Both Boris and Ursula are green converts so i imagine that may be a hidden factor in them wanting to get a deal done.Gamblers here may be unaware that that the Tory govt is proposing to possibly put in their forthcoming Gambling Reform Act a clause that bans anybody placing a bet if they have already lost £100 in a month across all bookmakers! Not for the first time one wonders if anyone in the House of Commons apart from Phillip Davies & Estey Mcvey know anything at all about gambling.
Am beginning to think No Deal may be the best path from here.
Despite being an arch remainer, I feel the U.K. is in the right on the last remaining blockers and I find the EU’s position unreasonable.
The underlying deal itself seems very thin - and simply allows the EU to continue enjoying a trade surplus on manufactured goods.
No Deal may have the advantage of removing some of the EU’s leverage. It may also finally prove instructive to the Tory Party and the country on the utter folly of Brexit.
I am trying to work out how BJ will spin this.....apart from blame Berlin/Paris/Brussels (delete as applicable) he will need to explain to the wider Conservative party (CBI backers, old school Tories, the city financers,) what will have gone wrong if things turn out badly - the JCB crashing through the "Get Brexit done" wall aint going to cut it and I cant see any political wins from this situation for No.10.
I have an investment in Holiday Property Bonds, a company which owns a number of holiday sites across Britain and (mainly Western) Europe. It's not timeshare, in that one can go at any time..... provided of course there is space. Members tend to be older, although of course some early members have passed on their holdings to younger people. The news about not be able to go to to the Western European sites is beginning to spread alarm and despondency on the Bondholders Facebook page.
We have one of their places a mile from where I live near Mojacar in SE Spain. Been effectively closed all year due to Covid. You really need to be pretty well heeled as it is very upmarket - I'd be surprised if many members will struggle for the few further months of Covid restrictions. I'd also expect Spain to be one of the first countries to ease the passage for tourists back into the country post Covid. The country's tourist trade cannot survive without British tourists in fairly large numbers.
A lot of the members are early/recent retirees, who like to go South for the winter, or at least a couple of weeks. Although we once met a couple who'd booked three places, one after the other, to spend three months in the warm! Retired bus driver, IIRC!
It's very expensive - prices way above the norm in our area - we use a restaurant just outside the complex and I've met many of them. Tourists on the bread line they are not. Either way - once the Covid restrictions are eased they will be back - regardless of Brexit. If not it'll go bust which would be hard on the local economy and the reason why Spain will ease the path for British tourism.
There will be big insurance premium rises to deal with for all UK travellers to the EU as from next year. For the elderly, the costs could become prohibitive.
I'm not sure if this is true or not, but i heard suggestions that EHIC was going to continue for pensioners.
If you are high risk the EHIC is one big gamble as it only provides limited emergency cover.
Am beginning to think No Deal may be the best path from here.
Despite being an arch remainer, I feel the U.K. is in the right on the last remaining blockers and I find the EU’s position unreasonable.
The underlying deal itself seems very thin - and simply allows the EU to continue enjoying a trade surplus on manufactured goods.
No Deal may have the advantage of removing some of the EU’s leverage. It may also finally prove instructive to the Tory Party and the country on the utter folly of Brexit.
I can't agree there. The EU is simply taking the words of Hannan, Redwood, Raab and others at face value ; that they want a "buccaneering Brexit", unshackled from environmental and labour standards.
It's hardly surprising that Johnson getting officially involved in the talks has made no difference, given that all previous evidence suggests that he understands almost none of the issues, and certainly not at a sufficient level of detail to make him any help whatsoever.
All he does is deal in broad brush slogans, which can only be any good for advancing general positions for use in political sloganising and campaigns, and absolutely useless for the nitty gritty of trade negotiations where the devil is (or always should be) in the detail, especially where there is a need to find paths between apparently irreconcilable positions.
Imagine, for one hypothetical moment, that there was some magical deal that emerged over the next few days. Does anyone seriously think that it wouldn't fall apart in ten minutes once anybody actually explained to him what he had agreed, and his backbenchers started sounding off about it?
You do realise don't you that David Frost with him in the talks is rather involved in the nitty gritty?
A bit more than his backbenchers are.
I don't see why that makes any difference if Johnson doesn't understand it.
So what was the purpose and outcome of Boris's late night dinner in Brussels? Presumably not to get an agreement. Von der Leyen has no power or mandate to make such an agreement, even with Barnier alongside. The focus had to be the next 2 days of the EU summit (which they want to be about other things such as their budget discussions), making it clear where the UK was not willing to budge and where there might be some room for manoeuvre.
Will this have the desired effect? Its looking increasingly unlikely but its not impossible. I quite liked the unnamed diplomat's analysis quoted on the BBC. The UK is demanding the right to do things it will never do and the EU is demanding the right to stop things that the UK would not contemplate.
I do think that we are right at the point where the smart thing to do is to give up and focus on the practicalities. So we need mini agreements that will facilitate border arrangements such as Gove's NI trusted trader regime, visa free travel, mutual recognition of standards where they remain the same etc. My understanding that flight arrangements etc have already been agreed but I am not clear if that is caught up in the nothing is agreed until everything has been agreed trap. If so that will need sorted out too. Time is short.
The withdrawal of the contentious clauses in the IMB will have made a No Deal on less than openly hostile terms much more feasible. Where the EU sees advantages in striking mini deals, there is much more chance of it happening now. That is a good thing.
Yes, the agreement on GB/NI customs makes No Deal more likely in the sense the that Good Friday Agreement is no longer a hostage to the negotiations. The risk to the GFA had always been a headache for the EU, but is now something they no longer have to worry about.
To be fair, that’s Boris as a journalist quoting the guy responsible for EU buildings saying it will have to fall because of asbestos.
Presumably it’s still full of asbestos today?
No they removed it.
Johnson quoted £60mn at the cost of refitting it. The EU spent £625mn.
So maintaining the icon of a building was considered to be worth more than half a billion to EU taxpayers, by EU officials?
Maybe that’s why we voted to leave.
It's absolutely laughable that Government supporters would attack the EU for wasting taxpayers money when our own government appears to have been handing fistfuls of taxpayers cash to their mates willy nilly.
I am trying to work out how BJ will spin this.....apart from blame Berlin/Paris/Brussels (delete as applicable) he will need to explain to the wider Conservative party (CBI backers, old school Tories, the city financers,) what will have gone wrong if things turn out badly - the JCB crashing through the "Get Brexit done" wall aint going to cut it and I cant see any political wins from this situation for No.10.
I have an investment in Holiday Property Bonds, a company which owns a number of holiday sites across Britain and (mainly Western) Europe. It's not timeshare, in that one can go at any time..... provided of course there is space. Members tend to be older, although of course some early members have passed on their holdings to younger people. The news about not be able to go to to the Western European sites is beginning to spread alarm and despondency on the Bondholders Facebook page.
We have one of their places a mile from where I live near Mojacar in SE Spain. Been effectively closed all year due to Covid. You really need to be pretty well heeled as it is very upmarket - I'd be surprised if many members will struggle for the few further months of Covid restrictions. I'd also expect Spain to be one of the first countries to ease the passage for tourists back into the country post Covid. The country's tourist trade cannot survive without British tourists in fairly large numbers.
A lot of the members are early/recent retirees, who like to go South for the winter, or at least a couple of weeks. Although we once met a couple who'd booked three places, one after the other, to spend three months in the warm! Retired bus driver, IIRC!
It's very expensive - prices way above the norm in our area - we use a restaurant just outside the complex and I've met many of them. Tourists on the bread line they are not. Either way - once the Covid restrictions are eased they will be back - regardless of Brexit. If not it'll go bust which would be hard on the local economy and the reason why Spain will ease the path for British tourism.
There will be big insurance premium rises to deal with for all UK travellers to the EU as from next year. For the elderly, the costs could become prohibitive.
Then Spain will suffer - as ever it takes to - in this case - not tango.
Mine (AXA) have already told me that it will remain unchanged, actually this year's quote was slightly lower. Although I am admittedly not elderly.
The diisconnect between the fear- mongering and reality resulted in the original Brexit vote - and the exteremists on both sides continue to play the silly game - with probably the same result.
Am beginning to think No Deal may be the best path from here.
Despite being an arch remainer, I feel the U.K. is in the right on the last remaining blockers and I find the EU’s position unreasonable.
The underlying deal itself seems very thin - and simply allows the EU to continue enjoying a trade surplus on manufactured goods.
No Deal may have the advantage of removing some of the EU’s leverage. It may also finally prove instructive to the Tory Party and the country on the utter folly of Brexit.
I can't agree there. The EU is simply taking the words of Hannan, Redwood, Raab and others at face value ; that they want a "buccaneering Brexit", unshackled from environmental and labour standards.
Sure. But a right to levy unilateral tariffs is not a fair way to tackle this. Why should the U.K. sign up to such a punitive and destabilising risk?
Spectacular test of Starship last night. So many major milestones ticked off in a single flight. For all the talk of "NASA will be on the moon in 2024" they need to get a move on. SLS - unflown, untested and 4 years behind schedule...
It still remains the mystery of modern life, a technology the Human Race had in 1969 which it does not have now.
Its not that mysterious - Saturn 5 was very very analogue. We could relearn how to make rockets that way but at what cost for what purpose? Apollo beat the Soviets to the moon - but we wouldn't do it that way now as the urgency isn't there to drive so many risks.
What grips me about Starship is that it combines literal cutting edge technology with blank sheet of paper "why can't we?" ideas that roll back the clock to tried and tested.
Starship is made from stainless sodding steel - forget your super advanced highly expensive composites. Go back to basic materials science, use something cheap in a brilliant way, collapse the cost. Elon is like an annoying toddler - anything presented to him he asks "why?". And it turns out that you don't have to do things the way we have been doing them because that's the way we're doing them.
Am beginning to think No Deal may be the best path from here.
Despite being an arch remainer, I feel the U.K. is in the right on the last remaining blockers and I find the EU’s position unreasonable.
The underlying deal itself seems very thin - and simply allows the EU to continue enjoying a trade surplus on manufactured goods.
No Deal may have the advantage of removing some of the EU’s leverage. It may also finally prove instructive to the Tory Party and the country on the utter folly of Brexit.
I can't agree there. The EU is simply taking the words of Hannan, Redwood, Raab and others at face value ; that they want a "buccaneering Brexit", unshackled from environmental and labour standards.
Sure. But a right to levy unilateral tariffs is not a fair way to tackle this. Why should the U.K. sign up to such a punitive and destabilising risk?
Both Boris and Ursula are green converts so i imagine that may be a hidden factor in them wanting to get a deal done.Gamblers here may be unaware that that the Tory govt is proposing to possibly put in their forthcoming Gambling Reform Act a clause that bans anybody placing a bet if they have already lost £100 in a month across all bookmakers! Not for the first time one wonders if anyone in the House of Commons apart from Phillip Davies & Estey Mcvey know anything at all about gambling.
Seriously? I sometimes 'lose' more than that on the lottery!
And have they ever heard of arbitrage? Or that short term bets can be offset against long term bets/strategies? Or that some long term bets could get settled as losers at random times? Or frankly, that for many people, £100 is basically chicken feed, and people who lose it are just treating betting as a hobby with disposable income that they are perfectly happy to lose?
Mr. Walker, if the EU does want the right to direct laws on us (via LPF means) and exact penalties which cannot be reciprocated if we do not follow their lead in that manner, that does seem beyond the bounds of acceptability.
A problem for Macron and Rejoiners is that the theory we'll leave, suffer a lot, and then want to rejoin or have a deal effectively dictated by the EU is that we'll already have a permanently instituted political division. As we saw with Scotland/Holyrood, impose a political dividing line and a divide will grow of its own accord.
A lot of turbulence and problems will arise if we leave without a deal.
But if we weather that for years then get back on an even keel and start adjusting to a new normal, the appetite to be legally subjugated via LPF and so on to an entity that is deemed (by some, at least) to have caused it may be rather less than the Adonises of this world believe. Not only that, the economy will have started adapting to the changed state of affairs.
The EU will, perhaps excepting a couple of months into No Deal turmoil, never have more political leverage than it does now because the change will be sudden, abrupt, and not to our advantage. That leverage will then diminish with each passing day thereafter, but the resentment stoked up will linger more persistently.
That's not good for us, or the EU, or Europe. But it may be what we'll get.
I am trying to work out how BJ will spin this.....apart from blame Berlin/Paris/Brussels (delete as applicable) he will need to explain to the wider Conservative party (CBI backers, old school Tories, the city financers,) what will have gone wrong if things turn out badly - the JCB crashing through the "Get Brexit done" wall aint going to cut it and I cant see any political wins from this situation for No.10.
I have an investment in Holiday Property Bonds, a company which owns a number of holiday sites across Britain and (mainly Western) Europe. It's not timeshare, in that one can go at any time..... provided of course there is space. Members tend to be older, although of course some early members have passed on their holdings to younger people. The news about not be able to go to to the Western European sites is beginning to spread alarm and despondency on the Bondholders Facebook page.
We have one of their places a mile from where I live near Mojacar in SE Spain. Been effectively closed all year due to Covid. You really need to be pretty well heeled as it is very upmarket - I'd be surprised if many members will struggle for the few further months of Covid restrictions. I'd also expect Spain to be one of the first countries to ease the passage for tourists back into the country post Covid. The country's tourist trade cannot survive without British tourists in fairly large numbers.
A lot of the members are early/recent retirees, who like to go South for the winter, or at least a couple of weeks. Although we once met a couple who'd booked three places, one after the other, to spend three months in the warm! Retired bus driver, IIRC!
It's very expensive - prices way above the norm in our area - we use a restaurant just outside the complex and I've met many of them. Tourists on the bread line they are not. Either way - once the Covid restrictions are eased they will be back - regardless of Brexit. If not it'll go bust which would be hard on the local economy and the reason why Spain will ease the path for British tourism.
There will be big insurance premium rises to deal with for all UK travellers to the EU as from next year. For the elderly, the costs could become prohibitive.
I'm not sure if this is true or not, but i heard suggestions that EHIC was going to continue for pensioners.
If you are high risk the EHIC is one big gamble as it only provides limited emergency cover.
Of course. Everyone should have travel insurance as a backup. But it's the loss of EHIC that is going to drive up travel insurance premiums.
Am beginning to think No Deal may be the best path from here.
Despite being an arch remainer, I feel the U.K. is in the right on the last remaining blockers and I find the EU’s position unreasonable.
The underlying deal itself seems very thin - and simply allows the EU to continue enjoying a trade surplus on manufactured goods.
No Deal may have the advantage of removing some of the EU’s leverage. It may also finally prove instructive to the Tory Party and the country on the utter folly of Brexit.
If the UK does no deal it gets back all of its territorial water, it gets 100% ability to diverge fro EU standards and it gets post-action arbitration via the WTO. I think the EU have failed to realise that once all of this has returned to Westminster there isn't any kind of government that's going to give it back, especially the territorial waters.
I really do believe that the EU are making a historic miscalculation, time and again politics and sentiment have been more important than economics. No deal isn't going to be any different.
Am beginning to think No Deal may be the best path from here.
Despite being an arch remainer, I feel the U.K. is in the right on the last remaining blockers and I find the EU’s position unreasonable.
The underlying deal itself seems very thin - and simply allows the EU to continue enjoying a trade surplus on manufactured goods.
No Deal may have the advantage of removing some of the EU’s leverage. It may also finally prove instructive to the Tory Party and the country on the utter folly of Brexit.
I can't agree there. The EU is simply taking the words of Hannan, Redwood, Raab and others at face value ; that they want a "buccaneering Brexit", unshackled from environmental and labour standards.
Sure. But a right to levy unilateral tariffs is not a fair way to tackle this. Why should the U.K. sign up to such a punitive and destabilising risk?
Maybe Brexiteers should have thought about this?
I’m a Remainer. Brexiters can speak for themselves, but the assumption that Britain could achieve terms similar to Canada does not - on the face of it - seem unreasonable.
Am beginning to think No Deal may be the best path from here.
Despite being an arch remainer, I feel the U.K. is in the right on the last remaining blockers and I find the EU’s position unreasonable.
The underlying deal itself seems very thin - and simply allows the EU to continue enjoying a trade surplus on manufactured goods.
No Deal may have the advantage of removing some of the EU’s leverage. It may also finally prove instructive to the Tory Party and the country on the utter folly of Brexit.
I can't agree there. The EU is simply taking the words of Hannan, Redwood, Raab and others at face value ; that they want a "buccaneering Brexit", unshackled from environmental and labour standards.
Sure. But a right to levy unilateral tariffs is not a fair way to tackle this. Why should the U.K. sign up to such a punitive and destabilising risk?
The problem is, it's the UK asking to retain some of the privileges of EU membership, not the other way round. The answer should surely be, because it's seeking a deal.
I am trying to work out how BJ will spin this.....apart from blame Berlin/Paris/Brussels (delete as applicable) he will need to explain to the wider Conservative party (CBI backers, old school Tories, the city financers,) what will have gone wrong if things turn out badly - the JCB crashing through the "Get Brexit done" wall aint going to cut it and I cant see any political wins from this situation for No.10.
I have an investment in Holiday Property Bonds, a company which owns a number of holiday sites across Britain and (mainly Western) Europe. It's not timeshare, in that one can go at any time..... provided of course there is space. Members tend to be older, although of course some early members have passed on their holdings to younger people. The news about not be able to go to to the Western European sites is beginning to spread alarm and despondency on the Bondholders Facebook page.
We have one of their places a mile from where I live near Mojacar in SE Spain. Been effectively closed all year due to Covid. You really need to be pretty well heeled as it is very upmarket - I'd be surprised if many members will struggle for the few further months of Covid restrictions. I'd also expect Spain to be one of the first countries to ease the passage for tourists back into the country post Covid. The country's tourist trade cannot survive without British tourists in fairly large numbers.
A lot of the members are early/recent retirees, who like to go South for the winter, or at least a couple of weeks. Although we once met a couple who'd booked three places, one after the other, to spend three months in the warm! Retired bus driver, IIRC!
It's very expensive - prices way above the norm in our area - we use a restaurant just outside the complex and I've met many of them. Tourists on the bread line they are not. Either way - once the Covid restrictions are eased they will be back - regardless of Brexit. If not it'll go bust which would be hard on the local economy and the reason why Spain will ease the path for British tourism.
There will be big insurance premium rises to deal with for all UK travellers to the EU as from next year. For the elderly, the costs could become prohibitive.
Then Spain will suffer - as ever it takes to - in this case - not tango.
It will get rich older Brits and slightly fewer of the rest of us. And the rest of Europe in the usual way. I can't see that being a huge issue.
I can think of decent chunks of the Costa Blanca that would significantly benefit from having fewer Brits. At least fewer of the kind of Brits who like to go there to get drunk and loudly insist that dago should speak English. Nothing better than sitting listening to British immigrants who come over there don't learn the language, don't integrate and don't add anything to the economy other than bar bills complaining about bloody migrants back home who don't integrate learn the language or add anything useful.
I am trying to work out how BJ will spin this.....apart from blame Berlin/Paris/Brussels (delete as applicable) he will need to explain to the wider Conservative party (CBI backers, old school Tories, the city financers,) what will have gone wrong if things turn out badly - the JCB crashing through the "Get Brexit done" wall aint going to cut it and I cant see any political wins from this situation for No.10.
I have an investment in Holiday Property Bonds, a company which owns a number of holiday sites across Britain and (mainly Western) Europe. It's not timeshare, in that one can go at any time..... provided of course there is space. Members tend to be older, although of course some early members have passed on their holdings to younger people. The news about not be able to go to to the Western European sites is beginning to spread alarm and despondency on the Bondholders Facebook page.
We have one of their places a mile from where I live near Mojacar in SE Spain. Been effectively closed all year due to Covid. You really need to be pretty well heeled as it is very upmarket - I'd be surprised if many members will struggle for the few further months of Covid restrictions. I'd also expect Spain to be one of the first countries to ease the passage for tourists back into the country post Covid. The country's tourist trade cannot survive without British tourists in fairly large numbers.
A lot of the members are early/recent retirees, who like to go South for the winter, or at least a couple of weeks. Although we once met a couple who'd booked three places, one after the other, to spend three months in the warm! Retired bus driver, IIRC!
It's very expensive - prices way above the norm in our area - we use a restaurant just outside the complex and I've met many of them. Tourists on the bread line they are not. Either way - once the Covid restrictions are eased they will be back - regardless of Brexit. If not it'll go bust which would be hard on the local economy and the reason why Spain will ease the path for British tourism.
I'd agree about the Covid restrictions, but my point is, what does 'eased' mean? Is it the EU that decides whether a country is Covid safe...... that visitors can be allowed in ........ our the individual countries? If it is the former the HPB and the ,like could be in trouble. If individual countries, then relaxations are more likely, given he reliance on tourism.
The restaurant just outside the complex is, AIUI, very popular with the members, as being considerably better value that that inside! Must admit I haven't been to that site for some years.
Am beginning to think No Deal may be the best path from here.
Despite being an arch remainer, I feel the U.K. is in the right on the last remaining blockers and I find the EU’s position unreasonable.
The underlying deal itself seems very thin - and simply allows the EU to continue enjoying a trade surplus on manufactured goods.
No Deal may have the advantage of removing some of the EU’s leverage. It may also finally prove instructive to the Tory Party and the country on the utter folly of Brexit.
I can't agree there. The EU is simply taking the words of Hannan, Redwood, Raab and others at face value ; that they want a "buccaneering Brexit", unshackled from environmental and labour standards.
Sure. But a right to levy unilateral tariffs is not a fair way to tackle this. Why should the U.K. sign up to such a punitive and destabilising risk?
Maybe Brexiteers should have thought about this?
I’m a Remainer. Brexiters can speak for themselves, but the assumption that Britain could achieve terms similar to Canada does not - on the face of it - seem unreasonable.
It's hardly surprising that Johnson getting officially involved in the talks has made no difference, given that all previous evidence suggests that he understands almost none of the issues, and certainly not at a sufficient level of detail to make him any help whatsoever.
All he does is deal in broad brush slogans, which can only be any good for advancing general positions for use in political sloganising and campaigns, and absolutely useless for the nitty gritty of trade negotiations where the devil is (or always should be) in the detail, especially where there is a need to find paths between apparently irreconcilable positions.
Imagine, for one hypothetical moment, that there was some magical deal that emerged over the next few days. Does anyone seriously think that it wouldn't fall apart in ten minutes once anybody actually explained to him what he had agreed, and his backbenchers started sounding off about it?
You do realise don't you that David Frost with him in the talks is rather involved in the nitty gritty?
A bit more than his backbenchers are.
I don't see why that makes any difference if Johnson doesn't understand it.
You think Johnson is going to sign an agreement with his expert in the room with him, not realise what he has signed until a backbencher points it out? 🤔
Am beginning to think No Deal may be the best path from here.
Despite being an arch remainer, I feel the U.K. is in the right on the last remaining blockers and I find the EU’s position unreasonable.
The underlying deal itself seems very thin - and simply allows the EU to continue enjoying a trade surplus on manufactured goods.
No Deal may have the advantage of removing some of the EU’s leverage. It may also finally prove instructive to the Tory Party and the country on the utter folly of Brexit.
I can't agree there. The EU is simply taking the words of Hannan, Redwood, Raab and others at face value ; that they want a "buccaneering Brexit", unshackled from environmental and labour standards.
Sure. But a right to levy unilateral tariffs is not a fair way to tackle this. Why should the U.K. sign up to such a punitive and destabilising risk?
The problem is, it's the UK asking to retain some of the privileges of EU membership, not the other way round. The answer should surely be, because it's seeking a deal.
No it isn't. The UK has asked for a bog standard free trade deal.
It's hardly surprising that Johnson getting officially involved in the talks has made no difference, given that all previous evidence suggests that he understands almost none of the issues, and certainly not at a sufficient level of detail to make him any help whatsoever.
All he does is deal in broad brush slogans, which can only be any good for advancing general positions for use in political sloganising and campaigns, and absolutely useless for the nitty gritty of trade negotiations where the devil is (or always should be) in the detail, especially where there is a need to find paths between apparently irreconcilable positions.
Imagine, for one hypothetical moment, that there was some magical deal that emerged over the next few days. Does anyone seriously think that it wouldn't fall apart in ten minutes once anybody actually explained to him what he had agreed, and his backbenchers started sounding off about it?
You do realise don't you that David Frost with him in the talks is rather involved in the nitty gritty?
A bit more than his backbenchers are.
I don't see why that makes any difference if Johnson doesn't understand it.
You think Johnson is going to sign an agreement with his expert in the room with him, not realise what he has signed until a backbencher points it out? 🤔
Am beginning to think No Deal may be the best path from here.
Despite being an arch remainer, I feel the U.K. is in the right on the last remaining blockers and I find the EU’s position unreasonable.
The underlying deal itself seems very thin - and simply allows the EU to continue enjoying a trade surplus on manufactured goods.
No Deal may have the advantage of removing some of the EU’s leverage. It may also finally prove instructive to the Tory Party and the country on the utter folly of Brexit.
I can't agree there. The EU is simply taking the words of Hannan, Redwood, Raab and others at face value ; that they want a "buccaneering Brexit", unshackled from environmental and labour standards.
Sure. But a right to levy unilateral tariffs is not a fair way to tackle this. Why should the U.K. sign up to such a punitive and destabilising risk?
The problem is, it's the UK asking to retain some of the privileges of EU membership, not the other way round. The answer should surely be, because it's seeking a deal.
I disagree.
The U.K. is not asking to “retain some of the privileges of EU membership”, it is seeking a free trade agreement with the EU.
And presumably, the EU is seeking an agreement with the U.K.
From none of this does it follow that the U.K. should be forced to sign up to a threat of unilateral punitive tariffs.
Am beginning to think No Deal may be the best path from here.
Despite being an arch remainer, I feel the U.K. is in the right on the last remaining blockers and I find the EU’s position unreasonable.
The underlying deal itself seems very thin - and simply allows the EU to continue enjoying a trade surplus on manufactured goods.
No Deal may have the advantage of removing some of the EU’s leverage. It may also finally prove instructive to the Tory Party and the country on the utter folly of Brexit.
I can't agree there. The EU is simply taking the words of Hannan, Redwood, Raab and others at face value ; that they want a "buccaneering Brexit", unshackled from environmental and labour standards.
Labour standards like a minimum wages 500% higher than the EU's?
It's hardly surprising that Johnson getting officially involved in the talks has made no difference, given that all previous evidence suggests that he understands almost none of the issues, and certainly not at a sufficient level of detail to make him any help whatsoever.
All he does is deal in broad brush slogans, which can only be any good for advancing general positions for use in political sloganising and campaigns, and absolutely useless for the nitty gritty of trade negotiations where the devil is (or always should be) in the detail, especially where there is a need to find paths between apparently irreconcilable positions.
Imagine, for one hypothetical moment, that there was some magical deal that emerged over the next few days. Does anyone seriously think that it wouldn't fall apart in ten minutes once anybody actually explained to him what he had agreed, and his backbenchers started sounding off about it?
You do realise don't you that David Frost with him in the talks is rather involved in the nitty gritty?
A bit more than his backbenchers are.
I don't see why that makes any difference if Johnson doesn't understand it.
You think Johnson is going to sign an agreement with his expert in the room with him, not realise what he has signed until a backbencher points it out? 🤔
It's hardly surprising that Johnson getting officially involved in the talks has made no difference, given that all previous evidence suggests that he understands almost none of the issues, and certainly not at a sufficient level of detail to make him any help whatsoever.
All he does is deal in broad brush slogans, which can only be any good for advancing general positions for use in political sloganising and campaigns, and absolutely useless for the nitty gritty of trade negotiations where the devil is (or always should be) in the detail, especially where there is a need to find paths between apparently irreconcilable positions.
Imagine, for one hypothetical moment, that there was some magical deal that emerged over the next few days. Does anyone seriously think that it wouldn't fall apart in ten minutes once anybody actually explained to him what he had agreed, and his backbenchers started sounding off about it?
You do realise don't you that David Frost with him in the talks is rather involved in the nitty gritty?
A bit more than his backbenchers are.
I don't see why that makes any difference if Johnson doesn't understand it.
You think Johnson is going to sign an agreement with his expert in the room with him, not realise what he has signed until a backbencher points it out? 🤔
Yes, considering it has already happened.
The Irish Sea says hi.
The Irish Sea renegotiation was a triumph.
The delusion continues.
You didn't understand the Withdrawal Agreement either so it's no surprise.
Both Boris and Ursula are green converts so i imagine that may be a hidden factor in them wanting to get a deal done.Gamblers here may be unaware that that the Tory govt is proposing to possibly put in their forthcoming Gambling Reform Act a clause that bans anybody placing a bet if they have already lost £100 in a month across all bookmakers! Not for the first time one wonders if anyone in the House of Commons apart from Phillip Davies & Estey Mcvey know anything at all about gambling.
I’ll bet that the honourable member for Newcastle-under-Lyme knows quite a bit about gambling.
It's hardly surprising that Johnson getting officially involved in the talks has made no difference, given that all previous evidence suggests that he understands almost none of the issues, and certainly not at a sufficient level of detail to make him any help whatsoever.
All he does is deal in broad brush slogans, which can only be any good for advancing general positions for use in political sloganising and campaigns, and absolutely useless for the nitty gritty of trade negotiations where the devil is (or always should be) in the detail, especially where there is a need to find paths between apparently irreconcilable positions.
Imagine, for one hypothetical moment, that there was some magical deal that emerged over the next few days. Does anyone seriously think that it wouldn't fall apart in ten minutes once anybody actually explained to him what he had agreed, and his backbenchers started sounding off about it?
You do realise don't you that David Frost with him in the talks is rather involved in the nitty gritty?
A bit more than his backbenchers are.
I don't see why that makes any difference if Johnson doesn't understand it.
You think Johnson is going to sign an agreement with his expert in the room with him, not realise what he has signed until a backbencher points it out? 🤔
Yes, considering it has already happened.
The Irish Sea says hi.
The Irish Sea renegotiation was a triumph.
The delusion continues.
You didn't understand the Withdrawal Agreement either so it's no surprise.
I did. Devolved arrangements for NI so long as NI is happy for them to continue. NI can vote for them to end it.
It's hardly surprising that Johnson getting officially involved in the talks has made no difference, given that all previous evidence suggests that he understands almost none of the issues, and certainly not at a sufficient level of detail to make him any help whatsoever.
All he does is deal in broad brush slogans, which can only be any good for advancing general positions for use in political sloganising and campaigns, and absolutely useless for the nitty gritty of trade negotiations where the devil is (or always should be) in the detail, especially where there is a need to find paths between apparently irreconcilable positions.
Imagine, for one hypothetical moment, that there was some magical deal that emerged over the next few days. Does anyone seriously think that it wouldn't fall apart in ten minutes once anybody actually explained to him what he had agreed, and his backbenchers started sounding off about it?
You do realise don't you that David Frost with him in the talks is rather involved in the nitty gritty?
A bit more than his backbenchers are.
I don't see why that makes any difference if Johnson doesn't understand it.
You think Johnson is going to sign an agreement with his expert in the room with him, not realise what he has signed until a backbencher points it out? 🤔
It's hardly surprising that Johnson getting officially involved in the talks has made no difference, given that all previous evidence suggests that he understands almost none of the issues, and certainly not at a sufficient level of detail to make him any help whatsoever.
All he does is deal in broad brush slogans, which can only be any good for advancing general positions for use in political sloganising and campaigns, and absolutely useless for the nitty gritty of trade negotiations where the devil is (or always should be) in the detail, especially where there is a need to find paths between apparently irreconcilable positions.
Imagine, for one hypothetical moment, that there was some magical deal that emerged over the next few days. Does anyone seriously think that it wouldn't fall apart in ten minutes once anybody actually explained to him what he had agreed, and his backbenchers started sounding off about it?
You do realise don't you that David Frost with him in the talks is rather involved in the nitty gritty?
A bit more than his backbenchers are.
I don't see why that makes any difference if Johnson doesn't understand it.
You think Johnson is going to sign an agreement with his expert in the room with him, not realise what he has signed until a backbencher points it out? 🤔
Yes, considering it has already happened.
The Irish Sea says hi.
The Irish Sea renegotiation was a triumph.
The delusion continues.
You didn't understand the Withdrawal Agreement either so it's no surprise.
I did. Devolved arrangements for NI so long as NI is happy for them to continue. NI can vote for them to end it.
I respect NI democracy. Do you?
Yeah, and black is white, red is blue, and up is down.
I am trying to work out how BJ will spin this.....apart from blame Berlin/Paris/Brussels (delete as applicable) he will need to explain to the wider Conservative party (CBI backers, old school Tories, the city financers,) what will have gone wrong if things turn out badly - the JCB crashing through the "Get Brexit done" wall aint going to cut it and I cant see any political wins from this situation for No.10.
I have an investment in Holiday Property Bonds, a company which owns a number of holiday sites across Britain and (mainly Western) Europe. It's not timeshare, in that one can go at any time..... provided of course there is space. Members tend to be older, although of course some early members have passed on their holdings to younger people. The news about not be able to go to to the Western European sites is beginning to spread alarm and despondency on the Bondholders Facebook page.
We have one of their places a mile from where I live near Mojacar in SE Spain. Been effectively closed all year due to Covid. You really need to be pretty well heeled as it is very upmarket - I'd be surprised if many members will struggle for the few further months of Covid restrictions. I'd also expect Spain to be one of the first countries to ease the passage for tourists back into the country post Covid. The country's tourist trade cannot survive without British tourists in fairly large numbers.
A lot of the members are early/recent retirees, who like to go South for the winter, or at least a couple of weeks. Although we once met a couple who'd booked three places, one after the other, to spend three months in the warm! Retired bus driver, IIRC!
It's very expensive - prices way above the norm in our area - we use a restaurant just outside the complex and I've met many of them. Tourists on the bread line they are not. Either way - once the Covid restrictions are eased they will be back - regardless of Brexit. If not it'll go bust which would be hard on the local economy and the reason why Spain will ease the path for British tourism.
There will be big insurance premium rises to deal with for all UK travellers to the EU as from next year. For the elderly, the costs could become prohibitive.
I'm not sure if this is true or not, but i heard suggestions that EHIC was going to continue for pensioners.
If you are high risk the EHIC is one big gamble as it only provides limited emergency cover.
It is nevertheless useful as a backstop and - since it currently includes citizens from Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway and Switzerland - you'd expect a sensible government to be looking to remain members, as part of any deal.
Am beginning to think No Deal may be the best path from here.
Despite being an arch remainer, I feel the U.K. is in the right on the last remaining blockers and I find the EU’s position unreasonable.
The underlying deal itself seems very thin - and simply allows the EU to continue enjoying a trade surplus on manufactured goods.
No Deal may have the advantage of removing some of the EU’s leverage. It may also finally prove instructive to the Tory Party and the country on the utter folly of Brexit.
I can't agree there. The EU is simply taking the words of Hannan, Redwood, Raab and others at face value ; that they want a "buccaneering Brexit", unshackled from environmental and labour standards.
Sure. But a right to levy unilateral tariffs is not a fair way to tackle this. Why should the U.K. sign up to such a punitive and destabilising risk?
Maybe Brexiteers should have thought about this?
I’m a Remainer. Brexiters can speak for themselves, but the assumption that Britain could achieve terms similar to Canada does not - on the face of it - seem unreasonable.
Brexiteers should still have thought about this.
We have. There are two options and we are happy with either.
1: If the EU is reasonable get a deal. 2: If the EU is unreasonable walk away.
So now is the time to determine if the EU is being reasonable or unreasonable. If reasonable see option 1. If unreasonable see option 2.
Nowhere in that article does anyone accuse Boris Johnson of failure - other than the headline writer.
Trash journalism. Retweeted by Scott.
And Angela Rayner (keep wanting to call her Claire), by dint of her misapplying "oven ready deal". And Ian Blackford. Which they'd be saying even if success was 100%.
One thing he doesn’t mention is that for a large number of countries, it will be available in bulk a good six months before the two which have been demonstrated to be more significantly effective. Which moves the risk/benefit calculation significantly in its favour.
One thing that hasn't got anywhere near coverage is the 0% hospitalisation from those who got the vaccine.
Indeed. That was actually pushed heavily on the BBC One 6 and 10 Main News though.
I think the strategy will be "Moderna and Pfizer for the oldies, carehomes and hospitals; and AZN for the plebs."
As I said here from the day the AZ test results came out. Not least because we only have enough Pfizer orders for the first 20 million on the list, which puts the break point at about age 65.
I don't think that's correct: your figures are a bit out there.
The Gov't are hinting that everyone over 55 may be given the Pfizer vaccine, which is c. 20 million people.
Possibly; my assessment was rough and ready. But I did make allowance for those health workers, care homes workers, and people with existing medical conditions, which will use up some of the 20 million before it is fully distributed by age.
On the other hand, there may be a level of refusals, enabling the doses to be spread further down the profile - although anecdotally it seems mainly younger people who are those more likely to refuse.
I make the 55+ plus care workers to be approx 22 million, perhaps a bit more, depending on whether medical staff count, which IMO they should.
To be fair, that’s Boris as a journalist quoting the guy responsible for EU buildings saying it will have to fall because of asbestos.
Presumably it’s still full of asbestos today?
No they removed it.
Johnson quoted £60mn at the cost of refitting it. The EU spent £625mn.
So maintaining the icon of a building was considered to be worth more than half a billion to EU taxpayers, by EU officials?
Maybe that’s why we voted to leave.
Berlaymonster's refurb was financed by the Belgian government (who owned up to that point) equivalent of PFI. I've been in it quite a few times as at least 15 of my old students now work in the Commission. It's not that flash even after the rebuild.
I am trying to work out how BJ will spin this.....apart from blame Berlin/Paris/Brussels (delete as applicable) he will need to explain to the wider Conservative party (CBI backers, old school Tories, the city financers,) what will have gone wrong if things turn out badly - the JCB crashing through the "Get Brexit done" wall aint going to cut it and I cant see any political wins from this situation for No.10.
I have an investment in Holiday Property Bonds, a company which owns a number of holiday sites across Britain and (mainly Western) Europe. It's not timeshare, in that one can go at any time..... provided of course there is space. Members tend to be older, although of course some early members have passed on their holdings to younger people. The news about not be able to go to to the Western European sites is beginning to spread alarm and despondency on the Bondholders Facebook page.
We have one of their places a mile from where I live near Mojacar in SE Spain. Been effectively closed all year due to Covid. You really need to be pretty well heeled as it is very upmarket - I'd be surprised if many members will struggle for the few further months of Covid restrictions. I'd also expect Spain to be one of the first countries to ease the passage for tourists back into the country post Covid. The country's tourist trade cannot survive without British tourists in fairly large numbers.
A lot of the members are early/recent retirees, who like to go South for the winter, or at least a couple of weeks. Although we once met a couple who'd booked three places, one after the other, to spend three months in the warm! Retired bus driver, IIRC!
It's very expensive - prices way above the norm in our area - we use a restaurant just outside the complex and I've met many of them. Tourists on the bread line they are not. Either way - once the Covid restrictions are eased they will be back - regardless of Brexit. If not it'll go bust which would be hard on the local economy and the reason why Spain will ease the path for British tourism.
There will be big insurance premium rises to deal with for all UK travellers to the EU as from next year. For the elderly, the costs could become prohibitive.
I'm not sure if this is true or not, but i heard suggestions that EHIC was going to continue for pensioners.
If you are high risk the EHIC is one big gamble as it only provides limited emergency cover.
It is nevertheless useful as a backstop and - since it currently includes citizens from Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway and Switzerland - you'd expect a sensible government to be looking to remain members, as part of any deal.
Agree. I have argued here that anyone travelling would be mad to rely on the EHIC and should take out insurance. However that does not negate that it is very useful and will be missed.
I am trying to work out how BJ will spin this.....apart from blame Berlin/Paris/Brussels (delete as applicable) he will need to explain to the wider Conservative party (CBI backers, old school Tories, the city financers,) what will have gone wrong if things turn out badly - the JCB crashing through the "Get Brexit done" wall aint going to cut it and I cant see any political wins from this situation for No.10.
I have an investment in Holiday Property Bonds, a company which owns a number of holiday sites across Britain and (mainly Western) Europe. It's not timeshare, in that one can go at any time..... provided of course there is space. Members tend to be older, although of course some early members have passed on their holdings to younger people. The news about not be able to go to to the Western European sites is beginning to spread alarm and despondency on the Bondholders Facebook page.
I have not picked that up. What is the issue here? It can't be travel as short term visas are I think set to be £7 and a rubber stamp. Is it COVID restrictions, which would be fair enough for at least the first half of the year.
Nowhere in that article does anyone accuse Boris Johnson of failure - other than the headline writer.
Trash journalism. Retweeted by Scott.
Or trash PB’ing given these extracts from that very article?:
Boris Johnson is being accused of failure....
Labour is claiming that a year after Mr Johnson promised an "oven-ready deal" he has failed to deliver what he promised...
....were billed as a make-or-break attempt to salvage a Brexit deal... failed to achieve the breakthrough hoped for by both sides
Angela Rayner tweeted: "One year after Boris Johnson promised us an oven-ready deal he has completely failed”
Ian Blackford tweeted: "A no deal would be a massive failure of diplomacy and leadership which @BorisJohnson has to take ownership of.”
When Johnson spoke of the oven-ready deal referred, that referred to the WA. As for Blackford's tweet, there is a conditional in there.
The cult cannot accept their messiah has feet of clay
True north of the border too.....
Well she has yet to prove that , but she is certainly on dodgy ground but not for being useless and unfit for the job , only for copying the lying and scheming.
Absolute tosh. These polls are rigged even if it's not intentional. I'm a woman and strong Brexiteer. I've gone off Boris because he's so weak and not the other way around. And I wouldnt give Starmer house room. The coutnry voted for Brexit and wants Brexit. That was a poll of 34 million people so this trash tiny poll means nothing. It's just click-bait.
Absolute tosh. These polls are rigged even if it's not intentional. I'm a woman and strong Brexiteer. I've gone off Boris because he's so weak and not the other way around. And I wouldnt give Starmer house room. The coutnry voted for Brexit and wants Brexit. That was a poll of 34 million people so this trash tiny poll means nothing. It's just click-bait.
I love the logic. As I understand it, you're saying that your own view is a better indication of the public view than a poll because you voted to Leave and you assume (for some reason) that those who voted with you didn't simply come to the same conclusion, but also had the same reasons and still think exactly the same as you on issues not contemplated at the time of that vote, four and a half years later.
LouiB: it seems to the only problem with your argument seems to be that you are relying on an event nearly five years ago. The world does move on. I guess if the result had been pro Remain you would now be saying but things are different now.
Absolute tosh. These polls are rigged even if it's not intentional. I'm a woman and strong Brexiteer. I've gone off Boris because he's so weak and not the other way around. And I wouldnt give Starmer house room. The coutnry voted for Brexit and wants Brexit. That was a poll of 34 million people so this trash tiny poll means nothing. It's just click-bait.
Er, a total sample of 1.7K isn't bad at all. And you do need to be careful on this site not to accuse the (reputable) polling companies of fiddling the results. Very much frowned on for obvious reasons of bringing the host into peril from lawyers.
Comments
Not for the first time one wonders if anyone in the House of Commons apart from Phillip Davies & Estey Mcvey know anything at all about gambling.
Despite being an arch remainer, I feel the U.K. is in the right on the last remaining blockers and I find the EU’s position unreasonable.
The underlying deal itself seems very thin - and simply allows the EU to continue enjoying a trade surplus on manufactured goods.
No Deal may have the advantage of removing some of the EU’s leverage. It may also finally prove instructive to the Tory Party and the country on the utter folly of Brexit.
Too many differences between Johnson's fantasy world and the reality of living next to a massive trading bloc.
Sunday? Saturday?
What grips me about Starship is that it combines literal cutting edge technology with blank sheet of paper "why can't we?" ideas that roll back the clock to tried and tested.
Starship is made from stainless sodding steel - forget your super advanced highly expensive composites. Go back to basic materials science, use something cheap in a brilliant way, collapse the cost. Elon is like an annoying toddler - anything presented to him he asks "why?". And it turns out that you don't have to do things the way we have been doing them because that's the way we're doing them.
And have they ever heard of arbitrage? Or that short term bets can be offset against long term bets/strategies? Or that some long term bets could get settled as losers at random times? Or frankly, that for many people, £100 is basically chicken feed, and people who lose it are just treating betting as a hobby with disposable income that they are perfectly happy to lose?
Mr. Walker, if the EU does want the right to direct laws on us (via LPF means) and exact penalties which cannot be reciprocated if we do not follow their lead in that manner, that does seem beyond the bounds of acceptability.
A problem for Macron and Rejoiners is that the theory we'll leave, suffer a lot, and then want to rejoin or have a deal effectively dictated by the EU is that we'll already have a permanently instituted political division. As we saw with Scotland/Holyrood, impose a political dividing line and a divide will grow of its own accord.
A lot of turbulence and problems will arise if we leave without a deal.
But if we weather that for years then get back on an even keel and start adjusting to a new normal, the appetite to be legally subjugated via LPF and so on to an entity that is deemed (by some, at least) to have caused it may be rather less than the Adonises of this world believe. Not only that, the economy will have started adapting to the changed state of affairs.
The EU will, perhaps excepting a couple of months into No Deal turmoil, never have more political leverage than it does now because the change will be sudden, abrupt, and not to our advantage. That leverage will then diminish with each passing day thereafter, but the resentment stoked up will linger more persistently.
That's not good for us, or the EU, or Europe. But it may be what we'll get.
I really do believe that the EU are making a historic miscalculation, time and again politics and sentiment have been more important than economics. No deal isn't going to be any different.
Brexiters can speak for themselves, but the assumption that Britain could achieve terms similar to Canada does not - on the face of it - seem unreasonable.
The restaurant just outside the complex is, AIUI, very popular with the members, as being considerably better value that that inside! Must admit I haven't been to that site for some years.
The Irish Sea says hi.
The U.K. is not asking to “retain some of the privileges of EU membership”, it is seeking a free trade agreement with the EU.
And presumably, the EU is seeking an agreement with the U.K.
From none of this does it follow that the U.K. should be forced to sign up to a threat of unilateral punitive tariffs.
You didn't understand the Withdrawal Agreement either so it's no surprise.
I respect NI democracy. Do you?
1: If the EU is reasonable get a deal.
2: If the EU is unreasonable walk away.
So now is the time to determine if the EU is being reasonable or unreasonable. If reasonable see option 1. If unreasonable see option 2.
Anyhoo, aren't all the Sky staff on holiday?
Well, it's a view.
I guess if the result had been pro Remain you would now be saying but things are different now.