Mike took him seriously at first though, just shows how desperate the Remainers are
Whenever anybody describes an action as desperate it mean they are worried it might be effective.
You might have made that argument successfully a week ago.
Do you seriously believe that anyone is "worried" Chapman might be effective now with hindsight?
Effective at torpedoing the continuity Remainers.
The Chappers incident has basically holed any new party below the waterline. That is a great result for Cable and Corbyn... Any conspiricy theory should start from there.
One might be tempted to remark on how the flapping white coats are no longer hard line Eurosceptics but hard line Europhiles.
@CornishJohn - Here's the explanation of erga omnes in relation to EU tariffs:
Erga omnes is the legal term for obligations or rights towards all. For instance, if a product's customs duty is "erga omnes", it is applicable to imports from all countries.
However developing countries have advantageous conditions to enter the EU market. You may not have to pay the full tariff –or indeed any at all-. Hence, next to the "erga omnes" tariff, you may find the preferential agreement that your country has and the reduced tariff it implies.
Your country may be eligible for more than one preferential arrangement with the EU. If so, you can choose the most advantageous one for you, provided you meet the conditions.
"Erga omnes" is also commonly referred to as "Most Favoured Nation" treatment, in WTO jargon
Bill Gates has been going on for a long time about how Western protectionism is stifling trade in developing countries, consistently arguing that free trade is the way forward and that aid often ends up in the wrong hands.
He is right of course, and as we leave the EU Britain should make it clear that we welcome free trade with the whole world.
Mike took him seriously at first though, just shows how desperate the Remainers are
Whenever anybody describes an action as desperate it mean they are worried it might be effective.
You might have made that argument successfully a week ago.
Do you seriously believe that anyone is "worried" Chapman might be effective now with hindsight?
Effective at torpedoing the continuity Remainers.
The Chappers incident has basically holed any new party below the waterline. That is a great result for Cable and Corbyn... Any conspiricy theory should start from there.
One might be tempted to remark on how the flapping white coats are no longer hard line Eurosceptics but hard line Europhiles.
This has always been the case. Europe has many different nations but the idea that centuries old nation-states should be effectively abolished and combined into a new nation called "Europe" is about as ideological as it gets. The only difference being that hitherto this vision has progressed remarkably far.
The gap between insanity and genius is measured only by success.
He [Davis] wrote that “both sides need to move swiftly on to discussing our future partnership and we want that to happen after the European Council in October”. So much for constructive ambiguity about what Britain needs. Read Mr Davis’s article closely, and gone is the pretence that Britain can walk away from the table. The phrase “no deal is better than a bad deal” is absent.
This has always been the case. The British Isles have many different nations but the idea that centuries old nation-states should be effectively abolished and combined into a new nation called "the United Kingdom" is about as ideological as it gets. The only difference being that hitherto this vision has progressed remarkably far.
The gap between insanity and genius is measured only by success.
A selective example of which there may be many, but there are also serious negative impacts on Africa from the way it trades (especially in Agriculture) with EU states.
It's not always a good deal for Africa, and in fact since the alteration of the old Preferential Treatment Deals that EU nations had with the ACP (WTO case was brought by the USA), the commission has rather exploited the situation to open up African Markets at great advantage to the EU.
Free Trade is often the expression of imperial power.
Similarly the NAFTA agreement has destroyed more Mexican agricultural jobs than the number of manufacturing jobs created.
Indeed the move to growing and smuggling drugs in Caribbean and Mexico is in part driven by lack of other agricultural work. It is not just British farmers and diabetes specialists who fear the import of cheap, high calorie American foodstuffs.
Wow. Did you really just write that?
I'm going to pretend it's a copy and paste, because I think you're cleverer than that.
This has always been the case. The British Isles have many different nations but the idea that centuries old nation-states should be effectively abolished and combined into a new nation called "the United Kingdom" is about as ideological as it gets. The only difference being that hitherto this vision has progressed remarkably far.
The gap between insanity and genius is measured only by success.
He [Davis] wrote that “both sides need to move swiftly on to discussing our future partnership and we want that to happen after the European Council in October”. So much for constructive ambiguity about what Britain needs. Read Mr Davis’s article closely, and gone is the pretence that Britain can walk away from the table. The phrase “no deal is better than a bad deal” is absent.
The Opinium poll linked by Carlotta in the last thread shows things very stable - Labour +3, up 1 on last Opinium, with May fractionally ahead on best PM. Interestingly, relatively few people about a quarter) strongly disapprove of either leader - I think the general view of May is that she's a bit meh, but there was pretty entrenched disapproval of Corbyn a while back which seems to have largely evaporated.
I don't think you've convinced ydoethur, though...
I think it is fair to say that even if the good Dr Palmer and I were on speaking terms he would be on to a lost cause there!
Mind you, Corbyn's better than some of the UKIP leadership candidates. He's possibly slightly better than Michael Gove as well.
"Gay donkey raped my horse" man is campaigning for mass removals of non ethnic Brits, aiming for net emigration of a million per year.
I am not a fan of repatriation at all but surely if he was going to target anyone gypsies, Bulgarians or radical Islamists would gain far more support than British Indians, most of whom are hard working and law abiding?
Are all the Indian medical staff in in the NHS going to be encouraged to leave - in which case we would have no health service.
No idea why you are commenting on a bloke that will never remotely influence govt. Its no better than "a boke in the pub says....."
I suspect when kippers start talking about repatriation that their 1950s mindset leads them to think that anyone not white-skinned is straight off the Windrush; in other words, Mr gay donkey would be surprised and disappointed at the number of brown and black people remaining in the country after every single person who could be repatriated, had been.
The bloke is full on mental, have you seen him speak? Ukip should have just jacked it in when Farage quit as leader, they are following the same well trodden path of a football team who go downhill after a successful manager leaves. The 2014-2016 era was their 15 mins of fame
Such views - linking race directly with culture, nationality and identity - were quite common in the Western world until the 1970s. Some would argue to some extent they still are.
But, the vast majority of people have now moved beyond this, and almost everyone knows somebody in an interracial or cross-cultural relationship.
@CycleFree: Genuine question here Mr M: how do you think Leavers should confront their campaign? And how do you think it might make a difference? ----- Good question.
For the moment I'm concerned with those Leavers for whom immigration is not the paramount concern. So the free traders and sovereigntists. (The anti-immigration gang will still be running around celebrating right up to the point that they lose their jobs or the local hospital shuts down, so they aren't worth bothering with for now.)
Following the referendum result, that group of Leavers appealed to Remainers to make common cause with them to secure an EEA-type deal for now. Unsurprisingly, that bombed. Why on earth would Remainers make common cause with people who had behaved cynically and despicably but were entirely unrepentant, for the Remain side to take the rap for what the Faragites would label a betrayal of the referendum vote? The next stab in the back from the EEA Leavers was telegraphed a mile off. It was in any case wholly inconsistent with how the referendum was won.
So the entire post-referendum process has been driven by the headbangers. You can see the distaste and creeping fear of the EEA Leavers but they have to date taken no responsibility for the state of affairs that they in large part created.
What can they do about it now? Until there is some public and clear acknowledgement at the most senior level that they allowed themselves to be carried along with a campaign and a prospectus that with hindsight they now deeply regret for its meaning and impact, the headbangers will win. So they need to start there.
This will involve severe loss of credibility. [....]
Where things go from there, I don't know. But that, followed by the inevitable public debate on these matters, must be the necessary first step.
I think Leavers need to take responsibility for the consequences of the decision to leave the EU. Leavers moan more about what's happening with Brexit than Remoaners do, although there's plenty of that too. Leavers need to lay out a way forward with the compromises they are prepared to make to achieve a Brexit that the large majority of people in the UK can live with. Something they have never done before or after the referendum. Unless they take responsibility Brexit has no chance of being a success.
So, for example, David Davis' department last week issued "position" papers on customs arrangements and the Irish border that are pure wishful thinking. What do they want? EU Customs Union or trade barriers and a hard border with Ireland? Unless Leavers face up to these kinds of trade offs, Brexit will fail on their terms. A warm sense of grievance against Remainers and the EU doesn't compensate for a failed Brexit.
Picking up on the most important topic of the day: does anyone know where in the UK you can buy decent taramasalata? The stuff that's sold in the supermarkets is an abomination. I used to work near a little Cypriot sandwich bar where they made their own, which was delicious, but the place no longer exists.
So, for example, David Davis' department last week issued "position" papers on customs arrangements and the Irish border that are pure wishful thinking. What do they want? EU Customs Union or trade barriers and a hard border with Ireland? Unless Leavers face up to these kinds of trade offs, Brexit will fail on their terms. A warm sense of grievance against Remainers and the EU doesn't compensate for a failed Brexit.
Brexiteers should be offering to pay the DUP whatever it takes for as long as it takes to get them to support special status and a de facto united Ireland. It's the only 'sufficient' solution that allows us them to move onto those wonderful trade deals.
So, for example, David Davis' department last week issued "position" papers on customs arrangements and the Irish border that are pure wishful thinking. What do they want? EU Customs Union or trade barriers and a hard border with Ireland? Unless Leavers face up to these kinds of trade offs, Brexit will fail on their terms. A warm sense of grievance against Remainers and the EU doesn't compensate for a failed Brexit.
Brexiteers should be offering to pay the DUP whatever it takes for as long as it takes to get them to support special status and a de facto united Ireland. It's the only 'sufficient' solution that allows us them to move onto those wonderful trade deals.
What we want is a Canada-USA style smart border between the UK and Ireland. It's yet another case that proves that the supposed trade-off is something that exists in the fantasy of the hardliners on the EU side and the arch-Remainers in the UK that will always buy everything they throw out.
As I said earlier today, the main thing us Brexit-supporters did not anticipate is the extent to which a contingent of hardcore Remainers were willing to harm the UK to sabotage the outcome of the vote they lost. I read yesterday Keir Starmer criticising Davis for now agreeing with the EU on the ECJ ruling on EU citizens in the UK. He is the supposedly Loyal Opposition's man on Brexit, and yet he supports an EU court ruling over UK residents, with no equivalent UK court ruling over EU residents. It is jaw-dropping.
Whoever leads the Conservatives and indeed Labour into the next election will need to be much bolder I think about going out and actually being seen by non-selected and potentially hostile audiences in key seats. Much though I dislike Corbyn, I have to say I think that would be no bad thing. A second contribution to public life?
Surely we would all gain from seeing a return to the open election meetings we saw back in the 1964 & 1966 election campaigns when Harold Wilson dealt so effectively with his Tory hecklers. Ted Heath did ok too - Alec Douglas-Home less so. Other leading figures such as George Brown and Quintin Hogg also helped to bring those campaigns to life with their open air meetings.
He [Davis] wrote that “both sides need to move swiftly on to discussing our future partnership and we want that to happen after the European Council in October”. So much for constructive ambiguity about what Britain needs. Read Mr Davis’s article closely, and gone is the pretence that Britain can walk away from the table. The phrase “no deal is better than a bad deal” is absent.
Osborne rightly labelled as unpatriotic. Not a good position for any person harbouring ambitions to be PM/
The decline of the Evening Standard into a mouthpiece for covering Osborne's backside was completely clear when it attacked Sadiq Khan for dropping the Garden Bridge. The project was clearly going to come at huge cost to the public purse and an independent report said as much, yet the Standard claimed Khan had only cut it due to politics. I'm no fan of Khan but it has clear any objectivity at all from the Standard has gone out the window.
He [Davis] wrote that “both sides need to move swiftly on to discussing our future partnership and we want that to happen after the European Council in October”. So much for constructive ambiguity about what Britain needs. Read Mr Davis’s article closely, and gone is the pretence that Britain can walk away from the table. The phrase “no deal is better than a bad deal” is absent.
Political coverage in the Evening Standard is, unsurprisingly, very much improved since Osborne became editor. His leader pieces in particular are superb - the latest being a good example.
This has always been the case. The British Isles have many different nations but the idea that centuries old nation-states should be effectively abolished and combined into a new nation called "the United Kingdom" is about as ideological as it gets. The only difference being that hitherto this vision has progressed remarkably far.
The gap between insanity and genius is measured only by success.
Fixed it for you.
The UK is not a new nation, but more than two centuries old. Prior to that, they had been ruled by the same monarch for another two centuries.
Political coverage in the Evening Standard is, unsurprisingly, very much improved since Osborne became editor. His leader pieces in particular are superb - the latest being a good example.
It is ridiculous. What is particularly silly is this new gambit of Remainers that a final payment to the EU is an additional cost to Brexit, rather than the next few years subs we were paying anyway, before eliminating the cost for everything after that.
He [Davis] wrote that “both sides need to move swiftly on to discussing our future partnership and we want that to happen after the European Council in October”. So much for constructive ambiguity about what Britain needs. Read Mr Davis’s article closely, and gone is the pretence that Britain can walk away from the table. The phrase “no deal is better than a bad deal” is absent.
Osborne rightly labelled as unpatriotic. Not a good position for any person harbouring ambitions to be PM/
The decline of the Evening Standard into a mouthpiece for covering Osborne's backside was completely clear when it attacked Sadiq Khan for dropping the Garden Bridge. The project was clearly going to come at huge cost to the public purse and an independent report said as much, yet the Standard claimed Khan had only cut it due to politics. I'm no fan of Khan but it has clear any objectivity at all from the Standard has gone out the window.
Saying he only cut it due to politics is unfair. But partially, certainly.
So, for example, David Davis' department last week issued "position" papers on customs arrangements and the Irish border that are pure wishful thinking. What do they want? EU Customs Union or trade barriers and a hard border with Ireland? Unless Leavers face up to these kinds of trade offs, Brexit will fail on their terms. A warm sense of grievance against Remainers and the EU doesn't compensate for a failed Brexit.
Brexiteers should be offering to pay the DUP whatever it takes for as long as it takes to get them to support special status and a de facto united Ireland. It's the only 'sufficient' solution that allows us them to move onto those wonderful trade deals.
What we want is a Canada-USA style smart border between the UK and Ireland. It's yet another case that proves that the supposed trade-off is something that exists in the fantasy of the hardliners on the EU side and the arch-Remainers in the UK that will always buy everything they throw out.
As I said earlier today, the main thing us Brexit-supporters did not anticipate is the extent to which a contingent of hardcore Remainers were willing to harm the UK to sabotage the outcome of the vote they lost. I read yesterday Keir Starmer criticising Davis for now agreeing with the EU on the ECJ ruling on EU citizens in the UK. He is the supposedly Loyal Opposition's man on Brexit, and yet he supports an EU court ruling over UK residents, with no equivalent UK court ruling over EU residents. It is jaw-dropping.
So a hard border with complex and burdensome red tape to avoid an EU customs union? I didn't pick that up that from the DExEU. I read they were proposing a "a new and special relationship" that has never been tried before.
He [Davis] wrote that “both sides need to move swiftly on to discussing our future partnership and we want that to happen after the European Council in October”. So much for constructive ambiguity about what Britain needs. Read Mr Davis’s article closely, and gone is the pretence that Britain can walk away from the table. The phrase “no deal is better than a bad deal” is absent.
Osborne rightly labelled as unpatriotic. Not a good position for any person harbouring ambitions to be PM/
Hardly extraordinary that someone who thinks that Brexit will be damaging to the nation should publish a piece saying that. "Rightly labelled as unpatriotic" - so failing to conform to your personal biases is unpatriotic ? You might just as well argue that anyone who votes for a party not elected as the government is unpatriotic. Absurd.
Political coverage in the Evening Standard is, unsurprisingly, very much improved since Osborne became editor. His leader pieces in particular are superb - the latest being a good example.
It is ridiculous. What is particularly silly is this new gambit of Remainers that a final payment to the EU is an additional cost to Brexit, rather than the next few years subs we were paying anyway, before eliminating the cost for everything after that.
You are rewriting history there. There was never any acknowledgement from the Leave side that there would be an exit bill at all, or indeed any significant ongoing payments.
Political coverage in the Evening Standard is, unsurprisingly, very much improved since Osborne became editor. His leader pieces in particular are superb - the latest being a good example.
It is ridiculous. What is particularly silly is this new gambit of Remainers that a final payment to the EU is an additional cost to Brexit, rather than the next few years subs we were paying anyway, before eliminating the cost for everything after that.
You are rewriting history there. There was never any acknowledgement from the Leave side that there would be an exit bill at all, or indeed any significant ongoing payments.
They aren't ongoing payments. They are wrapping up our exit in the next few years. It's like someone saying you should quit your gym membership to run outside as it would save you forty pounds a month. Then someone else pointing to wrapping up the three month contract would be an extra 120 and shows how exiting your gym actually costs money rather than saving it.
What we want is a Canada-USA style smart border between the UK and Ireland.
What does Ireland want?
I don't know. The Irish PM seems to be being deliberately obstructive about putting forward any proposals.
Varadkar: "It will come as no surprise to anyone here that I do not want there to be an economic border on our island, nor do I want one between Ireland and Britain."
That's clear enough. Is Brexit incompatible with that?
So, for example, David Davis' department last week issued "position" papers on customs arrangements and the Irish border that are pure wishful thinking. What do they want? EU Customs Union or trade barriers and a hard border with Ireland? Unless Leavers face up to these kinds of trade offs, Brexit will fail on their terms. A warm sense of grievance against Remainers and the EU doesn't compensate for a failed Brexit.
Brexiteers should be offering to pay the DUP whatever it takes for as long as it takes to get them to support special status and a de facto united Ireland. It's the only 'sufficient' solution that allows us them to move onto those wonderful trade deals.
What we want is a Canada-USA style smart border between the UK and Ireland. It's yet another case that proves that the supposed trade-off is something that exists in the fantasy of the hardliners on the EU side and the arch-Remainers in the UK that will always buy everything they throw out.
As I said earlier today, the main thing us Brexit-supporters did not anticipate is the extent to which a contingent of hardcore Remainers were willing to harm the UK to sabotage the outcome of the vote they lost. I read yesterday Keir Starmer criticising Davis for now agreeing with the EU on the ECJ ruling on EU citizens in the UK. He is the supposedly Loyal Opposition's man on Brexit, and yet he supports an EU court ruling over UK residents, with no equivalent UK court ruling over EU residents. It is jaw-dropping.
So a hard border with complex and burdensome red tape to avoid an EU customs union? I didn't pick that up that from the DExEU. I read they were proposing a "a new and special relationship" that has never been tried before.
No. The US and Canada doesn't have a hard border. It has checkpoints in some places (as would exist at Calais) and open roads in other places (as would exist in Northern Ireland).
So, for example, David Davis' department last week issued "position" papers on customs arrangements and the Irish border that are pure wishful thinking. What do they want? EU Customs Union or trade barriers and a hard border with Ireland? Unless Leavers face up to these kinds of trade offs, Brexit will fail on their terms. A warm sense of grievance against Remainers and the EU doesn't compensate for a failed Brexit.
Brexiteers should be offering to pay the DUP whatever it takes for as long as it takes to get them to support special status and a de facto united Ireland. It's the only 'sufficient' solution that allows us them to move onto those wonderful trade deals.
What we want is a Canada-USA style smart border between the UK and Ireland. It's yet another case that proves that the supposed trade-off is something that exists in the fantasy of the hardliners on the EU side and the arch-Remainers in the UK that will always buy everything they throw out.
As I said earlier today, the main thing us Brexit-supporters did not anticipate is the extent to which a contingent of hardcore Remainers were willing to harm the UK to sabotage the outcome of the vote they lost. I read yesterday Keir Starmer criticising Davis for now agreeing with the EU on the ECJ ruling on EU citizens in the UK. He is the supposedly Loyal Opposition's man on Brexit, and yet he supports an EU court ruling over UK residents, with no equivalent UK court ruling over EU residents. It is jaw-dropping.
So a hard border with complex and burdensome red tape to avoid an EU customs union? I didn't pick that up that from the DExEU. I read they were proposing a "a new and special relationship" that has never been tried before.
No. The US and Canada doesn't have a hard border. It has checkpoints in some places (as would exist at Calais) and open roads in other places (as would exist in Northern Ireland).
There is a certain power dynamic in relations between the US and Canada. In terms of the UK/Ireland border the mistake Brexiteers make is in thinking that we are in the role of the US, when in fact we are in the role of Canada.
They aren't ongoing payments. They are wrapping up our exit in the next few years. It's like someone saying you should quit your gym membership to run outside as it would save you forty pounds a month. Then someone else pointing to wrapping up the three month contract would be an extra 120 and shows how exiting your gym actually costs money rather than saving it.
If you think there aren't going to be substantial ongoing payments in return for any deal, then I have a bridge to sell you.
Varadkar: "It will come as no surprise to anyone here that I do not want there to be an economic border on our island, nor do I want one between Ireland and Britain."
That's clear enough. Is Brexit incompatible with that?
What Varadkar says is indeed perfectly clear. It's also identical to what the UK wants. The only question is whether the rest of the EU27 want it; so far, they are not showing much sign of doing so.
Come on, everyone. You’re better than this. Let’s get on with the trade talks and through them resolve these other matters at the same time. There’s a friendly mutually-beneficial deal to do. Let’s get it done.
So, for example, David Davis' department last week issued "position" papers on customs arrangements and the Irish border that are pure wishful thinking. What do they want? EU Customs Union or trade barriers and a hard border with Ireland? Unless Leavers face up to these kinds of trade offs, Brexit will fail on their terms. A warm sense of grievance against Remainers and the EU doesn't compensate for a failed Brexit.
Brexiteers should be offering to pay the DUP whatever it takes for as long as it takes to get them to support special status and a de facto united Ireland. It's the only 'sufficient' solution that allows us them to move onto those wonderful trade deals.
What we want is a Canada-USA style smart border between the UK and Ireland. It's yet another case that proves that the supposed trade-off is something that exists in the fantasy of the hardliners on the EU side and the arch-Remainers in the UK that will always buy everything they throw out.
As I said earlier today, the main thing us Brexit-supporters did not anticipate is the extent to which a contingent of hardcore Remainers were willing to harm the UK to sabotage the outcome of the vote they lost. I read yesterday Keir Starmer criticising Davis for now agreeing with the EU on the ECJ ruling on EU citizens in the UK. He is the supposedly Loyal Opposition's man on Brexit, and yet he supports an EU court ruling over UK residents, with no equivalent UK court ruling over EU residents. It is jaw-dropping.
So a hard border with complex and burdensome red tape to avoid an EU customs union? I didn't pick that up that from the DExEU. I read they were proposing a "a new and special relationship" that has never been tried before.
No. The US and Canada doesn't have a hard border. It has checkpoints in some places (as would exist at Calais) and open roads in other places (as would exist in Northern Ireland).
There is a certain power dynamic in relations between the US and Canada. In terms of the UK/Ireland border the mistake Brexiteers make is in thinking that we are in the role of the US, when in fact we are in the role of Canada.
Varadkar: "It will come as no surprise to anyone here that I do not want there to be an economic border on our island, nor do I want one between Ireland and Britain."
That's clear enough. Is Brexit incompatible with that?
What Varadkar says is indeed perfectly clear. It's also identical to what the UK wants. The only question is whether the rest of the EU27 want it; so far, they are not showing much sign of doing so.
No economic border is not possible if the UK (in particular Northern Ireland) leaves the single market and customs union. You're overindulging in cakeism lately.
So, for example, David Davis' department last week issued "position" papers on customs arrangements and the Irish border that are pure wishful thinking. What do they want? EU Customs Union or trade barriers and a hard border with Ireland? Unless Leavers face up to these kinds of trade offs, Brexit will fail on their terms. A warm sense of grievance against Remainers and the EU doesn't compensate for a failed Brexit.
Brexiteers should be offering to pay the DUP whatever it takes for as long as it takes to get them to support special status and a de facto united Ireland. It's the only 'sufficient' solution that allows us them to move onto those wonderful trade deals.
What we want is a Canada-USA style smart border between the UK and Ireland. It's yet another case that proves that the supposed trade-off is something that exists in the fantasy of the hardliners on the EU side and the arch-Remainers in the UK that will always buy everything they throw out.
As I said earlier today, the main thing us Brexit-supporters did not anticipate is the extent to which a contingent of hardcore Remainers were willing to harm the UK to sabotage the outcome of the vote they lost. I read yesterday Keir Starmer criticising Davis for now agreeing with the EU on the ECJ ruling on EU citizens in the UK. He is the supposedly Loyal Opposition's man on Brexit, and yet he supports an EU court ruling over UK residents, with no equivalent UK court ruling over EU residents. It is jaw-dropping.
So a hard border with complex and burdensome red tape to avoid an EU customs union? I didn't pick that up that from the DExEU. I read they were proposing a "a new and special relationship" that has never been tried before.
No. The US and Canada doesn't have a hard border. It has checkpoints in some places (as would exist at Calais) and open roads in other places (as would exist in Northern Ireland).
There is a certain power dynamic in relations between the US and Canada. In terms of the UK/Ireland border the mistake Brexiteers make is in thinking that we are in the role of the US, when in fact we are in the role of Canada.
ROI is the USA in your scenario ?
Boggling.
Yes, it clearly does boggle the minds of Brexiteers. They can't fathom how the EU can multiply the sovereignty of a member state to allow it to defend its interests with the full weight of the community behind it.
They aren't ongoing payments. They are wrapping up our exit in the next few years. It's like someone saying you should quit your gym membership to run outside as it would save you forty pounds a month. Then someone else pointing to wrapping up the three month contract would be an extra 120 and shows how exiting your gym actually costs money rather than saving it.
If you think there aren't going to be substantial ongoing payments in return for any deal, then I have a bridge to sell you.
Substantial is a relative term, but we will not be paying billions a year indefinitely.
Yes, it clearly does boggle the minds of Brexiteers. They can't fathom how the EU can multiply the sovereignty of a member state to allow it to defend its interests with the full weight of the community behind it.
The list of things that can boggle the minds of Brexiteers is long and varied
So, for example, David Davis' department last week issued "position" papers on customs arrangements and the Irish border that are pure wishful thinking. What do they want? EU Customs Union or trade barriers and a hard border with Ireland? Unless Leavers face up to these kinds of trade offs, Brexit will fail on their terms. A warm sense of grievance against Remainers and the EU doesn't compensate for a failed Brexit.
Brexiteers should be offering to pay the DUP whatever it takes for as long as it takes to get them to support special status and a de facto united Ireland. It's the only 'sufficient' solution that allows us them to move onto those wonderful trade deals.
What we want is a Canada-USA style smart border between the UK and Ireland. It's yet another case that proves that the supposed trade-off is something that exists in the fantasy of the hardliners on the EU side and the arch-Remainers in the UK that will always buy everything they throw out.
As I said earlier today, the main thing us Brexit-supporters did not anticipate is the extent to which a contingent of hardcore Remainers were willing to harm the UK to sabotage the outcome of the vote they lost. I read yesterday Keir Starmer criticising Davis for now agreeing with the EU on the ECJ ruling on EU citizens in the UK. He is the supposedly Loyal Opposition's man on Brexit, and yet he supports an EU court ruling over UK residents, with no equivalent UK court ruling over EU residents. It is jaw-dropping.
So a hard border with complex and burdensome red tape to avoid an EU customs union? I didn't pick that up that from the DExEU. I read they were proposing a "a new and special relationship" that has never been tried before.
No. The US and Canada doesn't have a hard border. It has checkpoints in some places (as would exist at Calais) and open roads in other places (as would exist in Northern Ireland).
There is a certain power dynamic in relations between the US and Canada. In terms of the UK/Ireland border the mistake Brexiteers make is in thinking that we are in the role of the US, when in fact we are in the role of Canada.
And yet the US/Canada border works the same for both sides, so your shifting of arguments won't wash.
There is a certain power dynamic in relations between the US and Canada. In terms of the UK/Ireland border the mistake Brexiteers make is in thinking that we are in the role of the US, when in fact we are in the role of Canada.
ROI is the USA in your scenario ? Boggling.
Not the ROI, but the EU, of which the ROI is a part.
They aren't ongoing payments. They are wrapping up our exit in the next few years. It's like someone saying you should quit your gym membership to run outside as it would save you forty pounds a month. Then someone else pointing to wrapping up the three month contract would be an extra 120 and shows how exiting your gym actually costs money rather than saving it.
If you think there aren't going to be substantial ongoing payments in return for any deal, then I have a bridge to sell you.
Substantial is a relative term, but we will not be paying billions a year indefinitely.
Did you see my post about erga omnes tariffs and do you accept that in the examples you came up with there are no tariffs to be reduced (and therefore no upside from Brexit)?
What we want is a Canada-USA style smart border between the UK and Ireland.
What does Ireland want?
I don't know. The Irish PM seems to be being deliberately obstructive about putting forward any proposals.
Varadkar: "It will come as no surprise to anyone here that I do not want there to be an economic border on our island, nor do I want one between Ireland and Britain."
That's clear enough. Is Brexit incompatible with that?
It is perfectly clear and we have set out proposals for doing so. If he does not like our proposals, he can suggest amendments. Something he currently is refusing to do.
Come on, everyone. You’re better than this. Let’s get on with the trade talks and through them resolve these other matters at the same time. There’s a friendly mutually-beneficial deal to do. Let’s get it done.
What he’s saying is that the EU need to abandon their silly idea that we talk about nothing until the money and NI border is agreed, and get round the table to talk about the trade deal - the outcome of which affects everything else. Let’s get on with it.
They aren't ongoing payments. They are wrapping up our exit in the next few years. It's like someone saying you should quit your gym membership to run outside as it would save you forty pounds a month. Then someone else pointing to wrapping up the three month contract would be an extra 120 and shows how exiting your gym actually costs money rather than saving it.
If you think there aren't going to be substantial ongoing payments in return for any deal, then I have a bridge to sell you.
Substantial is a relative term, but we will not be paying billions a year indefinitely.
Did you see my post about erga omnes tariffs and do you accept that in the examples you came up with there are no tariffs to be reduced (and therefore no upside from Brexit)?
I accept the former but not the latter. The Gates Institute does not complain about EU tariffs on Africa for nothing.
I fear that our more single-minded Leavers seem not to have appreciated that:
1) journalism is in part a branch of the entertainment industry, and part of its remit is to attract attention; and
2) a successful newspaper knows its audience, and for a London-based newspaper that means focusing on the 60% who voted Remain.
George Osborne is doing supremely well in his new role. It's hard to think of a newspaper editor with more impact at present. Today's editorial looks to me like the very definition of fair comment, carefully argued by reference to the facts. No wonder Leavers are so upset.
No economic border is not possible if the UK (in particular Northern Ireland) leaves the single market and customs union. You're overindulging in cakeism lately.
You speak as though the workings of the EU are immutable laws of nature. But of course they are not, they are a set of political conventions made by the EU states. They have a choice: they can come up with some fudge which accommodates the needs of Eire, is good for the UK, and is good for the other EU countries. Or they can choose not to.
It's up to them. I don't know what they will do, the signs we are getting are quite mixed, and the institutional inertia is a big problem. There is certainly a significant risk of an outcome disastrous for all parties. On the positive side, the EU's capacity for bureaucratic fudge is unsurpassed; this is, after all, an organisation which maintains simultaneously that northern Cyprus is both in the EU and not in the EU. We'll have to see what they can come up with in relation to Brexit.
It seems Mr Chapman has sent the wife & kids on ahead as the police still have his passport - and he's been declared unfit to travel - lets hope for his sake in particular but also all our sakes in general he makes it back safely to the UK, otherwise we'll never hear the end of it.....
So, for example, David Davis' department last week issued "position" papers on customs arrangements and the Irish border that are pure wishful thinking. What do they want? EU Customs Union or trade barriers and a hard border with Ireland? Unless Leavers face up to these kinds of trade offs, Brexit will fail on their terms. A warm sense of grievance against Remainers and the EU doesn't compensate for a failed Brexit.
Brexiteers should be offering to pay the DUP whatever it takes for as long as it takes to get them to support special status and a de facto united Ireland. It's the only 'sufficient' solution that allows us them to move onto those wonderful trade deals.
As I said earlier today, the main thing us Brexit-supporters did not anticipate is the extent to which a contingent of hardcore Remainers were willing to harm the UK to sabotage the outcome of the vote they lost. I read yesterday Keir Starmer criticising Davis for now agreeing with the EU on the ECJ ruling on EU citizens in the UK. He is the supposedly Loyal Opposition's man on Brexit, and yet he supports an EU court ruling over UK residents, with no equivalent UK court ruling over EU residents. It is jaw-dropping.
So a hard border with complex and burdensome red tape to avoid an EU customs union? I didn't pick that up that from the DExEU. I read they were proposing a "a new and special relationship" that has never been tried before.
No. The US and Canada doesn't have a hard border. It has checkpoints in some places (as would exist at Calais) and open roads in other places (as would exist in Northern Ireland).
There is a certain power dynamic in relations between the US and Canada. In terms of the UK/Ireland border the mistake Brexiteers make is in thinking that we are in the role of the US, when in fact we are in the role of Canada.
ROI is the USA in your scenario ?
Boggling.
Yes, it clearly does boggle the minds of Brexiteers. They can't fathom how the EU can multiply the sovereignty of a member state to allow it to defend its interests with the full weight of the community behind it.
Thankfully we will no longer be paying so many £Bns to "multiply the sovereignty" of the ROI. IE if the Germans want to build them more motorways then that's up to them.
It seems Mr Chapman has sent the wife & kids on ahead as the police still have his passport - and he's been declared unfit to travel - lets hope for his sake in particular but also all our sakes in general he makes it back safely to the UK, otherwise we'll never hear the end of it.....
They aren't ongoing payments. They are wrapping up our exit in the next few years. It's like someone saying you should quit your gym membership to run outside as it would save you forty pounds a month. Then someone else pointing to wrapping up the three month contract would be an extra 120 and shows how exiting your gym actually costs money rather than saving it.
If you think there aren't going to be substantial ongoing payments in return for any deal, then I have a bridge to sell you.
That depends what you mean by "substantial" and "in return for any deal".
Anything more than a nominal grant by the UK taxpayer directly to the EU budget simply in exchange for Leaving with a deal (as opposed to Leaving with no deal) would be unacceptable to Parliament. But contributions to particular agencies that we choose to rejoin are a different matter.
There is a certain power dynamic in relations between the US and Canada. In terms of the UK/Ireland border the mistake Brexiteers make is in thinking that we are in the role of the US, when in fact we are in the role of Canada.
ROI is the USA in your scenario ? Boggling.
Not the ROI, but the EU, of which the ROI is a part.
It seems Mr Chapman has sent the wife & kids on ahead as the police still have his passport - and he's been declared unfit to travel - lets hope for his sake in particular but also all our sakes in general he makes it back safely to the UK, otherwise we'll never hear the end of it.....
It seems Mr Chapman has sent the wife & kids on ahead as the police still have his passport - and he's been declared unfit to travel - lets hope for his sake in particular but also all our sakes in general he makes it back safely to the UK, otherwise we'll never hear the end of it.....
Poor chap. His wife must be getting really alarmed. Would have thought that unless there’s some serious problem he could be escorted home, though.
Come on, everyone. You’re better than this. Let’s get on with the trade talks and through them resolve these other matters at the same time. There’s a friendly mutually-beneficial deal to do. Let’s get it done.
What he’s saying is that the EU need to abandon their silly idea that we talk about nothing until the money and NI border is agreed, and get round the table to talk about the trade deal - the outcome of which affects everything else. Let’s get on with it.
"We'd like you to pay an unspecified bill, and possibly wash the dishes in our restaurant, before we've even shown you what's on the menu let alone eaten the food. And no you can't see the hygiene cert either till afterwards ".
It seems Mr Chapman has sent the wife & kids on ahead as the police still have his passport - and he's been declared unfit to travel - lets hope for his sake in particular but also all our sakes in general he makes it back safely to the UK, otherwise we'll never hear the end of it.....
Poor chap. His wife must be getting really alarmed. Would have thought that unless there’s some serious problem he could be escorted home, though.
He says Boris is providing him with a private plane out of Greece (presumably at tax payers expense?) so I think he'll be back "home" safe and sound shortly.
It seems Mr Chapman has sent the wife & kids on ahead as the police still have his passport - and he's been declared unfit to travel - lets hope for his sake in particular but also all our sakes in general he makes it back safely to the UK, otherwise we'll never hear the end of it.....
Do we have any news on what he was arrested for?
So far there is only one source - himself - and its not entirely clear how reliable a witness he is.....if he's right Theresa May ordered it to silence him.........
It seems Mr Chapman has sent the wife & kids on ahead as the police still have his passport - and he's been declared unfit to travel - lets hope for his sake in particular but also all our sakes in general he makes it back safely to the UK, otherwise we'll never hear the end of it.....
It seems Mr Chapman has sent the wife & kids on ahead as the police still have his passport - and he's been declared unfit to travel - lets hope for his sake in particular but also all our sakes in general he makes it back safely to the UK, otherwise we'll never hear the end of it.....
That depends what you mean by "substantial" and "in return for any deal".
Anything more than a nominal grant by the UK taxpayer directly to the EU budget simply in exchange for Leaving with a deal (as opposed to Leaving with no deal) would be unacceptable to Parliament. But contributions to particular agencies that we choose to rejoin are a different matter.
To my mind it's extremely simple. If we leave with no trade deal (i.e. we're just another third-party country like Cambodia or Chile), then we pay zero, just like any other third-party country. We'd have no conceivable motivation to do otherwise, a point which the EU27 don't seem quite to have got their heads around, at least in public.
Alternatively, as we are the weaker party in the negotiations, we'll have to accept some fairly chunky payment if we get a deal which allows trade to continue without disruption. Quite how that is structured between an 'exit payment' (in instalments?) and ongoing payments is a matter for the negotiations, assuming they get round to them. Clearly those negotiations can't start until we get to the core of the matter, which is the trade deal and the other details of our continuing relationship.
It seems Mr Chapman has sent the wife & kids on ahead as the police still have his passport - and he's been declared unfit to travel - lets hope for his sake in particular but also all our sakes in general he makes it back safely to the UK, otherwise we'll never hear the end of it.....
Do we have any news on what he was arrested for?
So far there is only one source - himself - and its not entirely clear how reliable a witness he is.....if he's right Theresa May ordered it to silence him.........
It seems Mr Chapman has sent the wife & kids on ahead as the police still have his passport - and he's been declared unfit to travel - lets hope for his sake in particular but also all our sakes in general he makes it back safely to the UK, otherwise we'll never hear the end of it.....
Do we have any news on what he was arrested for?
So far there is only one source - himself - and its not entirely clear how reliable a witness he is.....if he's right Theresa May ordered it to silence him.........
It seems Mr Chapman has sent the wife & kids on ahead as the police still have his passport - and he's been declared unfit to travel - lets hope for his sake in particular but also all our sakes in general he makes it back safely to the UK, otherwise we'll never hear the end of it.....
It seems Mr Chapman has sent the wife & kids on ahead as the police still have his passport - and he's been declared unfit to travel - lets hope for his sake in particular but also all our sakes in general he makes it back safely to the UK, otherwise we'll never hear the end of it.....
Do we have any news on what he was arrested for?
So far there is only one source - himself - and its not entirely clear how reliable a witness he is.....if he's right Theresa May ordered it to silence him.........
No economic border is not possible if the UK (in particular Northern Ireland) leaves the single market and customs union. You're overindulging in cakeism lately.
You speak as though the workings of the EU are immutable laws of nature. But of course they are not, they are a set of political conventions made by the EU states. They have a choice: they can come up with some fudge which accommodates the needs of Eire, is good for the UK, and is good for the other EU countries. Or they can choose not to.
They are immutable by force of one member state alone throwing its weight around, even in the context of an exit negotiation. That must not and will not be allowed to stand.
It seems Mr Chapman has sent the wife & kids on ahead as the police still have his passport - and he's been declared unfit to travel - lets hope for his sake in particular but also all our sakes in general he makes it back safely to the UK, otherwise we'll never hear the end of it.....
Do we have any news on what he was arrested for?
So far there is only one source - himself - and its not entirely clear how reliable a witness he is.....if he's right Theresa May ordered it to silence him.........
It seems Mr Chapman has sent the wife & kids on ahead as the police still have his passport - and he's been declared unfit to travel - lets hope for his sake in particular but also all our sakes in general he makes it back safely to the UK, otherwise we'll never hear the end of it.....
No economic border is not possible if the UK (in particular Northern Ireland) leaves the single market and customs union. You're overindulging in cakeism lately.
You speak as though the workings of the EU are immutable laws of nature. But of course they are not, they are a set of political conventions made by the EU states. They have a choice: they can come up with some fudge which accommodates the needs of Eire, is good for the UK, and is good for the other EU countries. Or they can choose not to.
They are immutable by force of one member state alone throwing its weight around, even in the context of an exit negotiation. That must not and will not be allowed to stand.
Yes - look at the growth and stability pact for example - every single member has immutably complied with it year on year..
It seems Mr Chapman has sent the wife & kids on ahead as the police still have his passport - and he's been declared unfit to travel - lets hope for his sake in particular but also all our sakes in general he makes it back safely to the UK, otherwise we'll never hear the end of it.....
Do we have any news on what he was arrested for?
So far there is only one source - himself - and its not entirely clear how reliable a witness he is.....if he's right Theresa May ordered it to silence him.........
Alternatively, as we are the weaker party in the negotiations, we'll have to accept some fairly chunky payment if we get a deal which allows trade to continue without disruption.
I can't see how that follows. Certainly allowing trade to continue without disruption is at lease as much in their interest as ours.
It seems Mr Chapman has sent the wife & kids on ahead as the police still have his passport - and he's been declared unfit to travel - lets hope for his sake in particular but also all our sakes in general he makes it back safely to the UK, otherwise we'll never hear the end of it.....
I can't see how that follows. Certainly allowing trade to continue without disruption is at lease as much in their interest as ours.
It's certainly in their interest, but disruption would be worse for us, simply because it would affect a higher proportion of our economy than would be case for most of the EU27. Of course it varies a lot: Eire would be very badly hit (perhaps even worse hit than us), some of the other small countries very dependent on UK tourism would be badly hit, and the big exporting countries like Germany and France could suffer a nasty jolt. The danger is that, like the Brexiteers, they think that's a price worth paying or simply underestimate the price, or that they are so tied up in their own bureaucratic log-jam that they are incapable of looking after their own interests.
The danger is that, like the Brexiteers, they think that's a price worth paying or simply underestimate the price, or that they are so tied up in their own bureaucratic log-jam that they are incapable of looking after their own interests.
The EU pushing us off a cliff of our own design would not be the result of bureaucratic failure but of political resolve.
I can't see how that follows. Certainly allowing trade to continue without disruption is at lease as much in their interest as ours.
It's certainly in their interest, but disruption would be worse for us, simply because it would affect a higher proportion of our economy than would be case for most of the EU27. Of course it varies a lot: Eire would be very badly hit (perhaps even worse hit than us), some of the other small countries very dependent on UK tourism would be badly hit, and the big exporting countries like Germany and France could suffer a nasty jolt. The danger is that, like the Brexiteers, they think that's a price worth paying or simply underestimate the price, or that they are so tied up in their own bureaucratic log-jam that they are incapable of looking after their own interests.
The other problem is negotiating delays clearly benefit them over us. If it is uncertain whether there will be a UK-EU FTA in place in July 2019, it will have minimal effects on EU firms' investment plans, while it might well have a meaningful effect on ours.
For this reason, I would expect that the EU will only concede on financial services at 11:59pm on the very last day. In this way, some firms shift their presence from the UK to the EU, wven though they needn't have.
Comments
https://twitter.com/NBCNightlyNews/status/899456246360748032
Erga omnes is the legal term for obligations or rights towards all. For instance, if a product's customs duty is "erga omnes", it is applicable to imports from all countries.
However developing countries have advantageous conditions to enter the EU market. You may not have to pay the full tariff –or indeed any at all-. Hence, next to the "erga omnes" tariff, you may find the preferential agreement that your country has and the reduced tariff it implies.
Your country may be eligible for more than one preferential arrangement with the EU. If so, you can choose the most advantageous one for you, provided you meet the conditions.
"Erga omnes" is also commonly referred to as "Most Favoured Nation" treatment, in WTO jargon
http://exporthelp.europa.eu/thdapp/display.htm?page=it/it_Tips__TricksOnEUTariffs.html&docType=main&languageId=en
"The New Harvest is a product of the Agricultural Innovation in Africa Project, funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation."
http://www.belfercenter.org/publication/new-harvest-agricultural-innovation-africa
He is right of course, and as we leave the EU Britain should make it clear that we welcome free trade with the whole world.
The gap between insanity and genius is measured only by success.
Remainers attacking Leavers: Leavers don't like it up 'em.
Leavers attacking Remainers: playing the man, not the ball.
I'm going to pretend it's a copy and paste, because I think you're cleverer than that.
The ill-will towards Britain seeps through every paragraph. https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/evening-standard-comment-a-high-price-looms-as-brexit-reality-bites-a3616306.html … Extraordinary.
Osborne rightly labelled as unpatriotic. Not a good position for any person harbouring ambitions to be PM/
But, the vast majority of people have now moved beyond this, and almost everyone knows somebody in an interracial or cross-cultural relationship.
So, for example, David Davis' department last week issued "position" papers on customs arrangements and the Irish border that are pure wishful thinking. What do they want? EU Customs Union or trade barriers and a hard border with Ireland? Unless Leavers face up to these kinds of trade offs, Brexit will fail on their terms. A warm sense of grievance against Remainers and the EU doesn't compensate for a failed Brexit.
http://news.sky.com/story/plot-foiled-to-blow-up-uae-bound-plane-with-barbie-doll-bomb-10999147
https://twitter.com/justinhendrix/status/899432213833535488
As I said earlier today, the main thing us Brexit-supporters did not anticipate is the extent to which a contingent of hardcore Remainers were willing to harm the UK to sabotage the outcome of the vote they lost. I read yesterday Keir Starmer criticising Davis for now agreeing with the EU on the ECJ ruling on EU citizens in the UK. He is the supposedly Loyal Opposition's man on Brexit, and yet he supports an EU court ruling over UK residents, with no equivalent UK court ruling over EU residents. It is jaw-dropping.
"Rightly labelled as unpatriotic" - so failing to conform to your personal biases is unpatriotic ?
You might just as well argue that anyone who votes for a party not elected as the government is unpatriotic. Absurd.
https://order-order.com/2017/08/17/corbyn-wrong-to-say-there-is-british-pakistani-grooming-problem/
That's clear enough. Is Brexit incompatible with that?
https://reaction.life/cannot-agree-orderly-brexit-withdrawal-questions-without-knowing-trade-deal-will/
Come on, everyone. You’re better than this. Let’s get on with the trade talks and through them resolve these other matters at the same time. There’s a friendly mutually-beneficial deal to do. Let’s get it done.
https://twitter.com/skynews/status/899619244882542596
https://twitter.com/tobyhelm/status/899619064380874752
Boggling.
Mr. Sandpit, indeed. The idea we settle the border and then determine trade makes no bloody sense.
https://twitter.com/James08209590/status/899615702834970626
And...
https://twitter.com/James08209590/status/899618846272872449
Who knew Greece was the EU version of North Korea?
1) journalism is in part a branch of the entertainment industry, and part of its remit is to attract attention; and
2) a successful newspaper knows its audience, and for a London-based newspaper that means focusing on the 60% who voted Remain.
George Osborne is doing supremely well in his new role. It's hard to think of a newspaper editor with more impact at present. Today's editorial looks to me like the very definition of fair comment, carefully argued by reference to the facts. No wonder Leavers are so upset.
It's up to them. I don't know what they will do, the signs we are getting are quite mixed, and the institutional inertia is a big problem. There is certainly a significant risk of an outcome disastrous for all parties. On the positive side, the EU's capacity for bureaucratic fudge is unsurpassed; this is, after all, an organisation which maintains simultaneously that northern Cyprus is both in the EU and not in the EU. We'll have to see what they can come up with in relation to Brexit.
Anything more than a nominal grant by the UK taxpayer directly to the EU budget simply in exchange for Leaving with a deal (as opposed to Leaving with no deal) would be unacceptable to Parliament. But contributions to particular agencies that we choose to rejoin are a different matter.
https://twitter.com/James08209590/with_replies
https://twitter.com/James08209590/status/899620394050695168
https://twitter.com/James08209590/status/899622683461242880
Personally I don't know him well enough to be able to identify him... Over to TSE!
Alternatively, as we are the weaker party in the negotiations, we'll have to accept some fairly chunky payment if we get a deal which allows trade to continue without disruption. Quite how that is structured between an 'exit payment' (in instalments?) and ongoing payments is a matter for the negotiations, assuming they get round to them. Clearly those negotiations can't start until we get to the core of the matter, which is the trade deal and the other details of our continuing relationship.
https://twitter.com/James08209590/status/899596617422168064
Now blocked, he says.
https://twitter.com/James08209590/status/899536344480980992
Crimes committed against me by Greek security officials I believe at behest of @theresa_may
She is not fit to be PM. Help me please
http://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/article/james-chapman-daily-mail
For this reason, I would expect that the EU will only concede on financial services at 11:59pm on the very last day. In this way, some firms shift their presence from the UK to the EU, wven though they needn't have.