change - it's very possible to argue that it's not, that it's been eaten from the inside by corporate lobbyists and become a sort of shallow, corporate lead econo-political organisation - but I think it still believes that it's the former. That's why the EU is still sometimes capable of doing something reasonable, like rejecting TTiP - it's why the conservative party and millionaire banker Nigel Farage wanted us out in the first place; the lingering spectre of a conscience. It makes it very difficult for negotiations to work when the EU keeps talking about people to groups that represent banks - I think we're seeing some of that, along with the sprinkling of fairy dust that seems to permeate the UK team. Anyway, the response seems to be "Errr, yeah, thanks for that....shall we go back to trying to negotiate?" 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ml1dch Posted September 22, 2017 Share Posted September 22, 2017 On 16/09/2017 at 09:59, ml1dch said: Looks like May's speech in Florence on Thursday is going to be the marker for how this is going to play out. Doubling down on the current nonsense - in April 2019 the ports and within a couple of weeks, the rest of the country will be a chaotic mess. Pulling back a bit and looking at remaining in the EEA - things will probably be fine. Or, it could just be more empty rhetoric to tide her over until conference, with more waffle than a Liege café. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ml1dch Posted September 22, 2017 Share Posted September 22, 2017 47 minutes ago, snowychap said: Barnier: "The sooner we reach an agreement on the principles of the orderly withdrawal in the different areas – and on the conditions of a possible transition period requested by the United Kingdom – the sooner we will be ready to engage in a constructive discussion on our future relationship" In other words "all the stuff we've been saying for six months is still the same as before". The useful lifespan of May's speech and the "offer" it was supposed to contain lasted about as long as it will have taken her to get back to the airport. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted September 22, 2017 Share Posted September 22, 2017 (edited) 13 minutes ago, ml1dch said: Quote Barnier: "The sooner we reach an agreement on the principles of the orderly withdrawal in the different areas – and on the conditions of a possible transition period requested by the United Kingdom – the sooner we will be ready to engage in a constructive discussion on our future relationship" In other words "all the stuff we've been saying for six months is still the same as before". The useful lifespan of May's speech and the "offer" it was supposed to contain lasted about as long as it will have taken her to get back to the airport. Isn't it also saying, "Before we get on to future relationships and all this 'creative' business, we've not only got to come to an agreement on the stuff we already knew about but also on this transitional period that you [Mrs May] now appear to have officially requested". Edited September 22, 2017 by snowychap Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ml1dch Posted September 22, 2017 Share Posted September 22, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, snowychap said: Isn't it also saying, "Before we get on to future relationships and all this 'creative' business, we've not only got to come to an agreement on the stuff we already knew about but also on this transitional period that you [Mrs May] now appear to have officially requested". True, but after all the lies we've seen from Davies and DFDM Liam Fox about "easy things to agree", that one genuinely should be. "We want a fairly open-ended transition, where we will continue to fund the EU, accept all the rules, abide by the current freedom of movement requirements but we'll give up our influence, our commissioner, our veto and our MEPs" I imagine they'll be quite happy with that arrangement to go on for as long as we want it. Edited September 22, 2017 by ml1dch 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted September 22, 2017 VT Supporter Share Posted September 22, 2017 I don't see how we can't realise the EU is not going to give us this mythical deal we keep hinting at. Today, between the completely empty rhetoric and waffle that formed the bulk of the waste of air May spouted, and nestled under the tiny moments of actual positions given, was this nudge and wink at a 'creative' solution, that wasn't Norway and wasn't Canada. The immediate reaction is 'what does creative really mean?' but then it's obvious. It's what the EU has told us all along, the cake and eating it choice. All the benefits of the market with none of the 'drawbacks'. We can not have that deal. That deal does not exist, and no amount of creativity will let it exist. It's fundamentally against what the EU represents. We can negotiate and beg and ultimately continue the pleading tone May had today and they will not give it to us. This is utterly utterly stupid. You'd need to be exceptionally stupid not to see just how much we need the market. No realistic amount of additional trade with India or Australia or the US or wherever else globally is going to outdo the fact that countries naturally trade with their nearest neighbours and that our economy has doubled down on that with the ease the market has given us. Yes that is a 2 way street and the EU27 rather like selling to us too, but the problem is... They've got 27 countries to readily trade with. Brexit is completely pants on head stupid. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
choffer Posted September 23, 2017 VT Supporter Share Posted September 23, 2017 Why Brexiteers hate experts: 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted September 23, 2017 Share Posted September 23, 2017 (edited) 24 minutes ago, choffer said: Why Brexiteers hate experts: I may be missing something but where does Mogg mention Brexit ? edit- reading a bit more on the web the BofE had downgraded forecasts so I guess Moggs reference to them answers the question for me Edited September 23, 2017 by tonyh29 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts