General Election 2017

[darrenm]

15 minutes ago, Risso said:

It was a question, hence the question mark. And "gathering pace" seems to mean the same fantasist being retweeted. 

The use of the superfluous 'Really?' makes it a supposition. It means that's what you already assume.

I'm afraid I don't understand your latter sentence.

[mockingbird_franklin]

I don't believe May is or will be under investigation for unethical behavior or failure to not declare a conflict of interest, not in the slightest, even if she had indeed done such things I still wouldn't expect one, but that is a comment about something other than Ms Robotnic, is she capable of doing these things?, I wouldn't be surprised in the least if it was found out she indeed had, After all it will be described as a mere oversight, the politicians magical excuse of preference 

[villaglint]

I can't find the Brexit thread for some reason but it's relevant here I think.

Has anyone seen the FAZ report on the May-Juncker dinner. Obviously leaked by EU side but it's pretty damning of the continuing delusions on our side. Really feel this should be front and centre in the General Election but something tells me it won't be widely reported by our media. 

[Risso]

42 minutes ago, darrenm said:

The use of the superfluous 'Really?' makes it a supposition. It means that's what you already assume.

I'm afraid I don't understand your latter sentence.

The fact that you posted it at all, and then added something about it gathering pace, would seem to imply that you're giving it some credence, and that other people are as well.  The story is quite clearly, utter rubbish.

[Xann]

1 hour ago, villaglint said:

I can't find the Brexit thread for some reason but it's relevant here I think.

Has anyone seen the FAZ report on the May-Juncker dinner. Obviously leaked by EU side but it's pretty damning of the continuing delusions on our side. Really feel this should be front and centre in the General Election but something tells me it won't be widely reported by our media. 

The Express

[Awol]

1 hour ago, villaglint said:

I can't find the Brexit thread for some reason but it's relevant here I think.

Has anyone seen the FAZ report on the May-Juncker dinner. Obviously leaked by EU side but it's pretty damning of the continuing delusions on our side. Really feel this should be front and centre in the General Election but something tells me it won't be widely reported by our media. 

Yes and it's hilarious.

Unnamed sources in the EU Commission do a hit piece on May and Davis via the German media, Remain supporting UK journos suspend their critical thinking, lap it up word for word then regurgitate it as the gospel truth. 

A pause for thought might remind people of the information operations the Commission ran against Greece throughout their negotiations, a tactic they clearly plan to repeat. 

Remember Juncker's memorable line, "when the going gets tough, we lie."

Its embarrassing how slavishly UK media buy blatant propaganda from the EU, when they would forensically dissect similar unsourced 'briefings' from within the UK. 

Its not a surprise that Remainers lap it up though, they are the intended target and the EU knows its audience. 

Edit: What IS delusional is the idea of the UK signing up to some £50B exit bill without a trade deal being agreed in parallel. 

The EU side know this, which suggests they actually have no interest in doing any kind of deal. The 'example' they've clearly stated they wish to make of the UK to deter anti-EU movements in the remaining 27.

'Unity through fear'. Catchy slogan. 

Edited May 1, 2017 by Awol

[Risso]

6 minutes ago, Awol said:

Yes and it's hilarious.

Unnamed sources in the EU Commission do a hit piece on May and Davis via the German media, Remain supporting UK journos suspend their critical thinking, lap it up word for word then regurgitate it as the gospel truth. 

A pause for thought might remind people of the information operations the Commission ran against Greece throughout their negotiations, a tactic they clearly plan to repeat. 

Remember Juncker's memorable line, "when the going gets tough, we lie."

Its embarrassing how slavishly UK media buy blatant propaganda from the EU, when they would forensically dissect similar unsourced 'briefings' from within the UK. 

Its not a surprise that Remainers lap it up though, they are the intended target and the EU knows its audience. 

Edit: What IS delusional is the idea of the UK signing up to some £50B exit bill without a trade deal being agreed in parallel. 

The EU side know this, which suggests they actually have no interest in doing any kind of deal. The 'example' they've clearly stated they wish to make of the UK to deter anti-EU movements in the remaining 27.

'Unity through fear'. Catchy slogan. 

 

Agreed.  It was the same the other day with the huge front page from The Times stating that the US was going to prioritise the EU ahead of the UK in trade deals.  The source of this information warranting almost the entire front page and all of the third page?  An unnamed source "close to the White House".

[Xann]

9 minutes ago, Awol said:

Remember Juncker's memorable line, "when the going gets tough, we lie."

Was it on the side of a bus though?

[Awol]

4 minutes ago, Xann said:

Was it on the side of a bus though?

No, it appears to runs through them all like Brighton rock.

[villaglint]

TBF I agree it is a hit job I don't think anyone would argue that this is extremely one sided. I think delusions are pretty strong on both sides which really just serves to show how entrenched these opposing views are. The one thing that isn't delusional is reality. 

Personally I am sad because I feel our relationship could have been so much more positive.  

[Amsterdam_Neil_D]

36 minutes ago, Awol said:

continuing delusions on our side

Nothing about the EU been delusional though,  they have never done a deal like this,  they are swanning about giving it the big one and acting like they know what they are doing as well.  They don't and all the little meetings in the EU mean nothing,  so you sign something in 4 minutes.  

I actually think the EU are more scared than the UK currently,  the little leaks and comments from Junker have a tiny bit of desperation within.  I have a feeling that,  the UK has something up it's sleeve in terms of leaving the EU (I hope I am right but it's just a guess by various peoples actions and comments).  May does not come across as very worried to me for a start.  There was need need for them to bring up Ireland for example, not at this stage.

We could just unify Ireland and make it all UK and remove the border completely  

Edited May 1, 2017 by Amsterdam_Neil_D

[meregreen]

4 minutes ago, Amsterdam_Neil_D said:

Nothing about the EU been delusional though,  they have never done a deal like this,  they are swanning about giving it the big one and acting like they know what they are doing as well.  They don't and all the little meetings in the EU mean nothing,  so you sign something in 4 minutes.  

I actually think the EU are more scared than the UK currently,  the little leaks and comments from Junker have a tiny bit of desperation within.  I have until I am proved wrong think the UK has something up it's sleeve in terms of leaving the EU (I hope I am right but it's just a guess by various peoples actions and comments).  May does not come across as very worried to me for a start.  

I think they know what they're doing more than we do.They really need us a lot less than we need them. The only thing up Mays sleeve is a well used hanky.Frankly the more I see of her and her robotic answers, the more out of her depth she looks. If she's not worried, she bloody well ought to be, only a fool wouldn't be worried for this country's future.

[Amsterdam_Neil_D]

3 minutes ago, meregreen said:

They really need us a lot less than we need them

This is very important.  Germany for example are not going to be happy if it all goes wrong,  100 Billion a year they get from the UK for Cars and the like.

I truly believe there will be a deal made and a fair one for all.  The problem is that May,  Cameron or any of that lot have to protect what is most important to them first,  that is her party and peers.  

[Xann]

17 minutes ago, Risso said:

Agreed.  It was the same the other day with the huge front page from The Times stating that the US was going to prioritise the EU ahead of the UK in trade deals.  The source of this information warranting almost the entire front page and all of the third page?  An unnamed source "close to the White House".

That was quite funny, the Sun also had a bit of a wobble around the same time.

Very out of character.

It makes sense when you factor in Murdoch requiring official approval for his complete take over of Sky.

It's not about Europe, that damage isn't going to be undone by a few headlines in isolation. It's Rupert threatening to play up if he doesn't get his way.

[Awol]

24 minutes ago, villaglint said:

TBF I agree it is a hit job I don't think anyone would argue that this is extremely one sided. I think delusions are pretty strong on both sides which really just serves to show how entrenched these opposing views are. The one thing that isn't delusional is reality. 

Personally I am sad because I feel our relationship could have been so much more positive.  

I'm with you on the last paragraph for sure and once we get over the actual business of leaving I think it will be. Time is a great healer etc.

IMO the EU was all set to fight over the FoM and writ of the ECJ thinking UK would want to remain in the single market. May rejecting that up front (the only way to control migration AND reorientate trade relations to growing economies) has removed the whip hand Brussels would have held to ensure a 'hook' and degree of ongoing leverage over the UK. 

They've had to quickly find another stick to beat us with hence the 'exit bill', which interestingly has no foundation in law according to the HoL Committee that looked into it.

The divorce analogy plays in to this issue but it's not a divorce, the U.K. is simply giving up membership of an organization. Scotland for example would be a divorce as it involves breaking up a legally constituted State.

Bottom line the EU was expecting to dictate the process but the U.K. is under no obligation to accept it. They need our money but want it on their terms, which isn't going to happen.

FWIW I think we'll agree to pay a substantial amount as long as no final agreement is made until the trade aspect is confirmed.

That's where it's likely to come unstuck as the EU feels it needs to be seen as the 'winner' of the negotiation to intimidate other member States. No UK Gov in its right mind will agree to pay the so called bill in the hope of maybe getting a trade deal X years hence. 

Both sides have set out their maximalist negotiating positions, the answer - if one exists - will be somewhere in the middle. 

[snowychap]

22 minutes ago, Awol said:

which interestingly has no foundation in law according to the HoL Committee that looked into it

That isn't quite correct.

What they said in their conclusion at the end of the chapter on the UK's legal obligations was:

Quote

135. On the basis of the legal opinions we have considered we conclude that, as a matter of EU law, Article 50 TEU allows the UK to leave the EU without being liable for outstanding financial obligations under the EU budget and related financial instruments, unless a withdrawal agreement is concluded which resolves this issue.

136. Individual EU Member States may seek to bring a case against the UK for the payments of outstanding liabilities under principles of public international law, but international law is slow to litigate and hard to enforce. In addition, it is questionable whether an international court or tribunal could have jurisdiction.

link to publication

And in their intro:

Quote

4. While the legal advice we have received differed, the stronger argument suggests that the UK will not be strictly obliged, as a matter of law, to render any payments at all after leaving.

 

[blandy]

1 hour ago, Awol said:

Remain supporting UK journos suspend their critical thinking, lap it up word for word ....

In the telegraph, express, mail etc. ?

yes it's a view from one angle, but hearing that is a good thing. If all we ever heard from was the Maydroid, we'd have nothing. I linked to the ft in depth analysis of the EU stance a few days ago. This story backs that up. Also, the original German paper article is reported quite factually, without spin. 

[Awol]

14 minutes ago, snowychap said:

That isn't quite correct.

What they said in their conclusion at the end of the chapter on the UK's legal obligations was:

And in their intro:

 

Lawyers in 'nuance' shocker  

Basically the weight of opinion is behind not owing them anything and should they dispute that there is no means of legal enforcement - so long as we're out from under ECJ jurisdiction. 

So any payment is entirely at the UK's discretion, not a bad place to be at the beginning of the negotiation. 

[Awol]

1 minute ago, blandy said:

In the telegraph, express, mail etc. ?

yes it's a view from one angle, but hearing that is a good thing. If all we ever heard from was the Maydroid, we'd have nothing. I linked to the ft in depth analysis of the EU stance a few days ago. This story backs that up. Also, the original German paper article is reported quite factually, without spin. 

Serious? They may have faithfully reported the spin given to them by the Commission, but it's still spin from the Commission!! 

As for the FT they just want Brexit to go away and are still smarting that we rejected the € in defiance of their editorial judgement. Along with the Economist they may as well be printed in Brussels - although the pink pages are usefully absorbent. 

[blandy]

2 minutes ago, Awol said:

Serious? They may have faithfully reported the spin given to them by the Commission, but it's still spin from the Commission!! 

As for the FT they just want Brexit to go away and are still smarting that we rejected the € in defiance of their editorial judgement. Along with the Economist they may as well be printed in Brussels - although the pink pages are usefully absorbent. 

If you want to take the view that every article posted in a paper is "spin" then that's fine. If you want to take the view that every article published in the FT is a bitter, remainy, propaganda piece, that's also fine.

I want to try and understand information and to pick verifiable or supportable analysis from cruft.

The German article says a few things of interest, to me at least.

The EU thinks the negotiation is more likely to fail than succeed. The EU is (currently) very united on their approach and plan - 4 minutes to agree the draft framework, with one change in priority between two aspects being the only tweak. The Gibraltar thing, the Ireland thing - all these are in the "rules" for the negotiation. They decide them, we don't. The money is the first obstacle. The EU and the UK have completely different takes on it. The EU insist "sort money out, then do the rest" the UK is "we owe nothing" and the EU responds "there will be no deal, then". The EU anticipates the UK will row back on its (May's) stance.

Aside from the posturing, (excluding the nutters on either side) everyone knows a soft deal is the best for both sides. It's interesting that it's already, before negotiations even started, turned into a bit of a slanging match (from both sides). Plus, the leaking of these stories will clearly continue all the way through. It's interesting that the mechanics of the talks that the UK want has been rejected - the UK wanting 4 day blocks of talks, in camera and the EU saying , no - there will be minuted talks and not in these monthly 4 days blocks, but as we decide.

So as part of a narrative to follow the events, I think that though it's only one side's take on things, it is informative, where you can pick out the detail from the newspaper/leaker's angle.