I'm very much looking forwards to brexit meaning brexit for the EU. No more security and intelligence cooperation, no more fishing waters, EU companies setting up capitalised subsidiary companies in the UK to get access to finance.
The desperation in their no deal contingency is really quite telling. That they feel the need to threaten the UK with what amounts to an economic blockade shows just how fragile their position actually is.
If only Boris had got an extra year or two to get the national infrastructure ready for no deal. In that position it really would be a no brainer. As it stands there is going to be a year or two of very difficult decision making and lots of upheaval in employment and industry. It's going to happen either way because the UK will never agree to the LPF and governance positions held by the EU, but we're going into it completely unprepared and in the shadow of a global pandemic which we're yet to recover from.
I remember being told last year that the UK would simply agree to the LPF and the EU would win whatever it was they were asking for by all of the usual suspects. For the whole year I've been saying that no UK government (Tory or Labour) would ever agree to either the LPF or governance that gave the EU unilateral right to apply tariffs without arbitration. Now it's happening because the EU didn't negotiate on either of those positions. It ending in no deal.
There is no way that once the UK assumes its territorial waters, the ability to set regulations and a post action arbitration via the WTO it will ever give them up as part of any deal with any nation or trading bloc. The EU are making a grave miscalculation and it's going to cost us what could have been a pretty good trade deal.
If it's a No Deal Brexit on 1st Jan 2021 then it's no more Mr. Nice Guy from the UK.
I don't want it but we need to hit them where it hurts. We've already managed to upset them now by approving a vaccine early so they're far more sensitive and fragile than they let on.
Some people on here fail to understand that it's not a strong hand if the other side can and does walk away.
That's called overplaying your hand.
That is a calculation for the side with the strong hand to make. The calculation for the other side is whether the harm done by walking away is worth it.
I'm very much looking forwards to brexit meaning brexit for the EU. No more security and intelligence cooperation, no more fishing waters, EU companies setting up capitalised subsidiary companies in the UK to get access to finance.
The desperation in their no deal contingency is really quite telling. That they feel the need to threaten the UK with what amounts to an economic blockade shows just how fragile their position actually is.
If only Boris had got an extra year or two to get the national infrastructure ready for no deal. In that position it really would be a no brainer. As it stands there is going to be a year or two of very difficult decision making and lots of upheaval in employment and industry. It's going to happen either way because the UK will never agree to the LPF and governance positions held by the EU, but we're going into it completely unprepared and in the shadow of a global pandemic which we're yet to recover from.
I remember being told last year that the UK would simply agree to the LPF and the EU would win whatever it was they were asking for by all of the usual suspects. For the whole year I've been saying that no UK government (Tory or Labour) would ever agree to either the LPF or governance that gave the EU unilateral right to apply tariffs without arbitration. Now it's happening because the EU didn't negotiate on either of those positions. It ending in no deal.
There is no way that once the UK assumes its territorial waters, the ability to set regulations and a post action arbitration via the WTO it will ever give them up as part of any deal with any nation or trading bloc. The EU are making a grave miscalculation and it's going to cost us what could have been a pretty good trade deal.
If it's a No Deal Brexit on 1st Jan 2021 then it's no more Mr. Nice Guy from the UK.
I don't want it but we need to hit them where it hurts. We've already managed to upset them now by approving a vaccine early so they're far more sensitive and fragile than they let on.
No deal is entirely our fault. Stop this nonsense, it isn't a game.
No, it absolutely isn't. I've always wanted a Deal, as you know - and I've been consistent in arguing against Leavers who've said the opposite - but if I what I understand to be true is the case (and none of us really know) then I wouldn't sign what's currently on the table. I'd be comfortable I'd been reasonable and proportionate in going up to and creatively around my red lines, but not clearly over them.
And, if it's No Deal, then that works both ways. The EU need to know that.
I don't understand people's objection of the LPF requirements the EU want to put in the FTA. Whether they trade with us and under what conditions is their sovereign decision, just as it is for us. They are simply saying that if we do things that they don't like then they reserve the right to put barriers to trade in place. That doesn't stop us doing the things they don't like, or indeed constrain us in any way. The EU is just saying, if things change then we will revisit the extent of market access. Brexiteers seem to be saying, we don't want the EU to have the right to maybe trade with us on less generous terms in the future, so we're going to force them to definitely trade with us on less generous terms right now. It's bizzare.
The point is that the LPF is open ended and they can gradually make the terms of trade worse unilaterally until there's not much value in the deal.
Trade deals include lots of LPF provisions, all of our other trade deals include them. The difference is that they are fixed in time unless both parties agree to change them and if one party decides to act unilaterally to undermine that then post action arbitration is the standard recourse with arbitration led tariff allowances. What the EU are proposing is to say "if we make our single market uneconomic, the UK must follow". It's completely ridiculous.
But we don't have to follow, we can diverge but at the cost of less generous market access with respect to EU trade. If we are willing to accept those less generous terms immediately in the case of no deal, why can't we sign up to the mere possibility of them in the future? Also, under a ratchet clause we don't have to increase our regulations in response to them increasing theirs. Only if we both increase our regulations, we can't then lower them without the threat of trade barriers being put up. Ie once we have both increased our regulations they form the new baseline. That seems a sensible way of dealing with changing norms. But in any case, the point is we can still lower them if we want to.
Some people on here fail to understand that it's not a strong hand if the other side can and does walk away.
That's called overplaying your hand.
It isn't if you don't really mind if the other side walks away.
Then they are stupid if the don't mind us walking away. It means the EU has lost track of its DNA - which is as a trade organisation. Crashing out of trade arrangements with its market in favour of some vague political gain for its nascent statehood may not look quite so bright a little way down the road. When the UK becomes one giant regulation-lite freeport, let us see where the future investment goes.
Wow. NO DEAL is 1.84. Big move from 2.57 following what sounds like a disappointing dinner date last night. John Redwood will be getting very excited (!) this morning.
I should think he'll be exhausted, after dreaming about controlling fish all night.
But happy. I see him manning a trawler on Jan 1st and helping to land that symbolic first fish of the new era. What will it be? A perch? Whatever, let's hope it's a whopper.
A perch is a freshwater fish
A large haddock on a Scottish fishing vessel is more likely
Yes, thanks. That's what I meant - a large haddock. Point is, it will be the first one caught by us outside the dominion of the EU and there will be a real symbolism in the event and the moment. I expect it to be televised, as was the first Covid jab for the same reason. Being totally serious here (although not about the John Redwood involvement obviously).
It would be my dear late Father in Laws dream event
He was a highly successful Scottish fisherman who had the most wonderful mild manner but his anger when we joined the EU was very evident and I still remember it to this day
Some people on here fail to understand that it's not a strong hand if the other side can and does walk away.
That's called overplaying your hand.
That is a calculation for the side with the strong hand to make. The calculation for the other side is whether the harm done by walking away is worth it.
What happens when both parties consider they have the strong hand?
I'm very much looking forwards to brexit meaning brexit for the EU. No more security and intelligence cooperation, no more fishing waters, EU companies setting up capitalised subsidiary companies in the UK to get access to finance.
The desperation in their no deal contingency is really quite telling. That they feel the need to threaten the UK with what amounts to an economic blockade shows just how fragile their position actually is.
If only Boris had got an extra year or two to get the national infrastructure ready for no deal. In that position it really would be a no brainer. As it stands there is going to be a year or two of very difficult decision making and lots of upheaval in employment and industry. It's going to happen either way because the UK will never agree to the LPF and governance positions held by the EU, but we're going into it completely unprepared and in the shadow of a global pandemic which we're yet to recover from.
I remember being told last year that the UK would simply agree to the LPF and the EU would win whatever it was they were asking for by all of the usual suspects. For the whole year I've been saying that no UK government (Tory or Labour) would ever agree to either the LPF or governance that gave the EU unilateral right to apply tariffs without arbitration. Now it's happening because the EU didn't negotiate on either of those positions. It ending in no deal.
There is no way that once the UK assumes its territorial waters, the ability to set regulations and a post action arbitration via the WTO it will ever give them up as part of any deal with any nation or trading bloc. The EU are making a grave miscalculation and it's going to cost us what could have been a pretty good trade deal.
If it's a No Deal Brexit on 1st Jan 2021 then it's no more Mr. Nice Guy from the UK.
I don't want it but we need to hit them where it hurts. We've already managed to upset them now by approving a vaccine early so they're far more sensitive and fragile than they let on.
No deal is entirely our fault. Stop this nonsense, it isn't a game.
No, it absolutely isn't. I've always wanted a Deal, as you know - and I've been consistent in arguing against Leavers who've said the opposite - but if I what I understand to be true is the case (and none of us really know) then I wouldn't sign what's currently on the table. I'd be comfortable I'd been reasonable and proportionate in going up to and creatively around my red lines, but not clearly over them.
And, if it's No Deal, then that works both ways. The EU need to know that.
1. We want a trade deal. 2. The EU have offered us a trade deal. 3. We've turned it down because we don't like the terms.
1. I want some sausages. 2. Aldi offer me some sausages for £1.99. 3. I don't want to buy Aldi's sausages because they're too expensive.
Is it Aldi's fault I don't have any sausages?
It is Aldi's loss when Sainsbury's, Lidl, Tescos will sell me sausages at £1.75.
Why did we go to Aldi in the first place?
We were paying a large annual fee for an Aldi loyalty card, but have stopped that so can now shop around.
So you agree it isn't Aldi's fault we don't have any sausages. It is a consequence of our own choice. Good.
I'm very much looking forwards to brexit meaning brexit for the EU. No more security and intelligence cooperation, no more fishing waters, EU companies setting up capitalised subsidiary companies in the UK to get access to finance.
The desperation in their no deal contingency is really quite telling. That they feel the need to threaten the UK with what amounts to an economic blockade shows just how fragile their position actually is.
If only Boris had got an extra year or two to get the national infrastructure ready for no deal. In that position it really would be a no brainer. As it stands there is going to be a year or two of very difficult decision making and lots of upheaval in employment and industry. It's going to happen either way because the UK will never agree to the LPF and governance positions held by the EU, but we're going into it completely unprepared and in the shadow of a global pandemic which we're yet to recover from.
I remember being told last year that the UK would simply agree to the LPF and the EU would win whatever it was they were asking for by all of the usual suspects. For the whole year I've been saying that no UK government (Tory or Labour) would ever agree to either the LPF or governance that gave the EU unilateral right to apply tariffs without arbitration. Now it's happening because the EU didn't negotiate on either of those positions. It ending in no deal.
There is no way that once the UK assumes its territorial waters, the ability to set regulations and a post action arbitration via the WTO it will ever give them up as part of any deal with any nation or trading bloc. The EU are making a grave miscalculation and it's going to cost us what could have been a pretty good trade deal.
If it's a No Deal Brexit on 1st Jan 2021 then it's no more Mr. Nice Guy from the UK.
I don't want it but we need to hit them where it hurts. We've already managed to upset them now by approving a vaccine early so they're far more sensitive and fragile than they let on.
No deal is entirely our fault. Stop this nonsense, it isn't a game.
No, it absolutely isn't. I've always wanted a Deal, as you know - and I've been consistent in arguing against Leavers who've said the opposite - but if I what I understand to be true is the case (and none of us really know) then I wouldn't sign what's currently on the table. I'd be comfortable I'd been reasonable and proportionate in going up to and creatively around my red lines, but not clearly over them.
And, if it's No Deal, then that works both ways. The EU need to know that.
I don't understand people's objection of the LPF requirements the EU want to put in the FTA. Whether they trade with us and under what conditions is their sovereign decision, just as it is for us. They are simply saying that if we do things that they don't like then they reserve the right to put barriers to trade in place. That doesn't stop us doing the things they don't like, or indeed constrain us in any way. The EU is just saying, if things change then we will revisit the extent of market access. Brexiteers seem to be saying, we don't want the EU to have the right to maybe trade with us on less generous terms in the future, so we're going to force them to definitely trade with us on less generous terms right now. It's bizzare.
The point is that the LPF is open ended and they can gradually make the terms of trade worse unilaterally until there's not much value in the deal.
Trade deals include lots of LPF provisions, all of our other trade deals include them. The difference is that they are fixed in time unless both parties agree to change them and if one party decides to act unilaterally to undermine that then post action arbitration is the standard recourse with arbitration led tariff allowances. What the EU are proposing is to say "if we make our single market uneconomic, the UK must follow". It's completely ridiculous.
So we walk away now to tariffs on the basis of something that could happen in the future and which we could respond to by just accepting tariffs at that point.
I'm very much looking forwards to brexit meaning brexit for the EU. No more security and intelligence cooperation, no more fishing waters, EU companies setting up capitalised subsidiary companies in the UK to get access to finance.
The desperation in their no deal contingency is really quite telling. That they feel the need to threaten the UK with what amounts to an economic blockade shows just how fragile their position actually is.
If only Boris had got an extra year or two to get the national infrastructure ready for no deal. In that position it really would be a no brainer. As it stands there is going to be a year or two of very difficult decision making and lots of upheaval in employment and industry. It's going to happen either way because the UK will never agree to the LPF and governance positions held by the EU, but we're going into it completely unprepared and in the shadow of a global pandemic which we're yet to recover from.
I remember being told last year that the UK would simply agree to the LPF and the EU would win whatever it was they were asking for by all of the usual suspects. For the whole year I've been saying that no UK government (Tory or Labour) would ever agree to either the LPF or governance that gave the EU unilateral right to apply tariffs without arbitration. Now it's happening because the EU didn't negotiate on either of those positions. It ending in no deal.
There is no way that once the UK assumes its territorial waters, the ability to set regulations and a post action arbitration via the WTO it will ever give them up as part of any deal with any nation or trading bloc. The EU are making a grave miscalculation and it's going to cost us what could have been a pretty good trade deal.
If it's a No Deal Brexit on 1st Jan 2021 then it's no more Mr. Nice Guy from the UK.
I don't want it but we need to hit them where it hurts. We've already managed to upset them now by approving a vaccine early so they're far more sensitive and fragile than they let on.
No deal is entirely our fault. Stop this nonsense, it isn't a game.
No, it absolutely isn't. I've always wanted a Deal, as you know - and I've been consistent in arguing against Leavers who've said the opposite - but if I what I understand to be true is the case (and none of us really know) then I wouldn't sign what's currently on the table. I'd be comfortable I'd been reasonable and proportionate in going up to and creatively around my red lines, but not clearly over them.
And, if it's No Deal, then that works both ways. The EU need to know that.
1. We want a trade deal. 2. The EU have offered us a trade deal. 3. We've turned it down because we don't like the terms.
1. I want some sausages. 2. Aldi offer me some sausages for £1.99. 3. I don't want to buy Aldi's sausages because they're too expensive.
Is it Aldi's fault I don't have any sausages?
It is Aldi's loss when Sainsbury's, Lidl, Tescos will sell me sausages at £1.75.
Why did we go to Aldi in the first place?
We were paying a large annual fee for an Aldi loyalty card, but have stopped that so can now shop around.
So you agree it isn't Aldi's fault we don't have any sausages. It is a consequence of our own choice. Good.
We do have sausages.
It is Aldi's fault we chose to buy our sausages elsewhere.
I'm very much looking forwards to brexit meaning brexit for the EU. No more security and intelligence cooperation, no more fishing waters, EU companies setting up capitalised subsidiary companies in the UK to get access to finance.
The desperation in their no deal contingency is really quite telling. That they feel the need to threaten the UK with what amounts to an economic blockade shows just how fragile their position actually is.
If only Boris had got an extra year or two to get the national infrastructure ready for no deal. In that position it really would be a no brainer. As it stands there is going to be a year or two of very difficult decision making and lots of upheaval in employment and industry. It's going to happen either way because the UK will never agree to the LPF and governance positions held by the EU, but we're going into it completely unprepared and in the shadow of a global pandemic which we're yet to recover from.
I remember being told last year that the UK would simply agree to the LPF and the EU would win whatever it was they were asking for by all of the usual suspects. For the whole year I've been saying that no UK government (Tory or Labour) would ever agree to either the LPF or governance that gave the EU unilateral right to apply tariffs without arbitration. Now it's happening because the EU didn't negotiate on either of those positions. It ending in no deal.
There is no way that once the UK assumes its territorial waters, the ability to set regulations and a post action arbitration via the WTO it will ever give them up as part of any deal with any nation or trading bloc. The EU are making a grave miscalculation and it's going to cost us what could have been a pretty good trade deal.
If it's a No Deal Brexit on 1st Jan 2021 then it's no more Mr. Nice Guy from the UK.
I don't want it but we need to hit them where it hurts. We've already managed to upset them now by approving a vaccine early so they're far more sensitive and fragile than they let on.
Oh no. You're in one of your bonkers moods.
Get in the tanks, troops.
Brexit means Brexit.
uh oh.
You can't adopt a position that says it's ok for the EU to play hardball on the UK in a No Deal situation but an outrage for the UK to do it the other way round.
Both sides will have the objective to get the other to return to the negotiating table.
Should say not a chance on fisheries. Certainly not for fisheries to be for longer than other ones that is crazy.
Depends whether the UK wants to be able to fly those vaccines in, doesn't it?
They are independent proposals, aren't they?
Unclear, but if things get very acrimonious, they will get acrimonious. Boris is taking us into the very worst of all possible worst worlds.
So is the EU by their unreasonable eleventh hour demands via Macron, and refusal to negotiate which you are blind to seeing any issues with.
There haven't been any eleventh hour demands, they've mostly been tediously consistent since 2016, although they have compromised on a lot of the detail (for example, they dropped the demand that the ECJ should be the arbiter).
In any case, so what if their demands are unreasonable, or seem so to us? They didn't ask the UK to impose economic sanctions on itself, quite the reverse. That choice was entirely ours, and the decision as to whether to accept the terms on offer (which are exactly in line with what was known in 2016), or plunge the country into chaos, is entirely that of the UK government. No-one else is responsible for that.
As David Gauke points out, the UK's objections to the proposed LPF clauses make zero sense anyway. On the off-chance that a fire might break out at some unspecified time in the future, we are proposing to burn the house down now.
Yes, they are - you need to look at how The Times reported the tightening last Thursday when a deal looked imminent - Macron led the charge against what Germany/Sweden/Austria and the Central and Eastern European states all had virtually sewn up with Ursula VDR. This new hard position included virtually no movement on fish above 15-18% (rather than comprising), an unbalanced approach to State Aid rules (we can, you can't) and a right to unilateral lightning tariffs in future without limit if they increased or changed LPF standards and we declined to follow suit, rather than just agreeing regression clauses on current standards now and agreeing to jointly reviewing the applicability and scope of the deal in future if either side wants to change them.
Your position (because you disagree so vociferously with the original Brexit vote) is that everything the EU does is reasonable and everything the UK does is unreasonable. You are worth listening to on virtually every issue - where we agree on almost everything - but on Brexit you simply become a LD'y Remoaner turned up to 11.
You never bother to delve into the specifics and nuances, so you're not interesting to listen to as a result. Brexit has happened. It's a reality. Both the UK and EU should be interested in forging a sustainable long-term relationship. You need to be able to exercise the dispassionate judgement on the respective negotiating positions of both sides to reflect that reality and be able to assess if they reasonable, sensible and constructive. Or what you say on the subject will simply be ignored.
Look at David Herdson's example to see how a Conservative Remainer is still able to see the flaws of the EU position. Learn from him.
I suspect Richard's position - which happens to be mine, so I may be projecting (and apologies to him if I am) - is that it does not matter whether the EU's position is reasonable or not, it is what it is: the EU's position. We either accept that and work to get an agreement within the parameters it sets or we walk away. That has always been the choice, as it will be in any negotiation in which one party has a stronger hand than the other one.
It does matter if the EU is being unreasonable because as you say we can either accept that or walk away.
If the EU is being reasonable we should strive to get an agreement, if its possible.
If the EU is being unreasonable then that gives more justification to walking away.
Do you disagree with that philosophy?
I have always said our choice is to accept a deal that the EU essentially dictates or to walk away with no deal. It's not a philosophical point, it's a practical one grounded entirely in cold hard reality. Politically, the government will clearly seek to blame the EU for the failure of the negotiation and that may well work for a few news cycles. We will then move to the delivery of the triumphant outcome from a no deal that the government has promised us.
This simply isn't true. The EU has negotiated and compromised, as has the UK, we've got 97-98% of the way there - we are simply unable to close the final gap.
The give away is your second sentence which clearly puts any blame on the failure of negotiations on the UK, and none on the EU. This is emotionally influenced. I think the EU (and, remember, I've always supported a Deal and had no problem with a LPF) isn't being rational in going for a 30-40% UK cut of fish (a big win), fairness on state aid interpretations on both sides of the channel and lighting tariffs and governance arbitration thereof.
On virtually everything else I think the UK and EU are fully aligned in a fair deal.
They are being way too sensitive and hardline - and it might blow the whole thing out of the water. The only thing I think the UK is being too persnickety on is locking in some of the current LPF standards, where we're never going to move away from them anyway.
Yes, I do blame this government for not understanding the cold, hard reality of negotiating with a party that has a stronger hand.
No attempt to answer the point.
How predictable, and disappointing.
Your point was that I - and I quote - put "any blame on the failure of negotiations on the UK, and none on the EU". I was largely agreeing. The talks have failed up to now because the UK has failed to understand the basic point: they have a better hand than we do and we will only get a deal they want to give us. This has always been the case and will continue to be so.
Ministers still do not believe we don't hold all the cards.
Raab in denial this morning claiming the average 5% on food prices outlined by the Chairman of Tesco yesterday in the event of no deal is just plain wrong. Raab couldn't himself give a figure.
Of course it's wrong. How could the chair of Tesco know anything about food prices? It's just ridiculous to think he knows more than Raab.
He could know an opportunity to stick 5% on prices when he sees it....
I'm very much looking forwards to brexit meaning brexit for the EU. No more security and intelligence cooperation, no more fishing waters, EU companies setting up capitalised subsidiary companies in the UK to get access to finance.
The desperation in their no deal contingency is really quite telling. That they feel the need to threaten the UK with what amounts to an economic blockade shows just how fragile their position actually is.
If only Boris had got an extra year or two to get the national infrastructure ready for no deal. In that position it really would be a no brainer. As it stands there is going to be a year or two of very difficult decision making and lots of upheaval in employment and industry. It's going to happen either way because the UK will never agree to the LPF and governance positions held by the EU, but we're going into it completely unprepared and in the shadow of a global pandemic which we're yet to recover from.
I remember being told last year that the UK would simply agree to the LPF and the EU would win whatever it was they were asking for by all of the usual suspects. For the whole year I've been saying that no UK government (Tory or Labour) would ever agree to either the LPF or governance that gave the EU unilateral right to apply tariffs without arbitration. Now it's happening because the EU didn't negotiate on either of those positions. It ending in no deal.
There is no way that once the UK assumes its territorial waters, the ability to set regulations and a post action arbitration via the WTO it will ever give them up as part of any deal with any nation or trading bloc. The EU are making a grave miscalculation and it's going to cost us what could have been a pretty good trade deal.
If it's a No Deal Brexit on 1st Jan 2021 then it's no more Mr. Nice Guy from the UK.
I don't want it but we need to hit them where it hurts. We've already managed to upset them now by approving a vaccine early so they're far more sensitive and fragile than they let on.
No deal is entirely our fault. Stop this nonsense, it isn't a game.
No, it absolutely isn't. I've always wanted a Deal, as you know - and I've been consistent in arguing against Leavers who've said the opposite - but if I what I understand to be true is the case (and none of us really know) then I wouldn't sign what's currently on the table. I'd be comfortable I'd been reasonable and proportionate in going up to and creatively around my red lines, but not clearly over them.
And, if it's No Deal, then that works both ways. The EU need to know that.
1. We want a trade deal. 2. The EU have offered us a trade deal. 3. We've turned it down because we don't like the terms.
1. I want some sausages. 2. Aldi offer me some sausages for £1.99. 3. I don't want to buy Aldi's sausages because they're too expensive.
Is it Aldi's fault I don't have any sausages?
It is Aldi's loss when Sainsbury's, Lidl, Tescos will sell me sausages at £1.75.
Why did we go to Aldi in the first place?
We were paying a large annual fee for an Aldi loyalty card, but have stopped that so can now shop around.
So you agree it isn't Aldi's fault we don't have any sausages. It is a consequence of our own choice. Good.
We do have sausages.
It is Aldi's fault we chose to buy our sausages elsewhere.
Some people on here fail to understand that it's not a strong hand if the other side can and does walk away.
That's called overplaying your hand.
That is a calculation for the side with the strong hand to make. The calculation for the other side is whether the harm done by walking away is worth it.
What happens when both parties consider they have the strong hand?
We get the current situation. We will find out soon enough who is right.
Some people on here fail to understand that it's not a strong hand if the other side can and does walk away.
That's called overplaying your hand.
That is a calculation for the side with the strong hand to make. The calculation for the other side is whether the harm done by walking away is worth it.
Again, failing to understand this isn't a 0/100 negotiation.
I get so bored saying this to erstwhile intelligent people.
Some people on here fail to understand that it's not a strong hand if the other side can and does walk away.
That's called overplaying your hand.
That is a calculation for the side with the strong hand to make. The calculation for the other side is whether the harm done by walking away is worth it.
Again, failing to understand this isn't a 0/100 negotiation.
I get so bored saying this to erstwhile intelligent people.
Oh, because you of course are the standard for intelligence. Give it a break.
I'm very much looking forwards to brexit meaning brexit for the EU. No more security and intelligence cooperation, no more fishing waters, EU companies setting up capitalised subsidiary companies in the UK to get access to finance.
The desperation in their no deal contingency is really quite telling. That they feel the need to threaten the UK with what amounts to an economic blockade shows just how fragile their position actually is.
If only Boris had got an extra year or two to get the national infrastructure ready for no deal. In that position it really would be a no brainer. As it stands there is going to be a year or two of very difficult decision making and lots of upheaval in employment and industry. It's going to happen either way because the UK will never agree to the LPF and governance positions held by the EU, but we're going into it completely unprepared and in the shadow of a global pandemic which we're yet to recover from.
I remember being told last year that the UK would simply agree to the LPF and the EU would win whatever it was they were asking for by all of the usual suspects. For the whole year I've been saying that no UK government (Tory or Labour) would ever agree to either the LPF or governance that gave the EU unilateral right to apply tariffs without arbitration. Now it's happening because the EU didn't negotiate on either of those positions. It ending in no deal.
There is no way that once the UK assumes its territorial waters, the ability to set regulations and a post action arbitration via the WTO it will ever give them up as part of any deal with any nation or trading bloc. The EU are making a grave miscalculation and it's going to cost us what could have been a pretty good trade deal.
If it's a No Deal Brexit on 1st Jan 2021 then it's no more Mr. Nice Guy from the UK.
I don't want it but we need to hit them where it hurts. We've already managed to upset them now by approving a vaccine early so they're far more sensitive and fragile than they let on.
No deal is entirely our fault. Stop this nonsense, it isn't a game.
No, it absolutely isn't. I've always wanted a Deal, as you know - and I've been consistent in arguing against Leavers who've said the opposite - but if I what I understand to be true is the case (and none of us really know) then I wouldn't sign what's currently on the table. I'd be comfortable I'd been reasonable and proportionate in going up to and creatively around my red lines, but not clearly over them.
And, if it's No Deal, then that works both ways. The EU need to know that.
1. We want a trade deal. 2. The EU have offered us a trade deal. 3. We've turned it down because we don't like the terms.
1. I want some sausages. 2. Aldi offer me some sausages for £1.99. 3. I don't want to buy Aldi's sausages because they're too expensive.
Is it Aldi's fault I don't have any sausages?
It is Aldi's loss when Sainsbury's, Lidl, Tescos will sell me sausages at £1.75.
Why did we go to Aldi in the first place?
We were paying a large annual fee for an Aldi loyalty card, but have stopped that so can now shop around.
Why were we paying a large annual fee for a loyalty card when we could at any time, as @MarqueeMark explains, have gone to Sainsbury's, Lidl, and Tescos to get the sausages cheaper?
Reduces the incentives to rush towards a deal - those eggs have already broken now.
Is there no subject you don't know nothing about?
So far around 14% of banking assets have been moved to the EU (mainly FFT). Obviously there is a rump of assets that can't move but still plenty to play for.
Less to play for than there used to be. That's the point, the longer we get through this disruption the less there is to play for.
I think you should see this as a process not an event that is not going to be arrested on any particular date. Increasingly the centre of gravity will shift. London as the EU's financial centre is not going to change any time soon but it will be diminished gradually over time as the pull towards being onshore in the EU increases.
To some degree yes, but there will be bigger gains made elsewhere. What will actually happen in the longer term is that the EU itself will diminish gradually in economic importance and the portion of that will be reflected in finance as well.
One of the best things about our industry is that physical distance makes no difference in the client base. We will be the first to benefit from a global outlook and to a certain extent I know we are, at least from the outlook of a Japanese bank which has mostly Asia focused clients.
I worked for one of those for a while (made it tricky to answer the regulatory tickboxes such as "has your employer ever been prosecuted for....")
And yes of course to the physical distance thing. As to the gains, financial services are nothing if not resourceful and I'm sure the UK will be very creative. But it will undoubtedly handicap itself by being offshore to the EU.
Also the most worrying thing for the City (where Dictum Meum Pactum is a founding principle) might be the damage done by having a govt ponder (if not it seems actually acting on) breaking international treaties.
Absolutely agreed on the final point, hopefully stepping back from the brink will have been enough but I'm not sure. I remember we said so at the time too.
I'm very much looking forwards to brexit meaning brexit for the EU. No more security and intelligence cooperation, no more fishing waters, EU companies setting up capitalised subsidiary companies in the UK to get access to finance.
The desperation in their no deal contingency is really quite telling. That they feel the need to threaten the UK with what amounts to an economic blockade shows just how fragile their position actually is.
If only Boris had got an extra year or two to get the national infrastructure ready for no deal. In that position it really would be a no brainer. As it stands there is going to be a year or two of very difficult decision making and lots of upheaval in employment and industry. It's going to happen either way because the UK will never agree to the LPF and governance positions held by the EU, but we're going into it completely unprepared and in the shadow of a global pandemic which we're yet to recover from.
I remember being told last year that the UK would simply agree to the LPF and the EU would win whatever it was they were asking for by all of the usual suspects. For the whole year I've been saying that no UK government (Tory or Labour) would ever agree to either the LPF or governance that gave the EU unilateral right to apply tariffs without arbitration. Now it's happening because the EU didn't negotiate on either of those positions. It ending in no deal.
There is no way that once the UK assumes its territorial waters, the ability to set regulations and a post action arbitration via the WTO it will ever give them up as part of any deal with any nation or trading bloc. The EU are making a grave miscalculation and it's going to cost us what could have been a pretty good trade deal.
If it's a No Deal Brexit on 1st Jan 2021 then it's no more Mr. Nice Guy from the UK.
I don't want it but we need to hit them where it hurts. We've already managed to upset them now by approving a vaccine early so they're far more sensitive and fragile than they let on.
No deal is entirely our fault. Stop this nonsense, it isn't a game.
No, it absolutely isn't. I've always wanted a Deal, as you know - and I've been consistent in arguing against Leavers who've said the opposite - but if I what I understand to be true is the case (and none of us really know) then I wouldn't sign what's currently on the table. I'd be comfortable I'd been reasonable and proportionate in going up to and creatively around my red lines, but not clearly over them.
And, if it's No Deal, then that works both ways. The EU need to know that.
1. We want a trade deal. 2. The EU have offered us a trade deal. 3. We've turned it down because we don't like the terms.
1. I want some sausages. 2. Aldi offer me some sausages for £1.99. 3. I don't want to buy Aldi's sausages because they're too expensive.
Is it Aldi's fault I don't have any sausages?
It is Aldi's loss when Sainsbury's, Lidl, Tescos will sell me sausages at £1.75.
Why did we go to Aldi in the first place?
We were paying a large annual fee for an Aldi loyalty card, but have stopped that so can now shop around.
Why were we paying a large annual fee for a loyalty card when we could at any time, as @MarqueeMark explains, have gone to Sainsbury's, Lidl, and Tescos to get the sausages cheaper?
The membership fee made those shops more expensive as part of the terms of membership.
I'm very much looking forwards to brexit meaning brexit for the EU. No more security and intelligence cooperation, no more fishing waters, EU companies setting up capitalised subsidiary companies in the UK to get access to finance.
The desperation in their no deal contingency is really quite telling. That they feel the need to threaten the UK with what amounts to an economic blockade shows just how fragile their position actually is.
If only Boris had got an extra year or two to get the national infrastructure ready for no deal. In that position it really would be a no brainer. As it stands there is going to be a year or two of very difficult decision making and lots of upheaval in employment and industry. It's going to happen either way because the UK will never agree to the LPF and governance positions held by the EU, but we're going into it completely unprepared and in the shadow of a global pandemic which we're yet to recover from.
I remember being told last year that the UK would simply agree to the LPF and the EU would win whatever it was they were asking for by all of the usual suspects. For the whole year I've been saying that no UK government (Tory or Labour) would ever agree to either the LPF or governance that gave the EU unilateral right to apply tariffs without arbitration. Now it's happening because the EU didn't negotiate on either of those positions. It ending in no deal.
There is no way that once the UK assumes its territorial waters, the ability to set regulations and a post action arbitration via the WTO it will ever give them up as part of any deal with any nation or trading bloc. The EU are making a grave miscalculation and it's going to cost us what could have been a pretty good trade deal.
If it's a No Deal Brexit on 1st Jan 2021 then it's no more Mr. Nice Guy from the UK.
I don't want it but we need to hit them where it hurts. We've already managed to upset them now by approving a vaccine early so they're far more sensitive and fragile than they let on.
No deal is entirely our fault. Stop this nonsense, it isn't a game.
No, it absolutely isn't. I've always wanted a Deal, as you know - and I've been consistent in arguing against Leavers who've said the opposite - but if I what I understand to be true is the case (and none of us really know) then I wouldn't sign what's currently on the table. I'd be comfortable I'd been reasonable and proportionate in going up to and creatively around my red lines, but not clearly over them.
And, if it's No Deal, then that works both ways. The EU need to know that.
1. We want a trade deal. 2. The EU have offered us a trade deal. 3. We've turned it down because we don't like the terms.
1. I want some sausages. 2. Aldi offer me some sausages for £1.99. 3. I don't want to buy Aldi's sausages because they're too expensive.
Is it Aldi's fault I don't have any sausages?
It is Aldi's loss when Sainsbury's, Lidl, Tescos will sell me sausages at £1.75.
Why did we go to Aldi in the first place?
We were paying a large annual fee for an Aldi loyalty card, but have stopped that so can now shop around.
But Aldi owns the nearest 27 supermarkets - now we could shop elsewhere but it's quite a hassle to drive past 27 supermarkets to get to a different one.
As an aside could we use Co-op rather than Aldi. I have to walk past 3 of them to get to the nearest none Co-op supermarket (it's an Aldi flagship next to their Northern HQ)
1. We want sausages for tea tonight. 2. It's 9:45pm and all the shops close at 10pm. 3. I go to Aldi and they offer me sausages for £1.99. 4. I refuse. 5. I go without sausages for tea because all other shops are now closed.
I'm very much looking forwards to brexit meaning brexit for the EU. No more security and intelligence cooperation, no more fishing waters, EU companies setting up capitalised subsidiary companies in the UK to get access to finance.
The desperation in their no deal contingency is really quite telling. That they feel the need to threaten the UK with what amounts to an economic blockade shows just how fragile their position actually is.
If only Boris had got an extra year or two to get the national infrastructure ready for no deal. In that position it really would be a no brainer. As it stands there is going to be a year or two of very difficult decision making and lots of upheaval in employment and industry. It's going to happen either way because the UK will never agree to the LPF and governance positions held by the EU, but we're going into it completely unprepared and in the shadow of a global pandemic which we're yet to recover from.
I remember being told last year that the UK would simply agree to the LPF and the EU would win whatever it was they were asking for by all of the usual suspects. For the whole year I've been saying that no UK government (Tory or Labour) would ever agree to either the LPF or governance that gave the EU unilateral right to apply tariffs without arbitration. Now it's happening because the EU didn't negotiate on either of those positions. It ending in no deal.
There is no way that once the UK assumes its territorial waters, the ability to set regulations and a post action arbitration via the WTO it will ever give them up as part of any deal with any nation or trading bloc. The EU are making a grave miscalculation and it's going to cost us what could have been a pretty good trade deal.
If it's a No Deal Brexit on 1st Jan 2021 then it's no more Mr. Nice Guy from the UK.
I don't want it but we need to hit them where it hurts. We've already managed to upset them now by approving a vaccine early so they're far more sensitive and fragile than they let on.
No deal is entirely our fault. Stop this nonsense, it isn't a game.
No, it absolutely isn't. I've always wanted a Deal, as you know - and I've been consistent in arguing against Leavers who've said the opposite - but if I what I understand to be true is the case (and none of us really know) then I wouldn't sign what's currently on the table. I'd be comfortable I'd been reasonable and proportionate in going up to and creatively around my red lines, but not clearly over them.
And, if it's No Deal, then that works both ways. The EU need to know that.
I don't understand people's objection of the LPF requirements the EU want to put in the FTA. Whether they trade with us and under what conditions is their sovereign decision, just as it is for us. They are simply saying that if we do things that they don't like then they reserve the right to put barriers to trade in place. That doesn't stop us doing the things they don't like, or indeed constrain us in any way. The EU is just saying, if things change then we will revisit the extent of market access. Brexiteers seem to be saying, we don't want the EU to have the right to maybe trade with us on less generous terms in the future, so we're going to force them to definitely trade with us on less generous terms right now. It's bizzare.
The point is that the LPF is open ended and they can gradually make the terms of trade worse unilaterally until there's not much value in the deal.
Trade deals include lots of LPF provisions, all of our other trade deals include them. The difference is that they are fixed in time unless both parties agree to change them and if one party decides to act unilaterally to undermine that then post action arbitration is the standard recourse with arbitration led tariff allowances. What the EU are proposing is to say "if we make our single market uneconomic, the UK must follow". It's completely ridiculous.
So we walk away now to tariffs on the basis of something that could happen in the future and which we could respond to by just accepting tariffs at that point.
Or walk away now, do a deal doesn't include unilateral tariff setting by the EU in the future when they've realised that the UK won't sign the one they're currently offering.
Some people on here fail to understand that it's not a strong hand if the other side can and does walk away.
That's called overplaying your hand.
That is a calculation for the side with the strong hand to make. The calculation for the other side is whether the harm done by walking away is worth it.
Again, failing to understand this isn't a 0/100 negotiation.
I get so bored saying this to erstwhile intelligent people.
Oh, because you of course are the standard for intelligence. Give it a break.
I wouldn't say that.
I would say that your role on this site is analogous to the stroppy teenager who won't go to his room.
Some people on here fail to understand that it's not a strong hand if the other side can and does walk away.
That's called overplaying your hand.
That is a calculation for the side with the strong hand to make. The calculation for the other side is whether the harm done by walking away is worth it.
Again, failing to understand this isn't a 0/100 negotiation.
I get so bored saying this to erstwhile intelligent people.
Oh, because you of course are the standard for intelligence. Give it a break.
I wouldn't say that.
I would say that your role on this site is analogous to the stroppy teenager who won't go to his room.
Says the guy who starts crying whenever someone posts an EU flag emoji.
Some people on here fail to understand that it's not a strong hand if the other side can and does walk away.
That's called overplaying your hand.
That is a calculation for the side with the strong hand to make. The calculation for the other side is whether the harm done by walking away is worth it.
What happens when both parties consider they have the strong hand?
It's not strong hands and weak hands, but whether there is any mutual gain.
If I am selling a house, and am willing to take any offer over $500k, and the potential buyer is will to pay up to $600k, there is a deal to be made. If the buyer is only willing to pay up to $400k, there is no deal to be done.
If the EU insist that ratcheting is necessary to ensure the integrity of the Single Market, and the UK insists that controlling its own regulatory environment is necessary both for domestic political reasons and to offer any potential upside of leaving the EU, then there is no basis for agreement. No amount of fudge can square that circle.
1. We want sausages for tea tonight. 2. It's 9:45pm and all the shops close at 10pm. 3. I go to Aldi and they offer me sausages for £1.99. 4. I refuse. 5. I go without sausages for tea because all other shops are now closed.
Is it Aldi's fault I am without sausages for tea?
The answer is no.
Why were you eating so late? And then calling it tea!?
1. We want sausages for tea tonight. 2. It's 9:45pm and all the shops close at 10pm. 3. I go to Aldi and they offer me sausages for £1.99. 4. I refuse. 5. I go without sausages for tea because all other shops are now closed.
Is it Aldi's fault I am without sausages for tea?
The answer is no.
Why were you eating so late?
I was too busy telling the wife that I already had sausages to actually get them.
Joe Anderson, the mayor of Liverpool, has announced he will step aside from the role following his arrest by detectives investigating allegations of bribery and witness intimidation linked to building deals in the city.
I'm very much looking forwards to brexit meaning brexit for the EU. No more security and intelligence cooperation, no more fishing waters, EU companies setting up capitalised subsidiary companies in the UK to get access to finance.
The desperation in their no deal contingency is really quite telling. That they feel the need to threaten the UK with what amounts to an economic blockade shows just how fragile their position actually is.
If only Boris had got an extra year or two to get the national infrastructure ready for no deal. In that position it really would be a no brainer. As it stands there is going to be a year or two of very difficult decision making and lots of upheaval in employment and industry. It's going to happen either way because the UK will never agree to the LPF and governance positions held by the EU, but we're going into it completely unprepared and in the shadow of a global pandemic which we're yet to recover from.
I remember being told last year that the UK would simply agree to the LPF and the EU would win whatever it was they were asking for by all of the usual suspects. For the whole year I've been saying that no UK government (Tory or Labour) would ever agree to either the LPF or governance that gave the EU unilateral right to apply tariffs without arbitration. Now it's happening because the EU didn't negotiate on either of those positions. It ending in no deal.
There is no way that once the UK assumes its territorial waters, the ability to set regulations and a post action arbitration via the WTO it will ever give them up as part of any deal with any nation or trading bloc. The EU are making a grave miscalculation and it's going to cost us what could have been a pretty good trade deal.
If it's a No Deal Brexit on 1st Jan 2021 then it's no more Mr. Nice Guy from the UK.
I don't want it but we need to hit them where it hurts. We've already managed to upset them now by approving a vaccine early so they're far more sensitive and fragile than they let on.
Oh no. You're in one of your bonkers moods.
Get in the tanks, troops.
Brexit means Brexit.
uh oh.
You can't adopt a position that says it's ok for the EU to play hardball on the UK in a No Deal situation but an outrage for the UK to do it the other way round.
Both sides will have the objective to get the other to return to the negotiating table.
Not at all. Both sides can play as hard a ball as they want. I mean it's only peoples' livelihoods that are at stake. Speaking as a Brit I don't give a flying fuck what happens in the EU - I don't want it to fail and I don't care what it does with other countries. I want the UK to hit 2nd Jan in as good a state as possible.
We are negotiating with a much larger entity and that means accepting, bitter as it may be, that we might not have as much leverage as we would if we were negotiating with Tonga.
I'm very much looking forwards to brexit meaning brexit for the EU. No more security and intelligence cooperation, no more fishing waters, EU companies setting up capitalised subsidiary companies in the UK to get access to finance.
The desperation in their no deal contingency is really quite telling. That they feel the need to threaten the UK with what amounts to an economic blockade shows just how fragile their position actually is.
If only Boris had got an extra year or two to get the national infrastructure ready for no deal. In that position it really would be a no brainer. As it stands there is going to be a year or two of very difficult decision making and lots of upheaval in employment and industry. It's going to happen either way because the UK will never agree to the LPF and governance positions held by the EU, but we're going into it completely unprepared and in the shadow of a global pandemic which we're yet to recover from.
I remember being told last year that the UK would simply agree to the LPF and the EU would win whatever it was they were asking for by all of the usual suspects. For the whole year I've been saying that no UK government (Tory or Labour) would ever agree to either the LPF or governance that gave the EU unilateral right to apply tariffs without arbitration. Now it's happening because the EU didn't negotiate on either of those positions. It ending in no deal.
There is no way that once the UK assumes its territorial waters, the ability to set regulations and a post action arbitration via the WTO it will ever give them up as part of any deal with any nation or trading bloc. The EU are making a grave miscalculation and it's going to cost us what could have been a pretty good trade deal.
If it's a No Deal Brexit on 1st Jan 2021 then it's no more Mr. Nice Guy from the UK.
I don't want it but we need to hit them where it hurts. We've already managed to upset them now by approving a vaccine early so they're far more sensitive and fragile than they let on.
No deal is entirely our fault. Stop this nonsense, it isn't a game.
No, it absolutely isn't. I've always wanted a Deal, as you know - and I've been consistent in arguing against Leavers who've said the opposite - but if I what I understand to be true is the case (and none of us really know) then I wouldn't sign what's currently on the table. I'd be comfortable I'd been reasonable and proportionate in going up to and creatively around my red lines, but not clearly over them.
And, if it's No Deal, then that works both ways. The EU need to know that.
1. We want a trade deal. 2. The EU have offered us a trade deal. 3. We've turned it down because we don't like the terms.
1. I want some sausages. 2. Aldi offer me some sausages for £1.99. 3. I don't want to buy Aldi's sausages because they're too expensive.
Is it Aldi's fault I don't have any sausages?
It is Aldi's loss when Sainsbury's, Lidl, Tescos will sell me sausages at £1.75.
Why did we go to Aldi in the first place?
We were paying a large annual fee for an Aldi loyalty card, but have stopped that so can now shop around.
But Aldi owns the nearest 27 supermarkets - now we could shop elsewhere but it's quite a hassle to drive past 27 supermarkets to get to a different one.
As an aside could we use Co-op rather than Aldi. I have to walk past 3 of them to get to the nearest none Co-op supermarket (it's an Aldi flagship next to their Northern HQ)
But this is the 21st century, location isn't the only determining factor. I don't have a Tesco's near me, I do have multiple Aldi's, but I can nowadays get online deliveries from Tesco's.
The internet has made trade from further afield much easier than it used to be.
This Aldi / sausage analogy is terrible. Aldi sausages are great quality (as are Lidl's) and at the same time cheaper than most other supermarkets' offerings.
Should say not a chance on fisheries. Certainly not for fisheries to be for longer than other ones that is crazy.
Depends whether the UK wants to be able to fly those vaccines in, doesn't it?
They are independent proposals, aren't they?
Unclear, but if things get very acrimonious, they will get acrimonious. Boris is taking us into the very worst of all possible worst worlds.
So is the EU by their unreasonable eleventh hour demands via Macron, and refusal to negotiate which you are blind to seeing any issues with.
There haven't been any eleventh hour demands, they've mostly been tediously consistent since 2016, although they have compromised on a lot of the detail (for example, they dropped the demand that the ECJ should be the arbiter).
In any case, so what if their demands are unreasonable, or seem so to us? They didn't ask the UK to impose economic sanctions on itself, quite the reverse. That choice was entirely ours, and the decision as to whether to accept the terms on offer (which are exactly in line with what was known in 2016), or plunge the country into chaos, is entirely that of the UK government. No-one else is responsible for that.
As David Gauke points out, the UK's objections to the proposed LPF clauses make zero sense anyway. On the off-chance that a fire might break out at some unspecified time in the future, we are proposing to burn the house down now.
Yes, they are - you need to look at how The Times reported the tightening last Thursday when a deal looked imminent - Macron led the charge against what Germany/Sweden/Austria and the Central and Eastern European states all had virtually sewn up with Ursula VDR. This new hard position included virtually no movement on fish above 15-18% (rather than comprising), an unbalanced approach to State Aid rules (we can, you can't) and a right to unilateral lightning tariffs in future without limit if they increased or changed LPF standards and we declined to follow suit, rather than just agreeing regression clauses on current standards now and agreeing to jointly reviewing the applicability and scope of the deal in future if either side wants to change them.
Your position (because you disagree so vociferously with the original Brexit vote) is that everything the EU does is reasonable and everything the UK does is unreasonable. You are worth listening to on virtually every issue - where we agree on almost everything - but on Brexit you simply become a LD'y Remoaner turned up to 11.
You never bother to delve into the specifics and nuances, so you're not interesting to listen to as a result. Brexit has happened. It's a reality. Both the UK and EU should be interested in forging a sustainable long-term relationship. You need to be able to exercise the dispassionate judgement on the respective negotiating positions of both sides to reflect that reality and be able to assess if they reasonable, sensible and constructive. Or what you say on the subject will simply be ignored.
Look at David Herdson's example to see how a Conservative Remainer is still able to see the flaws of the EU position. Learn from him.
I suspect Richard's position - which happens to be mine, so I may be projecting (and apologies to him if I am) - is that it does not matter whether the EU's position is reasonable or not, it is what it is: the EU's position. We either accept that and work to get an agreement within the parameters it sets or we walk away. That has always been the choice, as it will be in any negotiation in which one party has a stronger hand than the other one.
It does matter if the EU is being unreasonable because as you say we can either accept that or walk away.
If the EU is being reasonable we should strive to get an agreement, if its possible.
If the EU is being unreasonable then that gives more justification to walking away.
Do you disagree with that philosophy?
I have always said our choice is to accept a deal that the EU essentially dictates or to walk away with no deal. It's not a philosophical point, it's a practical one grounded entirely in cold hard reality. Politically, the government will clearly seek to blame the EU for the failure of the negotiation and that may well work for a few news cycles. We will then move to the delivery of the triumphant outcome from a no deal that the government has promised us.
This simply isn't true. The EU has negotiated and compromised, as has the UK, we've got 97-98% of the way there - we are simply unable to close the final gap.
The give away is your second sentence which clearly puts any blame on the failure of negotiations on the UK, and none on the EU. This is emotionally influenced. I think the EU (and, remember, I've always supported a Deal and had no problem with a LPF) isn't being rational in going for a 30-40% UK cut of fish (a big win), fairness on state aid interpretations on both sides of the channel and lighting tariffs and governance arbitration thereof.
On virtually everything else I think the UK and EU are fully aligned in a fair deal.
They are being way too sensitive and hardline - and it might blow the whole thing out of the water. The only thing I think the UK is being too persnickety on is locking in some of the current LPF standards, where we're never going to move away from them anyway.
Yes, I do blame this government for not understanding the cold, hard reality of negotiating with a party that has a stronger hand.
No attempt to answer the point.
How predictable, and disappointing.
Your point was that I - and I quote - put "any blame on the failure of negotiations on the UK, and none on the EU". I was largely agreeing. The talks have failed up to now because the UK has failed to understand the basic point: they have a better hand than we do and we will only get a deal they want to give us. This has always been the case and will continue to be so.
Ministers still do not believe we don't hold all the cards.
Raab in denial this morning claiming the average 5% on food prices outlined by the Chairman of Tesco yesterday in the event of no deal is just plain wrong. Raab couldn't himself give a figure.
Of course it's wrong. How could the chair of Tesco know anything about food prices? It's just ridiculous to think he knows more than Raab.
He could know an opportunity to stick 5% on prices when he sees it....
Yes because clearly none of their rivals who have been in an aggressive price war with them for a decade would undercut their inflated prices for market share.....
Some people on here fail to understand that it's not a strong hand if the other side can and does walk away.
That's called overplaying your hand.
That is a calculation for the side with the strong hand to make. The calculation for the other side is whether the harm done by walking away is worth it.
Again, failing to understand this isn't a 0/100 negotiation.
I get so bored saying this to erstwhile intelligent people.
I do understand. I just take a different view to you on where in the 0 to 100 the UK and the EU sit. It seems to me that a lot of very unintelligent people - who never took the time to understand how the EU, international trade, power politics and just-in-time supply chains work - believe there is a far higher level of equality than is actually the case.
1. We want sausages for tea tonight. 2. It's 9:45pm and all the shops close at 10pm. 3. I go to Aldi and they offer me sausages for £1.99. 4. I refuse. 5. I go without sausages for tea because all other shops are now closed.
Is it Aldi's fault I am without sausages for tea?
The answer is no.
Why were you eating so late? And then calling it tea!?
He's a Northerner. You're projecting your Southern preconceptions. [edit: I Hasten to add, that is a joke.]
Should say not a chance on fisheries. Certainly not for fisheries to be for longer than other ones that is crazy.
Depends whether the UK wants to be able to fly those vaccines in, doesn't it?
They are independent proposals, aren't they?
Unclear, but if things get very acrimonious, they will get acrimonious. Boris is taking us into the very worst of all possible worst worlds.
So is the EU by their unreasonable eleventh hour demands via Macron, and refusal to negotiate which you are blind to seeing any issues with.
There haven't been any eleventh hour demands, they've mostly been tediously consistent since 2016, although they have compromised on a lot of the detail (for example, they dropped the demand that the ECJ should be the arbiter).
In any case, so what if their demands are unreasonable, or seem so to us? They didn't ask the UK to impose economic sanctions on itself, quite the reverse. That choice was entirely ours, and the decision as to whether to accept the terms on offer (which are exactly in line with what was known in 2016), or plunge the country into chaos, is entirely that of the UK government. No-one else is responsible for that.
As David Gauke points out, the UK's objections to the proposed LPF clauses make zero sense anyway. On the off-chance that a fire might break out at some unspecified time in the future, we are proposing to burn the house down now.
Yes, they are - you need to look at how The Times reported the tightening last Thursday when a deal looked imminent - Macron led the charge against what Germany/Sweden/Austria and the Central and Eastern European states all had virtually sewn up with Ursula VDR. This new hard position included virtually no movement on fish above 15-18% (rather than comprising), an unbalanced approach to State Aid rules (we can, you can't) and a right to unilateral lightning tariffs in future without limit if they increased or changed LPF standards and we declined to follow suit, rather than just agreeing regression clauses on current standards now and agreeing to jointly reviewing the applicability and scope of the deal in future if either side wants to change them.
Your position (because you disagree so vociferously with the original Brexit vote) is that everything the EU does is reasonable and everything the UK does is unreasonable. You are worth listening to on virtually every issue - where we agree on almost everything - but on Brexit you simply become a LD'y Remoaner turned up to 11.
You never bother to delve into the specifics and nuances, so you're not interesting to listen to as a result. Brexit has happened. It's a reality. Both the UK and EU should be interested in forging a sustainable long-term relationship. You need to be able to exercise the dispassionate judgement on the respective negotiating positions of both sides to reflect that reality and be able to assess if they reasonable, sensible and constructive. Or what you say on the subject will simply be ignored.
Look at David Herdson's example to see how a Conservative Remainer is still able to see the flaws of the EU position. Learn from him.
What utter nonsense, except for the last bit. I very much learn from the very sensible David Herdson. I very, very rarely disagree with him.
Where you are confused is that you seem to think that understanding that we are in a weak position is the same as siding with the EU. Reality is reality, wishing it otherwise isn't saying everything the EU does is reasonable. In fact I've never said that - the EU have made lots of mistakes: misjudging the UK political realities, and above all screwing up the negotiations by their insistence on negotiating the Withdrawal Agreement, defining the transition, before either side had the faintest idea what we were supposed to be transitioning to. I'm pretty sure I've called that 'brain-dead' on numerous occasions, which is hardly a resounding endorsement.
But we are where we are. And it is the UK which is going to be very hard hit by it. That is the dispassionate reality, and, as far the damage to the UK is concerned, the fault lies with our own government. EU politicians will have to deal with any blame from their own voters on the damage done to EU economies. That's entirely their business, but the damage done to the UK is the responsibility of the UK government, by definition.
It's not utter nonsense. You are just having an emotional reaction to my challenge.
I'm not confused in the slightest and never have been. You shouldn't confuse disagreement with your position and analysis as "confusion", which is rather arrogant and unlike you.
The sad truth is I see no nuance whatsoever in your analysis on the EU from you. None. And I never have done. You've never criticised a single angle or position they've taken, as far as I can see. I, however, have done both and have been consistent in criticising both the UK and the EU sides when I think it's warranted. David Herdson and even Alastair Meeks have both managed this - you haven't.
As you know, I agree with you the relative merits on May's Deal. So I am capable of seeing the balance of advantage and also of interest. Your only response on the point of EU reasonableness is to say that any position they adopt is "reality".
Well, that makes sense if you see the UK as a supplicant in this - for whom a deal is utterly essential and for which the EU isn't fussed - but we know that's not true. The EU isn't as God-like as you think it is. And No Deal is a lose-lose for both parties, which is why they've been negotiating and compromising repeatedly.
As for blame, well, there will be some who blame the UK entirely, others who blame the EU and others who blame both.
My sympathies would lie with the last. And, sadly, the rancour and fall-out will last for years.
That is a classic! Leaving aside the question of which of us is showing an 'emotional reaction', just look at your third paragraph: "You've never criticised a single angle or position [the EU have] taken, as far as I can see." A pretty remarkable comment in response to me pointing out that I've frequently described one of their key positions as 'brain dead'.
Incidentally - since it's a topic which has been mentioned here today by @MaxPB and others - I believe I was the first to point out, some months ago, that the EU were worrying about the wrong thing - the danger for them isn't that we become some super-competitor on their doorstep, but that as one of their major customers we sink into a long period of economic stagnation as a result of Brexit. No doubt you thought I was saying they were 'God-like' when I've made that point.
Wales with 1,968 cases today, up from 1,473 last Thursday. This takes the 7-day average to 382 per 100,000, surpassing Northern Ireland's previous high of 379.
This Aldi / sausage analogy is terrible. Aldi sausages are great quality (as are Lidl's) and at the same time cheaper than most other supermarkets' offerings.
The Aldi near me is open til 11 anyway. That changes things.
1. We want sausages for tea tonight. 2. It's 9:45pm and all the shops close at 10pm. 3. I go to Aldi and they offer me sausages for £1.99. 4. I refuse. 5. I go without sausages for tea because all other shops are now closed.
Is it Aldi's fault I am without sausages for tea?
The answer is no.
Why were you eating so late? And then calling it tea!?
Because the prime minister kept on changing his mind on whether he wanted sausages or meatballs.
Wales with 1,968 cases today, up from 1,473 last Thursday. This takes the 7-day average to 382 per 100,000, surpassing Northern Ireland's previous high of 379.
And yet they won't make any decision on further restrictions for another 3 weeks...
1. We want sausages for tea tonight. 2. It's 9:45pm and all the shops close at 10pm. 3. I go to Aldi and they offer me sausages for £1.99. 4. I refuse. 5. I go without sausages for tea because all other shops are now closed.
Is it Aldi's fault I am without sausages for tea?
The answer is no.
Why were you eating so late? And then calling it tea!?
Because the prime minister kept on changing his mind on whether he wanted sausages or meatballs.
He wanted cake last I heard. Is Aldi's cake any good?
I'm very much looking forwards to brexit meaning brexit for the EU. No more security and intelligence cooperation, no more fishing waters, EU companies setting up capitalised subsidiary companies in the UK to get access to finance.
The desperation in their no deal contingency is really quite telling. That they feel the need to threaten the UK with what amounts to an economic blockade shows just how fragile their position actually is.
If only Boris had got an extra year or two to get the national infrastructure ready for no deal. In that position it really would be a no brainer. As it stands there is going to be a year or two of very difficult decision making and lots of upheaval in employment and industry. It's going to happen either way because the UK will never agree to the LPF and governance positions held by the EU, but we're going into it completely unprepared and in the shadow of a global pandemic which we're yet to recover from.
I remember being told last year that the UK would simply agree to the LPF and the EU would win whatever it was they were asking for by all of the usual suspects. For the whole year I've been saying that no UK government (Tory or Labour) would ever agree to either the LPF or governance that gave the EU unilateral right to apply tariffs without arbitration. Now it's happening because the EU didn't negotiate on either of those positions. It ending in no deal.
There is no way that once the UK assumes its territorial waters, the ability to set regulations and a post action arbitration via the WTO it will ever give them up as part of any deal with any nation or trading bloc. The EU are making a grave miscalculation and it's going to cost us what could have been a pretty good trade deal.
If it's a No Deal Brexit on 1st Jan 2021 then it's no more Mr. Nice Guy from the UK.
I don't want it but we need to hit them where it hurts. We've already managed to upset them now by approving a vaccine early so they're far more sensitive and fragile than they let on.
No deal is entirely our fault. Stop this nonsense, it isn't a game.
No, it absolutely isn't. I've always wanted a Deal, as you know - and I've been consistent in arguing against Leavers who've said the opposite - but if I what I understand to be true is the case (and none of us really know) then I wouldn't sign what's currently on the table. I'd be comfortable I'd been reasonable and proportionate in going up to and creatively around my red lines, but not clearly over them.
And, if it's No Deal, then that works both ways. The EU need to know that.
I don't understand people's objection of the LPF requirements the EU want to put in the FTA. Whether they trade with us and under what conditions is their sovereign decision, just as it is for us. They are simply saying that if we do things that they don't like then they reserve the right to put barriers to trade in place. That doesn't stop us doing the things they don't like, or indeed constrain us in any way. The EU is just saying, if things change then we will revisit the extent of market access. Brexiteers seem to be saying, we don't want the EU to have the right to maybe trade with us on less generous terms in the future, so we're going to force them to definitely trade with us on less generous terms right now. It's bizzare.
The point is that the LPF is open ended and they can gradually make the terms of trade worse unilaterally until there's not much value in the deal.
Trade deals include lots of LPF provisions, all of our other trade deals include them. The difference is that they are fixed in time unless both parties agree to change them and if one party decides to act unilaterally to undermine that then post action arbitration is the standard recourse with arbitration led tariff allowances. What the EU are proposing is to say "if we make our single market uneconomic, the UK must follow". It's completely ridiculous.
So we walk away now to tariffs on the basis of something that could happen in the future and which we could respond to by just accepting tariffs at that point.
Or walk away now, do a deal doesn't include unilateral tariff setting by the EU in the future when they've realised that the UK won't sign the one they're currently offering.
1. We want sausages for tea tonight. 2. It's 9:45pm and all the shops close at 10pm. 3. I go to Aldi and they offer me sausages for £1.99. 4. I refuse. 5. I go without sausages for tea because all other shops are now closed.
Is it Aldi's fault I am without sausages for tea?
The answer is no.
Why were you eating so late? And then calling it tea!?
He's a Northerner. You're projecting your Southern preconceptions. [edit: I Hasten to add, that is a joke.]
My wife, being a Northerner, once invited someone round "for tea" and was shocked to find they'd already eaten when they turned up expecting a cup of tea.
I'm very much looking forwards to brexit meaning brexit for the EU. No more security and intelligence cooperation, no more fishing waters, EU companies setting up capitalised subsidiary companies in the UK to get access to finance.
The desperation in their no deal contingency is really quite telling. That they feel the need to threaten the UK with what amounts to an economic blockade shows just how fragile their position actually is.
If only Boris had got an extra year or two to get the national infrastructure ready for no deal. In that position it really would be a no brainer. As it stands there is going to be a year or two of very difficult decision making and lots of upheaval in employment and industry. It's going to happen either way because the UK will never agree to the LPF and governance positions held by the EU, but we're going into it completely unprepared and in the shadow of a global pandemic which we're yet to recover from.
I remember being told last year that the UK would simply agree to the LPF and the EU would win whatever it was they were asking for by all of the usual suspects. For the whole year I've been saying that no UK government (Tory or Labour) would ever agree to either the LPF or governance that gave the EU unilateral right to apply tariffs without arbitration. Now it's happening because the EU didn't negotiate on either of those positions. It ending in no deal.
There is no way that once the UK assumes its territorial waters, the ability to set regulations and a post action arbitration via the WTO it will ever give them up as part of any deal with any nation or trading bloc. The EU are making a grave miscalculation and it's going to cost us what could have been a pretty good trade deal.
“ no more fishing waters” don’t we need to sell our catches to them, and import what we need from them? Our waters are not full of the fish we need. Although cod can enjoy our waters, they dont tend to swim into it.
If no deal is bad chaos and a New PM signs up for a deal to bring it to a close, that’s likely brexit tried, failed, done with forever, in terms of being able to win elections on it instead lose elections on it.
There is a global market for frozen fish, we buy the fish we like primarily from Iceland and Norway both of whom have just inked fresh trade deals with us allowing for the trade of fish with both nations without quotas or tariffs.
Additionally, if we have the fish and the EU want to buy it they'll need to change their rules so they can buy the fish.
The thing about no deal is that it requires a lot of upfront investment and cost, once that's done there really isn't much need for a deal and it becomes a "nice to have". What the French position is at the moment is to try and make the cost of no deal as high as possible so that it may be a year or two before the UK sees anything like normality.
Once we no deal it will be no deal for at least a few years.
Years???
Boris does not have the support back home for no deal chaos for years with promise 2 years it will be okay., not in his party, not in the country. 4 or 5 months no deal chaos, British public opinion can take no more, Boris replacement signs up to the EU bottom line and brings the chaos to a close.
It’s our biggest trading partner. You reckon we can replace them trading elsewhere? That’s like for real you believe that?
We don't need to, trade doesn't stop without a deal. We'll still be able to trade with them even without one.
Besides we have a massive trade deficit with them remember.
“Besides we have a massive trade deficit with them remember”
That’s your statement. I credit you with it being factual. Kudos for that much, as you said to me the other day.
But what do you actually mean by that, it’s a position of strength for us?
yes, the UK certainly does buy more from the 27 than the other way round.
The UK had a bilateral trade deficit to the tune of £67bn in 2017. That breaks down to a larger deficit of £95bn for goods, but a surplus of £28bn for services.
The first thing that leaps out is we are dependent on getting things in. That’s not a weak position for EU, if, as result of brexit, it’s turns out just as easy for them to sell elsewhere? That’s a dangerous assumption you are making of their dependency on us?
More seriously for your intellect though, EU's economy is so much larger, so you would expect the stat you trotted out, Yet at the same time impact of no deal for the EU economy as a whole the impact would be rather small. That’s just basic economic logic isn’t it, tiny place buys more from big place than other way round doesn’t mean big place dependent on tiny place?
Looking at it like this the basic logic of your statement is just insane? Isn’t it?
Are France really going to want chaos at their end of the ports too?
Are the French really going to want to stop their own exports to us?
The only nation with a significant trade deficit with us is I believe Ireland - who are keen on a deal.
So yes it is a strength, because the reality is that cold hard self-interest will mean that the French and others in the EU will want to facilitate their own exports getting to us. They will want to facilitate us giving them cash by spending money with them.
Chaos will be temporary and transient, it won't last until there is a deal.
As for your "EU's economy is so much larger" comment that is mad. No you would not expect automatically that would mean a trade surplus, there is no reason to say that. The EU have more consumers we can sell to. We have a net trade surplus for instance with the USA, not a trade deficit with them.
Nice non answer.
“Besides we have a massive trade deficit with them remember”
That statement yourself and John redwood trots out implies EU dependency on us (hence we hold all the cards, they have to give in negotiation)
But is that really true? Do you actually believe it? Yes or no.
Yes.
Thanks.
Phillip, I have to say you are great to debate with, you don’t cut up rough with fellow debaters like some do. And I do wonder about your PB/other life balance typing away incessantly here 18 hours every day.
The EU - with a population of more than half a billion and an annual economic activity or GDP of around £15 trillion - has a trade surplus with Andorra, which has a population of about 80,000 and GDP of less than £3bn. Does that mean that the EU needs Andorra more than Andorra needs the EU?
the UK still exports more as a share of its own GDP to the EU 27 than the other way round. Does that imply dependency?
Can a bigger economy absorb/displace no deal disruption easier than smaller economy?
If they are not selling to us, can they sell elsewhere, in their internal market or elsewhere?
Can we find equivalent non EU markets for our goods? What sort of extra costs (like hidden costs and admin) come with the new market?
That statement trotted out “Besides we have a massive trade deficit with them remember” is based on so many assumptions you agree?
I'm very much looking forwards to brexit meaning brexit for the EU. No more security and intelligence cooperation, no more fishing waters, EU companies setting up capitalised subsidiary companies in the UK to get access to finance.
The desperation in their no deal contingency is really quite telling. That they feel the need to threaten the UK with what amounts to an economic blockade shows just how fragile their position actually is.
If only Boris had got an extra year or two to get the national infrastructure ready for no deal. In that position it really would be a no brainer. As it stands there is going to be a year or two of very difficult decision making and lots of upheaval in employment and industry. It's going to happen either way because the UK will never agree to the LPF and governance positions held by the EU, but we're going into it completely unprepared and in the shadow of a global pandemic which we're yet to recover from.
I remember being told last year that the UK would simply agree to the LPF and the EU would win whatever it was they were asking for by all of the usual suspects. For the whole year I've been saying that no UK government (Tory or Labour) would ever agree to either the LPF or governance that gave the EU unilateral right to apply tariffs without arbitration. Now it's happening because the EU didn't negotiate on either of those positions. It ending in no deal.
There is no way that once the UK assumes its territorial waters, the ability to set regulations and a post action arbitration via the WTO it will ever give them up as part of any deal with any nation or trading bloc. The EU are making a grave miscalculation and it's going to cost us what could have been a pretty good trade deal.
If it's a No Deal Brexit on 1st Jan 2021 then it's no more Mr. Nice Guy from the UK.
I don't want it but we need to hit them where it hurts. We've already managed to upset them now by approving a vaccine early so they're far more sensitive and fragile than they let on.
No deal is entirely our fault. Stop this nonsense, it isn't a game.
No, it absolutely isn't. I've always wanted a Deal, as you know - and I've been consistent in arguing against Leavers who've said the opposite - but if I what I understand to be true is the case (and none of us really know) then I wouldn't sign what's currently on the table. I'd be comfortable I'd been reasonable and proportionate in going up to and creatively around my red lines, but not clearly over them.
And, if it's No Deal, then that works both ways. The EU need to know that.
1. We want a trade deal. 2. The EU have offered us a trade deal. 3. We've turned it down because we don't like the terms.
1. I want some sausages. 2. Aldi offer me some sausages for £1.99. 3. I don't want to buy Aldi's sausages because they're too expensive.
Is it Aldi's fault I don't have any sausages?
It is Aldi's loss when Sainsbury's, Lidl, Tescos will sell me sausages at £1.75.
Why did we go to Aldi in the first place?
We were paying a large annual fee for an Aldi loyalty card, but have stopped that so can now shop around.
Why were we paying a large annual fee for a loyalty card when we could at any time, as @MarqueeMark explains, have gone to Sainsbury's, Lidl, and Tescos to get the sausages cheaper?
The membership fee made those shops more expensive as part of the terms of membership.
They were cheaper.
OK I'm happy to relinquish this analogy.
As to the LPF here's another one.
Imagine we as the UK said we would trade with Nonsuchia as long as they didn't use child labour. For 10 years they don't use child labour and then they begin to use it. As such, at that time we stop trading with them. They violated our terms of trade.
The EU is demanding the right to alter the terms of trade at some point in the future at which point we can make a decision not to trade with them. Why make that decision now?
To change to subject, fascinating article on using AI to examine the evolutionary record via analysis of mass extinction and mass radiation (in this sense, evolution of new species) events over the course of the fossil record.
In short, previous received wisdom was that mass extinctions open to field for mass radiations (creative destruction). AI analysis shows that this link is not so strong, and that sometimes (as seems to be happening now with humans), evolution of new species has a snowball effect as they change the environment and ecosystems sufficiently to cause mass extinctions (destructive creation). The implication being this is not the first time.
I'm very much looking forwards to brexit meaning brexit for the EU. No more security and intelligence cooperation, no more fishing waters, EU companies setting up capitalised subsidiary companies in the UK to get access to finance.
The desperation in their no deal contingency is really quite telling. That they feel the need to threaten the UK with what amounts to an economic blockade shows just how fragile their position actually is.
If only Boris had got an extra year or two to get the national infrastructure ready for no deal. In that position it really would be a no brainer. As it stands there is going to be a year or two of very difficult decision making and lots of upheaval in employment and industry. It's going to happen either way because the UK will never agree to the LPF and governance positions held by the EU, but we're going into it completely unprepared and in the shadow of a global pandemic which we're yet to recover from.
I remember being told last year that the UK would simply agree to the LPF and the EU would win whatever it was they were asking for by all of the usual suspects. For the whole year I've been saying that no UK government (Tory or Labour) would ever agree to either the LPF or governance that gave the EU unilateral right to apply tariffs without arbitration. Now it's happening because the EU didn't negotiate on either of those positions. It ending in no deal.
There is no way that once the UK assumes its territorial waters, the ability to set regulations and a post action arbitration via the WTO it will ever give them up as part of any deal with any nation or trading bloc. The EU are making a grave miscalculation and it's going to cost us what could have been a pretty good trade deal.
If it's a No Deal Brexit on 1st Jan 2021 then it's no more Mr. Nice Guy from the UK.
I don't want it but we need to hit them where it hurts. We've already managed to upset them now by approving a vaccine early so they're far more sensitive and fragile than they let on.
No deal is entirely our fault. Stop this nonsense, it isn't a game.
No, it absolutely isn't. I've always wanted a Deal, as you know - and I've been consistent in arguing against Leavers who've said the opposite - but if I what I understand to be true is the case (and none of us really know) then I wouldn't sign what's currently on the table. I'd be comfortable I'd been reasonable and proportionate in going up to and creatively around my red lines, but not clearly over them.
And, if it's No Deal, then that works both ways. The EU need to know that.
1. We want a trade deal. 2. The EU have offered us a trade deal. 3. We've turned it down because we don't like the terms.
1. I want some sausages. 2. Aldi offer me some sausages for £1.99. 3. I don't want to buy Aldi's sausages because they're too expensive.
Is it Aldi's fault I don't have any sausages?
It is Aldi's loss when Sainsbury's, Lidl, Tescos will sell me sausages at £1.75.
Why did we go to Aldi in the first place?
We were paying a large annual fee for an Aldi loyalty card, but have stopped that so can now shop around.
Why were we paying a large annual fee for a loyalty card when we could at any time, as @MarqueeMark explains, have gone to Sainsbury's, Lidl, and Tescos to get the sausages cheaper?
The question answered in 2016: we shouldnt have been paying that large annual fee. The benefits weren't being felt - and its necessity just wasn't being explained by the Remain campaign.
1. We want sausages for tea tonight. 2. It's 9:45pm and all the shops close at 10pm. 3. I go to Aldi and they offer me sausages for £1.99. 4. I refuse. 5. I go without sausages for tea because all other shops are now closed.
Is it Aldi's fault I am without sausages for tea?
The answer is no.
Tea is a drink.
Dinner and supper are the only realistic names for that 9.45pm meal.
I'm very much looking forwards to brexit meaning brexit for the EU. No more security and intelligence cooperation, no more fishing waters, EU companies setting up capitalised subsidiary companies in the UK to get access to finance.
The desperation in their no deal contingency is really quite telling. That they feel the need to threaten the UK with what amounts to an economic blockade shows just how fragile their position actually is.
If only Boris had got an extra year or two to get the national infrastructure ready for no deal. In that position it really would be a no brainer. As it stands there is going to be a year or two of very difficult decision making and lots of upheaval in employment and industry. It's going to happen either way because the UK will never agree to the LPF and governance positions held by the EU, but we're going into it completely unprepared and in the shadow of a global pandemic which we're yet to recover from.
I remember being told last year that the UK would simply agree to the LPF and the EU would win whatever it was they were asking for by all of the usual suspects. For the whole year I've been saying that no UK government (Tory or Labour) would ever agree to either the LPF or governance that gave the EU unilateral right to apply tariffs without arbitration. Now it's happening because the EU didn't negotiate on either of those positions. It ending in no deal.
There is no way that once the UK assumes its territorial waters, the ability to set regulations and a post action arbitration via the WTO it will ever give them up as part of any deal with any nation or trading bloc. The EU are making a grave miscalculation and it's going to cost us what could have been a pretty good trade deal.
If it's a No Deal Brexit on 1st Jan 2021 then it's no more Mr. Nice Guy from the UK.
I don't want it but we need to hit them where it hurts. We've already managed to upset them now by approving a vaccine early so they're far more sensitive and fragile than they let on.
No deal is entirely our fault. Stop this nonsense, it isn't a game.
No, it absolutely isn't. I've always wanted a Deal, as you know - and I've been consistent in arguing against Leavers who've said the opposite - but if I what I understand to be true is the case (and none of us really know) then I wouldn't sign what's currently on the table. I'd be comfortable I'd been reasonable and proportionate in going up to and creatively around my red lines, but not clearly over them.
And, if it's No Deal, then that works both ways. The EU need to know that.
1. We want a trade deal. 2. The EU have offered us a trade deal. 3. We've turned it down because we don't like the terms.
1. I want some sausages. 2. Aldi offer me some sausages for £1.99. 3. I don't want to buy Aldi's sausages because they're too expensive.
Is it Aldi's fault I don't have any sausages?
It is Aldi's loss when Sainsbury's, Lidl, Tescos will sell me sausages at £1.75.
Why did we go to Aldi in the first place?
We were paying a large annual fee for an Aldi loyalty card, but have stopped that so can now shop around.
Why were we paying a large annual fee for a loyalty card when we could at any time, as @MarqueeMark explains, have gone to Sainsbury's, Lidl, and Tescos to get the sausages cheaper?
The question answered in 2016: we shouldnt have been paying that large annual fee. The benefits weren't being felt - and its necessity just wasn't being explained by the Remain campaign.
Ah, so "no deal" is the fault of the Remain campaign. Of course.
I see the PB Tories are getting ready to appoint Admiral HYFUD to lead the war to teach Europe a lesson by jingo...
It is like watching four year olds....
Yes, this is noticeable. And if we do actually No Deal - which we won't - there will be a determined appeal to jingoism in order to keep the campfires burning. The question is, will there be enough if it? Leavers in general have large reserves of this sentiment, true, but it's by no means all of them and it's not unlimited. Many are softies. Others will have their resolve sorely tested by the damage and inconvenience caused to themselves and their loved ones.
I am increasingly of the opinion that a No Deal Brexit is needed to settle this for once and for all. The fact that it is diametrically opposite to what I want no longer has a bearing on the matter. Getting a Deal will just prolong this nonsense.
I get you but I can't quite go for that. If I knew it would lead to a close alignment deal within a few months, maybe. But I wouldn't be confident of that at all. I think it might well be more like there's a fork in the road here and if we take that route it will lead to a bad place. Not forever, since nothing is, but for quite a long time.
1. We want sausages for tea tonight. 2. It's 9:45pm and all the shops close at 10pm. 3. I go to Aldi and they offer me sausages for £1.99. 4. I refuse. 5. I go without sausages for tea because all other shops are now closed.
Is it Aldi's fault I am without sausages for tea?
The answer is no.
Tea is a drink.
Dinner and supper are the only realistic names for that 9.45pm meal.
I'm very much looking forwards to brexit meaning brexit for the EU. No more security and intelligence cooperation, no more fishing waters, EU companies setting up capitalised subsidiary companies in the UK to get access to finance.
The desperation in their no deal contingency is really quite telling. That they feel the need to threaten the UK with what amounts to an economic blockade shows just how fragile their position actually is.
If only Boris had got an extra year or two to get the national infrastructure ready for no deal. In that position it really would be a no brainer. As it stands there is going to be a year or two of very difficult decision making and lots of upheaval in employment and industry. It's going to happen either way because the UK will never agree to the LPF and governance positions held by the EU, but we're going into it completely unprepared and in the shadow of a global pandemic which we're yet to recover from.
I remember being told last year that the UK would simply agree to the LPF and the EU would win whatever it was they were asking for by all of the usual suspects. For the whole year I've been saying that no UK government (Tory or Labour) would ever agree to either the LPF or governance that gave the EU unilateral right to apply tariffs without arbitration. Now it's happening because the EU didn't negotiate on either of those positions. It ending in no deal.
There is no way that once the UK assumes its territorial waters, the ability to set regulations and a post action arbitration via the WTO it will ever give them up as part of any deal with any nation or trading bloc. The EU are making a grave miscalculation and it's going to cost us what could have been a pretty good trade deal.
If it's a No Deal Brexit on 1st Jan 2021 then it's no more Mr. Nice Guy from the UK.
I don't want it but we need to hit them where it hurts. We've already managed to upset them now by approving a vaccine early so they're far more sensitive and fragile than they let on.
No deal is entirely our fault. Stop this nonsense, it isn't a game.
No, it absolutely isn't. I've always wanted a Deal, as you know - and I've been consistent in arguing against Leavers who've said the opposite - but if I what I understand to be true is the case (and none of us really know) then I wouldn't sign what's currently on the table. I'd be comfortable I'd been reasonable and proportionate in going up to and creatively around my red lines, but not clearly over them.
And, if it's No Deal, then that works both ways. The EU need to know that.
1. We want a trade deal. 2. The EU have offered us a trade deal. 3. We've turned it down because we don't like the terms.
1. I want some sausages. 2. Aldi offer me some sausages for £1.99. 3. I don't want to buy Aldi's sausages because they're too expensive.
Is it Aldi's fault I don't have any sausages?
It is Aldi's loss when Sainsbury's, Lidl, Tescos will sell me sausages at £1.75.
Why did we go to Aldi in the first place?
We were paying a large annual fee for an Aldi loyalty card, but have stopped that so can now shop around.
Why were we paying a large annual fee for a loyalty card when we could at any time, as @MarqueeMark explains, have gone to Sainsbury's, Lidl, and Tescos to get the sausages cheaper?
The membership fee made those shops more expensive as part of the terms of membership.
They were cheaper.
OK I'm happy to relinquish this analogy.
As to the LPF here's another one.
Imagine we as the UK said we would trade with Nonsuchia as long as they didn't use child labour. For 10 years they don't use child labour and then they begin to use it. As such, at that time we stop trading with them. They violated our terms of trade.
The EU is demanding the right to alter the terms of trade at some point in the future at which point we can make a decision not to trade with them. Why make that decision now?
They must have considered a deal that lasts 5 years (or another number) with a review then as a way around this. Which side if either are blocking such a deal and why?
This Aldi / sausage analogy is terrible. Aldi sausages are great quality (as are Lidl's) and at the same time cheaper than most other supermarkets' offerings.
The Aldi near me is open til 11 anyway. That changes things.
And you go in there for sausages and come out with a rigid inflatable boat which was on offer in the centre aisle.
Also the amusing thing @Gallowgate of the Aldi £1.99 sausages analogy is of course we want the same sausages at the same price as others.
So if your friend goes to Aldi and buys some 1.99 sausages and says they're good so you choose to go, see the price ticket says 1.99 and pick them up ... Only the cashier says £5 then that could cause an issue.
If you ask why you're being charged £5 and the response is that for anyone else it's £1.99 but for you personally they're going to charge £5 instead, then if you walk out is that at all their fault?
1. We want sausages for tea tonight. 2. It's 9:45pm and all the shops close at 10pm. 3. I go to Aldi and they offer me sausages for £1.99. 4. I refuse. 5. I go without sausages for tea because all other shops are now closed.
Is it Aldi's fault I am without sausages for tea?
The answer is no.
Tea is a drink.
Dinner and supper are the only realistic names for that 9.45pm meal.
1. We want sausages for tea tonight. 2. It's 9:45pm and all the shops close at 10pm. 3. I go to Aldi and they offer me sausages for £1.99. 4. I refuse. 5. I go without sausages for tea because all other shops are now closed.
Is it Aldi's fault I am without sausages for tea?
The answer is no.
Tea is a drink.
Dinner and supper are the only realistic names for that 9.45pm meal.
1. We want sausages for tea tonight. 2. It's 9:45pm and all the shops close at 10pm. 3. I go to Aldi and they offer me sausages for £1.99. 4. I refuse. 5. I go without sausages for tea because all other shops are now closed.
Is it Aldi's fault I am without sausages for tea?
The answer is no.
Tea is a drink.
Dinner and supper are the only realistic names for that 9.45pm meal.
1. We want sausages for tea tonight. 2. It's 9:45pm and all the shops close at 10pm. 3. I go to Aldi and they offer me sausages for £1.99. 4. I refuse. 5. I go without sausages for tea because all other shops are now closed.
Is it Aldi's fault I am without sausages for tea?
The answer is no.
Tea is a drink.
Dinner and supper are the only realistic names for that 9.45pm meal.
Hard to say "supper" without sounding like a twat.
Wales with 1,968 cases today, up from 1,473 last Thursday. This takes the 7-day average to 382 per 100,000, surpassing Northern Ireland's previous high of 379.
And yet they won't make any decision on further restrictions for another 3 weeks...
The collapse of the NHS in Wales may well be the big story as we go into 2021.
Should say not a chance on fisheries. Certainly not for fisheries to be for longer than other ones that is crazy.
Depends whether the UK wants to be able to fly those vaccines in, doesn't it?
They are independent proposals, aren't they?
Unclear, but if things get very acrimonious, they will get acrimonious. Boris is taking us into the very worst of all possible worst worlds.
So is the EU by their unreasonable eleventh hour demands via Macron, and refusal to negotiate which you are blind to seeing any issues with.
There haven't been any eleventh hour demands, they've mostly been tediously consistent since 2016, although they have compromised on a lot of the detail (for example, they dropped the demand that the ECJ should be the arbiter).
In any case, so what if their demands are unreasonable, or seem so to us? They didn't ask the UK to impose economic sanctions on itself, quite the reverse. That choice was entirely ours, and the decision as to whether to accept the terms on offer (which are exactly in line with what was known in 2016), or plunge the country into chaos, is entirely that of the UK government. No-one else is responsible for that.
As David Gauke points out, the UK's objections to the proposed LPF clauses make zero sense anyway. On the off-chance that a fire might break out at some unspecified time in the future, we are proposing to burn the house down now.
Yes, they are - you need to look at how The Times reported the tightening last Thursday when a deal looked imminent - Macron led the charge against what Germany/Sweden/Austria and the Central and Eastern European states all had virtually sewn up with Ursula VDR. This new hard position included virtually no movement on fish above 15-18% (rather than comprising), an unbalanced approach to State Aid rules (we can, you can't) and a right to unilateral lightning tariffs in future without limit if they increased or changed LPF standards and we declined to follow suit, rather than just agreeing regression clauses on current standards now and agreeing to jointly reviewing the applicability and scope of the deal in future if either side wants to change them.
Your position (because you disagree so vociferously with the original Brexit vote) is that everything the EU does is reasonable and everything the UK does is unreasonable. You are worth listening to on virtually every issue - where we agree on almost everything - but on Brexit you simply become a LD'y Remoaner turned up to 11.
You never bother to delve into the specifics and nuances, so you're not interesting to listen to as a result. Brexit has happened. It's a reality. Both the UK and EU should be interested in forging a sustainable long-term relationship. You need to be able to exercise the dispassionate judgement on the respective negotiating positions of both sides to reflect that reality and be able to assess if they reasonable, sensible and constructive. Or what you say on the subject will simply be ignored.
Look at David Herdson's example to see how a Conservative Remainer is still able to see the flaws of the EU position. Learn from him.
I suspect Richard's position - which happens to be mine, so I may be projecting (and apologies to him if I am) - is that it does not matter whether the EU's position is reasonable or not, it is what it is: the EU's position. We either accept that and work to get an agreement within the parameters it sets or we walk away. That has always been the choice, as it will be in any negotiation in which one party has a stronger hand than the other one.
It does matter if the EU is being unreasonable because as you say we can either accept that or walk away.
If the EU is being reasonable we should strive to get an agreement, if its possible.
If the EU is being unreasonable then that gives more justification to walking away.
Do you disagree with that philosophy?
I have always said our choice is to accept a deal that the EU essentially dictates or to walk away with no deal. It's not a philosophical point, it's a practical one grounded entirely in cold hard reality. Politically, the government will clearly seek to blame the EU for the failure of the negotiation and that may well work for a few news cycles. We will then move to the delivery of the triumphant outcome from a no deal that the government has promised us.
This simply isn't true. The EU has negotiated and compromised, as has the UK, we've got 97-98% of the way there - we are simply unable to close the final gap.
The give away is your second sentence which clearly puts any blame on the failure of negotiations on the UK, and none on the EU. This is emotionally influenced. I think the EU (and, remember, I've always supported a Deal and had no problem with a LPF) isn't being rational in going for a 30-40% UK cut of fish (a big win), fairness on state aid interpretations on both sides of the channel and lighting tariffs and governance arbitration thereof.
On virtually everything else I think the UK and EU are fully aligned in a fair deal.
They are being way too sensitive and hardline - and it might blow the whole thing out of the water. The only thing I think the UK is being too persnickety on is locking in some of the current LPF standards, where we're never going to move away from them anyway.
Yes, I do blame this government for not understanding the cold, hard reality of negotiating with a party that has a stronger hand.
No attempt to answer the point.
How predictable, and disappointing.
Your point was that I - and I quote - put "any blame on the failure of negotiations on the UK, and none on the EU". I was largely agreeing. The talks have failed up to now because the UK has failed to understand the basic point: they have a better hand than we do and we will only get a deal they want to give us. This has always been the case and will continue to be so.
Ministers still do not believe we don't hold all the cards.
Raab in denial this morning claiming the average 5% on food prices outlined by the Chairman of Tesco yesterday in the event of no deal is just plain wrong. Raab couldn't himself give a figure.
Of course it's wrong. How could the chair of Tesco know anything about food prices? It's just ridiculous to think he knows more than Raab.
He could know an opportunity to stick 5% on prices when he sees it....
Raab will have more say on the import prices. There's no compulsion on the UK to apply tariffs.
This Aldi / sausage analogy is terrible. Aldi sausages are great quality (as are Lidl's) and at the same time cheaper than most other supermarkets' offerings.
The Aldi near me is open til 11 anyway. That changes things.
And you go in there for sausages and come out with a rigid inflatable boat which was on offer in the centre aisle.
Good for fishing or patrolling the channel to be fair.
1. We want sausages for tea tonight. 2. It's 9:45pm and all the shops close at 10pm. 3. I go to Aldi and they offer me sausages for £1.99. 4. I refuse. 5. I go without sausages for tea because all other shops are now closed.
Is it Aldi's fault I am without sausages for tea?
The answer is no.
Tea is a drink.
Dinner and supper are the only realistic names for that 9.45pm meal.
But "dinner" is the name of the meal at midday?
No, that's lunch.
Lunch is just another word for the meal at midday, sure.
1. We want sausages for tea tonight. 2. It's 9:45pm and all the shops close at 10pm. 3. I go to Aldi and they offer me sausages for £1.99. 4. I refuse. 5. I go without sausages for tea because all other shops are now closed.
Is it Aldi's fault I am without sausages for tea?
The answer is no.
Tea is a drink.
Dinner and supper are the only realistic names for that 9.45pm meal.
But "dinner" is the name of the meal at midday?
No, that's lunch.
Not in Sheffield, but perhaps in Dore & Totley.
"Out to Dinner" doesn't have the correct ring, somehow.
Anyhoo. I just bought my sausages, and ox-tongue, from the farm shop. Whilst we were all queueing, a chap walked past and into the back with a piglet over his shoulder.
1. We want sausages for tea tonight. 2. It's 9:45pm and all the shops close at 10pm. 3. I go to Aldi and they offer me sausages for £1.99. 4. I refuse. 5. I go without sausages for tea because all other shops are now closed.
Is it Aldi's fault I am without sausages for tea?
The answer is no.
Tea is a drink.
Dinner and supper are the only realistic names for that 9.45pm meal.
But "dinner" is the name of the meal at midday?
Some strange people call their midday meal "lunch". Quite often the same people that call their tea "dinner".
Are we really back to calling voters thick / clueless again?
We had an referendum and two GEs, where voters have been told time and time again about the dangers of no-deal and that it was a real possibility, by the opposition and the media, day in, day out.
And the public decided.
I think you've just proven that, yes, they were thick or deluded.
1. We want sausages for tea tonight. 2. It's 9:45pm and all the shops close at 10pm. 3. I go to Aldi and they offer me sausages for £1.99. 4. I refuse. 5. I go without sausages for tea because all other shops are now closed.
Is it Aldi's fault I am without sausages for tea?
The answer is no.
Tea is a drink.
Dinner and supper are the only realistic names for that 9.45pm meal.
But "dinner" is the name of the meal at midday?
No, that's lunch.
Not in Sheffield, but perhaps in Dore & Totley.
"Out to Dinner" doesn't have the correct ring, somehow.
Anyhoo. I just bought my sausages, and ox-tongue, from the farm shop. Whilst we were all queueing, a chap walked past and into the back with a piglet over his shoulder.
This Aldi / sausage analogy is terrible. Aldi sausages are great quality (as are Lidl's) and at the same time cheaper than most other supermarkets' offerings.
The Aldi near me is open til 11 anyway. That changes things.
And you go in there for sausages and come out with a rigid inflatable boat which was on offer in the centre aisle.
1. We want sausages for tea tonight. 2. It's 9:45pm and all the shops close at 10pm. 3. I go to Aldi and they offer me sausages for £1.99. 4. I refuse. 5. I go without sausages for tea because all other shops are now closed.
Is it Aldi's fault I am without sausages for tea?
The answer is no.
Tea is a drink.
Dinner and supper are the only realistic names for that 9.45pm meal.
1. We want sausages for tea tonight. 2. It's 9:45pm and all the shops close at 10pm. 3. I go to Aldi and they offer me sausages for £1.99. 4. I refuse. 5. I go without sausages for tea because all other shops are now closed.
Is it Aldi's fault I am without sausages for tea?
The answer is no.
Tea is a drink.
Dinner and supper are the only realistic names for that 9.45pm meal.
But "dinner" is the name of the meal at midday?
No, that's lunch.
Not in Sheffield, but perhaps in Dore & Totley.
"Out to Dinner" doesn't have the correct ring, somehow.
Anyhoo. I just bought my sausages, and ox-tongue, from the farm shop. Whilst we were all queueing, a chap walked past and into the back with a piglet over his shoulder.
Dead or alive?
When I checked, TSE was still alive.
The piglet had had its squeal removed, shall we say.
1. We want sausages for tea tonight. 2. It's 9:45pm and all the shops close at 10pm. 3. I go to Aldi and they offer me sausages for £1.99. 4. I refuse. 5. I go without sausages for tea because all other shops are now closed.
Is it Aldi's fault I am without sausages for tea?
The answer is no.
Tea is a drink.
Dinner and supper are the only realistic names for that 9.45pm meal.
A better analogy than the Aldi sausages would be the pink coloured welder that you can only buy in the middle aisle at Aldi. You have to pay Aldi's price of £17.99 or do without? After brexit, it will cost £25.99. Do you still buy it?
1. We want sausages for tea tonight. 2. It's 9:45pm and all the shops close at 10pm. 3. I go to Aldi and they offer me sausages for £1.99. 4. I refuse. 5. I go without sausages for tea because all other shops are now closed.
Is it Aldi's fault I am without sausages for tea?
The answer is no.
Tea is a drink.
Dinner and supper are the only realistic names for that 9.45pm meal.
But "dinner" is the name of the meal at midday?
No, that's lunch.
Not in Sheffield, but perhaps in Dore & Totley.
"Out to Dinner" doesn't have the correct ring, somehow.
Anyhoo. I just bought my sausages, and ox-tongue, from the farm shop. Whilst we were all queueing, a chap walked past and into the back with a piglet over his shoulder.
Dead or alive?
If he'd been dead, I think MattW would have mentioned it.
Are we really back to calling voters thick / clueless again?
We had an referendum and two GEs, where voters have been told time and time again about the dangers of no-deal and that it was a real possibility, by the opposition and the media, day in, day out.
And the public decided.
I think you've just proven that, yes, they were thick or deluded.
Or mugged by politicians smashing bulldozers through brexit, and promising sunlit uplands.
1. We want sausages for tea tonight. 2. It's 9:45pm and all the shops close at 10pm. 3. I go to Aldi and they offer me sausages for £1.99. 4. I refuse. 5. I go without sausages for tea because all other shops are now closed.
Is it Aldi's fault I am without sausages for tea?
The answer is no.
Tea is a drink.
Dinner and supper are the only realistic names for that 9.45pm meal.
But "dinner" is the name of the meal at midday?
No, that's lunch.
Not in Sheffield, but perhaps in Dore & Totley.
"Out to Dinner" doesn't have the correct ring, somehow.
Anyhoo. I just bought my sausages, and ox-tongue, from the farm shop. Whilst we were all queueing, a chap walked past and into the back with a piglet over his shoulder.
Dead or alive?
When I checked, TSE was still alive.
The piglet had had its squeal removed, shall we say.
I stlll find it an odd remark - I used routinely to see the local butchers (3 of them in 100 yards) carrying half cattle over their shoulders into the back. So wondering what was so special about the piglet.
I'm very much looking forwards to brexit meaning brexit for the EU. No more security and intelligence cooperation, no more fishing waters, EU companies setting up capitalised subsidiary companies in the UK to get access to finance.
The desperation in their no deal contingency is really quite telling. That they feel the need to threaten the UK with what amounts to an economic blockade shows just how fragile their position actually is.
If only Boris had got an extra year or two to get the national infrastructure ready for no deal. In that position it really would be a no brainer. As it stands there is going to be a year or two of very difficult decision making and lots of upheaval in employment and industry. It's going to happen either way because the UK will never agree to the LPF and governance positions held by the EU, but we're going into it completely unprepared and in the shadow of a global pandemic which we're yet to recover from.
I remember being told last year that the UK would simply agree to the LPF and the EU would win whatever it was they were asking for by all of the usual suspects. For the whole year I've been saying that no UK government (Tory or Labour) would ever agree to either the LPF or governance that gave the EU unilateral right to apply tariffs without arbitration. Now it's happening because the EU didn't negotiate on either of those positions. It ending in no deal.
There is no way that once the UK assumes its territorial waters, the ability to set regulations and a post action arbitration via the WTO it will ever give them up as part of any deal with any nation or trading bloc. The EU are making a grave miscalculation and it's going to cost us what could have been a pretty good trade deal.
If it's a No Deal Brexit on 1st Jan 2021 then it's no more Mr. Nice Guy from the UK.
I don't want it but we need to hit them where it hurts. We've already managed to upset them now by approving a vaccine early so they're far more sensitive and fragile than they let on.
No deal is entirely our fault. Stop this nonsense, it isn't a game.
No, it absolutely isn't. I've always wanted a Deal, as you know - and I've been consistent in arguing against Leavers who've said the opposite - but if I what I understand to be true is the case (and none of us really know) then I wouldn't sign what's currently on the table. I'd be comfortable I'd been reasonable and proportionate in going up to and creatively around my red lines, but not clearly over them.
And, if it's No Deal, then that works both ways. The EU need to know that.
1. We want a trade deal. 2. The EU have offered us a trade deal. 3. We've turned it down because we don't like the terms.
1. I want some sausages. 2. Aldi offer me some sausages for £1.99. 3. I don't want to buy Aldi's sausages because they're too expensive.
Is it Aldi's fault I don't have any sausages?
It is Aldi's loss when Sainsbury's, Lidl, Tescos will sell me sausages at £1.75.
Why did we go to Aldi in the first place?
We were paying a large annual fee for an Aldi loyalty card, but have stopped that so can now shop around.
Why were we paying a large annual fee for a loyalty card when we could at any time, as @MarqueeMark explains, have gone to Sainsbury's, Lidl, and Tescos to get the sausages cheaper?
The question answered in 2016: we shouldnt have been paying that large annual fee. The benefits weren't being felt - and its necessity just wasn't being explained by the Remain campaign.
Ah, so "no deal" is the fault of the Remain campaign. Of course.
Leavers want glory, riches and cash. Blame does not fit any of those categories ...
1. We want sausages for tea tonight. 2. It's 9:45pm and all the shops close at 10pm. 3. I go to Aldi and they offer me sausages for £1.99. 4. I refuse. 5. I go without sausages for tea because all other shops are now closed.
Is it Aldi's fault I am without sausages for tea?
The answer is no.
Tea is a drink.
Dinner and supper are the only realistic names for that 9.45pm meal.
But "dinner" is the name of the meal at midday?
No, that's lunch.
Not in Sheffield, but perhaps in Dore & Totley.
"Out to Dinner" doesn't have the correct ring, somehow.
Anyhoo. I just bought my sausages, and ox-tongue, from the farm shop. Whilst we were all queueing, a chap walked past and into the back with a piglet over his shoulder.
Dead or alive?
If he'd been dead, I think MattW would have mentioned it.
Lady at the back of the socially distanced queue outside asked the chap "Are there any tomato sausages in the shop?"
"There will be by the time you reach the front of that queue." Quite sharp .
1. We want sausages for tea tonight. 2. It's 9:45pm and all the shops close at 10pm. 3. I go to Aldi and they offer me sausages for £1.99. 4. I refuse. 5. I go without sausages for tea because all other shops are now closed.
Is it Aldi's fault I am without sausages for tea?
The answer is no.
Tea is a drink.
Dinner and supper are the only realistic names for that 9.45pm meal.
But "dinner" is the name of the meal at midday?
No, that's lunch.
Not in Sheffield, but perhaps in Dore & Totley.
"Out to Dinner" doesn't have the correct ring, somehow.
Anyhoo. I just bought my sausages, and ox-tongue, from the farm shop. Whilst we were all queueing, a chap walked past and into the back with a piglet over his shoulder.
Dead or alive?
When I checked, TSE was still alive.
The piglet had had its squeal removed, shall we say.
I stlll find it an odd remark - I used routinely to see the local butchers (3 of them in 100 yards) carrying half cattle over their shoulders into the back. So wondering what was so special about the piglet.
To be fair, it was a large piglet. Might even be a porker. Probably 3 feet nose to tail.
He did come back later with a side of beef over the other shoulder.
A better analogy than the Aldi sausages would be the pink coloured welder that you can only buy in the middle aisle at Aldi. You have to pay Aldi's price of £17.99 or do without? After brexit, it will cost £25.99. Do you still buy it?
I dont need a welder so no I wouldnt buy it at either price, I am more interested in their sausages and cake if that helps resolve Brexit though.
I'm very much looking forwards to brexit meaning brexit for the EU. No more security and intelligence cooperation, no more fishing waters, EU companies setting up capitalised subsidiary companies in the UK to get access to finance.
The desperation in their no deal contingency is really quite telling. That they feel the need to threaten the UK with what amounts to an economic blockade shows just how fragile their position actually is.
If only Boris had got an extra year or two to get the national infrastructure ready for no deal. In that position it really would be a no brainer. As it stands there is going to be a year or two of very difficult decision making and lots of upheaval in employment and industry. It's going to happen either way because the UK will never agree to the LPF and governance positions held by the EU, but we're going into it completely unprepared and in the shadow of a global pandemic which we're yet to recover from.
I remember being told last year that the UK would simply agree to the LPF and the EU would win whatever it was they were asking for by all of the usual suspects. For the whole year I've been saying that no UK government (Tory or Labour) would ever agree to either the LPF or governance that gave the EU unilateral right to apply tariffs without arbitration. Now it's happening because the EU didn't negotiate on either of those positions. It ending in no deal.
There is no way that once the UK assumes its territorial waters, the ability to set regulations and a post action arbitration via the WTO it will ever give them up as part of any deal with any nation or trading bloc. The EU are making a grave miscalculation and it's going to cost us what could have been a pretty good trade deal.
If it's a No Deal Brexit on 1st Jan 2021 then it's no more Mr. Nice Guy from the UK.
I don't want it but we need to hit them where it hurts. We've already managed to upset them now by approving a vaccine early so they're far more sensitive and fragile than they let on.
No deal is entirely our fault. Stop this nonsense, it isn't a game.
No, it absolutely isn't. I've always wanted a Deal, as you know - and I've been consistent in arguing against Leavers who've said the opposite - but if I what I understand to be true is the case (and none of us really know) then I wouldn't sign what's currently on the table. I'd be comfortable I'd been reasonable and proportionate in going up to and creatively around my red lines, but not clearly over them.
And, if it's No Deal, then that works both ways. The EU need to know that.
1. We want a trade deal. 2. The EU have offered us a trade deal. 3. We've turned it down because we don't like the terms.
1. I want some sausages. 2. Aldi offer me some sausages for £1.99. 3. I don't want to buy Aldi's sausages because they're too expensive.
Is it Aldi's fault I don't have any sausages?
It is Aldi's loss when Sainsbury's, Lidl, Tescos will sell me sausages at £1.75.
Why did we go to Aldi in the first place?
We were paying a large annual fee for an Aldi loyalty card, but have stopped that so can now shop around.
Why were we paying a large annual fee for a loyalty card when we could at any time, as @MarqueeMark explains, have gone to Sainsbury's, Lidl, and Tescos to get the sausages cheaper?
The membership fee made those shops more expensive as part of the terms of membership.
They were cheaper.
OK I'm happy to relinquish this analogy.
As to the LPF here's another one.
Imagine we as the UK said we would trade with Nonsuchia as long as they didn't use child labour. For 10 years they don't use child labour and then they begin to use it. As such, at that time we stop trading with them. They violated our terms of trade.
The EU is demanding the right to alter the terms of trade at some point in the future at which point we can make a decision not to trade with them. Why make that decision now?
That's not quite right though, because in this scenario we aren't talking about Nonsuchia violating the original terms, but the UK changing them unilaterally, and potentially in a manner that deliberately harms Nonsuchia.
I'm very much looking forwards to brexit meaning brexit for the EU. No more security and intelligence cooperation, no more fishing waters, EU companies setting up capitalised subsidiary companies in the UK to get access to finance.
The desperation in their no deal contingency is really quite telling. That they feel the need to threaten the UK with what amounts to an economic blockade shows just how fragile their position actually is.
If only Boris had got an extra year or two to get the national infrastructure ready for no deal. In that position it really would be a no brainer. As it stands there is going to be a year or two of very difficult decision making and lots of upheaval in employment and industry. It's going to happen either way because the UK will never agree to the LPF and governance positions held by the EU, but we're going into it completely unprepared and in the shadow of a global pandemic which we're yet to recover from.
I remember being told last year that the UK would simply agree to the LPF and the EU would win whatever it was they were asking for by all of the usual suspects. For the whole year I've been saying that no UK government (Tory or Labour) would ever agree to either the LPF or governance that gave the EU unilateral right to apply tariffs without arbitration. Now it's happening because the EU didn't negotiate on either of those positions. It ending in no deal.
There is no way that once the UK assumes its territorial waters, the ability to set regulations and a post action arbitration via the WTO it will ever give them up as part of any deal with any nation or trading bloc. The EU are making a grave miscalculation and it's going to cost us what could have been a pretty good trade deal.
If it's a No Deal Brexit on 1st Jan 2021 then it's no more Mr. Nice Guy from the UK.
I don't want it but we need to hit them where it hurts. We've already managed to upset them now by approving a vaccine early so they're far more sensitive and fragile than they let on.
No deal is entirely our fault. Stop this nonsense, it isn't a game.
No, it absolutely isn't. I've always wanted a Deal, as you know - and I've been consistent in arguing against Leavers who've said the opposite - but if I what I understand to be true is the case (and none of us really know) then I wouldn't sign what's currently on the table. I'd be comfortable I'd been reasonable and proportionate in going up to and creatively around my red lines, but not clearly over them.
And, if it's No Deal, then that works both ways. The EU need to know that.
1. We want a trade deal. 2. The EU have offered us a trade deal. 3. We've turned it down because we don't like the terms.
1. I want some sausages. 2. Aldi offer me some sausages for £1.99. 3. I don't want to buy Aldi's sausages because they're too expensive.
Is it Aldi's fault I don't have any sausages?
It is Aldi's loss when Sainsbury's, Lidl, Tescos will sell me sausages at £1.75.
Why did we go to Aldi in the first place?
We were paying a large annual fee for an Aldi loyalty card, but have stopped that so can now shop around.
Why were we paying a large annual fee for a loyalty card when we could at any time, as @MarqueeMark explains, have gone to Sainsbury's, Lidl, and Tescos to get the sausages cheaper?
The membership fee made those shops more expensive as part of the terms of membership.
They were cheaper.
OK I'm happy to relinquish this analogy.
As to the LPF here's another one.
Imagine we as the UK said we would trade with Nonsuchia as long as they didn't use child labour. For 10 years they don't use child labour and then they begin to use it. As such, at that time we stop trading with them. They violated our terms of trade.
The EU is demanding the right to alter the terms of trade at some point in the future at which point we can make a decision not to trade with them. Why make that decision now?
That's not quite right though, because in this scenario we aren't talking about Nonsuchia violating the original terms, but the UK changing them unilaterally, and potentially in a manner that deliberately harms Nonsuchia.
Yes but that's life. The fact is that at the moment all is well between the two nations. When things change then decisions would have to be made. If they, the EU, change the terms of trade in 5 yrs we can say sod off.
Comments
Also, under a ratchet clause we don't have to increase our regulations in response to them increasing theirs. Only if we both increase our regulations, we can't then lower them without the threat of trade barriers being put up. Ie once we have both increased our regulations they form the new baseline. That seems a sensible way of dealing with changing norms. But in any case, the point is we can still lower them if we want to.
He was a highly successful Scottish fisherman who had the most wonderful mild manner but his anger when we joined the EU was very evident and I still remember it to this day
It goes to the EU
Ask the Brexiteer boss of Ineos
It is Aldi's fault we chose to buy our sausages elsewhere.
Both sides will have the objective to get the other to return to the negotiating table.
I get so bored saying this to erstwhile intelligent people.
As an aside could we use Co-op rather than Aldi. I have to walk past 3 of them to get to the nearest none Co-op supermarket (it's an Aldi flagship next to their Northern HQ)
1. We want sausages for tea tonight.
2. It's 9:45pm and all the shops close at 10pm.
3. I go to Aldi and they offer me sausages for £1.99.
4. I refuse.
5. I go without sausages for tea because all other shops are now closed.
Is it Aldi's fault I am without sausages for tea?
The answer is no.
I would say that your role on this site is analogous to the stroppy teenager who won't go to his room.
If I am selling a house, and am willing to take any offer over $500k, and the potential buyer is will to pay up to $600k, there is a deal to be made. If the buyer is only willing to pay up to $400k, there is no deal to be done.
If the EU insist that ratcheting is necessary to ensure the integrity of the Single Market, and the UK insists that controlling its own regulatory environment is necessary both for domestic political reasons and to offer any potential upside of leaving the EU, then there is no basis for agreement. No amount of fudge can square that circle.
We are negotiating with a much larger entity and that means accepting, bitter as it may be, that we might not have as much leverage as we would if we were negotiating with Tonga.
The internet has made trade from further afield much easier than it used to be.
Incidentally - since it's a topic which has been mentioned here today by @MaxPB and others - I believe I was the first to point out, some months ago, that the EU were worrying about the wrong thing - the danger for them isn't that we become some super-competitor on their doorstep, but that as one of their major customers we sink into a long period of economic stagnation as a result of Brexit. No doubt you thought I was saying they were 'God-like' when I've made that point.
Phillip, I have to say you are great to debate with, you don’t cut up rough with fellow debaters like some do. And I do wonder about your PB/other life balance typing away incessantly here 18 hours every day.
The EU - with a population of more than half a billion and an annual economic activity or GDP of around £15 trillion - has a trade surplus with Andorra, which has a population of about 80,000 and GDP of less than £3bn. Does that mean that the EU needs Andorra more than Andorra needs the EU?
the UK still exports more as a share of its own GDP to the EU 27 than the other way round. Does that imply dependency?
Can a bigger economy absorb/displace no deal disruption easier than smaller economy?
If they are not selling to us, can they sell elsewhere, in their internal market or elsewhere?
Can we find equivalent non EU markets for our goods? What sort of extra costs (like hidden costs and admin) come with the new market?
That statement trotted out “Besides we have a massive trade deficit with them remember” is based on so many assumptions you agree?
OK I'm happy to relinquish this analogy.
As to the LPF here's another one.
Imagine we as the UK said we would trade with Nonsuchia as long as they didn't use child labour. For 10 years they don't use child labour and then they begin to use it. As such, at that time we stop trading with them. They violated our terms of trade.
The EU is demanding the right to alter the terms of trade at some point in the future at which point we can make a decision not to trade with them. Why make that decision now?
In short, previous received wisdom was that mass extinctions open to field for mass radiations (creative destruction). AI analysis shows that this link is not so strong, and that sometimes (as seems to be happening now with humans), evolution of new species has a snowball effect as they change the environment and ecosystems sufficiently to cause mass extinctions (destructive creation). The implication being this is not the first time.
https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2020-12/tiot-aif120720.php
Dinner and supper are the only realistic names for that 9.45pm meal.
https://twitter.com/adamcooperF1/status/1337035389618556928
So if your friend goes to Aldi and buys some 1.99 sausages and says they're good so you choose to go, see the price ticket says 1.99 and pick them up ... Only the cashier says £5 then that could cause an issue.
If you ask why you're being charged £5 and the response is that for anyone else it's £1.99 but for you personally they're going to charge £5 instead, then if you walk out is that at all their fault?
C'mon, get with the program.
You'd know that if you'd ever visited Yorkshire.
"Out to Dinner" doesn't have the correct ring, somehow.
Anyhoo. I just bought my sausages, and ox-tongue, from the farm shop. Whilst we were all queueing, a chap walked past and into the back with a piglet over his shoulder.
The piglet had had its squeal removed, shall we say.
"There will be by the time you reach the front of that queue." Quite sharp
He did come back later with a side of beef over the other shoulder.
What's the point in saying sod off now?