Not strictly true, he said Scotland has a love for Europe and long live European Scotland, he did not explicitly support Scottish independence and in any case if the government bans indyref2 there is little he could do about it anyway unless he wants to follow the days of the Jacobite rebellions and send French military aid to the Scottish nationalists.
Plus given the EU did nothing when Madrid blocked a Catalan independence vote it would look hypocritical anyway
Dougseal if you're claiming sclerotic is simply a medical term then you are betraying your own ignorance.
The term Eurosclerosis was coined in the 1980s and has long been used by economists and was popularised by German economist Herbert Giersch.
Anything nefarious you want to see is in your own imagination.
Straw man. You deliberately misrepresent me. I said nothing of the sort. If you had read my post you would have seen that I explicitly concede that what you say is a secondary meaning. However the primary meaning is attested in the references I cite. Your unwillingness to use any other term whatsoever is instructive of your own prejudice, which I note you don't deny.
I do deny. Comprehensively deny.
I only use terms like Frogs as light-hearted affection. To take that out of context is dishonesty. I would never use the term in anger, there is nothing wrong with nicknames. I don't object to being called a POME or Rosbif.
I use the term sclerotic as it is a good term that well defines the EUs failings. It means exactly what I mean when I say it and if you're seeing anything nefarious then that is on you and you alone.
"Light hearted affection". Doesn't come accross that way it has to be said.
Yes it does. Only someone looking for insults would cherrypick remarks our of context. I haven't used the word Frogs in this thread have I, besides discussing YOU bringing it up?
IIRC you famously used the term in the context of tourists bringing Covid to London. That is not a light-hearted context in which to bring the term up. If a French person said "Je ne veux pas que les rosbifs amènent Covid à Paris" I think you, and indeed I, would be at least slightly put out. Yet that was the context.
You also said that we don't follow "...ze rules..." like the Germans, reinforcing a national sterotype in a decidedly non-banter way.
Mr. Jonathan, May certainly struggled to get her own party on-side.
However, when you've got the 'pro'-EU side lining up alongside hardline Leavers that was undoubtedly an act that could be called bloody silly. Pro-EU MPs have been the best unwitting allies of sceptics for years, from the stupid reneging of the Lisbon vote through to compelling May to get Commons approval for her deal, to then refusing the deal on three occasions, and now complaining that, having successfully removed almost every alternative, we're set for a turbulent No Deal, in all probability.
*sighs*
There's such a thing as nuance. As a middle between extremes. One might forget that, given blind opposition to The Enemy seems to be a prevailing school of thought amongst many in politics.
Who was more constructive , Remainer Clarke or Leaver Boris?
Leaver Boris.
Citation needed!
Boris got Brexit done.
He's taking back control.
He's even ensuring Brexit means Brexit.
Besides platitudes what do you want a citation for?
Because your assertion is factually incorrect, unless by "constructive" you mean he has built more lorry parks around the M2 and M20 and constructed a raft of new customs paperwork and an unnecessary hostility to our nearest neighbours.
The man is an embarrassment to our country. Turning up to Brussels looking like Benny Hill's Fred Scuttle, with his unkempt hair and ill fitting suit, His Environment speech yesterday was remarkable, particularly it's conclusion, which was utterly humiliating. And that is just first impressions, what goes beyond is an incompetence based on the inability to make a decision that he fears might annoy his base.
Whenever I go off on one about my utter contempt for Johnson, I find myself with a handful of extra "off-topics". "Off-topic" away, although I believe my post does relate to Alastair's excellent thread header and Johnson's shambolic handling of Brexit.
I don't off topic anyone. It is cowardly, anonymous and rude. Plus it spams OGH.
If I disagree with you then I'll say so to your face.
I disagree with you. Boris is shaping up to be potentially the second best postwar PM and third most consequential.
I wasn't suggesting you would "off-topic".
We will have to agree to disagree about Johnson's legacy. I didn't like Mrs Thatcher, but I can understand why people did rate her so highly. As for Johnson, I cannot see past the Fred Scuttle, half-wittery.
Johnson's legacy it is too early to say but I think he has the potential to be up there with Attlee and Thatcher as one of the three most consequential PMs post war.
Blair had the potential too but threw it away.
Johnson's legacy will be the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland ceasing to exist.
It won't, the government has made clear 2014 was a once in a generation vote and it will refuse to allow indyref2 even if Sturgeon gets a Holyrood majority next year and Northern Ireland has been given special arrangements to protect the GFA and minimise checks on goods going to and from GB
Yawn, keep repeating your lies
They are not lies Malc but also they are not real politics
The time will come for indy 2 to be addressed, probably realistically in 2022 or 2023 and I have no issue with that
There will never be indyref2 allowed while we have a Tory majority government, it is not happening
Of course their views don't really matter, this is what they signed up for.
The same Spanish Foreign Minister says something more interesting than that in the interview. The purpose of trade agreements is to manage interdependence, not to assert independence. What she doesn't say in this clip is that the European Union as the consortium owning the trade system will set the rules. The central contradiction of Brexit is that people voted Leave to take control, yet the only acceptable outcome is a close relationship with our peers in Europe, which will be on EU terms.
I don't disagree with what she says but I do think that she is missing the point. The negotiations have got bogged down because the EU has not been treating the UK like a sovereign partner with whom it is interdependent. They have been treating the UK like a supplicant greatly over valuing what they have to offer. If the negotiations had taken place in an atmosphere of mutual respect working on facilitating that interdependence that she is referring to there would have been a deal months ago.
But that is (my) point. The UK isn't a sovereign partner of the EU, because the EU isn't a sovereign state. It is a consortium of countries that runs a rules-based system. The question is on what terms does a third country get access to this system, which necessarily will be the consortium's terms. It won't change the rules for a third country. A membership organisation needs to maximise the value of membership, which means the EU will offer third countries much worse terms than members, albeit those terms need to offer some value to third countries.
The UK can decide its notions of sovereignty preclude it from any deal with the EU on its terms. In that case it cuts itself off from most of its peers and the relationship that offers most value. I don't think that is a sustainable position and that the UK will be forced into a relationship with the EU on its terms, which gives it less than before and which the UK no longer has much influence over. That's the central contradiction of Brexit.
That's struck me too. The UK and EU as "sovereign equals"? No. The UK is a sovereign nation. The EU is a union of 27 sovereign nations. It's a tell, I think. Either of thinking of the EU as a USE, or thinking of the UK as a superpower, or both. Not surprising, I guess, since this way of viewing things is in the Leaver psyche.
The EU has given itself sovereignty, not least in the Lisbon treaty. This is why they are entitled to insist upon Boris speaking to the leaders of that organisation rather than the individual countries. It is also clearly the direction of travel going forwards, especially for the EZ. So the EU is both a combination of sovereign countries (subject to the extent that they have agreed to pool their sovereignty by the treaties) and sovereign in its own right as a result of that pooling.
It's the phrase "negotiating as sovereign equals" that doesn't work for me. It's not quite the situation. However if I hear someone say the EU must "respect our sovereignty in the negotiations", that does sound right.
Mr. Jonathan, May certainly struggled to get her own party on-side.
However, when you've got the 'pro'-EU side lining up alongside hardline Leavers that was undoubtedly an act that could be called bloody silly. Pro-EU MPs have been the best unwitting allies of sceptics for years, from the stupid reneging of the Lisbon vote through to compelling May to get Commons approval for her deal, to then refusing the deal on three occasions, and now complaining that, having successfully removed almost every alternative, we're set for a turbulent No Deal, in all probability.
*sighs*
There's such a thing as nuance. As a middle between extremes. One might forget that, given blind opposition to The Enemy seems to be a prevailing school of thought amongst many in politics.
Who was more constructive , Remainer Clarke or Leaver Boris?
Leaver Boris.
Citation needed!
Boris got Brexit done.
He's taking back control.
He's even ensuring Brexit means Brexit.
Besides platitudes what do you want a citation for?
Because your assertion is factually incorrect, unless by "constructive" you mean he has built more lorry parks around the M2 and M20 and constructed a raft of new customs paperwork and an unnecessary hostility to our nearest neighbours.
The man is an embarrassment to our country. Turning up to Brussels looking like Benny Hill's Fred Scuttle, with his unkempt hair and ill fitting suit, His Environment speech yesterday was remarkable, particularly it's conclusion, which was utterly humiliating. And that is just first impressions, what goes beyond is an incompetence based on the inability to make a decision that he fears might annoy his base.
Whenever I go off on one about my utter contempt for Johnson, I find myself with a handful of extra "off-topics". "Off-topic" away, although I believe my post does relate to Alastair's excellent thread header and Johnson's shambolic handling of Brexit.
I don't off topic anyone. It is cowardly, anonymous and rude. Plus it spams OGH.
If I disagree with you then I'll say so to your face.
I disagree with you. Boris is shaping up to be potentially the second best postwar PM and third most consequential.
I wasn't suggesting you would "off-topic".
We will have to agree to disagree about Johnson's legacy. I didn't like Mrs Thatcher, but I can understand why people did rate her so highly. As for Johnson, I cannot see past the Fred Scuttle, half-wittery.
Johnson's legacy it is too early to say but I think he has the potential to be up there with Attlee and Thatcher as one of the three most consequential PMs post war.
Blair had the potential too but threw it away.
Johnson's legacy will be the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland ceasing to exist.
It won't, the government has made clear 2014 was a once in a generation vote and it will refuse to allow indyref2 even if Sturgeon gets a Holyrood majority next year and Northern Ireland has been given special arrangements to protect the GFA and minimise checks on goods going to and from GB
Yawn, keep repeating your lies
They are not lies Malc but also they are not real politics
The time will come for indy 2 to be addressed, probably realistically in 2022 or 2023 and I have no issue with that
There will never be indyref2 allowed while we have a Tory majority government, it is not happening
Of course their views don't really matter, this is what they signed up for.
The same Spanish Foreign Minister says something more interesting than that in the interview. The purpose of trade agreements is to manage interdependence, not to assert independence. What she doesn't say in this clip is that the European Union as the consortium owning the trade system will set the rules. The central contradiction of Brexit is that people voted Leave to take control, yet the only acceptable outcome is a close relationship with our peers in Europe, which will be on EU terms.
I don't disagree with what she says but I do think that she is missing the point. The negotiations have got bogged down because the EU has not been treating the UK like a sovereign partner with whom it is interdependent. They have been treating the UK like a supplicant greatly over valuing what they have to offer. If the negotiations had taken place in an atmosphere of mutual respect working on facilitating that interdependence that she is referring to there would have been a deal months ago.
The EU does not own the Trade System.
That, perhaps, is part of their problem.
Apologies. The EU owns the system covering almost all the trade in Europe. Not worldwide. The question is whether the UK is willing to participate in European trade according to the rules of that system and on terms set by the EU.
Personally I'm quite content with how Brexit is going. The EU are being scelerotic and unreasonable, so we have two choices: to give in to them or walk away. If I got a vote I would say walk away.
A lot of people are hyperventilating about the impact of a clean Brexit but I think it will be ultimately much ado about nothing, albeit with some disruption. People living in Kent may notice it more but they also voted for it more.
And if there's some disruption I think people can live with that so long as they think it's all a part of a plan.
Ah, a ‘clean’ Brexit is the new sugar on the pill, is it?
Mr. Jonathan, May certainly struggled to get her own party on-side.
However, when you've got the 'pro'-EU side lining up alongside hardline Leavers that was undoubtedly an act that could be called bloody silly. Pro-EU MPs have been the best unwitting allies of sceptics for years, from the stupid reneging of the Lisbon vote through to compelling May to get Commons approval for her deal, to then refusing the deal on three occasions, and now complaining that, having successfully removed almost every alternative, we're set for a turbulent No Deal, in all probability.
*sighs*
There's such a thing as nuance. As a middle between extremes. One might forget that, given blind opposition to The Enemy seems to be a prevailing school of thought amongst many in politics.
Who was more constructive , Remainer Clarke or Leaver Boris?
Leaver Boris.
Citation needed!
Boris got Brexit done.
He's taking back control.
He's even ensuring Brexit means Brexit.
Besides platitudes what do you want a citation for?
Because your assertion is factually incorrect, unless by "constructive" you mean he has built more lorry parks around the M2 and M20 and constructed a raft of new customs paperwork and an unnecessary hostility to our nearest neighbours.
The man is an embarrassment to our country. Turning up to Brussels looking like Benny Hill's Fred Scuttle, with his unkempt hair and ill fitting suit, His Environment speech yesterday was remarkable, particularly it's conclusion, which was utterly humiliating. And that is just first impressions, what goes beyond is an incompetence based on the inability to make a decision that he fears might annoy his base.
Whenever I go off on one about my utter contempt for Johnson, I find myself with a handful of extra "off-topics". "Off-topic" away, although I believe my post does relate to Alastair's excellent thread header and Johnson's shambolic handling of Brexit.
I don't off topic anyone. It is cowardly, anonymous and rude. Plus it spams OGH.
If I disagree with you then I'll say so to your face.
I disagree with you. Boris is shaping up to be potentially the second best postwar PM and third most consequential.
I wasn't suggesting you would "off-topic".
We will have to agree to disagree about Johnson's legacy. I didn't like Mrs Thatcher, but I can understand why people did rate her so highly. As for Johnson, I cannot see past the Fred Scuttle, half-wittery.
Johnson's legacy it is too early to say but I think he has the potential to be up there with Attlee and Thatcher as one of the three most consequential PMs post war.
Blair had the potential too but threw it away.
Johnson's legacy will be the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland ceasing to exist.
It won't, the government has made clear 2014 was a once in a generation vote and it will refuse to allow indyref2 even if Sturgeon gets a Holyrood majority next year and Northern Ireland has been given special arrangements to protect the GFA and minimise checks on goods going to and from GB
Just another Johnsonian lie, to sit nicely along with the oven-ready deal and a slogan slapped onto a bus.
Mr. Jonathan, May certainly struggled to get her own party on-side.
However, when you've got the 'pro'-EU side lining up alongside hardline Leavers that was undoubtedly an act that could be called bloody silly. Pro-EU MPs have been the best unwitting allies of sceptics for years, from the stupid reneging of the Lisbon vote through to compelling May to get Commons approval for her deal, to then refusing the deal on three occasions, and now complaining that, having successfully removed almost every alternative, we're set for a turbulent No Deal, in all probability.
*sighs*
There's such a thing as nuance. As a middle between extremes. One might forget that, given blind opposition to The Enemy seems to be a prevailing school of thought amongst many in politics.
Who was more constructive , Remainer Clarke or Leaver Boris?
Leaver Boris.
Citation needed!
Boris got Brexit done.
He's taking back control.
He's even ensuring Brexit means Brexit.
Besides platitudes what do you want a citation for?
Because your assertion is factually incorrect, unless by "constructive" you mean he has built more lorry parks around the M2 and M20 and constructed a raft of new customs paperwork and an unnecessary hostility to our nearest neighbours.
The man is an embarrassment to our country. Turning up to Brussels looking like Benny Hill's Fred Scuttle, with his unkempt hair and ill fitting suit, His Environment speech yesterday was remarkable, particularly it's conclusion, which was utterly humiliating. And that is just first impressions, what goes beyond is an incompetence based on the inability to make a decision that he fears might annoy his base.
Whenever I go off on one about my utter contempt for Johnson, I find myself with a handful of extra "off-topics". "Off-topic" away, although I believe my post does relate to Alastair's excellent thread header and Johnson's shambolic handling of Brexit.
I don't off topic anyone. It is cowardly, anonymous and rude. Plus it spams OGH.
If I disagree with you then I'll say so to your face.
I disagree with you. Boris is shaping up to be potentially the second best postwar PM and third most consequential.
I wasn't suggesting you would "off-topic".
We will have to agree to disagree about Johnson's legacy. I didn't like Mrs Thatcher, but I can understand why people did rate her so highly. As for Johnson, I cannot see past the Fred Scuttle, half-wittery.
Johnson's legacy it is too early to say but I think he has the potential to be up there with Attlee and Thatcher as one of the three most consequential PMs post war.
Blair had the potential too but threw it away.
Johnson's legacy will be the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland ceasing to exist.
It won't, the government has made clear 2014 was a once in a generation vote and it will refuse to allow indyref2 even if Sturgeon gets a Holyrood majority next year and Northern Ireland has been given special arrangements to protect the GFA and minimise checks on goods going to and from GB
Yawn, keep repeating your lies
They are not lies Malc but also they are not real politics
The time will come for indy 2 to be addressed, probably realistically in 2022 or 2023 and I have no issue with that
There will never be indyref2 allowed while we have a Tory majority government, it is not happening
Maybe they'll have one when they think they can win it? That worked out well the last time.
Mr. Jonathan, May certainly struggled to get her own party on-side.
However, when you've got the 'pro'-EU side lining up alongside hardline Leavers that was undoubtedly an act that could be called bloody silly. Pro-EU MPs have been the best unwitting allies of sceptics for years, from the stupid reneging of the Lisbon vote through to compelling May to get Commons approval for her deal, to then refusing the deal on three occasions, and now complaining that, having successfully removed almost every alternative, we're set for a turbulent No Deal, in all probability.
*sighs*
There's such a thing as nuance. As a middle between extremes. One might forget that, given blind opposition to The Enemy seems to be a prevailing school of thought amongst many in politics.
Who was more constructive , Remainer Clarke or Leaver Boris?
Leaver Boris.
Citation needed!
Boris got Brexit done.
He's taking back control.
He's even ensuring Brexit means Brexit.
Besides platitudes what do you want a citation for?
Because your assertion is factually incorrect, unless by "constructive" you mean he has built more lorry parks around the M2 and M20 and constructed a raft of new customs paperwork and an unnecessary hostility to our nearest neighbours.
The man is an embarrassment to our country. Turning up to Brussels looking like Benny Hill's Fred Scuttle, with his unkempt hair and ill fitting suit, His Environment speech yesterday was remarkable, particularly it's conclusion, which was utterly humiliating. And that is just first impressions, what goes beyond is an incompetence based on the inability to make a decision that he fears might annoy his base.
Whenever I go off on one about my utter contempt for Johnson, I find myself with a handful of extra "off-topics". "Off-topic" away, although I believe my post does relate to Alastair's excellent thread header and Johnson's shambolic handling of Brexit.
I don't off topic anyone. It is cowardly, anonymous and rude. Plus it spams OGH.
If I disagree with you then I'll say so to your face.
I disagree with you. Boris is shaping up to be potentially the second best postwar PM and third most consequential.
I wasn't suggesting you would "off-topic".
We will have to agree to disagree about Johnson's legacy. I didn't like Mrs Thatcher, but I can understand why people did rate her so highly. As for Johnson, I cannot see past the Fred Scuttle, half-wittery.
Johnson's legacy it is too early to say but I think he has the potential to be up there with Attlee and Thatcher as one of the three most consequential PMs post war.
Blair had the potential too but threw it away.
Johnson's legacy will be the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland ceasing to exist.
It won't, the government has made clear 2014 was a once in a generation vote and it will refuse to allow indyref2 even if Sturgeon gets a Holyrood majority next year and Northern Ireland has been given special arrangements to protect the GFA and minimise checks on goods going to and from GB
Yawn, keep repeating your lies
They are not lies Malc but also they are not real politics
The time will come for indy 2 to be addressed, probably realistically in 2022 or 2023 and I have no issue with that
There will never be indyref2 allowed while we have a Tory majority government, it is not happening
That is your view, it is not shared by others
No it is the government's view as confirmed by the Secretary of State for Scotland that the government would not grant indyref2 for a generation, your personal view on it is irrelevant
It's grown up negotiating to define the problem, and if the other side doesn't like your solution, to look at other ways of addressing the problem.
The EU doesn't want to grant free and frictionless access to its markets without reassurance that it won't be undercut on standards. You can argue the economic rights and wrongs, but it's not an unreasonable position.
Mr. Jonathan, May certainly struggled to get her own party on-side.
However, when you've got the 'pro'-EU side lining up alongside hardline Leavers that was undoubtedly an act that could be called bloody silly. Pro-EU MPs have been the best unwitting allies of sceptics for years, from the stupid reneging of the Lisbon vote through to compelling May to get Commons approval for her deal, to then refusing the deal on three occasions, and now complaining that, having successfully removed almost every alternative, we're set for a turbulent No Deal, in all probability.
*sighs*
There's such a thing as nuance. As a middle between extremes. One might forget that, given blind opposition to The Enemy seems to be a prevailing school of thought amongst many in politics.
Who was more constructive , Remainer Clarke or Leaver Boris?
Leaver Boris.
Citation needed!
Boris got Brexit done.
He's taking back control.
He's even ensuring Brexit means Brexit.
Besides platitudes what do you want a citation for?
Because your assertion is factually incorrect, unless by "constructive" you mean he has built more lorry parks around the M2 and M20 and constructed a raft of new customs paperwork and an unnecessary hostility to our nearest neighbours.
The man is an embarrassment to our country. Turning up to Brussels looking like Benny Hill's Fred Scuttle, with his unkempt hair and ill fitting suit, His Environment speech yesterday was remarkable, particularly it's conclusion, which was utterly humiliating. And that is just first impressions, what goes beyond is an incompetence based on the inability to make a decision that he fears might annoy his base.
Whenever I go off on one about my utter contempt for Johnson, I find myself with a handful of extra "off-topics". "Off-topic" away, although I believe my post does relate to Alastair's excellent thread header and Johnson's shambolic handling of Brexit.
I don't off topic anyone. It is cowardly, anonymous and rude. Plus it spams OGH.
If I disagree with you then I'll say so to your face.
I disagree with you. Boris is shaping up to be potentially the second best postwar PM and third most consequential.
I wasn't suggesting you would "off-topic".
We will have to agree to disagree about Johnson's legacy. I didn't like Mrs Thatcher, but I can understand why people did rate her so highly. As for Johnson, I cannot see past the Fred Scuttle, half-wittery.
Johnson's legacy it is too early to say but I think he has the potential to be up there with Attlee and Thatcher as one of the three most consequential PMs post war.
Blair had the potential too but threw it away.
Johnson's legacy will be the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland ceasing to exist.
It won't, the government has made clear 2014 was a once in a generation vote and it will refuse to allow indyref2 even if Sturgeon gets a Holyrood majority next year and Northern Ireland has been given special arrangements to protect the GFA and minimise checks on goods going to and from GB
Yawn, keep repeating your lies
They are not lies Malc but also they are not real politics
The time will come for indy 2 to be addressed, probably realistically in 2022 or 2023 and I have no issue with that
There will never be indyref2 allowed while we have a Tory majority government, it is not happening
Maybe they'll have one when they think they can win it? That worked out well the last time.
That was not a Tory majority government, it included the LDs in a coalition government and that was a referendum the campaign for which was accepted by both sides to be a once in a generation vote
Just as a point, if Boris does achieve a good deal he will be in a very strong position politically
I agree, which is the reason I think he’d be very silly to derail the negotiations now. He’ll cop it from the ERG but fundamentally he has already spiked Farage’s guns and Labour will need to vote for a deal despite their divisions. There is almost no political upside to him in no deal.
Mr. Jonathan, May certainly struggled to get her own party on-side.
However, when you've got the 'pro'-EU side lining up alongside hardline Leavers that was undoubtedly an act that could be called bloody silly. Pro-EU MPs have been the best unwitting allies of sceptics for years, from the stupid reneging of the Lisbon vote through to compelling May to get Commons approval for her deal, to then refusing the deal on three occasions, and now complaining that, having successfully removed almost every alternative, we're set for a turbulent No Deal, in all probability.
*sighs*
There's such a thing as nuance. As a middle between extremes. One might forget that, given blind opposition to The Enemy seems to be a prevailing school of thought amongst many in politics.
Who was more constructive , Remainer Clarke or Leaver Boris?
Leaver Boris.
Citation needed!
Boris got Brexit done.
He's taking back control.
He's even ensuring Brexit means Brexit.
Besides platitudes what do you want a citation for?
Because your assertion is factually incorrect, unless by "constructive" you mean he has built more lorry parks around the M2 and M20 and constructed a raft of new customs paperwork and an unnecessary hostility to our nearest neighbours.
The man is an embarrassment to our country. Turning up to Brussels looking like Benny Hill's Fred Scuttle, with his unkempt hair and ill fitting suit, His Environment speech yesterday was remarkable, particularly it's conclusion, which was utterly humiliating. And that is just first impressions, what goes beyond is an incompetence based on the inability to make a decision that he fears might annoy his base.
Whenever I go off on one about my utter contempt for Johnson, I find myself with a handful of extra "off-topics". "Off-topic" away, although I believe my post does relate to Alastair's excellent thread header and Johnson's shambolic handling of Brexit.
I don't off topic anyone. It is cowardly, anonymous and rude. Plus it spams OGH.
If I disagree with you then I'll say so to your face.
I disagree with you. Boris is shaping up to be potentially the second best postwar PM and third most consequential.
I wasn't suggesting you would "off-topic".
We will have to agree to disagree about Johnson's legacy. I didn't like Mrs Thatcher, but I can understand why people did rate her so highly. As for Johnson, I cannot see past the Fred Scuttle, half-wittery.
Johnson's legacy it is too early to say but I think he has the potential to be up there with Attlee and Thatcher as one of the three most consequential PMs post war.
Blair had the potential too but threw it away.
Johnson's legacy will be the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland ceasing to exist.
It won't, the government has made clear 2014 was a once in a generation vote and it will refuse to allow indyref2 even if Sturgeon gets a Holyrood majority next year and Northern Ireland has been given special arrangements to protect the GFA and minimise checks on goods going to and from GB
Yawn, keep repeating your lies
They are not lies Malc but also they are not real politics
The time will come for indy 2 to be addressed, probably realistically in 2022 or 2023 and I have no issue with that
There will never be indyref2 allowed while we have a Tory majority government, it is not happening
Here we go again... Look Pal, this is the exact right way to ensure the end of the United Kingdom, even David Cameron understood that.
If you think that bleating that "its not fair", that "we are the government and we forbid this" will cut any ice at all then you do not understand either human nature or history,
So if you actually want to save the UK you profess to love I would button it and let the grown ups sort it out.
Alastair said: "... The EU is certainly being short-sighted. It has prioritised its own immediate interests in negotiations ahead of having a stable relationship with a close neighbour... "
True enough, but if the EU had bent over backwards to accommodate the Brexiteers then the Brexiteers would still be unhappy. Given the antics of Farage and his supporters over the years I think the EU has figured out that there is no mileage in being overly helpful.
Mr. Jonathan, May certainly struggled to get her own party on-side.
However, when you've got the 'pro'-EU side lining up alongside hardline Leavers that was undoubtedly an act that could be called bloody silly. Pro-EU MPs have been the best unwitting allies of sceptics for years, from the stupid reneging of the Lisbon vote through to compelling May to get Commons approval for her deal, to then refusing the deal on three occasions, and now complaining that, having successfully removed almost every alternative, we're set for a turbulent No Deal, in all probability.
*sighs*
There's such a thing as nuance. As a middle between extremes. One might forget that, given blind opposition to The Enemy seems to be a prevailing school of thought amongst many in politics.
Who was more constructive , Remainer Clarke or Leaver Boris?
Leaver Boris.
Citation needed!
Boris got Brexit done.
He's taking back control.
He's even ensuring Brexit means Brexit.
Besides platitudes what do you want a citation for?
Because your assertion is factually incorrect, unless by "constructive" you mean he has built more lorry parks around the M2 and M20 and constructed a raft of new customs paperwork and an unnecessary hostility to our nearest neighbours.
The man is an embarrassment to our country. Turning up to Brussels looking like Benny Hill's Fred Scuttle, with his unkempt hair and ill fitting suit, His Environment speech yesterday was remarkable, particularly it's conclusion, which was utterly humiliating. And that is just first impressions, what goes beyond is an incompetence based on the inability to make a decision that he fears might annoy his base.
Whenever I go off on one about my utter contempt for Johnson, I find myself with a handful of extra "off-topics". "Off-topic" away, although I believe my post does relate to Alastair's excellent thread header and Johnson's shambolic handling of Brexit.
I don't off topic anyone. It is cowardly, anonymous and rude. Plus it spams OGH.
If I disagree with you then I'll say so to your face.
I disagree with you. Boris is shaping up to be potentially the second best postwar PM and third most consequential.
I wasn't suggesting you would "off-topic".
We will have to agree to disagree about Johnson's legacy. I didn't like Mrs Thatcher, but I can understand why people did rate her so highly. As for Johnson, I cannot see past the Fred Scuttle, half-wittery.
Johnson's legacy it is too early to say but I think he has the potential to be up there with Attlee and Thatcher as one of the three most consequential PMs post war.
Blair had the potential too but threw it away.
Johnson's legacy will be the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland ceasing to exist.
It won't, the government has made clear 2014 was a once in a generation vote and it will refuse to allow indyref2 even if Sturgeon gets a Holyrood majority next year and Northern Ireland has been given special arrangements to protect the GFA and minimise checks on goods going to and from GB
Just another Johnsonian lie, to sit nicely along with the oven-ready deal and a slogan slapped onto a bus.
No, Boris has a majority now unlike last year and while he is not going to risk upsetting his Leaver base he can largely ignore Scotland which did not vote for him anyway bar 6 seats and he can especially afford to ignore Sturgeon given he has a majority of 80 and is not going to risk being the last UK PM however much she whinges
Of course their views don't really matter, this is what they signed up for.
The same Spanish Foreign Minister says something more interesting than that in the interview. The purpose of trade agreements is to manage interdependence, not to assert independence. What she doesn't say in this clip is that the European Union as the consortium owning the trade system will set the rules. The central contradiction of Brexit is that people voted Leave to take control, yet the only acceptable outcome is a close relationship with our peers in Europe, which will be on EU terms.
I don't disagree with what she says but I do think that she is missing the point. The negotiations have got bogged down because the EU has not been treating the UK like a sovereign partner with whom it is interdependent. They have been treating the UK like a supplicant greatly over valuing what they have to offer. If the negotiations had taken place in an atmosphere of mutual respect working on facilitating that interdependence that she is referring to there would have been a deal months ago.
But that is (my) point. The UK isn't a sovereign partner of the EU, because the EU isn't a sovereign state. It is a consortium of countries that runs a rules-based system. The question is on what terms does a third country get access to this system, which necessarily will be the consortium's terms. It won't change the rules for a third country. A membership organisation needs to maximise the value of membership, which means the EU will offer third countries much worse terms than members, albeit those terms need to offer some value to third countries.
The UK can decide its notions of sovereignty preclude it from any deal with the EU on its terms. In that case it cuts itself off from most of its peers and the relationship that offers most value. I don't think that is a sustainable position and that the UK will be forced into a relationship with the EU on its terms, which gives it less than before and which the UK no longer has much influence over. That's the central contradiction of Brexit.
That's struck me too. The UK and EU as "sovereign equals"? No. The UK is a sovereign nation. The EU is a union of 27 sovereign nations. It's a tell, I think. Either of thinking of the EU as a USE, or thinking of the UK as a superpower, or both. Not surprising, I guess, since this way of viewing things is in the Leaver psyche.
The EU has given itself sovereignty, not least in the Lisbon treaty. This is why they are entitled to insist upon Boris speaking to the leaders of that organisation rather than the individual countries. It is also clearly the direction of travel going forwards, especially for the EZ. So the EU is both a combination of sovereign countries (subject to the extent that they have agreed to pool their sovereignty by the treaties) and sovereign in its own right as a result of that pooling.
I'm a Remainer but one thing that troubled me greatly over the last 20 years from the perspective of how our politicians have sold the EU to the UK has been the practice of other (not ours obvs) EU Heads of Government and their Parliaments to hang the EU flag next to their own in the background while on camera - which is something US State Governors invariably do with their own state flags next to the Stars and Stripes. US constitutional theory posits that each state holds governmental jurisdiction over a defined geographic territory, and shares its sovereignty with the United States federal government in specific areas. So does the Lisbon Treaty.
In terms of Brexit, you can run that argument both ways for your own ends, the states are both sovereign and not, its Schrodigers Cat (a lot stems from both sides not appreciating how complex a concept it is) but optically the EU flag thing indicates federalism. The EU is usually called a "sui generis" organisation but it's not all that sui generis based on the Lisbon Treaty which does, as you say, pool soverignty a la the US. If we were to be critical that is something our side never faced up to.
Mr. Jonathan, May certainly struggled to get her own party on-side.
However, when you've got the 'pro'-EU side lining up alongside hardline Leavers that was undoubtedly an act that could be called bloody silly. Pro-EU MPs have been the best unwitting allies of sceptics for years, from the stupid reneging of the Lisbon vote through to compelling May to get Commons approval for her deal, to then refusing the deal on three occasions, and now complaining that, having successfully removed almost every alternative, we're set for a turbulent No Deal, in all probability.
*sighs*
There's such a thing as nuance. As a middle between extremes. One might forget that, given blind opposition to The Enemy seems to be a prevailing school of thought amongst many in politics.
Who was more constructive , Remainer Clarke or Leaver Boris?
Leaver Boris.
Citation needed!
Boris got Brexit done.
He's taking back control.
He's even ensuring Brexit means Brexit.
Besides platitudes what do you want a citation for?
Because your assertion is factually incorrect, unless by "constructive" you mean he has built more lorry parks around the M2 and M20 and constructed a raft of new customs paperwork and an unnecessary hostility to our nearest neighbours.
The man is an embarrassment to our country. Turning up to Brussels looking like Benny Hill's Fred Scuttle, with his unkempt hair and ill fitting suit, His Environment speech yesterday was remarkable, particularly it's conclusion, which was utterly humiliating. And that is just first impressions, what goes beyond is an incompetence based on the inability to make a decision that he fears might annoy his base.
Whenever I go off on one about my utter contempt for Johnson, I find myself with a handful of extra "off-topics". "Off-topic" away, although I believe my post does relate to Alastair's excellent thread header and Johnson's shambolic handling of Brexit.
I don't off topic anyone. It is cowardly, anonymous and rude. Plus it spams OGH.
If I disagree with you then I'll say so to your face.
I disagree with you. Boris is shaping up to be potentially the second best postwar PM and third most consequential.
I wasn't suggesting you would "off-topic".
We will have to agree to disagree about Johnson's legacy. I didn't like Mrs Thatcher, but I can understand why people did rate her so highly. As for Johnson, I cannot see past the Fred Scuttle, half-wittery.
Johnson's legacy it is too early to say but I think he has the potential to be up there with Attlee and Thatcher as one of the three most consequential PMs post war.
Blair had the potential too but threw it away.
Johnson's legacy will be the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland ceasing to exist.
It won't, the government has made clear 2014 was a once in a generation vote and it will refuse to allow indyref2 even if Sturgeon gets a Holyrood majority next year and Northern Ireland has been given special arrangements to protect the GFA and minimise checks on goods going to and from GB
Yawn, keep repeating your lies
They are not lies Malc but also they are not real politics
The time will come for indy 2 to be addressed, probably realistically in 2022 or 2023 and I have no issue with that
There will never be indyref2 allowed while we have a Tory majority government, it is not happening
Maybe they'll have one when they think they can win it? That worked out well the last time.
That was not a Tory majority government, it included the LDs in a coalition government and that was a referendum the campaign for which was accepted by both sides to be a once in a generation vote
Mr. Jonathan, May certainly struggled to get her own party on-side.
However, when you've got the 'pro'-EU side lining up alongside hardline Leavers that was undoubtedly an act that could be called bloody silly. Pro-EU MPs have been the best unwitting allies of sceptics for years, from the stupid reneging of the Lisbon vote through to compelling May to get Commons approval for her deal, to then refusing the deal on three occasions, and now complaining that, having successfully removed almost every alternative, we're set for a turbulent No Deal, in all probability.
*sighs*
There's such a thing as nuance. As a middle between extremes. One might forget that, given blind opposition to The Enemy seems to be a prevailing school of thought amongst many in politics.
Who was more constructive , Remainer Clarke or Leaver Boris?
Leaver Boris.
Citation needed!
Boris got Brexit done.
He's taking back control.
He's even ensuring Brexit means Brexit.
Besides platitudes what do you want a citation for?
Because your assertion is factually incorrect, unless by "constructive" you mean he has built more lorry parks around the M2 and M20 and constructed a raft of new customs paperwork and an unnecessary hostility to our nearest neighbours.
The man is an embarrassment to our country. Turning up to Brussels looking like Benny Hill's Fred Scuttle, with his unkempt hair and ill fitting suit, His Environment speech yesterday was remarkable, particularly it's conclusion, which was utterly humiliating. And that is just first impressions, what goes beyond is an incompetence based on the inability to make a decision that he fears might annoy his base.
Whenever I go off on one about my utter contempt for Johnson, I find myself with a handful of extra "off-topics". "Off-topic" away, although I believe my post does relate to Alastair's excellent thread header and Johnson's shambolic handling of Brexit.
I don't off topic anyone. It is cowardly, anonymous and rude. Plus it spams OGH.
If I disagree with you then I'll say so to your face.
I disagree with you. Boris is shaping up to be potentially the second best postwar PM and third most consequential.
I wasn't suggesting you would "off-topic".
We will have to agree to disagree about Johnson's legacy. I didn't like Mrs Thatcher, but I can understand why people did rate her so highly. As for Johnson, I cannot see past the Fred Scuttle, half-wittery.
Johnson's legacy it is too early to say but I think he has the potential to be up there with Attlee and Thatcher as one of the three most consequential PMs post war.
Blair had the potential too but threw it away.
Johnson's legacy will be the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland ceasing to exist.
It won't, the government has made clear 2014 was a once in a generation vote and it will refuse to allow indyref2 even if Sturgeon gets a Holyrood majority next year and Northern Ireland has been given special arrangements to protect the GFA and minimise checks on goods going to and from GB
Yawn, keep repeating your lies
They are not lies Malc but also they are not real politics
The time will come for indy 2 to be addressed, probably realistically in 2022 or 2023 and I have no issue with that
There will never be indyref2 allowed while we have a Tory majority government, it is not happening
Here we go again... Look Pal, this is the exact right way to ensure the end of the United Kingdom, even David Cameron understood that.
If you think that bleating that "its not fair", that "we are the government and we forbid this" will cut any ice at all then you do not understand either human nature or history,
So if you actually want to save the UK you profess to love I would button it and let the grown ups sort it out.
Not strictly true, he said Scotland has a love for Europe and long live European Scotland, he did not explicitly support Scottish independence and in any case if the government bans indyref2 there is little he could do about it anyway unless he wants to follow the days of the Jacobite rebellions and send French military aid to the Scottish nationalists.
Plus given the EU did nothing when Madrid blocked a Catalan independence vote it would look hypocritical anyway
Why are you so unable to discuss the potential for Scottish independence without putting the word "military" in there somewhere?
Mr. Jonathan, May certainly struggled to get her own party on-side.
However, when you've got the 'pro'-EU side lining up alongside hardline Leavers that was undoubtedly an act that could be called bloody silly. Pro-EU MPs have been the best unwitting allies of sceptics for years, from the stupid reneging of the Lisbon vote through to compelling May to get Commons approval for her deal, to then refusing the deal on three occasions, and now complaining that, having successfully removed almost every alternative, we're set for a turbulent No Deal, in all probability.
*sighs*
There's such a thing as nuance. As a middle between extremes. One might forget that, given blind opposition to The Enemy seems to be a prevailing school of thought amongst many in politics.
Who was more constructive , Remainer Clarke or Leaver Boris?
Leaver Boris.
Citation needed!
Boris got Brexit done.
He's taking back control.
He's even ensuring Brexit means Brexit.
Besides platitudes what do you want a citation for?
Because your assertion is factually incorrect, unless by "constructive" you mean he has built more lorry parks around the M2 and M20 and constructed a raft of new customs paperwork and an unnecessary hostility to our nearest neighbours.
The man is an embarrassment to our country. Turning up to Brussels looking like Benny Hill's Fred Scuttle, with his unkempt hair and ill fitting suit, His Environment speech yesterday was remarkable, particularly it's conclusion, which was utterly humiliating. And that is just first impressions, what goes beyond is an incompetence based on the inability to make a decision that he fears might annoy his base.
Whenever I go off on one about my utter contempt for Johnson, I find myself with a handful of extra "off-topics". "Off-topic" away, although I believe my post does relate to Alastair's excellent thread header and Johnson's shambolic handling of Brexit.
I don't off topic anyone. It is cowardly, anonymous and rude. Plus it spams OGH.
If I disagree with you then I'll say so to your face.
I disagree with you. Boris is shaping up to be potentially the second best postwar PM and third most consequential.
I wasn't suggesting you would "off-topic".
We will have to agree to disagree about Johnson's legacy. I didn't like Mrs Thatcher, but I can understand why people did rate her so highly. As for Johnson, I cannot see past the Fred Scuttle, half-wittery.
Johnson's legacy it is too early to say but I think he has the potential to be up there with Attlee and Thatcher as one of the three most consequential PMs post war.
Blair had the potential too but threw it away.
Johnson's legacy will be the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland ceasing to exist.
It won't, the government has made clear 2014 was a once in a generation vote and it will refuse to allow indyref2 even if Sturgeon gets a Holyrood majority next year and Northern Ireland has been given special arrangements to protect the GFA and minimise checks on goods going to and from GB
Yawn, keep repeating your lies
They are not lies Malc but also they are not real politics
The time will come for indy 2 to be addressed, probably realistically in 2022 or 2023 and I have no issue with that
There will never be indyref2 allowed while we have a Tory majority government, it is not happening
Here we go again... Look Pal, this is the exact right way to ensure the end of the United Kingdom, even David Cameron understood that.
If you think that bleating that "its not fair", that "we are the government and we forbid this" will cut any ice at all then you do not understand either human nature or history,
So if you actually want to save the UK you profess to love I would button it and let the grown ups sort it out.
Rubbish, see Catalonia where 3 years after the Spanish government refused to allow the Catalan nationalist government to hold an independence referendum and even went so far as to arrest Catalan leaders and suspend the Catalan Parliament Catalonia is still part of Spain.
Given the attitude of Spain with Catalonia or China in suspending pro democracy Hong Kong legislators the Tory government is being mild in comparison
Mr. Jonathan, May certainly struggled to get her own party on-side.
However, when you've got the 'pro'-EU side lining up alongside hardline Leavers that was undoubtedly an act that could be called bloody silly. Pro-EU MPs have been the best unwitting allies of sceptics for years, from the stupid reneging of the Lisbon vote through to compelling May to get Commons approval for her deal, to then refusing the deal on three occasions, and now complaining that, having successfully removed almost every alternative, we're set for a turbulent No Deal, in all probability.
*sighs*
There's such a thing as nuance. As a middle between extremes. One might forget that, given blind opposition to The Enemy seems to be a prevailing school of thought amongst many in politics.
Who was more constructive , Remainer Clarke or Leaver Boris?
Leaver Boris.
Citation needed!
Boris got Brexit done.
He's taking back control.
He's even ensuring Brexit means Brexit.
Besides platitudes what do you want a citation for?
Because your assertion is factually incorrect, unless by "constructive" you mean he has built more lorry parks around the M2 and M20 and constructed a raft of new customs paperwork and an unnecessary hostility to our nearest neighbours.
The man is an embarrassment to our country. Turning up to Brussels looking like Benny Hill's Fred Scuttle, with his unkempt hair and ill fitting suit, His Environment speech yesterday was remarkable, particularly it's conclusion, which was utterly humiliating. And that is just first impressions, what goes beyond is an incompetence based on the inability to make a decision that he fears might annoy his base.
Whenever I go off on one about my utter contempt for Johnson, I find myself with a handful of extra "off-topics". "Off-topic" away, although I believe my post does relate to Alastair's excellent thread header and Johnson's shambolic handling of Brexit.
I don't off topic anyone. It is cowardly, anonymous and rude. Plus it spams OGH.
If I disagree with you then I'll say so to your face.
I disagree with you. Boris is shaping up to be potentially the second best postwar PM and third most consequential.
I wasn't suggesting you would "off-topic".
We will have to agree to disagree about Johnson's legacy. I didn't like Mrs Thatcher, but I can understand why people did rate her so highly. As for Johnson, I cannot see past the Fred Scuttle, half-wittery.
Johnson's legacy it is too early to say but I think he has the potential to be up there with Attlee and Thatcher as one of the three most consequential PMs post war.
Blair had the potential too but threw it away.
Johnson's legacy will be the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland ceasing to exist.
It won't, the government has made clear 2014 was a once in a generation vote and it will refuse to allow indyref2 even if Sturgeon gets a Holyrood majority next year and Northern Ireland has been given special arrangements to protect the GFA and minimise checks on goods going to and from GB
Yawn, keep repeating your lies
They are not lies Malc but also they are not real politics
The time will come for indy 2 to be addressed, probably realistically in 2022 or 2023 and I have no issue with that
There will never be indyref2 allowed while we have a Tory majority government, it is not happening
Here we go again... Look Pal, this is the exact right way to ensure the end of the United Kingdom, even David Cameron understood that.
If you think that bleating that "its not fair", that "we are the government and we forbid this" will cut any ice at all then you do not understand either human nature or history,
So if you actually want to save the UK you profess to love I would button it and let the grown ups sort it out.
In probability theory a martingale is a random walk (Doob) and in finance financial prices are theorised to follow such a time sequence. In betting it is the "double or quits" strategy. But then there is the equine meaning - it is a harness to control the movement of the horse. Alastair uses the term for its betting connotation. But in context you can also see it as the device that the EU wants to apply to the UK (the ratchet) to keep it under control.
It must be so tiring seeing everything in the world as racist.
I think he's potentially saying some quite interesting things ... especially about "heritage" varieties as some sort of refuge in the mind, which is only a couple of jumps from the "Frankenfood" guff, but to try and make it about racism is right up there with the TV programme that tried to link Nazism to the Kennel Club because of the way dogs are bred for a characteristic. ("Controversy at Crufts").
If the EU have blinked then hopefully a deal can be agreed. So long as both parties are reasonable a deal should be agreeable. Just need EU to agree to copy and paste the Canada agreement LPF.
Of course their views don't really matter, this is what they signed up for.
Lunchtime call between UK and EU apparently..
But those who make the actual decisions in the EU have decided. Britain needs to be punished for its temerity in leaving the project. The views of those directly affected like Eire and Spain can be disregarded as usual. There is no evidence at all of any activity consistent with a last minute compromise.
I wanted and expected a deal but I have called it wrong because I focused on the economics rather than the politics. Its unfortunate but the consequences will be far more modest than the thread header and others suggest.
Absurd. Britain doesn't want just first to leave, but then also to retain privileges beyond those of other third-countries for the EU. What would be your own response in its situation ?
Britain doesn't want to retain any such privileges that's a lie.
Unless you think Canada has privileges of membership. All Britain has asked for is a Canada style simple FTA.
All EU is asking for is for us not to undercut their standards and employment terms and we can have one.
The issue is they’re asking us not to undercut any *future* standards and employment terms they may come up with down the line.
So if they decide that two years’ maternity leave on full pay, or a maximum 35-hour working week, or a ratio between top and bottom earners in companies, is new EU law, we have to either agree or suffer trade consequences.
Assuming that is true - and we cannot know it is because no-one outside of the negotiations (including cabinet ministers) has seen the legal texts - why is the solution to suffer tariffs now instead of perhaps facing them in the future if we decide to have lower standards than the EU?
Several reasons:
1. It was apparently put in late in the proceedings, and as such shows bad faith on the EU side. 2. It appears that the EU want to arbitrate this themselves, making them judge, jury and executioner. 3. It’s one-sided, with no reciprocal arrangements from us to them (notwithstanding what VdL said the other day). 4. There is a thought that the EU may deliberately target new legislation, especially on standards, so that either it allows them to punish the UK further or affects UK a competitiveness in these areas on the global market. Macron and friends have already said there isn’t enough punishment in the deal, and other EU politicians have suggested in the past that every new piece of EU legislation should have a “Screw The British Clause”
All of the above likely ends up, a few years down the road, with a situation whereby the EU have imposed large numbers of tarrifs on UK imports, which the U.K. cannot do so with the EU.
There of course the opposite viewpoints, and some tweaking may land a deal, but I think both sides have eroded trust in each other, to the point where no deal is now possible until no-deal has occurred.
Fingers crossed we make progress in the next 24 hours.
Point 4 is seriousaly paranoid. Even a cursory glance at the Continental press shows how marginal Brexit is now as an issue - it's like having a mad uncle, an issue of family concern but not something that one thinks about all the time. The idea of going through the extremely elaborate EU legislative process in order to punish Britain is derisory. They wouldn't really want to, but even if they thought it was a good idea they couldn't be bothered - there are more urgent matters to address. (Citation needed for that "Screw the British clause".)
Moreover, if we don't like such a deal, we can give notice and return to WTO terms.
If the EU have blinked then hopefully a deal can be agreed. So long as both parties are reasonable a deal should be agreeable. Just need EU to agree to copy and paste the Canada agreement LPF.
Personally I'm quite content with how Brexit is going. The EU are being scelerotic and unreasonable, so we have two choices: to give in to them or walk away. If I got a vote I would say walk away. We have al A lot of people are hyperventilating about the impact of a clean Brexit but I think it will be ultimately much ado about nothing, albeit with some disruption. People living in Kent may notice it more but they also voted for it more.
And if there's some disruption I think people can live with that so long as they think it's all a part of a plan.
That is not entirely true, East Kent voted heavily Leave, West Kent voted Leave at about the English average, Tunbridge Wells voted Remain
Yes. But aren’t we now at war with East Kent? Haven’t you seen the Gun Boats in the Channel?
Of course their views don't really matter, this is what they signed up for.
The same Spanish Foreign Minister says something more interesting than that in the interview. The purpose of trade agreements is to manage interdependence, not to assert independence. What she doesn't say in this clip is that the European Union as the consortium owning the trade system will set the rules. The central contradiction of Brexit is that people voted Leave to take control, yet the only acceptable outcome is a close relationship with our peers in Europe, which will be on EU terms.
I don't disagree with what she says but I do think that she is missing the point. The negotiations have got bogged down because the EU has not been treating the UK like a sovereign partner with whom it is interdependent. They have been treating the UK like a supplicant greatly over valuing what they have to offer. If the negotiations had taken place in an atmosphere of mutual respect working on facilitating that interdependence that she is referring to there would have been a deal months ago.
But that is (my) point. The UK isn't a sovereign partner of the EU, because the EU isn't a sovereign state. It is a consortium of countries that runs a rules-based system. The question is on what terms does a third country get access to this system, which necessarily will be the consortium's terms. It won't change the rules for a third country. A membership organisation needs to maximise the value of membership, which means the EU will offer third countries much worse terms than members, albeit those terms need to offer some value to third countries.
The UK can decide its notions of sovereignty preclude it from any deal with the EU on its terms. In that case it cuts itself off from most of its peers and the relationship that offers most value. I don't think that is a sustainable position and that the UK will be forced into a relationship with the EU on its terms, which gives it less than before and which the UK no longer has much influence over. That's the central contradiction of Brexit.
That's struck me too. The UK and EU as "sovereign equals"? No. The UK is a sovereign nation. The EU is a union of 27 sovereign nations. It's a tell, I think. Either of thinking of the EU as a USE, or thinking of the UK as a superpower, or both. Not surprising, I guess, since this way of viewing things is in the Leaver psyche.
The EU has given itself sovereignty, not least in the Lisbon treaty. This is why they are entitled to insist upon Boris speaking to the leaders of that organisation rather than the individual countries. It is also clearly the direction of travel going forwards, especially for the EZ. So the EU is both a combination of sovereign countries (subject to the extent that they have agreed to pool their sovereignty by the treaties) and sovereign in its own right as a result of that pooling.
It's the phrase "negotiating as sovereign equals" that doesn't work for me. It's not quite the situation. However if I hear someone say the EU must "respect our sovereignty in the negotiations", that does sound right.
The EU Commission has little autonomy when it comes to agreeing treaties. Member states set the negotiating lines under the European Council and sign off the actual treaties. So called mixed, more complex treaties, need to be ratified by all member state parliaments. The European Parliament has a referral role; it can reject treaties but doesn't generally make decisions.
Sky saying the language has changed and joint statement is a good sign
It shows they think a deal is still possible, which is good.
The snag is, everyone has now bet the house on it (although arguably that was true three years ago). If a deal is not agreed, it will be complete chaos as there is no time to do anything to mitigate an abrupt change.
Edit - truthfully, although I despise Johnson I fully understand why he feels he cannot sign up to the terms on offer, and it is both unreasonable and foolish of the EU to not accept an independent arbitration panel (a principle they conceded in May’s deal, after all) and try to keep it in the hands of a much criticised court that nobody trusts and is under their direct control.
Personally I'm quite content with how Brexit is going. The EU are being scelerotic and unreasonable, so we have two choices: to give in to them or walk away. If I got a vote I would say walk away. We have al A lot of people are hyperventilating about the impact of a clean Brexit but I think it will be ultimately much ado about nothing, albeit with some disruption. People living in Kent may notice it more but they also voted for it more.
And if there's some disruption I think people can live with that so long as they think it's all a part of a plan.
That is not entirely true, East Kent voted heavily Leave, West Kent voted Leave at about the English average, Tunbridge Wells voted Remain
Yes. But aren’t we now at war with East Kent? Haven’t you seen the Gun Boats in the Channel?
Personally I'm quite content with how Brexit is going. The EU are being scelerotic and unreasonable, so we have two choices: to give in to them or walk away. If I got a vote I would say walk away. We have al A lot of people are hyperventilating about the impact of a clean Brexit but I think it will be ultimately much ado about nothing, albeit with some disruption. People living in Kent may notice it more but they also voted for it more.
And if there's some disruption I think people can live with that so long as they think it's all a part of a plan.
That is not entirely true, East Kent voted heavily Leave, West Kent voted Leave at about the English average, Tunbridge Wells voted Remain
Yes. But aren’t we now at war with East Kent? Haven’t you seen the Gun Boats in the Channel?
We have always been at war with East Kent.
Canterbury, the Parliamentary constituency as opposed to the local authority (which is essentially the constituency plus f***ing Herne Bay) voted Remain - thus Rosie Duffield from 2017. Herne Bay has a lot to answer for. Nuke it from space I say.
Personally I'm quite content with how Brexit is going. The EU are being scelerotic and unreasonable, so we have two choices: to give in to them or walk away. If I got a vote I would say walk away. We have al A lot of people are hyperventilating about the impact of a clean Brexit but I think it will be ultimately much ado about nothing, albeit with some disruption. People living in Kent may notice it more but they also voted for it more.
And if there's some disruption I think people can live with that so long as they think it's all a part of a plan.
That is not entirely true, East Kent voted heavily Leave, West Kent voted Leave at about the English average, Tunbridge Wells voted Remain
Yes. But aren’t we now at war with East Kent? Haven’t you seen the Gun Boats in the Channel?
We have always been at war with East Kent.
West Kent certainly has.
We kent be sure of that given they never speak to outsiders.
Sky saying the language has changed and joint statement is a good sign
It shows they think a deal is still possible, which is good.
The snag is, everyone has now bet the house on it (although arguably that was true three years ago). If a deal is not agreed, it will be complete chaos as there is no time to do anything to mitigate an abrupt change.
The 'avoid chaos' ship sailed some time ago if there is no deal. As Hennig said on BBC earlier, we are so far already into overtime that there is no time to do implementation and so continuing to talk makes no difference on that front. There wont be time to read the 1000 page document never mind implement it by January. A fudge on the cliff edge will be found if there is a Deal.
Mr. Jonathan, May certainly struggled to get her own party on-side.
However, when you've got the 'pro'-EU side lining up alongside hardline Leavers that was undoubtedly an act that could be called bloody silly. Pro-EU MPs have been the best unwitting allies of sceptics for years, from the stupid reneging of the Lisbon vote through to compelling May to get Commons approval for her deal, to then refusing the deal on three occasions, and now complaining that, having successfully removed almost every alternative, we're set for a turbulent No Deal, in all probability.
*sighs*
There's such a thing as nuance. As a middle between extremes. One might forget that, given blind opposition to The Enemy seems to be a prevailing school of thought amongst many in politics.
Who was more constructive , Remainer Clarke or Leaver Boris?
Leaver Boris.
Citation needed!
Boris got Brexit done.
He's taking back control.
He's even ensuring Brexit means Brexit.
Besides platitudes what do you want a citation for?
Because your assertion is factually incorrect, unless by "constructive" you mean he has built more lorry parks around the M2 and M20 and constructed a raft of new customs paperwork and an unnecessary hostility to our nearest neighbours.
The man is an embarrassment to our country. Turning up to Brussels looking like Benny Hill's Fred Scuttle, with his unkempt hair and ill fitting suit, His Environment speech yesterday was remarkable, particularly it's conclusion, which was utterly humiliating. And that is just first impressions, what goes beyond is an incompetence based on the inability to make a decision that he fears might annoy his base.
Whenever I go off on one about my utter contempt for Johnson, I find myself with a handful of extra "off-topics". "Off-topic" away, although I believe my post does relate to Alastair's excellent thread header and Johnson's shambolic handling of Brexit.
I don't off topic anyone. It is cowardly, anonymous and rude. Plus it spams OGH.
If I disagree with you then I'll say so to your face.
I disagree with you. Boris is shaping up to be potentially the second best postwar PM and third most consequential.
I wasn't suggesting you would "off-topic".
We will have to agree to disagree about Johnson's legacy. I didn't like Mrs Thatcher, but I can understand why people did rate her so highly. As for Johnson, I cannot see past the Fred Scuttle, half-wittery.
Johnson's legacy it is too early to say but I think he has the potential to be up there with Attlee and Thatcher as one of the three most consequential PMs post war.
Blair had the potential too but threw it away.
Johnson's legacy will be the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland ceasing to exist.
It won't, the government has made clear 2014 was a once in a generation vote and it will refuse to allow indyref2 even if Sturgeon gets a Holyrood majority next year and Northern Ireland has been given special arrangements to protect the GFA and minimise checks on goods going to and from GB
Yawn, keep repeating your lies
They are not lies Malc but also they are not real politics
The time will come for indy 2 to be addressed, probably realistically in 2022 or 2023 and I have no issue with that
There will never be indyref2 allowed while we have a Tory majority government, it is not happening
Here we go again... Look Pal, this is the exact right way to ensure the end of the United Kingdom, even David Cameron understood that.
If you think that bleating that "its not fair", that "we are the government and we forbid this" will cut any ice at all then you do not understand either human nature or history,
So if you actually want to save the UK you profess to love I would button it and let the grown ups sort it out.
I wonder if BJ’s subconscious is now in charge of the flabby, corpse-white Golem? In its determination to cosplay Churchill, it must know that short of bombing up a Lanc and pounding the crap out of Essen, no deal is the best way of indulging its ‘we stood alone’ fantasies.
Sky saying the language has changed and joint statement is a good sign
It shows they think a deal is still possible, which is good.
The snag is, everyone has now bet the house on it (although arguably that was true three years ago). If a deal is not agreed, it will be complete chaos as there is no time to do anything to mitigate an abrupt change.
It is going to be pretty chaotic, deal or no deal.
I am not sure marching the ERG to the top of the no deal hill and back down again will play well to them.
Everyone with any common sense , please excuse the Daily Express and the cranky Tory right from that, knows there will be a Deal whether its today, tomorrow, next week, month or year. With respect all this is miniscule to what is happening in the States. There could be Civil War there soon, even States seceeding from the Union and the streets a battlefield. Trump, the Devil Incarnate has set it all up. With both issues we reap what we sow.
As the guy from RTE is saying, fish just comes down to numbers. The last I saw they wanted 80% of current for ten years, and we were offering something like 15% for three years. 50% for five years is an obvious potential settling point.
Then you're just left with what mechanism is used to ensure that if we try and undercut EU standards then our access to their markets is limited in some way. Given that the alternative is that our access is limited dramatically and immediately (and that at any stage in the future we could decide to move to the same arrangement) it is hard to see why this should be insoluable.
Sky saying the language has changed and joint statement is a good sign
It shows they think a deal is still possible, which is good.
The snag is, everyone has now bet the house on it (although arguably that was true three years ago). If a deal is not agreed, it will be complete chaos as there is no time to do anything to mitigate an abrupt change.
The 'avoid chaos' ship sailed some time ago if there is no deal. As Hennig said on BBC earlier, we are so far already into overtime that there is no time to do implementation and so continuing to talk makes no difference on that front. There wont be time to read the 1000 page document never mind implement it by January. A fudge on the cliff edge will be found if there is a Deal.
Yes. You can only avoid tariffs if you can prove your goods qualify for tariff-free trade. There isn't time for companies to prove their stuff qualifies. In principle they will have to pay tariffs on January 1.
Good news if this is all legitimate. A deal feels much closer now than it did a few days ago.
Must be odds on from here. Joint statement, no talk of major disagreements, no deadlines. It's going to happen - unless the ERG kicks up one hell of a stink.
I wonder if BJ’s subconscious is now in charge of the flabby, corpse-white Golem? In its determination to cosplay Churchill, it must know that short of bombing up a Lanc and pounding the crap out of Essen, no deal is the best way of indulging its ‘we stood alone’ fantasies.
The issue has moved on and we look to be standing on the verge of a deal
Everyone with any sense should welcome it and let us all move on
Sky saying the language has changed and joint statement is a good sign
It shows they think a deal is still possible, which is good.
The snag is, everyone has now bet the house on it (although arguably that was true three years ago). If a deal is not agreed, it will be complete chaos as there is no time to do anything to mitigate an abrupt change.
The 'avoid chaos' ship sailed some time ago if there is no deal. As Hennig said on BBC earlier, we are so far already into overtime that there is no time to do implementation and so continuing to talk makes no difference on that front. There wont be time to read the 1000 page document never mind implement it by January. A fudge on the cliff edge will be found if there is a Deal.
I think what would happen is the deal, should one be reached, would be brought in informally from the 1st as part of an amended transition. Then, it could be ratified later.
Knowing the EU, if it was not ratified that would also mean it could carry on indefinitely as a temporary arrangement under the WA.
Which in fact might suit us quite well, given it would mean we could leave at any time that suited us, and would almost certainly never choose to do so.
As the guy from RTE is saying, fish just comes down to numbers. The last I saw they wanted 80% of current for ten years, and we were offering something like 15% for three years. 50% for five years is an obvious potential settling point.
Then you're just left with what mechanism is used to ensure that if we try and undercut EU standards then our access to their markets is limited in some way. Given that the alternative is that our access is limited dramatically and immediately (and that at any stage in the future we could decide to move to the same arrangement) it is hard to see why this should be insoluable.
Personally I'm quite content with how Brexit is going. The EU are being scelerotic and unreasonable, so we have two choices: to give in to them or walk away. If I got a vote I would say walk away. We have al A lot of people are hyperventilating about the impact of a clean Brexit but I think it will be ultimately much ado about nothing, albeit with some disruption. People living in Kent may notice it more but they also voted for it more.
And if there's some disruption I think people can live with that so long as they think it's all a part of a plan.
That is not entirely true, East Kent voted heavily Leave, West Kent voted Leave at about the English average, Tunbridge Wells voted Remain
Yes. But aren’t we now at war with East Kent? Haven’t you seen the Gun Boats in the Channel?
We have always been at war with East Kent.
West Kent certainly has.
Kentish Man versus Man of Kent? And only the Medway between them.
Sky saying the language has changed and joint statement is a good sign
It shows they think a deal is still possible, which is good.
The snag is, everyone has now bet the house on it (although arguably that was true three years ago). If a deal is not agreed, it will be complete chaos as there is no time to do anything to mitigate an abrupt change.
The 'avoid chaos' ship sailed some time ago if there is no deal. As Hennig said on BBC earlier, we are so far already into overtime that there is no time to do implementation and so continuing to talk makes no difference on that front. There wont be time to read the 1000 page document never mind implement it by January. A fudge on the cliff edge will be found if there is a Deal.
I think what would happen is the deal, should one be reached, would be brought in informally from the 1st as part of an amended transition. Then, it could be ratified later.
Knowing the EU, if it was not ratified that would also mean it could carry on indefinitely as a temporary arrangement under the WA.
Which in fact might suit us quite well, given it would mean we could leave at any time that suited us, and would almost certainly never choose to do so.
If the EU have blinked then hopefully a deal can be agreed. So long as both parties are reasonable a deal should be agreeable. Just need EU to agree to copy and paste the Canada agreement LPF.
Unlikely they'll be doing that. I expect something substantially along the lines of where we are. Future divergence possible at the price of market access.
Good news if this is all legitimate. A deal feels much closer now than it did a few days ago.
Must be odds on from here. Joint statement, no talk of major disagreements, no deadlines. It's going to happen - unless the ERG kicks up one hell of a stink.
Hopefully, a decent deal (or at least, not totally useless deal) is agreed, the ERG go ape, Johnson passes it with Starmer and Blackford’s backing, and he is brutally defenestrated in the new year.
Win, win, win.
Apart from Graham Brady’s unfortunate postie, but with luck a lorry will be provided to avoid a hernia.
Personally I'm quite content with how Brexit is going. The EU are being scelerotic and unreasonable, so we have two choices: to give in to them or walk away. If I got a vote I would say walk away. We have al A lot of people are hyperventilating about the impact of a clean Brexit but I think it will be ultimately much ado about nothing, albeit with some disruption. People living in Kent may notice it more but they also voted for it more.
And if there's some disruption I think people can live with that so long as they think it's all a part of a plan.
That is not entirely true, East Kent voted heavily Leave, West Kent voted Leave at about the English average, Tunbridge Wells voted Remain
Yes. But aren’t we now at war with East Kent? Haven’t you seen the Gun Boats in the Channel?
We have always been at war with East Kent.
West Kent certainly has.
Kentish Man versus Man of Kent? And only the Medway between them.
Or Rainham Mark. Or the settlement areas of the Angles and Jutes. Who can say?
As the guy from RTE is saying, fish just comes down to numbers. The last I saw they wanted 80% of current for ten years, and we were offering something like 15% for three years. 50% for five years is an obvious potential settling point.
Then you're just left with what mechanism is used to ensure that if we try and undercut EU standards then our access to their markets is limited in some way. Given that the alternative is that our access is limited dramatically and immediately (and that at any stage in the future we could decide to move to the same arrangement) it is hard to see why this should be insoluable.
A phasing out of EU shares of fish to the eventual stable amounts would be best rather than a flat amount. Eg 80% for the EU next year, 60% year after, 40% then 20%
That way the French fishermen get most of what they want next year and can phase adjustment, the UK fishermen can spend time building up their capabilities and most of the transition would be completed before the next election.
Sky saying the language has changed and joint statement is a good sign
It shows they think a deal is still possible, which is good.
The snag is, everyone has now bet the house on it (although arguably that was true three years ago). If a deal is not agreed, it will be complete chaos as there is no time to do anything to mitigate an abrupt change.
The 'avoid chaos' ship sailed some time ago if there is no deal. As Hennig said on BBC earlier, we are so far already into overtime that there is no time to do implementation and so continuing to talk makes no difference on that front. There wont be time to read the 1000 page document never mind implement it by January. A fudge on the cliff edge will be found if there is a Deal.
I think what would happen is the deal, should one be reached, would be brought in informally from the 1st as part of an amended transition. Then, it could be ratified later.
Knowing the EU, if it was not ratified that would also mean it could carry on indefinitely as a temporary arrangement under the WA.
Which in fact might suit us quite well, given it would mean we could leave at any time that suited us, and would almost certainly never choose to do so.
If the EU have blinked then hopefully a deal can be agreed. So long as both parties are reasonable a deal should be agreeable. Just need EU to agree to copy and paste the Canada agreement LPF.
Unlikely they'll be doing that. I expect something substantially along the lines of where we are. Future divergence possible at the price of market access.
Yep - there is no getting away from the central dynamic.
Personally I'm quite content with how Brexit is going. The EU are being scelerotic and unreasonable, so we have two choices: to give in to them or walk away. If I got a vote I would say walk away. We have al A lot of people are hyperventilating about the impact of a clean Brexit but I think it will be ultimately much ado about nothing, albeit with some disruption. People living in Kent may notice it more but they also voted for it more.
And if there's some disruption I think people can live with that so long as they think it's all a part of a plan.
That is not entirely true, East Kent voted heavily Leave, West Kent voted Leave at about the English average, Tunbridge Wells voted Remain
Yes. But aren’t we now at war with East Kent? Haven’t you seen the Gun Boats in the Channel?
We have always been at war with East Kent.
Canterbury, the Parliamentary constituency as opposed to the local authority (which is essentially the constituency plus f***ing Herne Bay) voted Remain - thus Rosie Duffield from 2017. Herne Bay has a lot to answer for. Nuke it from space I say.
I have never gone that far
'Herne Bay has a lot to answer for. Nuke it from space I say.'
If the EU have blinked then hopefully a deal can be agreed. So long as both parties are reasonable a deal should be agreeable. Just need EU to agree to copy and paste the Canada agreement LPF.
Unlikely they'll be doing that. I expect something substantially along the lines of where we are. Future divergence possible at the price of market access.
Comments
Plus given the EU did nothing when Madrid blocked a Catalan independence vote it would look hypocritical anyway
You also said that we don't follow "...ze rules..." like the Germans, reinforcing a national sterotype in a decidedly non-banter way.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-54827100
The EU doesn't want to grant free and frictionless access to its markets without reassurance that it won't be undercut on standards. You can argue the economic rights and wrongs, but it's not an unreasonable position.
If you think that bleating that "its not fair", that "we are the government and we forbid this" will cut any ice at all then you do not understand either human nature or history,
So if you actually want to save the UK you profess to love I would button it and let the grown ups sort it out.
True enough, but if the EU had bent over backwards to accommodate the Brexiteers then the Brexiteers would still be unhappy. Given the antics of Farage and his supporters over the years I think the EU has figured out that there is no mileage in being overly helpful.
I reckon that means No Deal. If still talking no need for full cabinet discussion at this stage on Sunday???
In terms of Brexit, you can run that argument both ways for your own ends, the states are both sovereign and not, its Schrodigers Cat (a lot stems from both sides not appreciating how complex a concept it is) but optically the EU flag thing indicates federalism. The EU is usually called a "sui generis" organisation but it's not all that sui generis based on the Lisbon Treaty which does, as you say, pool soverignty a la the US. If we were to be critical that is something our side never faced up to.
Given the attitude of Spain with Catalonia or China in suspending pro democracy Hong Kong legislators the Tory government is being mild in comparison
Turned out it was actually a bit of a steel...
Alastair uses the term for its betting connotation. But in context you can also see it as the device that the EU wants to apply to the UK (the ratchet) to keep it under control.
I'm also wondering why his BBC bio says he was born in Singapore.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/profiles/39rJR77Vcd9mBf1cTfdcb7v/james-wong
Moreover, if we don't like such a deal, we can give notice and return to WTO terms.
At least she didn’t say ‘kilometre’ or the Faragists would really have lost their shit.
https://twitter.com/nickeardleybbc/status/1338087804299931649?s=20
It really looks as if a deal is very much in the pipeline
The snag is, everyone has now bet the house on it (although arguably that was true three years ago). If a deal is not agreed, it will be complete chaos as there is no time to do anything to mitigate an abrupt change.
Edit - truthfully, although I despise Johnson I fully understand why he feels he cannot sign up to the terms on offer, and it is both unreasonable and foolish of the EU to not accept an independent arbitration panel (a principle they conceded in May’s deal, after all) and try to keep it in the hands of a much criticised court that nobody trusts and is under their direct control.
With the important proviso that time is running out.
I am not sure marching the ERG to the top of the no deal hill and back down again will play well to them.
With respect all this is miniscule to what is happening in the States. There could be Civil War there soon, even States seceeding from the Union and the streets a battlefield. Trump, the Devil Incarnate has set it all up.
With both issues we reap what we sow.
Then you're just left with what mechanism is used to ensure that if we try and undercut EU standards then our access to their markets is limited in some way. Given that the alternative is that our access is limited dramatically and immediately (and that at any stage in the future we could decide to move to the same arrangement) it is hard to see why this should be insoluable.
Everyone with any sense should welcome it and let us all move on
Knowing the EU, if it was not ratified that would also mean it could carry on indefinitely as a temporary arrangement under the WA.
Which in fact might suit us quite well, given it would mean we could leave at any time that suited us, and would almost certainly never choose to do so.
Good.
Time for grown ups to compromise then. Takes two to tango.
Win, win, win.
Apart from Graham Brady’s unfortunate postie, but with luck a lorry will be provided to avoid a hernia.
That way the French fishermen get most of what they want next year and can phase adjustment, the UK fishermen can spend time building up their capabilities and most of the transition would be completed before the next election.
'Herne Bay has a lot to answer for. Nuke it from space I say.'