I can exclusively reveal that the Telegraph has unearthed only part of this scandal. It's worse than that: European Union citizens will be free to cross into UK from France as well. And indeed to fly in from anywhere in the world.
Not without passport checks. Anyone entering the UK via France can be turned back at the UK border. Not so with Ireland.
Sure. But they need a passport to get into Ireland. Just like a Cambodian or a Nigerian. Obviously EU citizens won't need a visa anyway, but in any case we already have in place a reciprocal arrangement with Ireland to recognise each other's visas.
There really is no problem here at all.
Quite.
If I'm an EU citizen and I fancy doing a bit of cash in hand work in London in 2025 (assuming all is done by then!) whilst awaiting something else to turn up (illegally), why am I going to think "I know I'll be crafty, fly to Dublin, where they'll let me in no questions at all, catch the bus to Belfast, and hop on a flight to Stansted, where at that point I'll have to show suitable photo ID and risk the airline (who will be told to look out for just this) refusing me". What then? Bit of cash in hand dishwashing in Ballymena? Well the latter's possible, but it's not going to keep me awake at night.
Seems a sensible compromise.
Or arrive on a 3 month tourist visa legally and work illegally anyway. A hundred plus non EU nations have visa free travel to the UK for tourism now - I don't see the practical difference. Perhaps we need to bear down on illegal workers doing cash in hand work and their employers?
Blimmin heck imagine the inflationary pressures that will arise should they fuck off back home. Or be thrown out. Or not be replaced when they have had their fun living in the UK.
I think wage inflation is not much affected by high employment levels in the globalised world, and not just in the UK. The jobs will either disappear to automation or be exported.
A self-making flat white extra hot?
There are already machines that do that sort of thing. The bar I was in last night had one - dial in your coffee choice and out pops your coffee. It even has a hopper for the coffee beans which it grinds as needed for each cup.
The results from such machines are always revolting.
The Bank of England still has at least one Klix drinks machine.
I can exclusively reveal that the Telegraph has unearthed only part of this scandal. It's worse than that: European Union citizens will be free to cross into UK from France as well. And indeed to fly in from anywhere in the world.
Not without passport checks. Anyone entering the UK via France can be turned back at the UK border. Not so with Ireland.
Sure. But they need a passport to get into Ireland. Just like a Cambodian or a Nigerian. Obviously EU citizens won't need a visa anyway, but in any case we already have in place a reciprocal arrangement with Ireland to recognise each other's visas.
There really is no problem here at all.
Quite.
If I'm an EU citizen and I fancy doing a bit of cash in hand work in London in 2025 (assuming all is done by then!) whilst awaiting something else to turn up (illegally), why am I going to think "I know I'll be crafty, fly to Dublin, where they'll let me in no questions at all, catch the bus to Belfast, and hop on a flight to Stansted, where at that point I'll have to show suitable photo ID and risk the airline (who will be told to look out for just this) refusing me". What then? Bit of cash in hand dishwashing in Ballymena? Well the latter's possible, but it's not going to keep me awake at night.
Seems a sensible compromise.
Be interesting to see the quotas applied to Ireland for future EU refugee intakes. Once they're there, they can walk into the UK under the government's proposals. Just like now, of course. No change at all. That's some control.
The UK approach seems to be to be putting any emphasis on future change onto the EU.
A hard Irish border ? We won't put it up.
Tariffs on EU goods arriving in the U.K. ? As before and we will pass them on - but UK tariffs could be less..
Banking on lack of inertia for change winning through.
If a post Brexit world is different the govt looks to be putting the ball into the EUs court - or perhaps saying you can cut your own throats with your own knife if you wish.
The EU doesn't seem to have a response yet other than suggesting it will race for the knife.
There's deeper point here.
I can see what the EU's tactics are in terms of negotiating in a timeframe from next week to the early 2020's. Get as much cash as we can, "protect" Ireland, keep the ECJ where we want it to be etc etc, and to achieve this you finger wag that none of the sweeties of free trade will be let out of the tin till you've agreed all this (even if by not discussing how many sweeties there are making it all a bit farcical as both strands are interlinked of course).
But what's the strategy? What do they want the UK to be vis a vis them in the period 2025 -2075?
Are they trying to brow beat us not to leave? (that's not going to go down well in much of the populous is it!) Are they trying to beat us up pour encourager les autres in the EU now? Do they want a friend, or a surly neighbour?
Just to chuck this in say they screwed us for £100bn, said the ECJ rules supreme forever, and you must take all EU migrants that we decide - why bother with NATO? Why would I want to defend this lot (quite the opposite)?.
Much of the reason we never really were comfortable stems from the thought Europe was "done to us" not something we were "part of". I fear they are in danger of adopting tactics that will lead to a poor strategic outcome all round.
I can exclusively reveal that the Telegraph has unearthed only part of this scandal. It's worse than that: European Union citizens will be free to cross into UK from France as well. And indeed to fly in from anywhere in the world.
Not without passport checks. Anyone entering the UK via France can be turned back at the UK border. Not so with Ireland.
Sure. But they need a passport to get into Ireland. Just like a Cambodian or a Nigerian. Obviously EU citizens won't need a visa anyway, but in any case we already have in place a reciprocal arrangement with Ireland to recognise each other's visas.
There really is no problem here at all.
Quite.
If I'm an EU citizen and I fancy doing a bit of cash in hand work in London in 2025 (assuming all is done by then!) whilst awaiting something else to turn up (illegally), why am I going to think "I know I'll be crafty, fly to Dublin, where they'll let me in no questions at all, catch the bus to Belfast, and hop on a flight to Stansted, where at that point I'll have to show suitable photo ID and risk the airline (who will be told to look out for just this) refusing me". What then? Bit of cash in hand dishwashing in Ballymena? Well the latter's possible, but it's not going to keep me awake at night.
Seems a sensible compromise.
Be interesting to see the quotas applied to Ireland for future EU refugee intakes. Once they're there, they can walk into the UK under the government's proposals. Just like now, of course. No change at all. That's some control.
No they could get as far as Larne and Belfast (illegally). They can't get to Stranraer or Liverpool any more than the Jungle inhabitants of Calais could. As I said, compromise.
I can exclusively reveal that the Telegraph has unearthed only part of this scandal. It's worse than that: European Union citizens will be free to cross into UK from France as well. And indeed to fly in from anywhere in the world.
Not without passport checks. Anyone entering the UK via France can be turned back at the UK border. Not so with Ireland.
Sure. But they need a passport to get into Ireland. Just like a Cambodian or a Nigerian. Obviously EU citizens won't need a visa anyway, but in any case we already have in place a reciprocal arrangement with Ireland to recognise each other's visas.
There really is no problem here at all.
Not for you or me, perhaps. But we were told that leaving the EU means taking back control of the UK border. The government has now said it doesn't want to.
We were also told that leaving the EU would mean less red tape and lower costs for business. Yesterday, the government told us that the opposite would, in fact, be true.
A pattern is emerging.
Control of borders meant control of immigration - yes, there is a big difference, but average joe doesn't care about the semantics. While the border will continue to be porous those crossing the border will not have the same residency or employment rights they enjoy now.
I can exclusively reveal that the Telegraph has unearthed only part of this scandal. It's worse than that: European Union citizens will be free to cross into UK from France as well. And indeed to fly in from anywhere in the world.
Not without passport checks. Anyone entering the UK via France can be turned back at the UK border. Not so with Ireland.
Sure. But they need a passport to get into Ireland. Just like a Cambodian or a Nigerian. Obviously EU citizens won't need a visa anyway, but in any case we already have in place a reciprocal arrangement with Ireland to recognise each other's visas.
There really is no problem here at all.
Quite.
If I'm an EU citizen and I fancy doing a bit of cash in hand work in London in 2025 (assuming all is done by then!) whilst awaiting something else to turn up (illegally), why am I going to think "I know I'll be crafty, fly to Dublin, where they'll let me in no questions at all, catch the bus to Belfast, and hop on a flight to Stansted, where at that point I'll have to show suitable photo ID and risk the airline (who will be told to look out for just this) refusing me". What then? Bit of cash in hand dishwashing in Ballymena? Well the latter's possible, but it's not going to keep me awake at night.
Seems a sensible compromise.
Or arrive on a 3 month tourist visa legally and work illegally anyway. A hundred plus non EU nations have visa free travel to the UK for tourism now - I don't see the practical difference. Perhaps we need to bear down on illegal workers doing cash in hand work and their employers?
What a bizarre thing to say. There is literally no one on this earth suggesting that the Common Travel Area arrangement needs to be changed at all, so why is there a need for discussions about how it should be 'protected'? It pre-dates the EU by many decades anyway.
The EU should focus on the real point, which is blindingly obvious: the Irish border issue is inseparable from the UK/EU trade deal and customs deal.
If this is self-evident, there should be no problem in agreeing it in black and white and then we can move swiftly on to discussing trade, including technical solutions if necessary.
We have agreed it in black and white, in multiple statements, and no doubt it will be reiterated again in the paper which is about to be published.
The EU27's position is looking more bizarre by the day.
I'm afraid to say you are morphing into a poor copy of Adrian Harper with your comedic hagiographies about the work of the Brexit department.
If we are to leave the EU without an agreement and all the economic harm that will entail over a sustained period of time, then the only hope of political survival the Tories have is to be able to blame it all on the EU.
Which may well be possible. 52% voted Leave because they thought the EU was a bad thing. Bad things happening as we leave could as easily confirm that view as undermine it, I would think.
Blimmin heck imagine the inflationary pressures that will arise should they fuck off back home. Or be thrown out. Or not be replaced when they have had their fun living in the UK.
I think wage inflation is not much affected by high employment levels in the globalised world, and not just in the UK. The jobs will either disappear to automation or be exported.
A self-making flat white extra hot?
You jest, but the historical link between high employment and wage inflation is at best much weaker than previously, and perhaps history.
I appreciate that. It comes down, however, to NAIRU (as famously imprecise as the Laffer curve), and what Mr Greenspan termed, the pool of available workers.
I thought econometrics had a good handle on NAIRU?
What a bizarre thing to say. There is literally no one on this earth suggesting that the Common Travel Area arrangement needs to be changed at all, so why is there a need for discussions about how it should be 'protected'? It pre-dates the EU by many decades anyway.
The EU should focus on the real point, which is blindingly obvious: the Irish border issue is inseparable from the UK/EU trade deal and customs deal.
If this is self-evident, there should be no problem in agreeing it in black and white and then we can move swiftly on to discussing trade, including technical solutions if necessary.
We have agreed it in black and white, in multiple statements, and no doubt it will be reiterated again in the paper which is about to be published.
The EU27's position is looking more bizarre by the day.
I'm afraid to say you are morphing into a poor copy of Adrian Harper with your comedic hagiographies about the work of the Brexit department.
If we are to leave the EU without an agreement and all the economic harm that will entail over a sustained period of time, then the only hope of political survival the Tories have is to be able to blame it all on the EU.
Which may well be possible. 52% voted Leave because they thought the EU was a bad thing. Bad things happening as we leave could as easily confirm that view as undermine it, I would think.
They voted Leave for many reasons, one of which was there would be no downsides to it.
I can exclusively reveal that the Telegraph has unearthed only part of this scandal. It's worse than that: European Union citizens will be free to cross into UK from France as well. And indeed to fly in from anywhere in the world.
Not without passport checks. Anyone entering the UK via France can be turned back at the UK border. Not so with Ireland.
Sure. But they need a passport to get into Ireland. Just like a Cambodian or a Nigerian. Obviously EU citizens won't need a visa anyway, but in any case we already have in place a reciprocal arrangement with Ireland to recognise each other's visas.
There really is no problem here at all.
Not for you or me, perhaps. But we were told that leaving the EU means taking back control of the UK border. The government has now said it doesn't want to.
We were also told that leaving the EU would mean less red tape and lower costs for business. Yesterday, the government told us that the opposite would, in fact, be true.
A pattern is emerging.
That leaving the EU would mean less red tape was a Leave campaign claim, not a government claim. They are of course not the same. There is no reason the government should ensure to honour or implement any Leave promise, any more than it should implement the SNP's manifesto.
The UK approach seems to be to be putting any emphasis on future change onto the EU.
A hard Irish border ? We won't put it up.
Tariffs on EU goods arriving in the U.K. ? As before and we will pass them on - but UK tariffs could be less..
Banking on lack of inertia for change winning through.
If a post Brexit world is different the govt looks to be putting the ball into the EUs court - or perhaps saying you can cut your own throats with your own knife if you wish.
The EU doesn't seem to have a response yet other than suggesting it will race for the knife.
There's deeper point here.
I can see what the EU's tactics are in terms of negotiating in a timeframe from next week to the early 2020's. Get as much cash as we can, "protect" Ireland, keep the ECJ where we want it to be etc etc, and to achieve this you finger wag that none of the sweeties of free trade will be let out of the tin till you've agreed all this (even if by not discussing how many sweeties there are making it all a bit farcical as both strands are interlinked of course).
But what's the strategy? What do they want the UK to be vis a vis them in the period 2025 -2075?
Are they trying to brow beat us not to leave? (that's not going to go down well in much of the populous is it!) Are they trying to beat us up pour encourager les autres in the EU now? Do they want a friend, or a surly neighbour?
Just to chuck this in say they screwed us for £100bn, said the ECJ rules supreme forever, and you must take all EU migrants that we decide - why bother with NATO? Why would I want to defend this lot (quite the opposite)?.
Much of the reason we never really were comfortable stems from the thought Europe was "done to us" not something we were "part of". I fear they are in danger of adopting tactics that will lead to a poor strategic outcome all round.
All of that is fair comment.
However, the point applies still more forcibly to Leavers: what relationship do they want with the EU? Tectonic Leavers are uncomfortable sharing the same planet with it and Hostile Leavers want to see the EU destroyed in the manner that the Romans destroyed Carthage, but what we might amusingly call Moderate Leavers have comprehensively failed to set out any kind of more constructive relationship with the EU that they are aiming for.
In the absence of anything constructive coming from this side of the English Channel, it's not particularly surprising (if unintelligent) that the EU has decided to be something that it does to Britain rather than work with.
After a deal could be cheaper in London than Paris.
Yum.
The government is essentially saying that the only deals we can do involving agriculture must comply with EU standards. I agree that is a good thing. Good luck with that US FTA, though.
I'm sure the contractors doing the Big Ben renovations will be delighted that it has to ring out whilst they're working on it.
334 steps up and down, 25 minutes up and out tools, 20 minutes down and packing away tools. So the renovations are going to take 4 (Probably) 5 times as long.
Of course the workmen will still be heading up and down the stairs - and they can't stay there as the noise level passes safety thresholds.
Which means the bill will be ~ 10 times (At a minimum) the size it otherwise would have been...
But what's the strategy? What do they want the UK to be vis a vis them in the period 2025 -2075?
Brexiteers used to brag that there would be no EU left to leave by the time we were done. They predicted the demise of the wrong union.
On what grounds? The SNP lost almost half its seats in June, the DUP is the largest NI party still and Wales voted Leave anyway. Meanwhile in Germany the Eurosceptic AfD will enter the Bundestag for the first time in September and Italian polls next year show Berlusconi returning to power with either the Eurosceptic Northern League or the anti Euro Beppe Grillo
I can exclusively reveal that the Telegraph has unearthed only part of this scandal. It's worse than that: European Union citizens will be free to cross into UK from France as well. And indeed to fly in from anywhere in the world.
Not without passport checks. Anyone entering the UK via France can be turned back at the UK border. Not so with Ireland.
Sure. But they need a passport to get into Ireland. Just like a Cambodian or a Nigerian. Obviously EU citizens won't need a visa anyway, but in any case we already have in place a reciprocal arrangement with Ireland to recognise each other's visas.
There really is no problem here at all.
Not for you or me, perhaps. But we were told that leaving the EU means taking back control of the UK border. The government has now said it doesn't want to.
We were also told that leaving the EU would mean less red tape and lower costs for business. Yesterday, the government told us that the opposite would, in fact, be true.
A pattern is emerging.
That leaving the EU would mean less red tape was a Leave campaign claim, not a government claim. They are of course not the same. There is no reason the government should ensure to honour or implement any Leave promise, any more than it should implement the SNP's manifesto.
If the EU want to bring in more red tape that's their problem.
They have a trade surplus with the Uk - they can put that at risk of if they choose - they can "take back control"...
This merely demonstrates that people misunderstand the meaning of "regulatory equivalence". It doesn't mean the mirroring of regulations, it agreement to accept both parties regulatory systems as equivalent despite their differences.
There is also nothing to stop UK accepting goods from another country with different standards so long as the goods are not then exported to the EU. This is one of the perks of not being within a single customs union...
The UK approach seems to be to be putting any emphasis on future change onto the EU.
A hard Irish border ? We won't put it up.
Tariffs on EU goods arriving in the U.K. ? As before and we will pass them on - but UK tariffs could be less..
Banking on lack of inertia for change winning through.
If a post Brexit world is different the govt looks to be putting the ball into the EUs court - or perhaps saying you can cut your own throats with your own knife if you wish.
The EU doesn't seem to have a response yet other than suggesting it will race for the knife.
There's deeper point here.
I can see what the EU's tactics are in terms of negotiating in a timeframe from next week to the early 2020's. Get as much cash as we can, "protect" Ireland, keep the ECJ where we want it to be etc etc, and to achieve this you finger wag that none of the sweeties of free trade will be let out of the tin till you've agreed all this (even if by not discussing how many sweeties there are making it all a bit farcical as both strands are interlinked of course).
But what's the strategy? What do they want the UK to be vis a vis them in the period 2025 -2075?
Are they trying to brow beat us not to leave? (that's not going to go down well in much of the populous is it!) Are they trying to beat us up pour encourager les autres in the EU now? Do they want a friend, or a surly neighbour?
Just to chuck this in say they screwed us for £100bn, said the ECJ rules supreme forever, and you must take all EU migrants that we decide - why bother with NATO? Why would I want to defend this lot (quite the opposite)?.
Much of the reason we never really were comfortable stems from the thought Europe was "done to us" not something we were "part of". I fear they are in danger of adopting tactics that will lead to a poor strategic outcome all round.
All of that is fair comment.
However, the point applies still more forcibly to Leavers: what relationship do they want with the EU? Tectonic Leavers are uncomfortable sharing the same planet with it and Hostile Leavers want to see the EU destroyed in the manner that the Romans destroyed Carthage, but what we might amusingly call Moderate Leavers have comprehensively failed to set out any kind of more constructive relationship with the EU that they are aiming for.
In the absence of anything constructive coming from this side of the English Channel, it's not particularly surprising (if unintelligent) that the EU has decided to be something that it does to Britain rather than work with.
Canada to the USA? NZ to Australia? That sort of thing. Friendly, cooperative, but separate.
But what's the strategy? What do they want the UK to be vis a vis them in the period 2025 -2075?
Brexiteers used to brag that there would be no EU left to leave by the time we were done. They predicted the demise of the wrong union.
On what grounds? The SNP lost almost half its seats in June, the DUP is the largest NI party still and Wales voted Leave anyway. Meanwhile in Germany the Eurosceptic AfD will enter the Bundestag for the first time in September and Italian polls next year show Berlusconi returning to power with either the Eurosceptic Northern League or the anti Euro Beppe Grillo
Ah Berlusconi.
Been waiting for this one to come in for a while now...
19/11/2013 Single To Win No @ 4/7 |Will Berlusconi be a PDL candidate in t Will Silvio Berlusconi be a PDL candidate at the next general election? £110.72 Pending
What a bizarre thing to say. There is literally no one on this earth suggesting that the Common Travel Area arrangement needs to be changed at all, so why is there a need for discussions about how it should be 'protected'? It pre-dates the EU by many decades anyway.
The EU should focus on the real point, which is blindingly obvious: the Irish border issue is inseparable from the UK/EU trade deal and customs deal.
If this is self-evident, there should be no problem in agreeing it in black and white and then we can move swiftly on to discussing trade, including technical solutions if necessary.
We have agreed it in black and white, in multiple statements, and no doubt it will be reiterated again in the paper which is about to be published.
The EU27's position is looking more bizarre by the day.
I'm afraid to say you are morphing into a poor copy of Adrian Harper with your comedic hagiographies about the work of the Brexit department.
If we are to leave the EU without an agreement and all the economic harm that will entail over a sustained period of time, then the only hope of political survival the Tories have is to be able to blame it all on the EU.
Which may well be possible. 52% voted Leave because they thought the EU was a bad thing. Bad things happening as we leave could as easily confirm that view as undermine it, I would think.
They voted Leave for many reasons, one of which was there would be no downsides to it.
I can exclusively reveal that the Telegraph has unearthed only part of this scandal. It's worse than that: European Union citizens will be free to cross into UK from France as well. And indeed to fly in from anywhere in the world.
Not without passport checks. Anyone entering the UK via France can be turned back at the UK border. Not so with Ireland.
Sure. But they need a passport to get into Ireland. Just like a Cambodian or a Nigerian. Obviously EU citizens won't need a visa anyway, but in any case we already have in place a reciprocal arrangement with Ireland to recognise each other's visas.
There really is no problem here at all.
Not for you or me, perhaps. But we were told that leaving the EU means taking back control of the UK border. The government has now said it doesn't want to.
We were also told that leaving the EU would mean less red tape and lower costs for business. Yesterday, the government told us that the opposite would, in fact, be true.
A pattern is emerging.
That leaving the EU would mean less red tape was a Leave campaign claim, not a government claim. They are of course not the same. There is no reason the government should ensure to honour or implement any Leave promise, any more than it should implement the SNP's manifesto.
If the EU want to bring in more red tape that's their problem.
They have a trade surplus with the Uk - they can put that at risk of if they choose - they can "take back control"...
Yet another policy not met, as with tree planting, tube fare price freeze, etc etc etc. Khan is as useless as he was as a government minister.
Housing takes time?
"Of the 90,000 homes planned by 2021, 17,500 will be available at around social rent levels. He said: “The average is two years from inception to work starting, so we are trying to speed things up. I’m afraid the bad news is it will be a marathon, not a sprint. It takes some time for homes to be built. I’m afraid for at least two or three years or longer you’ll be seeing the consequences of the previous mayor’s policies.”
What a bizarre thing to say. There is literally no one on this earth suggesting that the Common Travel Area arrangement needs to be changed at all, so why is there a need for discussions about how it should be 'protected'? It pre-dates the EU by many decades anyway.
The EU should focus on the real point, which is blindingly obvious: the Irish border issue is inseparable from the UK/EU trade deal and customs deal.
If this is self-evident, there should be no problem in agreeing it in black and white and then we can move swiftly on to discussing trade, including technical solutions if necessary.
We have agreed it in black and white, in multiple statements, and no doubt it will be reiterated again in the paper which is about to be published.
The EU27's position is looking more bizarre by the day.
I'm afraid to say you are morphing into a poor copy of Adrian Harper with your comedic hagiographies about the work of the Brexit department.
If we are to leave the EU without an agreement and all the economic harm that will entail over a sustained period of time, then the only hope of political survival the Tories have is to be able to blame it all on the EU.
Which may well be possible. 52% voted Leave because they thought the EU was a bad thing. Bad things happening as we leave could as easily confirm that view as undermine it, I would think.
They voted Leave for many reasons, one of which was there would be no downsides to it.
Name one downside.
Significant restrictions on the rights of UK citizens to live and work in three G8 economies and a number of other G20 ones.
Canada to the USA? NZ to Australia? That sort of thing. Friendly, cooperative, but separate.
Brexit is driven by identity politics. It's ironic that many of its strongest adherents are the quickest to condemn the same phenomenon in other contexts.
This merely demonstrates that people misunderstand the meaning of "regulatory equivalence". It doesn't mean the mirroring of regulations, it agreement to accept both parties regulatory systems as equivalent despite their differences.
There is also nothing to stop UK accepting goods from another country with different standards so long as the goods are not then exported to the EU. This is one of the perks of not being within a single customs union...
How do you stop exports if you don't police the border?
Well I'm very encouraged by the things we've heard from the government yesterday and today - It all sounds very sensible and (with negotiation) completely workable.
The fact the extremists on both sides (several of them from the Remain side are on here) are seeing nothing but problems and negativity tells me that the government is definitely on the right track.
Well I'm very encouraged by the things we've heard from the government yesterday and today - It all sounds very sensible and (with negotiation) completely workable.
The fact the extremists on both sides (several of them from the Remain side are on here) are seeing nothing but problems and negativity tells me that the government is definitely on the right track.
Canada to the USA? NZ to Australia? That sort of thing. Friendly, cooperative, but separate.
Have you noticed much being said along those lines? The average Leaver is mostly being heard saying "thank goodness we have left the shackles of that evil empire". I haven't heard any talk about neighbourliness.
Sure is... now if only they could get their unemployment levels down to UK levels.
With their sound fundamentals, that should be on the cards for the next couple of years. Sound money and sound finances are the basis of a strong and stable economy. By the time we reapply in a decade, the EZ will look good
Well I'm very encouraged by the things we've heard from the government yesterday and today - It all sounds very sensible and (with negotiation) completely workable.
The fact the extremists on both sides (several of them from the Remain side are on here) are seeing nothing but problems and negativity tells me that the government is definitely on the right track.
What a bizarre thing to say. There is literally no one on this earth suggesting that the Common Travel Area arrangement needs to be changed at all, so why is there a need for discussions about how it should be 'protected'? It pre-dates the EU by many decades anyway.
The EU should focus on the real point, which is blindingly obvious: the Irish border issue is inseparable from the UK/EU trade deal and customs deal.
If this is self-evident, there should be no problem in agreeing it in black and white and then we can move swiftly on to discussing trade, including technical solutions if necessary.
We have agreed it in black and white, in multiple statements, and no doubt it will be reiterated again in the paper which is about to be published.
The EU27's position is looking more bizarre by the day.
I'm afraid to say you are morphing into a poor copy of Adrian Harper with your comedic hagiographies about the work of the Brexit department.
If we are to leave the EU without an agreement and all the economic harm that will entail over a sustained period of time, then the only hope of political survival the Tories have is to be able to blame it all on the EU.
Which may well be possible. 52% voted Leave because they thought the EU was a bad thing. Bad things happening as we leave could as easily confirm that view as undermine it, I would think.
They voted Leave for many reasons, one of which was there would be no downsides to it.
Name one downside.
We are all a lot poorer. £1 bought 1.35 euros before EURef - now it's approaching parity.
Well I'm very encouraged by the things we've heard from the government yesterday and today - It all sounds very sensible and (with negotiation) completely workable.
The fact the extremists on both sides (several of them from the Remain side are on here) are seeing nothing but problems and negativity tells me that the government is definitely on the right track.
Mire red tape and an open border with the EU. Sub-optimal, but it does indicate the beginning of a process by which the government comes to realise that the only way forward is to tie ourselves to the EU as closely as possible. Extremist Brexiteers will hate it, but it will probably mean a deal is done. We'll get blue passports, UK citizens will lose some rights, but essentially we'll leave in name only and Nigel Farage will be back on the stump for UKIP.
Oh dear - now that doesn't fit the script. We were told they were propping up the NHS not the dole queues.
Put another way, unemployment is far higher among people over whom we have full immigration control.
Not sure why you'd want to do that. It certainly exposes a problem with free movement as well as a need to deal with those from outside the EU. the fact that 20% of our total unemployment is down to immigrants is pretty shocking given what we keep being told about how they are more hard-working than UK nationals.
This merely demonstrates that people misunderstand the meaning of "regulatory equivalence". It doesn't mean the mirroring of regulations, it agreement to accept both parties regulatory systems as equivalent despite their differences.
There is also nothing to stop UK accepting goods from another country with different standards so long as the goods are not then exported to the EU. This is one of the perks of not being within a single customs union...
How do you stop exports if you don't police the border?
With laws? How do we stop the import and sale of hand guns from other countries in the EU where they are legal?
This merely demonstrates that people misunderstand the meaning of "regulatory equivalence". It doesn't mean the mirroring of regulations, it agreement to accept both parties regulatory systems as equivalent despite their differences.
There is also nothing to stop UK accepting goods from another country with different standards so long as the goods are not then exported to the EU. This is one of the perks of not being within a single customs union...
How do you stop exports if you don't police the border?
With laws? How do we stop the import and sale of hand guns from other countries in the EU where they are legal?
We police the import and export of guns. We are not proposing to police the Irish border.
This merely demonstrates that people misunderstand the meaning of "regulatory equivalence". It doesn't mean the mirroring of regulations, it agreement to accept both parties regulatory systems as equivalent despite their differences.
There is also nothing to stop UK accepting goods from another country with different standards so long as the goods are not then exported to the EU. This is one of the perks of not being within a single customs union...
How do you stop exports if you don't police the border?
With laws? How do we stop the import and sale of hand guns from other countries in the EU where they are legal?
We police the import and export of guns. We are not proposing to police the Irish border.
With what customs checks? We rely on self assessment... the same system as would be required here.
This not dissimilar from requirements to comply with local building regulations which vary from country to country - don't import the stuff you can't legally use.
I think Nigel will find fault with whatever outcome the government manages to secure, even if it doesn't secure anything at all. Why wouldn't he? Nigel's position is to destroy the Tory party and replace it with himself. With whipped-out feelings of betrayal and disappointment behind him, he'll make easy meat of Theresa's already crippled Tory party. Theresa should be very afraid.
Oh dear - now that doesn't fit the script. We were told they were propping up the NHS not the dole queues.
Put another way, unemployment is far higher among people over whom we have full immigration control.
Not sure why you'd want to do that. It certainly exposes a problem with free movement as well as a need to deal with those from outside the EU. the fact that 20% of our total unemployment is down to immigrants is pretty shocking given what we keep being told about how they are more hard-working than UK nationals.
You can be hardworking and unemployed.
Lol - you are both pathetic and funny. Well done.
Nope - I just believe that not all unemployed people are scrounging, feckless wasters. In the same way, I don't believe all Brexit-backing ex-pats are hypocritical plastic patriots.
Canada to the USA? NZ to Australia? That sort of thing. Friendly, cooperative, but separate.
Have you noticed much being said along those lines? The average Leaver is mostly being heard saying "thank goodness we have left the shackles of that evil empire". I haven't heard any talk about neighbourliness.
We can be happy neighbours with France, Germany Spain, etc. It is those arrogant unelected feckers overlording it in Brussels that we want to divorce ourselves from.
Proposes a continuation of EU funding for Northern Ireland, and 'full' recognition of Irish citizens' rights as EU citizens in Northern Ireland. I think we can safely say the ECJ is not going away in Northern Ireland.
I'd rate no deal as odds-on. There's too much anger and partisanship on both sides.
And I don't think the EU are really interested in an innovative comprehensive new UK-EU agreement that works. They either want to bring us to heel, or agree a BINO.
Canada to the USA? NZ to Australia? That sort of thing. Friendly, cooperative, but separate.
Have you noticed much being said along those lines? The average Leaver is mostly being heard saying "thank goodness we have left the shackles of that evil empire". I haven't heard any talk about neighbourliness.
We can be happy neighbours with France, Germany Spain, etc. It is those arrogant unelected feckers overlording it in Brussels that we want to divorce ourselves from.
An uncharacteristically silly post from you. Do you think "those arrogant unelected feckers overlording it in Brussels" are going to go away just because you wish them to? And if not, what kind of relationship do you want Britain to have with the EU?
If not friendly and co-operative, what do you have in mind?
Canada to the USA? NZ to Australia? That sort of thing. Friendly, cooperative, but separate.
Have you noticed much being said along those lines? The average Leaver is mostly being heard saying "thank goodness we have left the shackles of that evil empire". I haven't heard any talk about neighbourliness.
We can be happy neighbours with France, Germany Spain, etc. It is those arrogant unelected feckers overlording it in Brussels that we want to divorce ourselves from.
So having divorced ourselves, we then find that we still need to deal with France, Germany, Spain, etc, only to discover that they want to act collectively through Brussels...
But what's the strategy? What do they want the UK to be vis a vis them in the period 2025 -2075?
Brexiteers used to brag that there would be no EU left to leave by the time we were done. They predicted the demise of the wrong union.
On what grounds? The SNP lost almost half its seats in June, the DUP is the largest NI party still and Wales voted Leave anyway. Meanwhile in Germany the Eurosceptic AfD will enter the Bundestag for the first time in September and Italian polls next year show Berlusconi returning to power with either the Eurosceptic Northern League or the anti Euro Beppe Grillo
Ah Berlusconi.
Been waiting for this one to come in for a while now...
19/11/2013 Single To Win No @ 4/7 |Will Berlusconi be a PDL candidate in t Will Silvio Berlusconi be a PDL candidate at the next general election? £110.72 Pending
Yes the return of Silvio at 80 could well be the biggest political story of 2018, in Europe at least. His coalition comfortably won the local elections this year
I'd rate no deal as odds-on. There's too much anger and partisanship on both sides.
And I don't think the EU are really interested in an innovative comprehensive new UK-EU agreement that works. They either want to bring us to heel, or agree a BINO.
It's the politics that will sink this.
I still think cold, hard economic reality will win the day and we'll get an agreement both sides can live with.
The UK approach seems to be to be putting any emphasis on future change onto the EU.
A hard Irish border ? We won't put it up.
Tariffs on EU goods arriving in the U.K. ? As before and we will pass them on - but UK tariffs could be less..
Banking on lack of inertia for change winning through.
If a post Brexit world is different the govt looks to be putting the ball into the EUs court - or perhaps saying you can cut your own throats with your own knife if you wish.
The EU doesn't seem to have a response yet other than suggesting it will race for the knife.
There's deeper point here.
I can see what the EU's tactics are in terms of negotiating in a timeframe from next week to the early 2020's. Get as much cash as we can, "protect" Ireland, keep the ECJ where we want it to be etc etc, and to achieve this you finger wag that none of the sweeties of free trade will be let out of the tin till you've agreed all this (even if by not discussing how many sweeties there are making it all a bit farcical as both strands are interlinked of course).
But what's the strategy? What do they want the UK to be vis a vis them in the period 2025 -2075?
Are they trying to brow beat us not to leave? (that's not going to go down well in much of the populous is it!) Are they trying to beat us up pour encourager les autres in the EU now? Do they want a friend, or a surly neighbour?
Just to chuck this in say they screwed us for £100bn, said the ECJ rules supreme forever, and you must take all EU migrants that we decide - why bother with NATO? Why would I want to defend this lot (quite the opposite)?.
Much of the reason we never really were comfortable stems from the thought Europe was "done to us" not something we were "part of". I fear they are in danger of adopting tactics that will lead to a poor strategic outcome all round.
All of that is fair comment.
However, the point applies still more forcibly to Leavers: what relationship do they want with the EU? Tectonic Leavers are uncomfortable sharing the same planet with it and Hostile Leavers want to see the EU destroyed in the manner that the Romans destroyed Carthage, but what we might amusingly call Moderate Leavers have comprehensively failed to set out any kind of more constructive relationship with the EU that they are aiming for.
In the absence of anything constructive coming from this side of the English Channel, it's not particularly surprising (if unintelligent) that the EU has decided to be something that it does to Britain rather than work with.
Canada to the USA? NZ to Australia? That sort of thing. Friendly, cooperative, but separate.
I'd rate no deal as odds-on. There's too much anger and partisanship on both sides.
And I don't think the EU are really interested in an innovative comprehensive new UK-EU agreement that works. They either want to bring us to heel, or agree a BINO.
It's the politics that will sink this.
I still think cold, hard economic reality will win the day and we'll get an agreement both sides can live with.
I'm not so sure.
Everyone pretends this is about economics but it's really about politics and that is what will make or break it.
I'd rate no deal as odds-on. There's too much anger and partisanship on both sides.
And I don't think the EU are really interested in an innovative comprehensive new UK-EU agreement that works. They either want to bring us to heel, or agree a BINO.
It's the politics that will sink this.
Stripped of some of your pro-Leave approach showing through in the phrasing (why should the EU be interested in exploring anything innovative when Britain is continuing to negotiate as if the sun had never set on the British Empire?), I agree. Neither side wants a deal enough to make the necessary adjustments to its position.
What a bizarre thing to say. There is literally no one on this earth suggesting that the Common Travel Area arrangement needs to be changed at all, so why is there a need for discussions about how it should be 'protected'? It pre-dates the EU by many decades anyway.
The EU should focus on the real point, which is blindingly obvious: the Irish border issue is inseparable from the UK/EU trade deal and customs deal.
If this is self-evident, there should be no problem in agreeing it in black and white and then we can move swiftly on to discussing trade, including technical solutions if necessary.
We have agreed it in black and white, in multiple statements, and no doubt it will be reiterated again in the paper which is about to be published.
The EU27's position is looking more bizarre by the day.
I'm afraid to say you are morphing into a poor copy of Adrian Harper with your comedic hagiographies about the work of the Brexit department.
If we are to leave the EU without an agreement and all the economic harm that will entail over a sustained period of time, then the only hope of political survival the Tories have is to be able to blame it all on the EU.
Which may well be possible. 52% voted Leave because they thought the EU was a bad thing. Bad things happening as we leave could as easily confirm that view as undermine it, I would think.
They voted Leave for many reasons, one of which was there would be no downsides to it.
Name one downside.
Significant restrictions on the rights of UK citizens to live and work in three G8 economies and a number of other G20 ones.
That's a good thing. Yes, they should be controlling their borders and their immigration properly/better, as should we.
Northern Ireland was always going to have some "slightly different" arrangements due to its unique history post Brexit.
You need to consider the counterfactual if we'd never joined the EEC in the seventies - a workround fudge would have been found for it in time with Ireland in that scenario too.
Well I'm very encouraged by the things we've heard from the government yesterday and today - It all sounds very sensible and (with negotiation) completely workable.
The fact the extremists on both sides (several of them from the Remain side are on here) are seeing nothing but problems and negativity tells me that the government is definitely on the right track.
What a bizarre thing to say. There is literally no one on this earth suggesting that the Common Travel Area arrangement needs to be changed at all, so why is there a need for discussions about how it should be 'protected'? It pre-dates the EU by many decades anyway.
The EU should focus on the real point, which is blindingly obvious: the Irish border issue is inseparable from the UK/EU trade deal and customs deal.
If this is self-evident, there should be no problem in agreeing it in black and white and then we can move swiftly on to discussing trade, including technical solutions if necessary.
We have agreed it in black and white, in multiple statements, and no doubt it will be reiterated again in the paper which is about to be published.
The EU27's position is looking more bizarre by the day.
I'm afraid to say you are morphing into a poor copy of Adrian Harper with your comedic hagiographies about the work of the Brexit department.
If we are to leave the EU without an agreement and all the economic harm that will entail over a sustained period of time, then the only hope of political survival the Tories have is to be able to blame it all on the EU.
Which may well be possible. 52% voted Leave because they thought the EU was a bad thing. Bad things happening as we leave could as easily confirm that view as undermine it, I would think.
They voted Leave for many reasons, one of which was there would be no downsides to it.
Name one downside.
We are all a lot poorer. £1 bought 1.35 euros before EURef - now it's approaching parity.
When was the last time you bought something in euros?
What a bizarre thing to say. There is literally no one on this earth suggesting that the Common Travel Area arrangement needs to be changed at all, so why is there a need for discussions about how it should be 'protected'? It pre-dates the EU by many decades anyway.
The EU should focus on the real point, which is blindingly obvious: the Irish border issue is inseparable from the UK/EU trade deal and customs deal.
If this is self-evident, there should be no problem in agreeing it in black and white and then we can move swiftly on to discussing trade, including technical solutions if necessary.
It's becoming increasingly clear that there are only two options:
1. We will leave the EU in name only.
2. We will leave with no agreement.
It's touch and go which one it will be.
With catastrophically inept negotiators on both sides of the table, it doesn't particularly look touch and go to me.
I think popular opinion will very soon become angered by the EU and the wish to leave, no matter the consequences, will increase dramatically
Canada to the USA? NZ to Australia? That sort of thing. Friendly, cooperative, but separate.
Have you noticed much being said along those lines? The average Leaver is mostly being heard saying "thank goodness we have left the shackles of that evil empire". I haven't heard any talk about neighbourliness.
We can be happy neighbours with France, Germany Spain, etc. It is those arrogant unelected feckers overlording it in Brussels that we want to divorce ourselves from.
An uncharacteristically silly post from you. Do you think "those arrogant unelected feckers overlording it in Brussels" are going to go away just because you wish them to? And if not, what kind of relationship do you want Britain to have with the EU?
If not friendly and co-operative, what do you have in mind?
OK, so I was being deliberately OTT. However, I do believe that it is our relationships with our individual neighbours and partners that count, and that is the way to get enough of them on-side to change minds in Brussels towards a sensible, win-win position.
Canada to the USA? NZ to Australia? That sort of thing. Friendly, cooperative, but separate.
Have you noticed much being said along those lines? The average Leaver is mostly being heard saying "thank goodness we have left the shackles of that evil empire". I haven't heard any talk about neighbourliness.
We can be happy neighbours with France, Germany Spain, etc. It is those arrogant unelected feckers overlording it in Brussels that we want to divorce ourselves from.
An uncharacteristically silly post from you. Do you think "those arrogant unelected feckers overlording it in Brussels" are going to go away just because you wish them to? And if not, what kind of relationship do you want Britain to have with the EU?
If not friendly and co-operative, what do you have in mind?
OK, so I was being deliberately OTT. However, I do believe that it is our relationships with our individual neighbours and partners that count, and that is the way to get enough of them on-side to change minds in Brussels towards a sensible, win-win position.
Now, tell me how you translate that into a communications strategy that's going to win hearts and minds with the negotiators on the other side of the table, who by an unhappy coincidence are being led by "arrogant unelected feckers overlording it in Brussels". I'm not sure that "we hate you, but don't worry we're going to try to bypass you to get the deal we want" is really going to produce the optimal result.
I can exclusively reveal that the Telegraph has unearthed only part of this scandal. It's worse than that: European Union citizens will be free to cross into UK from France as well. And indeed to fly in from anywhere in the world.
Not without passport checks. Anyone entering the UK via France can be turned back at the UK border. Not so with Ireland.
Sure. But they need a passport to get into Ireland. Just like a Cambodian or a Nigerian. Obviously EU citizens won't need a visa anyway, but in any case we already have in place a reciprocal arrangement with Ireland to recognise each other's visas.
There really is no problem here at all.
Quite.
If I'm an EU citizen and I fancy doing a bit of cash in hand work in London in 2025 (assuming all is done by then!) whilst awaiting something else to turn up (illegally), why am I going to think "I know I'll be crafty, fly to Dublin, where they'll let me in no questions at all, catch the bus to Belfast, and hop on a flight to Stansted, where at that point I'll have to show suitable photo ID and risk the airline (who will be told to look out for just this) refusing me". What then? Bit of cash in hand dishwashing in Ballymena? Well the latter's possible, but it's not going to keep me awake at night.
Seems a sensible compromise.
"But I've been here since 2014." - in a French accent.
Northern Ireland was always going to have some "slightly different" arrangements due to its unique history post Brexit.
You need to consider the counterfactual if we'd never joined the EEC in the seventies - a workround fudge would have been found for it in time with Ireland in that scenario too.
Having agreed to 'slightly different' arrangements for Northern Ireland, how do you argue against demands for 'slightly different' arrangements for Scotland?
Oh dear - now that doesn't fit the script. We were told they were propping up the NHS not the dole queues.
Put another way, unemployment is far higher among people over whom we have full immigration control.
Not sure why you'd want to do that. It certainly exposes a problem with free movement as well as a need to deal with those from outside the EU. the fact that 20% of our total unemployment is down to immigrants is pretty shocking given what we keep being told about how they are more hard-working than UK nationals.
You can be hardworking and unemployed.
Lol - you are both pathetic and funny. Well done.
Nope - I just believe that not all unemployed people are scrounging, feckless wasters. In the same way, I don't believe all Brexit-backing ex-pats are hypocritical plastic patriots.
Phew - at least you can't mean me as I'm a Brexit accepting immigrant non-plastic patriot. Dunno who it was said anything about 'scrounging, feckless wasters' - not me either guv. Just in your head.
Blimmin heck imagine the inflationary pressures that will arise should they fuck off back home. Or be thrown out. Or not be replaced when they have had their fun living in the UK.
I think wage inflation is not much affected by high employment levels in the globalised world, and not just in the UK. The jobs will either disappear to automation or be exported.
A self-making flat white extra hot?
You jest, but the historical link between high employment and wage inflation is at best much weaker than previously, and perhaps history.
I appreciate that. It comes down, however, to NAIRU (as famously imprecise as the Laffer curve), and what Mr Greenspan termed, the pool of available workers.
I thought econometrics had a good handle on NAIRU?
It changes from time to time and I think there are still some who dispute it.
Well I'm very encouraged by the things we've heard from the government yesterday and today - It all sounds very sensible and (with negotiation) completely workable.
The fact the extremists on both sides (several of them from the Remain side are on here) are seeing nothing but problems and negativity tells me that the government is definitely on the right track.
What a bizarre thing to say. There is literally no one on this earth suggesting that the Common Travel Area arrangement needs to be changed at all, so why is there a need for discussions about how it should be 'protected'? It pre-dates the EU by many decades anyway.
The EU should focus on the real point, which is blindingly obvious: the Irish border issue is inseparable from the UK/EU trade deal and customs deal.
If this is self-evident, there should be no problem in agreeing it in black and white and then we can move swiftly on to discussing trade, including technical solutions if necessary.
We have agreed it in black and white, in multiple statements, and no doubt it will be reiterated again in the paper which is about to be published.
The EU27's position is looking more bizarre by the day.
I'm afraid to say you are morphing into a poor copy of Adrian Harper with your comedic hagiographies about the work of the Brexit department.
If we are to leave the EU without an agreement and all the economic harm that will entail over a sustained period of time, then the only hope of political survival the Tories have is to be able to blame it all on the EU.
Which may well be possible. 52% voted Leave because they thought the EU was a bad thing. Bad things happening as we leave could as easily confirm that view as undermine it, I would think.
They voted Leave for many reasons, one of which was there would be no downsides to it.
Name one downside.
We are all a lot poorer. £1 bought 1.35 euros before EURef - now it's approaching parity.
My $400k of shares went from being worth £274k, at $1.46 to the £ on 22/6/16, to being worth £317k, at £1.26 to the £ a year later. So I'm better off by £43k just there.
Brexit bought me two completely refitted C P Hart bathrooms.
Northern Ireland was always going to have some "slightly different" arrangements due to its unique history post Brexit.
You need to consider the counterfactual if we'd never joined the EEC in the seventies - a workround fudge would have been found for it in time with Ireland in that scenario too.
Having agreed to 'slightly different' arrangements for Northern Ireland, how do you argue against demands for 'slightly different' arrangements for Scotland?
Not even remotely comparable situations in terms of history, plus Scotland doesn't have a a land border with the EU
What a bizarre thing to say. There is literally no one on this earth suggesting that the Common Travel Area arrangement needs to be changed at all, so why is there a need for discussions about how it should be 'protected'? It pre-dates the EU by many decades anyway.
The EU should focus on the real point, which is blindingly obvious: the Irish border issue is inseparable from the UK/EU trade deal and customs deal.
If this is self-evident, there should be no problem in agreeing it in black and white and then we can move swiftly on to discussing trade, including technical solutions if necessary.
We have agreed it in black and white, in multiple statements, and no doubt it will be reiterated again in the paper which is about to be published.
The EU27's position is looking more bizarre by the day.
I'm afraid to say you are morphing into a poor copy of Adrian Harper with your comedic hagiographies about the work of the Brexit department.
If we are to leave the EU without an agreement and all the economic harm that will entail over a sustained period of time, then the only hope of political survival the Tories have is to be able to blame it all on the EU.
Which may well be possible. 52% voted Leave because they thought the EU was a bad thing. Bad things happening as we leave could as easily confirm that view as undermine it, I would think.
They voted Leave for many reasons, one of which was there would be no downsides to it.
Name one downside.
Significant restrictions on the rights of UK citizens to live and work in three G8 economies and a number of other G20 ones.
My $400k of shares went from being worth £274k, at $1.46 to the £ on 22/6/16, to being worth £317k, at £1.26 to the £ a year later. So I'm better off by £43k just there.
Brexit bought me two completely refitted C P Hart bathrooms.
Not quite in that league, Brexit certainly boosted my pension statement though
Up from 45k to 60k (Don't worry I have a while to go till retirement yet)
What a bizarre thing to say. There is literally no one on this earth suggesting that the Common Travel Area arrangement needs to be changed at all, so why is there a need for discussions about how it should be 'protected'? It pre-dates the EU by many decades anyway.
The EU should focus on the real point, which is blindingly obvious: the Irish border issue is inseparable from the UK/EU trade deal and customs deal.
If this is self-evident, there should be no problem in agreeing it in black and white and then we can move swiftly on to discussing trade, including technical solutions if necessary.
We have agreed it in black and white, in multiple statements, and no doubt it will be reiterated again in the paper which is about to be published.
The EU27's position is looking more bizarre by the day.
I'm afraid to say you are morphing into a poor copy of Adrian Harper with your comedic hagiographies about the work of the Brexit department.
If we are to leave the EU without an agreement and all the economic harm that will entail over a sustained period of time, then the only hope of political survival the Tories have is to be able to blame it all on the EU.
Which may well be possible. 52% voted Leave because they thought the EU was a bad thing. Bad things happening as we leave could as easily confirm that view as undermine it, I would think.
They voted Leave for many reasons, one of which was there would be no downsides to it.
Name one downside.
Significant restrictions on the rights of UK citizens to live and work in three G8 economies and a number of other G20 ones.
That's a good thing. Yes, they should be controlling their borders and their immigration properly/better, as should we.
Bizarre response. You think inhibiting the movement of people, UK citizens, is a good thing?
Northern Ireland was always going to have some "slightly different" arrangements due to its unique history post Brexit.
You need to consider the counterfactual if we'd never joined the EEC in the seventies - a workround fudge would have been found for it in time with Ireland in that scenario too.
Having agreed to 'slightly different' arrangements for Northern Ireland, how do you argue against demands for 'slightly different' arrangements for Scotland?
Northern Ireland's got a land border with a foreign country, whereas 45% of Scotchmen only wish Scotland had.
Northern Ireland was always going to have some "slightly different" arrangements due to its unique history post Brexit.
You need to consider the counterfactual if we'd never joined the EEC in the seventies - a workround fudge would have been found for it in time with Ireland in that scenario too.
Having agreed to 'slightly different' arrangements for Northern Ireland, how do you argue against demands for 'slightly different' arrangements for Scotland?
Not even remotely comparable situations in terms of history, plus Scotland doesn't have a a land border with the EU
It has an elected government that doesn't want to leave the single market, and a larger democratic mandate for Remain from the referendum. Once the principle is established that different arrangements are possible, Scotland would have every right to demand a seat at the table.
Northern Ireland was always going to have some "slightly different" arrangements due to its unique history post Brexit.
You need to consider the counterfactual if we'd never joined the EEC in the seventies - a workround fudge would have been found for it in time with Ireland in that scenario too.
Having agreed to 'slightly different' arrangements for Northern Ireland, how do you argue against demands for 'slightly different' arrangements for Scotland?
Scots value the United Kingdom over the European Union.
No land border either, and Scotland was never part of a larger entity that has not contained England.
What a bizarre thing to say. There is literally no one on this earth suggesting that the Common Travel Area arrangement needs to be changed at all, so why is there a need for discussions about how it should be 'protected'? It pre-dates the EU by many decades anyway.
The EU should focus on the real point, which is blindingly obvious: the Irish border issue is inseparable from the UK/EU trade deal and customs deal.
If this is self-evident, there should be no problem in agreeing it in black and white and then we can move swiftly on to discussing trade, including technical solutions if necessary.
We have agreed it in black and white, in multiple statements, and no doubt it will be reiterated again in the paper which is about to be published.
The EU27's position is looking more bizarre by the day.
I'm afraid to say you are morphing into a poor copy of Adrian Harper with your comedic hagiographies about the work of the Brexit department.
If we are to leave the EU without an agreement and all the economic harm that will entail over a sustained period of time, then the only hope of political survival the Tories have is to be able to blame it all on the EU.
Which may well be possible. 52% voted Leave because they thought the EU was a bad thing. Bad things happening as we leave could as easily confirm that view as undermine it, I would think.
They voted Leave for many reasons, one of which was there would be no downsides to it.
Name one downside.
Significant restrictions on the rights of UK citizens to live and work in three G8 economies and a number of other G20 ones.
That's a good thing. Yes, they should be controlling their borders and their immigration properly/better, as should we.
Bizarre response. You think inhibiting the movement of people, UK citizens, is a good thing?
Whether it's good or not - it was a clear motivating factor in the referendum vote. FOM is not popular - it's misunderstood perhaps but not popular.
Well I'm very encouraged by the things we've heard from the government yesterday and today - It all sounds very sensible and (with negotiation) completely workable.
The fact the extremists on both sides (several of them from the Remain side are on here) are seeing nothing but problems and negativity tells me that the government is definitely on the right track.
The EU should focus on the real point, which is blindingly obvious: the Irish border issue is inseparable from the UK/EU trade deal and customs deal.
If this is self-evident, there should be no problem in agreeing it in black and white and then we can move swiftly on to discussing trade, including technical solutions if necessary.
We have agreed it in black and white, in multiple statements, and no doubt it will be reiterated again in the paper which is about to be published.
The EU27's position is looking more bizarre by the day.
I'm afraid to say you are morphing into a poor copy of Adrian Harper with your comedic hagiographies about the work of the Brexit department.
If we are to leave the EU without an agreement and all the economic harm that will entail over a sustained period of time, then the only hope of political survival the Tories have is to be able to blame it all on the EU.
Which may well be possible. 52% voted Leave because they thought the EU was a bad thing. Bad things happening as we leave could as easily confirm that view as undermine it, I would think.
They voted Leave for many reasons, one of which was there would be no downsides to it.
Name one downside.
We are all a lot poorer. £1 bought 1.35 euros before EURef - now it's approaching parity.
My $400k of shares went from being worth £274k, at $1.46 to the £ on 22/6/16, to being worth £317k, at £1.26 to the £ a year later. So I'm better off by £43k just there.
Brexit bought me two completely refitted C P Hart bathrooms.
Congratulations. I'm guessing, though, that you are not entirely characteristic of the wider UK population.
Seen Chapman's output since this thread went up this morning? If it was me I'd stick up a new thread double quick and pretend this one never happened. Perhaps something on the merits of the various rival electoral systems?
Northern Ireland was always going to have some "slightly different" arrangements due to its unique history post Brexit.
You need to consider the counterfactual if we'd never joined the EEC in the seventies - a workround fudge would have been found for it in time with Ireland in that scenario too.
Having agreed to 'slightly different' arrangements for Northern Ireland, how do you argue against demands for 'slightly different' arrangements for Scotland?
Not even remotely comparable situations in terms of history, plus Scotland doesn't have a a land border with the EU
It has an elected government that doesn't want to leave the single market, and a larger democratic mandate for Remain from the referendum. Once the principle is established that different arrangements are possible, Scotland would have every right to demand a seat at the table.
Nope - because the 'special' position in NI predates the EU. However, you are correct Scotland can demand seats at lots of tables. Demands are not always granted.
What a bizarre thing to say. There is literally no one on this earth suggesting that the Common Travel Area arrangement needs to be changed at all, so why is there a need for discussions about how it should be 'protected'? It pre-dates the EU by many decades anyway.
The EU should focus on the real point, which is blindingly obvious: the Irish border issue is inseparable from the UK/EU trade deal and customs deal.
If this is self-evident, there should be no problem in agreeing it in black and white and then we can move swiftly on to discussing trade, including technical solutions if necessary.
We have agreed it in black and white, in multiple statements, and no doubt it will be reiterated again in the paper which is about to be published.
The EU27's position is looking more bizarre by the day.
I'm afraid to say you are morphing into a poor copy of Adrian Harper with your comedic hagiographies about the work of the Brexit department.
If we are to leave the EU without an agreement and all the economic harm that will entail over a sustained period of time, then the only hope of political survival the Tories have is to be able to blame it all on the EU.
Which may well be possible. 52% voted Leave because they thought the EU was a bad thing. Bad things happening as we leave could as easily confirm that view as undermine it, I would think.
They voted Leave for many reasons, one of which was there would be no downsides to it.
Name one downside.
Significant restrictions on the rights of UK citizens to live and work in three G8 economies and a number of other G20 ones.
That's a good thing. Yes, they should be controlling their borders and their immigration properly/better, as should we.
Bizarre response. You think inhibiting the movement of people, UK citizens, is a good thing?
Whether it's good or not - it was a clear motivating factor in the referendum vote. FOM is not popular - it's misunderstood perhaps but not popular.
Hoondootedly. I am always reluctant to ascribe a motive to why people voted Leave, but I don't doubt that a significant element was anti-foreigner/immigration.
Comments
The Bank of England still has at least one Klix drinks machine.
I can see what the EU's tactics are in terms of negotiating in a timeframe from next week to the early 2020's. Get as much cash as we can, "protect" Ireland, keep the ECJ where we want it to be etc etc, and to achieve this you finger wag that none of the sweeties of free trade will be let out of the tin till you've agreed all this (even if by not discussing how many sweeties there are making it all a bit farcical as both strands are interlinked of course).
But what's the strategy? What do they want the UK to be vis a vis them in the period 2025 -2075?
Are they trying to brow beat us not to leave? (that's not going to go down well in much of the populous is it!) Are they trying to beat us up pour encourager les autres in the EU now? Do they want a friend, or a surly neighbour?
Just to chuck this in say they screwed us for £100bn, said the ECJ rules supreme forever, and you must take all EU migrants that we decide - why bother with NATO? Why would I want to defend this lot (quite the opposite)?.
Much of the reason we never really were comfortable stems from the thought Europe was "done to us" not something we were "part of". I fear they are in danger of adopting tactics that will lead to a poor strategic outcome all round.
After a deal could be cheaper in London than Paris.
Yum.
Wait, I've got a great idea, we'll get the EU to control our borders.
GENIUS!!
http://www.nzmeatboard.org/main.cfm?id=21
Having moved on at the present from Scotland destroying Brexit you seem to now be hoping NI will?
What's next Wales?
However, the point applies still more forcibly to Leavers: what relationship do they want with the EU? Tectonic Leavers are uncomfortable sharing the same planet with it and Hostile Leavers want to see the EU destroyed in the manner that the Romans destroyed Carthage, but what we might amusingly call Moderate Leavers have comprehensively failed to set out any kind of more constructive relationship with the EU that they are aiming for.
In the absence of anything constructive coming from this side of the English Channel, it's not particularly surprising (if unintelligent) that the EU has decided to be something that it does to Britain rather than work with.
334 steps up and down, 25 minutes up and out tools, 20 minutes down and packing away tools.
So the renovations are going to take 4 (Probably) 5 times as long.
Of course the workmen will still be heading up and down the stairs - and they can't stay there as the noise level passes safety thresholds.
Which means the bill will be ~ 10 times (At a minimum) the size it otherwise would have been...
They have a trade surplus with the Uk - they can put that at risk of if they choose - they can "take back control"...
There is also nothing to stop UK accepting goods from another country with different standards so long as the goods are not then exported to the EU. This is one of the perks of not being within a single customs union...
Been waiting for this one to come in for a while now...
19/11/2013 Single To Win
No @ 4/7
|Will Berlusconi be a PDL candidate in t
Will Silvio Berlusconi be a PDL candidate at the next general election? £110.72 Pending
"Of the 90,000 homes planned by 2021, 17,500 will be available at around social rent levels. He said: “The average is two years from inception to work starting, so we are trying to speed things up. I’m afraid the bad news is it will be a marathon, not a sprint. It takes some time for homes to be built. I’m afraid for at least two or three years or longer you’ll be seeing the consequences of the previous mayor’s policies.”
Feel the Sovereignty...
The fact the extremists on both sides (several of them from the Remain side are on here) are seeing nothing but problems and negativity tells me that the government is definitely on the right track.
https://twitter.com/richardtol/status/897790438656102400
https://twitter.com/oconnellhugh/status/897785910561042432
https://twitter.com/oconnellhugh/status/897786535449419776
This not dissimilar from requirements to comply with local building regulations which vary from country to country - don't import the stuff you can't legally use.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/northern-ireland-and-ireland-a-position-paper
And I don't think the EU are really interested in an innovative comprehensive new UK-EU agreement that works. They either want to bring us to heel, or agree a BINO.
It's the politics that will sink this.
If not friendly and co-operative, what do you have in mind?
Everyone pretends this is about economics but it's really about politics and that is what will make or break it.
You need to consider the counterfactual if we'd never joined the EEC in the seventies - a workround fudge would have been found for it in time with Ireland in that scenario too.
QED
I positively voted to reject those particular bits of paperwork. Nobody is "stripping" me of anything.
If you don't think "free speech or self defence" are bureaucratic inventions you need to get out more.
"Nobody is "stripping" me of anything."
You are stripping me of rights I currently have. Forgive me if I don't thank you for it
Brexit bought me two completely refitted C P Hart bathrooms.
Up from 45k to 60k (Don't worry I have a while to go till retirement yet)
No land border either, and Scotland was never part of a larger entity that has not contained England.
I'm guessing, though, that you are not entirely characteristic of the wider UK population.