Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Punters think the deal will be done by the deadline – politicalbetting.com

1246

Comments

  • Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    Starry said:

    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    Utter rubbish.

    Less than 1% of Scots work with seed potatoes and the government is still pushing for their inclusion anyway.

    The Deal will be disastrous news for Sturgeon who was praying for No Deal to push for independence.

    There is now the prospect the SNP will not even get a majority next year and when Boris refuses indyref2 the SNP will descend into civil war
    Here was me thinking NoDeal was going to be the final nail in the Independence coffin what with the prospect of Razor Wire and Machine Gun posts from Berwick to Gretna.

    Now a deal is the final nail.

    Interesting. That's a lot of different nails.
    At least they're changed so often that there's not the slightest chance of any of them getting rusty
    There's only one nail that mattered to this former No voter: what was the role of the Scottish Government in the Brexit negotiations? No voice = no union worth defending
    Retruning to the seed potatoes, remember that

    (a) this messup hits the Nirish farmers even more - as they have been loudly saying for weeks/months and as was pointed out on PB a month or two back (no seed potatoes = empty fields which were supposed to grow spuds)
    (b) both the Scottish and Nirish farmers tend to be, erm, not the least supporters of the Union
    (c) who's representing the Nirish farmers in the negotiations at present? Clue: not the French
    (d) the sainted Mrs T woulkd have been shocked to see the party of business so carelessly wrecking a valuable trade, buit then it's now the "**** business" party
    (e) for HYUFD - the seed potatoes are needed to grow potatoes. I know it's a difficult concept, but it does affect the farming industry quite a lot.
    Less than 1% of Scots work in seed potatoes, it shows the utter desperation of Nationalists that they can only find this issue to whinge about and even then the UK government is still pressing for its inclusion too.

    Today is a disastrous day for Sturgeon and a triumphant day for Boris
    Just under 5K people work in commercial fishing in Scotland. I make that about 2.1% of the working population. Bassically, you are dismissing something of comparable size to fishing as a completely avoidable effect opf Brexit.

    And it's been known about for months, so why hasn't it been sorted??
    Yes and those fishermen are getting more of their own catch they would never have got from the SNP.

    Seed potato producers meanwhile export more to Egypt than the EU, sheer desperation from Nationalists like you
    But those figures don't include NI do they?? They will be for previous years.

    YOu aree delighted to wreck a significant part of the Scottish seed potato trade for no good reason. And Nirish farming. Or maybe the Nirish don'ty count either.
    Are they English Anglican Tory voters? No?

    Fuck them then.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,190
    stjohn said:

    stjohn said:

    Why wouldn't Labour MPs support the deal?

    From a Remainer point of view? Remain is not an option. It's either this Deal or No Deal.

    From a Brexiteer point of view? There are Labour MPs who want to Brexit with No Deal? Who are they are? And how does No Deal help their constituents?

    Because it appears to be a poor deal (unless one believes Guido).

    Abstention allows the deal to go through without confirmation.

    In twelve months time,

    Starmer: "The trade deal has proven to be a failure, all the car manufacturers have moved to mainland Europe"

    Johnson: " Well it's your fault, you supported the deal".
    Grievously mistaken thinking.
    So I am clearly not as over Brexit as I thought.

    However my assertion, is how Johnson rolls, " you supported it, you must have agreed it was a good idea at the time".
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,270
    edited December 2020
    Carnyx said:

    Mr. Carnyx, because one involves the absence of a land border and the other the imposition of one? Also, Northern Ireland and Scotland do have ever so slightly different political histories and present circumstances.

    As an aside, the border down the Irish Sea is ****ing stupid. That was one thing May got right.

    Undoubtedly different histories. Nevertheless, historical contingencies, and the demonstrated possibility of such a dual situation, are different things.
    Scotland has no border with another EU nation unlike NI and Scotland voted to stay in the UK in the once in a generation 2014 referendum.

    Scotland therefore has no greater right to special arrangements than Remain voting London, Winchester, Bath, St Albans, Esher and Walton, Guildford, Tunbridge Wells, Brighton, Cardiff, Oxford and Cambridge etc have
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,344
    M. TD, does TSE's post have to be reposted as quite such a large picture?
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 28,795
    edited December 2020

    So what does David Cameron feel now

    Like he has found a special sexy time friend




  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,639
    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    Mr. Carnyx, because one involves the absence of a land border and the other the imposition of one? Also, Northern Ireland and Scotland do have ever so slightly different political histories and present circumstances.

    As an aside, the border down the Irish Sea is ****ing stupid. That was one thing May got right.

    Undoubtedly different histories. Nevertheless, historical contingencies, and the demonstrated possibility of such a dual situation, are different things.
    Scotland has no border with another EU nation and Scotland voted to stay in the UK in the once in a generation 2014 referendum.

    Scotland has no greater right to special arrangements than Remain voting London, Winchester, Bath, St Albans, Esher and Walton, Guildford, Tunbridge Wells, Cardiff, Oxford and Cambridge etc have
    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    Mr. Carnyx, because one involves the absence of a land border and the other the imposition of one? Also, Northern Ireland and Scotland do have ever so slightly different political histories and present circumstances.

    As an aside, the border down the Irish Sea is ****ing stupid. That was one thing May got right.

    Undoubtedly different histories. Nevertheless, historical contingencies, and the demonstrated possibility of such a dual situation, are different things.
    Scotland has no border with another EU nation and Scotland voted to stay in the UK in the once in a generation 2014 referendum.

    Scotland has no greater right to special arrangements than Remain voting London, Winchester, Bath, St Albans, Esher and Walton, Guildford, Tunbridge Wells, Cardiff, Oxford and Cambridge etc have
    Scotland has lots of borders - with Ireland, Scandinavia, Netherlands, etc. etc. as shown by ferry and air routes.

    Or are people and trade only allowerd to move on land?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,871

    stjohn said:

    Why wouldn't Labour MPs support the deal?

    From a Remainer point of view? Remain is not an option. It's either this Deal or No Deal.

    From a Brexiteer point of view? There are Labour MPs who want to Brexit with No Deal? Who are they are? And how does No Deal help their constituents?

    Because it appears to be a poor deal (unless one believes Guido).

    Abstention allows the deal to go through without confirmation.

    In twelve months time,

    Starmer: "The trade deal has proven to be a failure, all the car manufacturers have moved to mainland Europe"

    Johnson: " Well it's your fault, you supported the deal".
    You're absolutely delusional if you think a deal will ever be Starmers fault. This is Boris's deal.
    Yes, but voting for it means Boris can seek to muddy the waters and has a convenient if bullcrap rejoinder to use.
  • stjohn said:

    Why wouldn't Labour MPs support the deal?

    From a Remainer point of view? Remain is not an option. It's either this Deal or No Deal.

    From a Brexiteer point of view? There are Labour MPs who want to Brexit with No Deal? Who are they are? And how does No Deal help their constituents?

    Because it appears to be a poor deal (unless one believes Guido).

    Abstention allows the deal to go through without confirmation.

    In twelve months time,

    Starmer: "The trade deal has proven to be a failure, all the car manufacturers have moved to mainland Europe"

    Johnson: " Well it's your fault, you supported the deal".

    The question would not be framed around a deal. It would be: "You promised car workers in the UK a bright future with more opportunities, there is now no car industry in the UK. Why have you let them down and what are you going to do now to mitigate the disaster for them and their communities of those jobs going?" No need to mention the deal at all.

    And that's the point. This government has made a series of very explicit promises. It must to be held to account on their delivery
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688
    Nigel Farage's fury is a joy to behold.

    One of his 'arguments', for HYUFD's benefit, is that this is being announced on Christmas Eve so that no newspapers will cover what a sell-out it is tomorrow.

    We have to move on now but the thought that the diehard Brexiteer nutjobs are pissed off is a particular satisfaction.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,344
    edited December 2020

    stjohn said:

    Why wouldn't Labour MPs support the deal?

    From a Remainer point of view? Remain is not an option. It's either this Deal or No Deal.

    From a Brexiteer point of view? There are Labour MPs who want to Brexit with No Deal? Who are they are? And how does No Deal help their constituents?

    Because it appears to be a poor deal (unless one believes Guido).

    Abstention allows the deal to go through without confirmation.

    In twelve months time,

    Starmer: "The trade deal has proven to be a failure, all the car manufacturers have moved to mainland Europe"

    Johnson: " Well it's your fault, you supported the deal".
    You're absolutely delusional if you think a deal will ever be Starmers fault. This is Boris's deal.
    There is a trap though for Labour. The Brexit deal - once we get through the hubris to the detail - won't be the magic bullet it was sold as. The realities of a shit ton of red tape and increased costs and delays and lack of freedoms will impact onto people already sick of a lack of freedom and increased cost of living.

    Let me give you an example. We appear to have dodged the (self-threatened) tariff on cars and car parts. So all we suffer now are the costs of reams of paperwork and lengthy transit through formerly open borders. If - as suggested by their COO - that is enough for Nissan to pull the plug then the workforce in the North East aren't going to just blame Boris. They will blame Labour for not protecting them from it.

    This is Keith's conundrum. People need to be protected from something that they have falsely been promised will benefit them. If he protects them they will be outraged now. If he doesn't protect them they will be outraged later.
    But 2023/4 and the election & preparatory campaign will, surely, be later.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,357

    So what does David Cameron feel now ?

    Does he wonder what would have happened if he had actually negotiated with the EU instead of thinking it was 'too much of a faff' ?

    He should feel ashamed.
    Deep, deep, lifelong embarrassment I should think.

    The EU just never believed he would walk away. Failure of Negotiating 1.01
  • kle4 said:

    It could even be true, though not all wins and losses are equal in significance so it likely doesn't matter overmuch if it is in the right ballpark even, as much as what they were, and no one will agree on that.
    Well indeed it will be a compromise.

    Like all good compromises we will move more on stuff that matters least for us and most for them - and vice versa.

    So far it seems no "red lines" have been breached (though inevitably I'm sure some will nitpick and claim something for point scoring) so the deal is as you would expect it to be in the ZOPA.

    A good deal is in the best interests of all parties.
  • StarryStarry Posts: 110
    HYUFD said:

    Starry said:

    Mr. Starry, you're a former No voter who thinks the SNP should've had an influence on the negotiations?

    Foreign policy isn't and cannot be devolved.

    Doesn't matter the Party in charge. If a country's government is completely excluded and it's voice unheard, despite an overwhelming vote from its electorate, then the political union cannot stand.
    Scotland's sovereign government is Westminster and has been since 1707 as confirmed in the once in a generation 2014 vote.

    Holyrood correctly is purely for domestic matters within Scotland
    If you remember, the SNP manifesto said a once in a generation vote unless there is a material change in circumstances, which explicitly states Scotland being taken out of the EU against the wishes of her people. The people then elected the SNP both to the Scottish and UK Parliament on this manifesto. Denying the stated will of the people will not subdue the desire for independence, but only increase the demand.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,639
    edited December 2020

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    Starry said:

    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    Utter rubbish.

    Less than 1% of Scots work with seed potatoes and the government is still pushing for their inclusion anyway.

    The Deal will be disastrous news for Sturgeon who was praying for No Deal to push for independence.

    There is now the prospect the SNP will not even get a majority next year and when Boris refuses indyref2 the SNP will descend into civil war
    Here was me thinking NoDeal was going to be the final nail in the Independence coffin what with the prospect of Razor Wire and Machine Gun posts from Berwick to Gretna.

    Now a deal is the final nail.

    Interesting. That's a lot of different nails.
    At least they're changed so often that there's not the slightest chance of any of them getting rusty
    There's only one nail that mattered to this former No voter: what was the role of the Scottish Government in the Brexit negotiations? No voice = no union worth defending
    Retruning to the seed potatoes, remember that

    (a) this messup hits the Nirish farmers even more - as they have been loudly saying for weeks/months and as was pointed out on PB a month or two back (no seed potatoes = empty fields which were supposed to grow spuds)
    (b) both the Scottish and Nirish farmers tend to be, erm, not the least supporters of the Union
    (c) who's representing the Nirish farmers in the negotiations at present? Clue: not the French
    (d) the sainted Mrs T woulkd have been shocked to see the party of business so carelessly wrecking a valuable trade, buit then it's now the "**** business" party
    (e) for HYUFD - the seed potatoes are needed to grow potatoes. I know it's a difficult concept, but it does affect the farming industry quite a lot.
    Less than 1% of Scots work in seed potatoes, it shows the utter desperation of Nationalists that they can only find this issue to whinge about and even then the UK government is still pressing for its inclusion too.

    Today is a disastrous day for Sturgeon and a triumphant day for Boris
    Just under 5K people work in commercial fishing in Scotland. I make that about 2.1% of the working population. Bassically, you are dismissing something of comparable size to fishing as a completely avoidable effect opf Brexit.

    And it's been known about for months, so why hasn't it been sorted??
    Yes and those fishermen are getting more of their own catch they would never have got from the SNP.

    Seed potato producers meanwhile export more to Egypt than the EU, sheer desperation from Nationalists like you
    But those figures don't include NI do they?? They will be for previous years.

    YOu aree delighted to wreck a significant part of the Scottish seed potato trade for no good reason. And Nirish farming. Or maybe the Nirish don'ty count either.
    Are they English Anglican Tory voters? No?

    Fuck them then.
    Quite. Though in this case they are [edit] likely to be Scottish or Irish pro-Union voters. Which is why this is such an odd argument in the first place given the obsessive emphasis placed on a few fishermen.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,528
    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    Starry said:

    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    Utter rubbish.

    Less than 1% of Scots work with seed potatoes and the government is still pushing for their inclusion anyway.

    The Deal will be disastrous news for Sturgeon who was praying for No Deal to push for independence.

    There is now the prospect the SNP will not even get a majority next year and when Boris refuses indyref2 the SNP will descend into civil war
    Here was me thinking NoDeal was going to be the final nail in the Independence coffin what with the prospect of Razor Wire and Machine Gun posts from Berwick to Gretna.

    Now a deal is the final nail.

    Interesting. That's a lot of different nails.
    At least they're changed so often that there's not the slightest chance of any of them getting rusty
    There's only one nail that mattered to this former No voter: what was the role of the Scottish Government in the Brexit negotiations? No voice = no union worth defending
    Retruning to the seed potatoes, remember that

    (a) this messup hits the Nirish farmers even more - as they have been loudly saying for weeks/months and as was pointed out on PB a month or two back (no seed potatoes = empty fields which were supposed to grow spuds)
    (b) both the Scottish and Nirish farmers tend to be, erm, not the least supporters of the Union
    (c) who's representing the Nirish farmers in the negotiations at present? Clue: not the French
    (d) the sainted Mrs T woulkd have been shocked to see the party of business so carelessly wrecking a valuable trade, buit then it's now the "**** business" party
    (e) for HYUFD - the seed potatoes are needed to grow potatoes. I know it's a difficult concept, but it does affect the farming industry quite a lot.
    Less than 1% of Scots work in seed potatoes, it shows the utter desperation of Nationalists that they can only find this issue to whinge about and even then the UK government is still pressing for its inclusion too.

    Today is a disastrous day for Sturgeon and a triumphant day for Boris
    Just under 5K people work in commercial fishing in Scotland. I make that about 2.1% of the working population. Bassically, you are dismissing something of comparable size to fishing as a completely avoidable effect opf Brexit.

    And it's been known about for months, so why hasn't it been sorted??
    Hold on let's get something straight, there's market value and there's export value and then there's the portion of those exports that currently go to the EU. The whole market isn't going to disappear because a small portion of the exports are less viable.

    The whole market doesn't suddenly disappear even though that might be politically convenient for some people.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,270
    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    Mr. Carnyx, because one involves the absence of a land border and the other the imposition of one? Also, Northern Ireland and Scotland do have ever so slightly different political histories and present circumstances.

    As an aside, the border down the Irish Sea is ****ing stupid. That was one thing May got right.

    Undoubtedly different histories. Nevertheless, historical contingencies, and the demonstrated possibility of such a dual situation, are different things.
    Scotland has no border with another EU nation and Scotland voted to stay in the UK in the once in a generation 2014 referendum.

    Scotland has no greater right to special arrangements than Remain voting London, Winchester, Bath, St Albans, Esher and Walton, Guildford, Tunbridge Wells, Cardiff, Oxford and Cambridge etc have
    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    Mr. Carnyx, because one involves the absence of a land border and the other the imposition of one? Also, Northern Ireland and Scotland do have ever so slightly different political histories and present circumstances.

    As an aside, the border down the Irish Sea is ****ing stupid. That was one thing May got right.

    Undoubtedly different histories. Nevertheless, historical contingencies, and the demonstrated possibility of such a dual situation, are different things.
    Scotland has no border with another EU nation and Scotland voted to stay in the UK in the once in a generation 2014 referendum.

    Scotland has no greater right to special arrangements than Remain voting London, Winchester, Bath, St Albans, Esher and Walton, Guildford, Tunbridge Wells, Cardiff, Oxford and Cambridge etc have
    Scotland has lots of borders - with Ireland, Scandinavia, Netherlands, etc. etc. as shown by ferry and air routes.

    Or are people and trade only allowerd to move on land?
    You can fly from Remain voting London and Newcastle to the continent, that does not mean they have a land border with the EU.

    Scotland will be treated exactly the same as the rest of GB as Scots confirmed they were happy with when they voted 55% to stay in the UK in the once in a generation 2014 vote
  • Carnyx said:

    Starry said:

    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    Utter rubbish.

    Less than 1% of Scots work with seed potatoes and the government is still pushing for their inclusion anyway.

    The Deal will be disastrous news for Sturgeon who was praying for No Deal to push for independence.

    There is now the prospect the SNP will not even get a majority next year and when Boris refuses indyref2 the SNP will descend into civil war
    Here was me thinking NoDeal was going to be the final nail in the Independence coffin what with the prospect of Razor Wire and Machine Gun posts from Berwick to Gretna.

    Now a deal is the final nail.

    Interesting. That's a lot of different nails.
    At least they're changed so often that there's not the slightest chance of any of them getting rusty
    There's only one nail that mattered to this former No voter: what was the role of the Scottish Government in the Brexit negotiations? No voice = no union worth defending
    Retruning to the seed potatoes, remember that

    (a) this messup hits the Nirish farmers even more - as they have been loudly saying for weeks/months and as was pointed out on PB a month or two back (no seed potatoes = empty fields which were supposed to grow spuds)
    (b) both the Scottish and Nirish farmers tend to be, erm, not the least supporters of the Union
    (c) who's representing the Nirish farmers in the negotiations at present? Clue: not the French
    (d) the sainted Mrs T woulkd have been shocked to see the party of business so carelessly wrecking a valuable trade, buit then it's now the "**** business" party
    (e) for HYUFD - the seed potatoes are needed to grow potatoes. I know it's a difficult concept, but it does affect the farming industry quite a lot.
    It looks like more SNP grievance politics to be honest.
    I'm shocked I tell you!

    Shocked!

    How are the Scottish government ever going to find £13 million from the £330 million they've kept back from Scottish business COVID relief for "Brexit issues"?
  • kle4 said:

    It could even be true, though not all wins and losses are equal in significance so it likely doesn't matter overmuch if it is in the right ballpark even, as much as what they were, and no one will agree on that.

    Yep - we get more haddock, cod and mackerel, the EU gets Northern Ireland and Gibraltar. We win 3-2!

  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,639
    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    Mr. Carnyx, because one involves the absence of a land border and the other the imposition of one? Also, Northern Ireland and Scotland do have ever so slightly different political histories and present circumstances.

    As an aside, the border down the Irish Sea is ****ing stupid. That was one thing May got right.

    Undoubtedly different histories. Nevertheless, historical contingencies, and the demonstrated possibility of such a dual situation, are different things.
    Scotland has no border with another EU nation and Scotland voted to stay in the UK in the once in a generation 2014 referendum.

    Scotland has no greater right to special arrangements than Remain voting London, Winchester, Bath, St Albans, Esher and Walton, Guildford, Tunbridge Wells, Cardiff, Oxford and Cambridge etc have
    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    Mr. Carnyx, because one involves the absence of a land border and the other the imposition of one? Also, Northern Ireland and Scotland do have ever so slightly different political histories and present circumstances.

    As an aside, the border down the Irish Sea is ****ing stupid. That was one thing May got right.

    Undoubtedly different histories. Nevertheless, historical contingencies, and the demonstrated possibility of such a dual situation, are different things.
    Scotland has no border with another EU nation and Scotland voted to stay in the UK in the once in a generation 2014 referendum.

    Scotland has no greater right to special arrangements than Remain voting London, Winchester, Bath, St Albans, Esher and Walton, Guildford, Tunbridge Wells, Cardiff, Oxford and Cambridge etc have
    Scotland has lots of borders - with Ireland, Scandinavia, Netherlands, etc. etc. as shown by ferry and air routes.

    Or are people and trade only allowerd to move on land?
    You can fly from Remain voting London and Newcastle to the continent, that does not mean they have a land border with the EU.

    Scotland will be treated exactly the same as the rest of GB as Scots confirmed they were happy with when they voted 55% to stay in the UK in the once in a generation 2014 vote
    You said "border."

    You didn't say "land border".
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,871
    I think kinabalu in particular has kept a cool head on likely outcomes. Accidental no deal I do think was possible, but time and again people allowed hatred of Boris to mean he wanted no deal, when it looks like he really didn't. The difficulties in agreeing come down to competence and calculation.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,270
    edited December 2020
    Starry said:

    HYUFD said:

    Starry said:

    Mr. Starry, you're a former No voter who thinks the SNP should've had an influence on the negotiations?

    Foreign policy isn't and cannot be devolved.

    Doesn't matter the Party in charge. If a country's government is completely excluded and it's voice unheard, despite an overwhelming vote from its electorate, then the political union cannot stand.
    Scotland's sovereign government is Westminster and has been since 1707 as confirmed in the once in a generation 2014 vote.

    Holyrood correctly is purely for domestic matters within Scotland
    If you remember, the SNP manifesto said a once in a generation vote unless there is a material change in circumstances, which explicitly states Scotland being taken out of the EU against the wishes of her people. The people then elected the SNP both to the Scottish and UK Parliament on this manifesto. Denying the stated will of the people will not subdue the desire for independence, but only increase the demand.
    You are clearly a diehard Remainer for whom the only validity in the Union is within the EU.

    Tough, even last year after the Brexit vote 55% of Scots still did not vote SNP. 2014 was a once in a generation referendum, end of conversation.

    If it rained tomorrow the SNP would say that was a mandate for independence, I could not care less what the SNP think or their latest whinge
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,639
    MaxPB said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    Starry said:

    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    Utter rubbish.

    Less than 1% of Scots work with seed potatoes and the government is still pushing for their inclusion anyway.

    The Deal will be disastrous news for Sturgeon who was praying for No Deal to push for independence.

    There is now the prospect the SNP will not even get a majority next year and when Boris refuses indyref2 the SNP will descend into civil war
    Here was me thinking NoDeal was going to be the final nail in the Independence coffin what with the prospect of Razor Wire and Machine Gun posts from Berwick to Gretna.

    Now a deal is the final nail.

    Interesting. That's a lot of different nails.
    At least they're changed so often that there's not the slightest chance of any of them getting rusty
    There's only one nail that mattered to this former No voter: what was the role of the Scottish Government in the Brexit negotiations? No voice = no union worth defending
    Retruning to the seed potatoes, remember that

    (a) this messup hits the Nirish farmers even more - as they have been loudly saying for weeks/months and as was pointed out on PB a month or two back (no seed potatoes = empty fields which were supposed to grow spuds)
    (b) both the Scottish and Nirish farmers tend to be, erm, not the least supporters of the Union
    (c) who's representing the Nirish farmers in the negotiations at present? Clue: not the French
    (d) the sainted Mrs T woulkd have been shocked to see the party of business so carelessly wrecking a valuable trade, buit then it's now the "**** business" party
    (e) for HYUFD - the seed potatoes are needed to grow potatoes. I know it's a difficult concept, but it does affect the farming industry quite a lot.
    Less than 1% of Scots work in seed potatoes, it shows the utter desperation of Nationalists that they can only find this issue to whinge about and even then the UK government is still pressing for its inclusion too.

    Today is a disastrous day for Sturgeon and a triumphant day for Boris
    Just under 5K people work in commercial fishing in Scotland. I make that about 2.1% of the working population. Bassically, you are dismissing something of comparable size to fishing as a completely avoidable effect opf Brexit.

    And it's been known about for months, so why hasn't it been sorted??
    Hold on let's get something straight, there's market value and there's export value and then there's the portion of those exports that currently go to the EU. The whole market isn't going to disappear because a small portion of the exports are less viable.

    The whole market doesn't suddenly disappear even though that might be politically convenient for some people.
    Of course not. But it will damage the trade. Prices for all farmers; some will be hit as they have specialoised in the NI trade; and so on.

    And 'currently go to the EU" needs to be increased anyway because NI is now in the EU for practical purposes.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 22,703

    I'm sure this can be sorted down the road if it is such a major problem.
    As if they will care a jot, it is Scotland so of no importance. Four and a half years and that is bit they miss, very appropriate.
    The statistic is fake.

    According to the Scottish Govt Scotland has 13.5% of EU Market, not 80% of world market.

    https://www.gov.scot/news/threat-to-seed-potato-exports/

    And EU imports are only 20% of Scottish exports. Egypt alone takes more.

    And since the Netherlands do about 2 million tonnes a year, I think the "world leading" is a bit of a stretch, too.
  • FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 4,597
    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    Starry said:

    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    Utter rubbish.

    Less than 1% of Scots work with seed potatoes and the government is still pushing for their inclusion anyway.

    The Deal will be disastrous news for Sturgeon who was praying for No Deal to push for independence.

    There is now the prospect the SNP will not even get a majority next year and when Boris refuses indyref2 the SNP will descend into civil war
    Here was me thinking NoDeal was going to be the final nail in the Independence coffin what with the prospect of Razor Wire and Machine Gun posts from Berwick to Gretna.

    Now a deal is the final nail.

    Interesting. That's a lot of different nails.
    At least they're changed so often that there's not the slightest chance of any of them getting rusty
    There's only one nail that mattered to this former No voter: what was the role of the Scottish Government in the Brexit negotiations? No voice = no union worth defending
    Retruning to the seed potatoes, remember that

    (a) this messup hits the Nirish farmers even more - as they have been loudly saying for weeks/months and as was pointed out on PB a month or two back (no seed potatoes = empty fields which were supposed to grow spuds)
    (b) both the Scottish and Nirish farmers tend to be, erm, not the least supporters of the Union
    (c) who's representing the Nirish farmers in the negotiations at present? Clue: not the French
    (d) the sainted Mrs T woulkd have been shocked to see the party of business so carelessly wrecking a valuable trade, buit then it's now the "**** business" party
    (e) for HYUFD - the seed potatoes are needed to grow potatoes. I know it's a difficult concept, but it does affect the farming industry quite a lot.
    The EU is not a big market for seed potatoes. Twice as many are sold to Egypt as the entire EU.

    There is actually a local industry in NI anyway. Perhaps it could expand to fill any gaps in the market?

    The arrangement may be a bit daft but the noise is totally out of proportion. It looks like more SNP grievance politics to be honest.
    The EU figures won't inclide the Nirish ones.

    And if I were a potato farmer I would not be happy. I've worked on potato farms and seen specialist seed potato farms and it does have a personal emotional impact.
    I agree it isn't ideal but it probably won't have a huge effect on the industry.

    I'm not sure what the EU is thinking though. It looks every bit like a deliberate attempt to give Scotland and Ireland something to complain about.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,851

    So what does David Cameron feel now

    Like he has found a special sexy time friend




    Do Tinder do those now?
  • So what does David Cameron feel now ?

    Does he wonder what would have happened if he had actually negotiated with the EU instead of thinking it was 'too much of a faff' ?

    He should feel ashamed.
    Deep, deep, lifelong embarrassment I should think.

    The EU just never believed he would walk away. Failure of Negotiating 1.01
    And then May, Hammond and Robbins repeated that mistake.

    Some here may belittle Boris as a clown but cometh the hour, cometh the man and he was exactly the kind of unpredictable leader that was needed.
  • stjohn said:

    Why wouldn't Labour MPs support the deal?

    From a Remainer point of view? Remain is not an option. It's either this Deal or No Deal.

    From a Brexiteer point of view? There are Labour MPs who want to Brexit with No Deal? Who are they are? And how does No Deal help their constituents?

    Because it appears to be a poor deal (unless one believes Guido).

    Abstention allows the deal to go through without confirmation.

    In twelve months time,

    Starmer: "The trade deal has proven to be a failure, all the car manufacturers have moved to mainland Europe"

    Johnson: " Well it's your fault, you supported the deal".
    You're absolutely delusional if you think a deal will ever be Starmers fault. This is Boris's deal.
    There is a trap though for Labour. The Brexit deal - once we get through the hubris to the detail - won't be the magic bullet it was sold as. The realities of a shit ton of red tape and increased costs and delays and lack of freedoms will impact onto people already sick of a lack of freedom and increased cost of living.

    Let me give you an example. We appear to have dodged the (self-threatened) tariff on cars and car parts. So all we suffer now are the costs of reams of paperwork and lengthy transit through formerly open borders. If - as suggested by their COO - that is enough for Nissan to pull the plug then the workforce in the North East aren't going to just blame Boris. They will blame Labour for not protecting them from it.

    This is Keith's conundrum. People need to be protected from something that they have falsely been promised will benefit them. If he protects them they will be outraged now. If he doesn't protect them they will be outraged later.

    No-one ever blamed the Tories for the Iraq War.

  • stjohn said:

    Why wouldn't Labour MPs support the deal?

    From a Remainer point of view? Remain is not an option. It's either this Deal or No Deal.

    From a Brexiteer point of view? There are Labour MPs who want to Brexit with No Deal? Who are they are? And how does No Deal help their constituents?

    Because it appears to be a poor deal (unless one believes Guido).

    Abstention allows the deal to go through without confirmation.

    In twelve months time,

    Starmer: "The trade deal has proven to be a failure, all the car manufacturers have moved to mainland Europe"

    Johnson: " Well it's your fault, you supported the deal".
    You're absolutely delusional if you think a deal will ever be Starmers fault. This is Boris's deal.
    There is a trap though for Labour. The Brexit deal - once we get through the hubris to the detail - won't be the magic bullet it was sold as. The realities of a shit ton of red tape and increased costs and delays and lack of freedoms will impact onto people already sick of a lack of freedom and increased cost of living.

    Let me give you an example. We appear to have dodged the (self-threatened) tariff on cars and car parts. So all we suffer now are the costs of reams of paperwork and lengthy transit through formerly open borders. If - as suggested by their COO - that is enough for Nissan to pull the plug then the workforce in the North East aren't going to just blame Boris. They will blame Labour for not protecting them from it.

    This is Keith's conundrum. People need to be protected from something that they have falsely been promised will benefit them. If he protects them they will be outraged now. If he doesn't protect them they will be outraged later.
    But 2023/4 and the election & preparatory campaign will, surely, be later.
    Once they take the decision to pull the plug it takes 18-24 months like Honda. So late 22 early 23 if Nissan pull the plug in the new year. Not that far before the election is it.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,639

    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    Starry said:

    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    Utter rubbish.

    Less than 1% of Scots work with seed potatoes and the government is still pushing for their inclusion anyway.

    The Deal will be disastrous news for Sturgeon who was praying for No Deal to push for independence.

    There is now the prospect the SNP will not even get a majority next year and when Boris refuses indyref2 the SNP will descend into civil war
    Here was me thinking NoDeal was going to be the final nail in the Independence coffin what with the prospect of Razor Wire and Machine Gun posts from Berwick to Gretna.

    Now a deal is the final nail.

    Interesting. That's a lot of different nails.
    At least they're changed so often that there's not the slightest chance of any of them getting rusty
    There's only one nail that mattered to this former No voter: what was the role of the Scottish Government in the Brexit negotiations? No voice = no union worth defending
    Retruning to the seed potatoes, remember that

    (a) this messup hits the Nirish farmers even more - as they have been loudly saying for weeks/months and as was pointed out on PB a month or two back (no seed potatoes = empty fields which were supposed to grow spuds)
    (b) both the Scottish and Nirish farmers tend to be, erm, not the least supporters of the Union
    (c) who's representing the Nirish farmers in the negotiations at present? Clue: not the French
    (d) the sainted Mrs T woulkd have been shocked to see the party of business so carelessly wrecking a valuable trade, buit then it's now the "**** business" party
    (e) for HYUFD - the seed potatoes are needed to grow potatoes. I know it's a difficult concept, but it does affect the farming industry quite a lot.
    The EU is not a big market for seed potatoes. Twice as many are sold to Egypt as the entire EU.

    There is actually a local industry in NI anyway. Perhaps it could expand to fill any gaps in the market?

    The arrangement may be a bit daft but the noise is totally out of proportion. It looks like more SNP grievance politics to be honest.
    The EU figures won't inclide the Nirish ones.

    And if I were a potato farmer I would not be happy. I've worked on potato farms and seen specialist seed potato farms and it does have a personal emotional impact.
    I agree it isn't ideal but it probably won't have a huge effect on the industry.

    I'm not sure what the EU is thinking though. It looks every bit like a deliberate attempt to give Scotland and Ireland something to complain about.
    Are they? the Nirish are not part of the EU yet - so if the EU started negotiating on their behalf then Mr Frost would be upset, no?
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,528
    Carnyx said:

    MaxPB said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    Starry said:

    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    Utter rubbish.

    Less than 1% of Scots work with seed potatoes and the government is still pushing for their inclusion anyway.

    The Deal will be disastrous news for Sturgeon who was praying for No Deal to push for independence.

    There is now the prospect the SNP will not even get a majority next year and when Boris refuses indyref2 the SNP will descend into civil war
    Here was me thinking NoDeal was going to be the final nail in the Independence coffin what with the prospect of Razor Wire and Machine Gun posts from Berwick to Gretna.

    Now a deal is the final nail.

    Interesting. That's a lot of different nails.
    At least they're changed so often that there's not the slightest chance of any of them getting rusty
    There's only one nail that mattered to this former No voter: what was the role of the Scottish Government in the Brexit negotiations? No voice = no union worth defending
    Retruning to the seed potatoes, remember that

    (a) this messup hits the Nirish farmers even more - as they have been loudly saying for weeks/months and as was pointed out on PB a month or two back (no seed potatoes = empty fields which were supposed to grow spuds)
    (b) both the Scottish and Nirish farmers tend to be, erm, not the least supporters of the Union
    (c) who's representing the Nirish farmers in the negotiations at present? Clue: not the French
    (d) the sainted Mrs T woulkd have been shocked to see the party of business so carelessly wrecking a valuable trade, buit then it's now the "**** business" party
    (e) for HYUFD - the seed potatoes are needed to grow potatoes. I know it's a difficult concept, but it does affect the farming industry quite a lot.
    Less than 1% of Scots work in seed potatoes, it shows the utter desperation of Nationalists that they can only find this issue to whinge about and even then the UK government is still pressing for its inclusion too.

    Today is a disastrous day for Sturgeon and a triumphant day for Boris
    Just under 5K people work in commercial fishing in Scotland. I make that about 2.1% of the working population. Bassically, you are dismissing something of comparable size to fishing as a completely avoidable effect opf Brexit.

    And it's been known about for months, so why hasn't it been sorted??
    Hold on let's get something straight, there's market value and there's export value and then there's the portion of those exports that currently go to the EU. The whole market isn't going to disappear because a small portion of the exports are less viable.

    The whole market doesn't suddenly disappear even though that might be politically convenient for some people.
    Of course not. But it will damage the trade. Prices for all farmers; some will be hit as they have specialoised in the NI trade; and so on.

    And 'currently go to the EU" needs to be increased anyway because NI is now in the EU for practical purposes.
    Also, is it that the sale becomes impossible or does it just mean paperwork and a small tariff? I'd wait to see the deal text because if it's the latter then the market will adjust to the new reality with differential pricing.
  • RH1992RH1992 Posts: 788

    We haven't seen the details of the deal yet, but what we do know already is that it will deliver:
    1. Tariff free access for EU goods to the UK market, where they enjoy a significant trade surplus.
    2. More barriers to the EU market for UK services, where we enjoy a significant surplus.
    3. Fewer freedoms for UK citizens and businesses.
    4. More red tape for UK businesses and citizens who operate in or wish to visit the EU.
    5. A customs border in the Irish Sea.
    But that is by the by. Any deal is better than no deal because it will mean we have a friendly relationship with the EU, which is our most important trading partner and an organisation of which most of our best friends are members. because we have sealed a deal we can hope for cooperation and a level of goodwill that will enable us to forge a closer relationship over time in a relatively pain-free manner. That is very good news indeed.

    This is the best summary I've seen. Barriers were never in doubt as part of the point of voting to leave was detachment from the EU, but it's still a tad disappointing to have those barriers anyway. However, the fact that we in the end have had an amicable split and can hopefully work on some closer ties where necessary/desired in the future is a good thing.
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483
    So the pathetic game of who ‘won’ the negotiations begins along with all the other things we have to prove we are better the Europe at. Leaving the EU will not stop this silly. Game it. Will make. It worse as. Everything wi lol be viewed by some as how bad it would have been if we still were. Let’s drop this shit and get on with the new world as best we can.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,639
    MattW said:

    I'm sure this can be sorted down the road if it is such a major problem.
    As if they will care a jot, it is Scotland so of no importance. Four and a half years and that is bit they miss, very appropriate.
    The statistic is fake.

    According to the Scottish Govt Scotland has 13.5% of EU Market, not 80% of world market.

    https://www.gov.scot/news/threat-to-seed-potato-exports/

    And EU imports are only 20% of Scottish exports. Egypt alone takes more.

    And since the Netherlands do about 2 million tonnes a year, I think the "world leading" is a bit of a stretch, too.
    Still need to add the current Nirish market. And if I worked in an industry where exports were suddenly cut 20% I wouldn't be happy.
  • RH1992RH1992 Posts: 788
    edited December 2020

    Share if you agree.


    There's a well known Christmas film partly about him, don't know if you've heard of it.
  • Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    Starry said:

    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    Utter rubbish.

    Less than 1% of Scots work with seed potatoes and the government is still pushing for their inclusion anyway.

    The Deal will be disastrous news for Sturgeon who was praying for No Deal to push for independence.

    There is now the prospect the SNP will not even get a majority next year and when Boris refuses indyref2 the SNP will descend into civil war
    Here was me thinking NoDeal was going to be the final nail in the Independence coffin what with the prospect of Razor Wire and Machine Gun posts from Berwick to Gretna.

    Now a deal is the final nail.

    Interesting. That's a lot of different nails.
    At least they're changed so often that there's not the slightest chance of any of them getting rusty
    There's only one nail that mattered to this former No voter: what was the role of the Scottish Government in the Brexit negotiations? No voice = no union worth defending
    Retruning to the seed potatoes, remember that

    (a) this messup hits the Nirish farmers even more - as they have been loudly saying for weeks/months and as was pointed out on PB a month or two back (no seed potatoes = empty fields which were supposed to grow spuds)
    (b) both the Scottish and Nirish farmers tend to be, erm, not the least supporters of the Union
    (c) who's representing the Nirish farmers in the negotiations at present? Clue: not the French
    (d) the sainted Mrs T woulkd have been shocked to see the party of business so carelessly wrecking a valuable trade, buit then it's now the "**** business" party
    (e) for HYUFD - the seed potatoes are needed to grow potatoes. I know it's a difficult concept, but it does affect the farming industry quite a lot.
    Less than 1% of Scots work in seed potatoes, it shows the utter desperation of Nationalists that they can only find this issue to whinge about and even then the UK government is still pressing for its inclusion too.

    Today is a disastrous day for Sturgeon and a triumphant day for Boris
    Just under 5K people work in commercial fishing in Scotland. I make that about 2.1% of the working population. Bassically, you are dismissing something of comparable size to fishing as a completely avoidable effect opf Brexit.

    And it's been known about for months, so why hasn't it been sorted??
    Yes and those fishermen are getting more of their own catch they would never have got from the SNP.

    Seed potato producers meanwhile export more to Egypt than the EU, sheer desperation from Nationalists like you
    But those figures don't include NI do they?? They will be for previous years.

    YOu aree delighted to wreck a significant part of the Scottish seed potato trade for no good reason. And Nirish farming. Or maybe the Nirish don'ty count either.
    Are they English Anglican Tory voters? No?

    Fuck them then.
    Quite. Though in this case they are [edit] likely to be Scottish or Irish pro-Union voters. Which is why this is such an odd argument in the first place given the obsessive emphasis placed on a few fishermen.
    As has been pointed out the cash value of Seed Potato exports isn't a lot. Then again the people saying that were defending threatening the whole deal over English fish quotas which isn't a lot either.

    Its the symbolism that resonates. Westminster not knowing or caring. And then angrily dismissing the protests as "whining". Its how you make it sad but inevitable that No voters become yes voters.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,141

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Worth bearing in mind that this is the first trade deal in history designed to make it harder not easier to trade. On average, economists think it will subtract about 4% from UK GDP in the long run, relative to single market membership. If they are right this cost is far greater than the net payments we made as an EU member. Still, it is better than no deal, and for that at least we should be thankful.

    Well, no it really isn’t, and I say that as a Remainer. The EU wasn’t just about trade, or it’s unlikely we’d ever have left it. It also had major sociopolitical ramifications that were, to put it mildly, not universally popular.

    This deal *is* designed to make trade easier than it would be in a clean break. So from that point of view it might fairly be compared to the free trade deals in the former Soviet Union, or Greenland’s arrangements with Denmark after 1985, which in itself sees your point fail.
    If you are arguing that UK-EU trade won't be harder on Jan 1st after this deal takes effect than on Dec 31st under existing rules then you are demonstrably wrong. Of course it is better than no deal, which is why I said precisely that.
    Yes, but my point is that you are making a totally false statement. Your implication is we have negotiated a trade deal to make trade harder. We haven’t. We left a political system, rightly or wrongly, and negotiated a trade deal to free up trade in this new political situation rather than trade on WTO terms. Which actually happens very frequently. So whatever your private views on leave or remain, it is you who is ‘demonstrably wrong’ in your claim that ‘this is the first trade deal in history designed to make it harder not easier to trade.‘
    It is common in analysing trade deals to compare what has been negotiated with what went before, rather than with some hypothetical third scenario. Since I have repeatedly said that the deal is better than this hypothetical third scenario I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. Yes it is better than no deal, but much much worse than our prior arrangements.
    Yes, but our prior arrangements were not a trade deal, and shouldn’t therefore be compared on a like for like basis.
    That is pure sophistry. I thought this was meant to be a serious debate.
    No, it’s a statement of fact. That is definitely part of a serious debate, although regrettably your previous statement was an example of hyperbole, both for the reasons I have stated and because as has been pointed out elsewhere even had your statement been correctly premised there are other examples of trade deals becoming more restrictive.

    Ultimately, such statements are a big part of the reason why we lost the argument to Remain, because they undermine our credibility and cause people to stop listening to us.

    You have a problem with that? Then stop making them. But don’t abuse me for pointing out that you are wrong.
    I don't really understand the point you are trying to make. Let me restate mine. This is the first major trade deal between significant trading blocs that aims to put in place a trading environment more restrictive than that which preceded it. This really shouldn't be a controversial argument, in fact it is the most fundamental description of the situation we are in, I am hardly the only person making it. To argue that isn't the case because the EU single market isn't an FTA is sophistry.
    Then let me put it to you in simple terms. You are wrong. Because countries separate all the time, and the EU is considered a country Sui Generis, and put in place more restrictive arrangements than they had before. Ukraine and Russia. Ireland and the UK. Australia and Papua New Guinea. The UK and New Zealand.

    Your point would have validity if EU membership were just about trade, but it isn’t. So we leave our membership, over many matters, and negotiate a new relationship that is just about trade. It is nonsensical to suggest that this a more restrictive trade deal replacing a less restrictive one. You are comparing apples and scones.
    I'll leave others to judge the relative merits of our arguments.
    Okay. Ydoethur is correct and you are completely wrong. Judgement made. Happy now?
    That has to be correct. The EU is about much more than trade. Whether the EU will ever go so far as to create a single state is open to question, but political integration goes hand in hand with economic integration. If one does not wish to be part of this process of political integration, it's fairly immaterial to be told that GDP in twenty years time will be a bit smaller than would otherwise have been the case.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,639
    MaxPB said:

    Carnyx said:

    MaxPB said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    Starry said:

    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    Utter rubbish.

    Less than 1% of Scots work with seed potatoes and the government is still pushing for their inclusion anyway.

    The Deal will be disastrous news for Sturgeon who was praying for No Deal to push for independence.

    There is now the prospect the SNP will not even get a majority next year and when Boris refuses indyref2 the SNP will descend into civil war
    Here was me thinking NoDeal was going to be the final nail in the Independence coffin what with the prospect of Razor Wire and Machine Gun posts from Berwick to Gretna.

    Now a deal is the final nail.

    Interesting. That's a lot of different nails.
    At least they're changed so often that there's not the slightest chance of any of them getting rusty
    There's only one nail that mattered to this former No voter: what was the role of the Scottish Government in the Brexit negotiations? No voice = no union worth defending
    Retruning to the seed potatoes, remember that

    (a) this messup hits the Nirish farmers even more - as they have been loudly saying for weeks/months and as was pointed out on PB a month or two back (no seed potatoes = empty fields which were supposed to grow spuds)
    (b) both the Scottish and Nirish farmers tend to be, erm, not the least supporters of the Union
    (c) who's representing the Nirish farmers in the negotiations at present? Clue: not the French
    (d) the sainted Mrs T woulkd have been shocked to see the party of business so carelessly wrecking a valuable trade, buit then it's now the "**** business" party
    (e) for HYUFD - the seed potatoes are needed to grow potatoes. I know it's a difficult concept, but it does affect the farming industry quite a lot.
    Less than 1% of Scots work in seed potatoes, it shows the utter desperation of Nationalists that they can only find this issue to whinge about and even then the UK government is still pressing for its inclusion too.

    Today is a disastrous day for Sturgeon and a triumphant day for Boris
    Just under 5K people work in commercial fishing in Scotland. I make that about 2.1% of the working population. Bassically, you are dismissing something of comparable size to fishing as a completely avoidable effect opf Brexit.

    And it's been known about for months, so why hasn't it been sorted??
    Hold on let's get something straight, there's market value and there's export value and then there's the portion of those exports that currently go to the EU. The whole market isn't going to disappear because a small portion of the exports are less viable.

    The whole market doesn't suddenly disappear even though that might be politically convenient for some people.
    Of course not. But it will damage the trade. Prices for all farmers; some will be hit as they have specialoised in the NI trade; and so on.

    And 'currently go to the EU" needs to be increased anyway because NI is now in the EU for practical purposes.
    Also, is it that the sale becomes impossible or does it just mean paperwork and a small tariff? I'd wait to see the deal text because if it's the latter then the market will adjust to the new reality with differential pricing.
    Fair enough.
  • So what does David Cameron feel now ?

    Does he wonder what would have happened if he had actually negotiated with the EU instead of thinking it was 'too much of a faff' ?

    I don't think Cameron wanted the disruption or damage of leaving the single market, customs union and a border in the Irish sea.
    Then perhaps he should not have made promises he couldn't keep, postured about standing up to the EU, agreed to whatever the EU wanted and then turned Project Fear up to 11.

    Leave could not have won without Farage creating a movement or Boris and his ambition or the mistakes by Blair and Brown.

    But neither could it have won without Cameron's EU strategy.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,851
    It feels like we're moving further and further from civilisation
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688

    Share if you agree.


    It can't have been "on Christmas", surely?
    Well it was Christmas Eve but yes it can be 'on' Christmas because the word comes from Old English Cristes-messe meaning Christ's Mass, therefore that use of English is fine. It would be like writing 'on Valentine's Day.'
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,528
    edited December 2020

    So what does David Cameron feel now ?

    Does he wonder what would have happened if he had actually negotiated with the EU instead of thinking it was 'too much of a faff' ?

    He should feel ashamed.
    Deep, deep, lifelong embarrassment I should think.

    The EU just never believed he would walk away. Failure of Negotiating 1.01
    And then May, Hammond and Robbins repeated that mistake.

    Some here may belittle Boris as a clown but cometh the hour, cometh the man and he was exactly the kind of unpredictable leader that was needed.
    I think it was @Casino_Royale that made the point on the aggressive fishing waters stance in no deal concentrating minds in the EU.

    Those tough stances have ensured the EU compromised and did a deal realising the UK would force the no deal to mean no deal on both sides of it. They knew with May and Robbins they'd still get preferential access to the UK without needing to give anything in return in the no deal scenario.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,270

    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    Starry said:

    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    Utter rubbish.

    Less than 1% of Scots work with seed potatoes and the government is still pushing for their inclusion anyway.

    The Deal will be disastrous news for Sturgeon who was praying for No Deal to push for independence.

    There is now the prospect the SNP will not even get a majority next year and when Boris refuses indyref2 the SNP will descend into civil war
    Here was me thinking NoDeal was going to be the final nail in the Independence coffin what with the prospect of Razor Wire and Machine Gun posts from Berwick to Gretna.

    Now a deal is the final nail.

    Interesting. That's a lot of different nails.
    At least they're changed so often that there's not the slightest chance of any of them getting rusty
    There's only one nail that mattered to this former No voter: what was the role of the Scottish Government in the Brexit negotiations? No voice = no union worth defending
    Retruning to the seed potatoes, remember that

    (a) this messup hits the Nirish farmers even more - as they have been loudly saying for weeks/months and as was pointed out on PB a month or two back (no seed potatoes = empty fields which were supposed to grow spuds)
    (b) both the Scottish and Nirish farmers tend to be, erm, not the least supporters of the Union
    (c) who's representing the Nirish farmers in the negotiations at present? Clue: not the French
    (d) the sainted Mrs T woulkd have been shocked to see the party of business so carelessly wrecking a valuable trade, buit then it's now the "**** business" party
    (e) for HYUFD - the seed potatoes are needed to grow potatoes. I know it's a difficult concept, but it does affect the farming industry quite a lot.
    Less than 1% of Scots work in seed potatoes, it shows the utter desperation of Nationalists that they can only find this issue to whinge about and even then the UK government is still pressing for its inclusion too.

    Today is a disastrous day for Sturgeon and a triumphant day for Boris
    Just under 5K people work in commercial fishing in Scotland. I make that about 2.1% of the working population. Bassically, you are dismissing something of comparable size to fishing as a completely avoidable effect opf Brexit.

    And it's been known about for months, so why hasn't it been sorted??
    Yes and those fishermen are getting more of their own catch they would never have got from the SNP.

    Seed potato producers meanwhile export more to Egypt than the EU, sheer desperation from Nationalists like you
    But those figures don't include NI do they?? They will be for previous years.

    YOu aree delighted to wreck a significant part of the Scottish seed potato trade for no good reason. And Nirish farming. Or maybe the Nirish don'ty count either.
    Are they English Anglican Tory voters? No?

    Fuck them then.
    Quite. Though in this case they are [edit] likely to be Scottish or Irish pro-Union voters. Which is why this is such an odd argument in the first place given the obsessive emphasis placed on a few fishermen.
    As has been pointed out the cash value of Seed Potato exports isn't a lot. Then again the people saying that were defending threatening the whole deal over English fish quotas which isn't a lot either.

    Its the symbolism that resonates. Westminster not knowing or caring. And then angrily dismissing the protests as "whining". Its how you make it sad but inevitable that No voters become yes voters.
    No, just desperation from anti Tories like you to ensure that the Union breaks under the Tories, tough, we will not be giving the SNP a legal independence referendum under any circumstances and having achieved a Deal with the EU Boris will now correctly tell Sturgeon next year to sod off if she asks for one.

    The fact in desperation you Nat appeasers are clinging onto this tiny issue is absurd
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,344
    Sean_F said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Worth bearing in mind that this is the first trade deal in history designed to make it harder not easier to trade. On average, economists think it will subtract about 4% from UK GDP in the long run, relative to single market membership. If they are right this cost is far greater than the net payments we made as an EU member. Still, it is better than no deal, and for that at least we should be thankful.

    Well, no it really isn’t, and I say that as a Remainer. The EU wasn’t just about trade, or it’s unlikely we’d ever have left it. It also had major sociopolitical ramifications that were, to put it mildly, not universally popular.

    This deal *is* designed to make trade easier than it would be in a clean break. So from that point of view it might fairly be compared to the free trade deals in the former Soviet Union, or Greenland’s arrangements with Denmark after 1985, which in itself sees your point fail.
    If you are arguing that UK-EU trade won't be harder on Jan 1st after this deal takes effect than on Dec 31st under existing rules then you are demonstrably wrong. Of course it is better than no deal, which is why I said precisely that.
    Yes, but my point is that you are making a totally false statement. Your implication is we have negotiated a trade deal to make trade harder. We haven’t. We left a political system, rightly or wrongly, and negotiated a trade deal to free up trade in this new political situation rather than trade on WTO terms. Which actually happens very frequently. So whatever your private views on leave or remain, it is you who is ‘demonstrably wrong’ in your claim that ‘this is the first trade deal in history designed to make it harder not easier to trade.‘
    It is common in analysing trade deals to compare what has been negotiated with what went before, rather than with some hypothetical third scenario. Since I have repeatedly said that the deal is better than this hypothetical third scenario I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. Yes it is better than no deal, but much much worse than our prior arrangements.
    Yes, but our prior arrangements were not a trade deal, and shouldn’t therefore be compared on a like for like basis.
    That is pure sophistry. I thought this was meant to be a serious debate.
    No, it’s a statement of fact. That is definitely part of a serious debate, although regrettably your previous statement was an example of hyperbole, both for the reasons I have stated and because as has been pointed out elsewhere even had your statement been correctly premised there are other examples of trade deals becoming more restrictive.

    Ultimately, such statements are a big part of the reason why we lost the argument to Remain, because they undermine our credibility and cause people to stop listening to us.

    You have a problem with that? Then stop making them. But don’t abuse me for pointing out that you are wrong.
    I don't really understand the point you are trying to make. Let me restate mine. This is the first major trade deal between significant trading blocs that aims to put in place a trading environment more restrictive than that which preceded it. This really shouldn't be a controversial argument, in fact it is the most fundamental description of the situation we are in, I am hardly the only person making it. To argue that isn't the case because the EU single market isn't an FTA is sophistry.
    Then let me put it to you in simple terms. You are wrong. Because countries separate all the time, and the EU is considered a country Sui Generis, and put in place more restrictive arrangements than they had before. Ukraine and Russia. Ireland and the UK. Australia and Papua New Guinea. The UK and New Zealand.

    Your point would have validity if EU membership were just about trade, but it isn’t. So we leave our membership, over many matters, and negotiate a new relationship that is just about trade. It is nonsensical to suggest that this a more restrictive trade deal replacing a less restrictive one. You are comparing apples and scones.
    I'll leave others to judge the relative merits of our arguments.
    Okay. Ydoethur is correct and you are completely wrong. Judgement made. Happy now?
    That has to be correct. The EU is about much more than trade. Whether the EU will ever go so far as to create a single state is open to question, but political integration goes hand in hand with economic integration. If one does not wish to be part of this process of political integration, it's fairly immaterial to be told that GDP in twenty years time will be a bit smaller than would otherwise have been the case.
    What, I wonder, will the deal say about, for example, security co-operation and the EAW?

    Will the UK be (be able to) rejoin Erasmus?
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 41,947
    edited December 2020

    kinabalu said:

    Morning all -

    So, deal. Wahay. A good deal compared to no deal, a bad deal compared to membership, but since neither of those were on the table let’s just call it the deal. The substance is what it was always going to be, given the macro economic and political imperatives of the 2 sides. FOM ends and we start to take back our fish. Those were our red lines. The EU protects the integrity of their SM. We can diverge from LPF but at a price. That was their red line.

    It’s positive news, here on Christmas Eve, but I will be a trifle disappointed if I see lots of “relief” being expressed. A recurring theme of my Brexit postings over the piece has been to share the insight that the insanity on every level of “WTO” Brexit was never a real world option for the UK. It was a near 0% probability outcome under any PM other than a genuine hardcore BritNat such as a Redwood or a Cash. Or of course the man himself, the Big Daddy of Brexit, Nigel Farage.

    Boris Johnson is not such an individual. He is not a genuine hardcore anything except opportunist. He was never going to pull the pin on the no deal grenade. He has an 80 seat majority won on the basis of getting Brexit done with a trade deal. It’s come very very late partly because that’s how things go – they expand to fill the time available – but mainly because it works politically for Johnson. This is deemed more important than the anxiety and chaos caused.

    The ‘last minute’ aspect works for him domestically in a number of ways. (i) An atmosphere of relief, fed by all the no deal hyping, is conducive to selling the deal. (ii) It provides the optics of “Boris battling to the wire for Britain”. See today’s softhead tabloids for the early fruits of this. (iii) It makes detailed prolonged examination of the deal pre-implementation impossible. This last, I think, is a particular boon. This is not a PM who relishes scrutiny and debate.

    Cheers.

    It still amazes me that this is the end point.

    Back in 2016 it was widely assumed that membership of the SM and CU would continue.

    And that membership fees, FOM and full regulation would be necessary.

    Instead the overton window has been shifted and shifted and shifted towards a harder and harder and harder Brexit.
    That's fair but 2 points -

    Immigration was the totemic issue in the Referendum therefore any outcome that did not end FOM was never a realistic possibility. This ruled out continuing SM membership.

    The May Deal steered towards a softer Brexit than this, because of the Backstop, but it's not possible to know where it would have led since it would have depended on who on our side was in power. It might have been taken towards close alignment and CU, or towards more or less where we are.
  • StarryStarry Posts: 110
    HYUFD said:

    Starry said:

    HYUFD said:

    Starry said:

    Mr. Starry, you're a former No voter who thinks the SNP should've had an influence on the negotiations?

    Foreign policy isn't and cannot be devolved.

    Doesn't matter the Party in charge. If a country's government is completely excluded and it's voice unheard, despite an overwhelming vote from its electorate, then the political union cannot stand.
    Scotland's sovereign government is Westminster and has been since 1707 as confirmed in the once in a generation 2014 vote.

    Holyrood correctly is purely for domestic matters within Scotland
    If you remember, the SNP manifesto said a once in a generation vote unless there is a material change in circumstances, which explicitly states Scotland being taken out of the EU against the wishes of her people. The people then elected the SNP both to the Scottish and UK Parliament on this manifesto. Denying the stated will of the people will not subdue the desire for independence, but only increase the demand.
    You are clearly a diehard Remainer for whom the only validity in the Union is within the EU.

    Tough, even last year after the Brexit vote 55% of Brits still did not vote Conservative and the majority voted for Remain parties. 2014 was a once in a generation referendum, except for a material change in circumstance.

    If it rained tomorrow the SNP would stay that was a mandate for independence, I could not care less what the Scottish people think or their overwhelming vote in their own country
    Actually, I favour the EEA. However, I've fixed the rest of your message.

  • Mr. Pioneers, English fish quotas?

    Could be wrong, but don't Wales and Scotland and Northern Ireland have fishermen too?
  • Nigel Farage's fury is a joy to behold.

    One of his 'arguments', for HYUFD's benefit, is that this is being announced on Christmas Eve so that no newspapers will cover what a sell-out it is tomorrow.

    We have to move on now but the thought that the diehard Brexiteer nutjobs are pissed off is a particular satisfaction.

    But they're not pissed off.

    They are posturing because that's what they enjoy doing.
  • stjohn said:

    Why wouldn't Labour MPs support the deal?

    From a Remainer point of view? Remain is not an option. It's either this Deal or No Deal.

    From a Brexiteer point of view? There are Labour MPs who want to Brexit with No Deal? Who are they are? And how does No Deal help their constituents?

    Because it appears to be a poor deal (unless one believes Guido).

    Abstention allows the deal to go through without confirmation.

    In twelve months time,

    Starmer: "The trade deal has proven to be a failure, all the car manufacturers have moved to mainland Europe"

    Johnson: " Well it's your fault, you supported the deal".

    The question would not be framed around a deal. It would be: "You promised car workers in the UK a bright future with more opportunities, there is now no car industry in the UK. Why have you let them down and what are you going to do now to mitigate the disaster for them and their communities of those jobs going?" No need to mention the deal at all.

    And that's the point. This government has made a series of very explicit promises. It must to be held to account on their delivery
    What does Starmer want? I don't know, but I guess:

    1 That The Deal happens, because the alternative doesn't bear thinking about
    2 That the gap between Brexit promise and Brexit reality is on the government
    3 That the sting of "Remainer Keir" is neutralised
    4 That the splits in the Conservative party are made as clear as possible by maximising the ERG rebellion

    I think that means speaking against ("this isn't what you promised"), using as much judo-move as possible ("this is how I would use the paragraph on page 751 to move to a beneficially closer relationship") and then vote yes to "prevent the disaster of No Deal, which I am glad the Prime Minister has finally realised is the worst deal of all".

    Yes, it will be an emotional wench for many Labour MPs to do this, and some might need a doctor's note. But I don't think he can sit this one out.
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382

    stjohn said:

    Why wouldn't Labour MPs support the deal?

    From a Remainer point of view? Remain is not an option. It's either this Deal or No Deal.

    From a Brexiteer point of view? There are Labour MPs who want to Brexit with No Deal? Who are they are? And how does No Deal help their constituents?

    Because it appears to be a poor deal (unless one believes Guido).

    Abstention allows the deal to go through without confirmation.

    In twelve months time,

    Starmer: "The trade deal has proven to be a failure, all the car manufacturers have moved to mainland Europe"

    Johnson: " Well it's your fault, you supported the deal".
    You're absolutely delusional if you think a deal will ever be Starmers fault. This is Boris's deal.
    There is a trap though for Labour. The Brexit deal - once we get through the hubris to the detail - won't be the magic bullet it was sold as. The realities of a shit ton of red tape and increased costs and delays and lack of freedoms will impact onto people already sick of a lack of freedom and increased cost of living.

    Let me give you an example. We appear to have dodged the (self-threatened) tariff on cars and car parts. So all we suffer now are the costs of reams of paperwork and lengthy transit through formerly open borders. If - as suggested by their COO - that is enough for Nissan to pull the plug then the workforce in the North East aren't going to just blame Boris. They will blame Labour for not protecting them from it.

    This is Keith's conundrum. People need to be protected from something that they have falsely been promised will benefit them. If he protects them they will be outraged now. If he doesn't protect them they will be outraged later.

    No-one ever blamed the Tories for the Iraq War.

    True rochdale just has a downer on Labour by his childish name calling of sks. He needs to grow up.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,480

    kinabalu said:

    Morning all -

    So, deal. Wahay. A good deal compared to no deal, a bad deal compared to membership, but since neither of those were on the table let’s just call it the deal. The substance is what it was always going to be, given the macro economic and political imperatives of the 2 sides. FOM ends and we start to take back our fish. Those were our red lines. The EU protects the integrity of their SM. We can diverge from LPF but at a price. That was their red line.

    It’s positive news, here on Christmas Eve, but I will be a trifle disappointed if I see lots of “relief” being expressed. A recurring theme of my Brexit postings over the piece has been to share the insight that the insanity on every level of “WTO” Brexit was never a real world option for the UK. It was a near 0% probability outcome under any PM other than a genuine hardcore BritNat such as a Redwood or a Cash. Or of course the man himself, the Big Daddy of Brexit, Nigel Farage.

    Boris Johnson is not such an individual. He is not a genuine hardcore anything except opportunist. He was never going to pull the pin on the no deal grenade. He has an 80 seat majority won on the basis of getting Brexit done with a trade deal. It’s come very very late partly because that’s how things go – they expand to fill the time available – but mainly because it works politically for Johnson. This is deemed more important than the anxiety and chaos caused.

    The ‘last minute’ aspect works for him domestically in a number of ways. (i) An atmosphere of relief, fed by all the no deal hyping, is conducive to selling the deal. (ii) It provides the optics of “Boris battling to the wire for Britain”. See today’s softhead tabloids for the early fruits of this. (iii) It makes detailed prolonged examination of the deal pre-implementation impossible. This last, I think, is a particular boon. This is not a PM who relishes scrutiny and debate.

    Cheers.

    It still amazes me that this is the end point.

    Back in 2016 it was widely assumed that membership of the SM and CU would continue.

    And that membership fees, FOM and full regulation would be necessary.

    Instead the overton window has been shifted and shifted and shifted towards a harder and harder and harder Brexit.
    "I love the smell of napalm in the morning, it...it smells of victory!"
    That's Charlie's point....
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,270
    Starry said:

    HYUFD said:

    Starry said:

    HYUFD said:

    Starry said:

    Mr. Starry, you're a former No voter who thinks the SNP should've had an influence on the negotiations?

    Foreign policy isn't and cannot be devolved.

    Doesn't matter the Party in charge. If a country's government is completely excluded and it's voice unheard, despite an overwhelming vote from its electorate, then the political union cannot stand.
    Scotland's sovereign government is Westminster and has been since 1707 as confirmed in the once in a generation 2014 vote.

    Holyrood correctly is purely for domestic matters within Scotland
    If you remember, the SNP manifesto said a once in a generation vote unless there is a material change in circumstances, which explicitly states Scotland being taken out of the EU against the wishes of her people. The people then elected the SNP both to the Scottish and UK Parliament on this manifesto. Denying the stated will of the people will not subdue the desire for independence, but only increase the demand.
    You are clearly a diehard Remainer for whom the only validity in the Union is within the EU.

    Tough, even last year after the Brexit vote 55% of Brits still did not vote Conservative and the majority voted for Remain parties. 2014 was a once in a generation referendum, except for a material change in circumstance.

    If it rained tomorrow the SNP would stay that was a mandate for independence, I could not care less what the Scottish people think or their overwhelming vote in their own country
    Actually, I favour the EEA. However, I've fixed the rest of your message.

    45% is on no definition 'an overwhelming vote'
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,357
    MJW said:

    Nigelb said:

    Good morning, fellow surrenderers and capitulators.

    Morning Casino.
    Speak for yourself; I shall nurture my resentments. :smile:
    I expect to see Remainers painting the EU flag on the end of their houses for the next three hundred years. If it is good enough to carry on the fight in Northern Ireland.....
    To be fair, Brexiteers of all stripes - from Tony Benn to Enoch Powell spent every moment trying to drag us out after we joined the common market. There was no accepting the result there.

    What's more likely to happen is that a the folly of Brexit becomes clear and it's the incumbent, and the generation who it's been foisted upon by their elders gain power, we gradually sign up to stuff that draws us back in without the flag stuff, and we tilt back in the direction of reason and good sense, while those who become the Guilty Men of Brexit, viewed as this generation's Chamberlains and Halifax's are tainted and we gradually get our country back.
    "those who become the Guilty Men of Brexit, viewed as this generation's Chamberlains and Halifax's are tainted and we gradually get our country back."

    Oh FFS, the self-pity is so strong with this one.... He's gone all WW2 analogies before lunch. I thought that was why people mocked Boris?
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,639

    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    Starry said:

    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    Utter rubbish.

    Less than 1% of Scots work with seed potatoes and the government is still pushing for their inclusion anyway.

    The Deal will be disastrous news for Sturgeon who was praying for No Deal to push for independence.

    There is now the prospect the SNP will not even get a majority next year and when Boris refuses indyref2 the SNP will descend into civil war
    Here was me thinking NoDeal was going to be the final nail in the Independence coffin what with the prospect of Razor Wire and Machine Gun posts from Berwick to Gretna.

    Now a deal is the final nail.

    Interesting. That's a lot of different nails.
    At least they're changed so often that there's not the slightest chance of any of them getting rusty
    There's only one nail that mattered to this former No voter: what was the role of the Scottish Government in the Brexit negotiations? No voice = no union worth defending
    Retruning to the seed potatoes, remember that

    (a) this messup hits the Nirish farmers even more - as they have been loudly saying for weeks/months and as was pointed out on PB a month or two back (no seed potatoes = empty fields which were supposed to grow spuds)
    (b) both the Scottish and Nirish farmers tend to be, erm, not the least supporters of the Union
    (c) who's representing the Nirish farmers in the negotiations at present? Clue: not the French
    (d) the sainted Mrs T woulkd have been shocked to see the party of business so carelessly wrecking a valuable trade, buit then it's now the "**** business" party
    (e) for HYUFD - the seed potatoes are needed to grow potatoes. I know it's a difficult concept, but it does affect the farming industry quite a lot.
    Less than 1% of Scots work in seed potatoes, it shows the utter desperation of Nationalists that they can only find this issue to whinge about and even then the UK government is still pressing for its inclusion too.

    Today is a disastrous day for Sturgeon and a triumphant day for Boris
    Just under 5K people work in commercial fishing in Scotland. I make that about 2.1% of the working population. Bassically, you are dismissing something of comparable size to fishing as a completely avoidable effect opf Brexit.

    And it's been known about for months, so why hasn't it been sorted??
    Yes and those fishermen are getting more of their own catch they would never have got from the SNP.

    Seed potato producers meanwhile export more to Egypt than the EU, sheer desperation from Nationalists like you
    But those figures don't include NI do they?? They will be for previous years.

    YOu aree delighted to wreck a significant part of the Scottish seed potato trade for no good reason. And Nirish farming. Or maybe the Nirish don'ty count either.
    Are they English Anglican Tory voters? No?

    Fuck them then.
    Quite. Though in this case they are [edit] likely to be Scottish or Irish pro-Union voters. Which is why this is such an odd argument in the first place given the obsessive emphasis placed on a few fishermen.
    As has been pointed out the cash value of Seed Potato exports isn't a lot. Then again the people saying that were defending threatening the whole deal over English fish quotas which isn't a lot either.

    Its the symbolism that resonates. Westminster not knowing or caring. And then angrily dismissing the protests as "whining". Its how you make it sad but inevitable that No voters become yes voters.
    It may not seem a lot to the Brexiters on PB - but it is focussed in certain rural areas in Scotland. And you need to add the knockon effects on Nirish ware maincrop sales.

    On top of the usual worries and uncertainty over b umf which you have rehearsed for our education, I expect the potato farmers are particularly concerned because by definition the spuds are alive - ergo potentialy falling under the biosecurity regulations. It's not as if they are washed and packed in bags.

  • MrEdMrEd Posts: 5,578
    Sean_F said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Worth bearing in mind that this is the first trade deal in history designed to make it harder not easier to trade. On average, economists think it will subtract about 4% from UK GDP in the long run, relative to single market membership. If they are right this cost is far greater than the net payments we made as an EU member. Still, it is better than no deal, and for that at least we should be thankful.

    Well, no it really isn’t, and I say that as a Remainer. The EU wasn’t just about trade, or it’s unlikely we’d ever have left it. It also had major sociopolitical ramifications that were, to put it mildly, not universally popular.

    This deal *is* designed to make trade easier than it would be in a clean break. So from that point of view it might fairly be compared to the free trade deals in the former Soviet Union, or Greenland’s arrangements with Denmark after 1985, which in itself sees your point fail.
    If you are arguing that UK-EU trade won't be harder on Jan 1st after this deal takes effect than on Dec 31st under existing rules then you are demonstrably wrong. Of course it is better than no deal, which is why I said precisely that.
    Yes, but my point is that you are making a totally false statement. Your implication is we have negotiated a trade deal to make trade harder. We haven’t. We left a political system, rightly or wrongly, and negotiated a trade deal to free up trade in this new political situation rather than trade on WTO terms. Which actually happens very frequently. So whatever your private views on leave or remain, it is you who is ‘demonstrably wrong’ in your claim that ‘this is the first trade deal in history designed to make it harder not easier to trade.‘
    It is common in analysing trade deals to compare what has been negotiated with what went before, rather than with some hypothetical third scenario. Since I have repeatedly said that the deal is better than this hypothetical third scenario I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. Yes it is better than no deal, but much much worse than our prior arrangements.
    Yes, but our prior arrangements were not a trade deal, and shouldn’t therefore be compared on a like for like basis.
    That is pure sophistry. I thought this was meant to be a serious debate.
    No, it’s a statement of fact. That is definitely part of a serious debate, although regrettably your previous statement was an example of hyperbole, both for the reasons I have stated and because as has been pointed out elsewhere even had your statement been correctly premised there are other examples of trade deals becoming more restrictive.

    Ultimately, such statements are a big part of the reason why we lost the argument to Remain, because they undermine our credibility and cause people to stop listening to us.

    You have a problem with that? Then stop making them. But don’t abuse me for pointing out that you are wrong.
    I don't really understand the point you are trying to make. Let me restate mine. This is the first major trade deal between significant trading blocs that aims to put in place a trading environment more restrictive than that which preceded it. This really shouldn't be a controversial argument, in fact it is the most fundamental description of the situation we are in, I am hardly the only person making it. To argue that isn't the case because the EU single market isn't an FTA is sophistry.
    Then let me put it to you in simple terms. You are wrong. Because countries separate all the time, and the EU is considered a country Sui Generis, and put in place more restrictive arrangements than they had before. Ukraine and Russia. Ireland and the UK. Australia and Papua New Guinea. The UK and New Zealand.

    Your point would have validity if EU membership were just about trade, but it isn’t. So we leave our membership, over many matters, and negotiate a new relationship that is just about trade. It is nonsensical to suggest that this a more restrictive trade deal replacing a less restrictive one. You are comparing apples and scones.
    I'll leave others to judge the relative merits of our arguments.
    Okay. Ydoethur is correct and you are completely wrong. Judgement made. Happy now?
    That has to be correct. The EU is about much more than trade. Whether the EU will ever go so far as to create a single state is open to question, but political integration goes hand in hand with economic integration. If one does not wish to be part of this process of political integration, it's fairly immaterial to be told that GDP in twenty years time will be a bit smaller than would otherwise have been the case.
    A classic example of this choice is Irish Independence. People favoured political independence even knowing that the a break from the UK would have economic consequences.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,871
    edited December 2020
    Roger said:

    It feels like we're moving further and further from civilisation

    That level of histrionics just feels very insincere. On balance, being in the EU was probably the best option in the end, but I don't believe anyone, however pro-EU, genuinely believes that inclusion within it is necessary for 'civilisation'. I doubt even Guy Verhofstadt would say such a thing.

    Treating post Brexit like it is Mad Max land is exactly the sort of thing that allows people like Boris to sell things to those on the fence. You do his work for him very well.
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688
    HYUFD said:

    Starry said:

    HYUFD said:

    Starry said:

    Mr. Starry, you're a former No voter who thinks the SNP should've had an influence on the negotiations?

    Foreign policy isn't and cannot be devolved.

    Doesn't matter the Party in charge. If a country's government is completely excluded and it's voice unheard, despite an overwhelming vote from its electorate, then the political union cannot stand.
    Scotland's sovereign government is Westminster and has been since 1707 as confirmed in the once in a generation 2014 vote.

    Holyrood correctly is purely for domestic matters within Scotland
    If you remember, the SNP manifesto said a once in a generation vote unless there is a material change in circumstances, which explicitly states Scotland being taken out of the EU against the wishes of her people. The people then elected the SNP both to the Scottish and UK Parliament on this manifesto. Denying the stated will of the people will not subdue the desire for independence, but only increase the demand.
    You are clearly a diehard Remainer for whom the only validity in the Union is within the EU.

    Tough, even last year after the Brexit vote 55% of Scots still did not vote SNP. 2014 was a once in a generation referendum, end of conversation.

    If it rained tomorrow the SNP would say that was a mandate for independence, I could not care less what the SNP think or their latest whinge
    You showed just how wrong you are about many things during the Presidential Election and I thought it might have brought some contrition.

    The argument that '55% of Scots did not vote SNP' is surely not one that you would like to press unless you are going all Trumpesque on us? After all, if you want to play that kindergarten game, 74% of the the United Kingdom did not vote for Brexit :smiley::smiley::smiley::smiley::smiley:
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382

    So what does David Cameron feel now ?

    Does he wonder what would have happened if he had actually negotiated with the EU instead of thinking it was 'too much of a faff' ?

    He should feel ashamed.
    Deep, deep, lifelong embarrassment I should think.

    The EU just never believed he would walk away. Failure of Negotiating 1.01
    And then May, Hammond and Robbins repeated that mistake.

    Some here may belittle Boris as a clown but cometh the hour, cometh the man and he was exactly the kind of unpredictable leader that was needed.
    Maybe but can you explain why Johnson voted for Mays deal then ?
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688

    Nigel Farage's fury is a joy to behold.

    One of his 'arguments', for HYUFD's benefit, is that this is being announced on Christmas Eve so that no newspapers will cover what a sell-out it is tomorrow.

    We have to move on now but the thought that the diehard Brexiteer nutjobs are pissed off is a particular satisfaction.

    But they're not pissed off.

    They are posturing because that's what they enjoy doing.
    No he really is pissed off. Look at his tweets and replies. He is in a rage.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,270
    edited December 2020

    HYUFD said:

    Starry said:

    HYUFD said:

    Starry said:

    Mr. Starry, you're a former No voter who thinks the SNP should've had an influence on the negotiations?

    Foreign policy isn't and cannot be devolved.

    Doesn't matter the Party in charge. If a country's government is completely excluded and it's voice unheard, despite an overwhelming vote from its electorate, then the political union cannot stand.
    Scotland's sovereign government is Westminster and has been since 1707 as confirmed in the once in a generation 2014 vote.

    Holyrood correctly is purely for domestic matters within Scotland
    If you remember, the SNP manifesto said a once in a generation vote unless there is a material change in circumstances, which explicitly states Scotland being taken out of the EU against the wishes of her people. The people then elected the SNP both to the Scottish and UK Parliament on this manifesto. Denying the stated will of the people will not subdue the desire for independence, but only increase the demand.
    You are clearly a diehard Remainer for whom the only validity in the Union is within the EU.

    Tough, even last year after the Brexit vote 55% of Scots still did not vote SNP. 2014 was a once in a generation referendum, end of conversation.

    If it rained tomorrow the SNP would say that was a mandate for independence, I could not care less what the SNP think or their latest whinge
    You showed just how wrong you are about many things during the Presidential Election and I thought it might have brought some contrition.

    The argument that '55% of Scots did not vote SNP' is surely not one that you would like to press unless you are going all Trumpesque on us? After all, if you want to play that kindergarten game, 74% of the the United Kingdom did not vote for Brexit :smiley::smiley::smiley::smiley::smiley:
    On what grounds? I alternated between a narrow Biden victory and a narrow Trump victory, it was the former with Trump being the first losing presidential candidate to win Ohio and Florida since 1960. Biden might have won but it was not the Biden landslide some polls predicted.

    52% of UK voters voted for Brexit, only 45% of Scottish voters voted for the SNP last year after the Brexit vote
  • RH1992 said:

    We haven't seen the details of the deal yet, but what we do know already is that it will deliver:
    1. Tariff free access for EU goods to the UK market, where they enjoy a significant trade surplus.
    2. More barriers to the EU market for UK services, where we enjoy a significant surplus.
    3. Fewer freedoms for UK citizens and businesses.
    4. More red tape for UK businesses and citizens who operate in or wish to visit the EU.
    5. A customs border in the Irish Sea.
    But that is by the by. Any deal is better than no deal because it will mean we have a friendly relationship with the EU, which is our most important trading partner and an organisation of which most of our best friends are members. because we have sealed a deal we can hope for cooperation and a level of goodwill that will enable us to forge a closer relationship over time in a relatively pain-free manner. That is very good news indeed.

    This is the best summary I've seen. Barriers were never in doubt as part of the point of voting to leave was detachment from the EU, but it's still a tad disappointing to have those barriers anyway. However, the fact that we in the end have had an amicable split and can hopefully work on some closer ties where necessary/desired in the future is a good thing.
    What remains to be seen is the cost of those barriers...
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688
    HYUFD said:

    Starry said:

    HYUFD said:

    Starry said:

    HYUFD said:

    Starry said:

    Mr. Starry, you're a former No voter who thinks the SNP should've had an influence on the negotiations?

    Foreign policy isn't and cannot be devolved.

    Doesn't matter the Party in charge. If a country's government is completely excluded and it's voice unheard, despite an overwhelming vote from its electorate, then the political union cannot stand.
    Scotland's sovereign government is Westminster and has been since 1707 as confirmed in the once in a generation 2014 vote.

    Holyrood correctly is purely for domestic matters within Scotland
    If you remember, the SNP manifesto said a once in a generation vote unless there is a material change in circumstances, which explicitly states Scotland being taken out of the EU against the wishes of her people. The people then elected the SNP both to the Scottish and UK Parliament on this manifesto. Denying the stated will of the people will not subdue the desire for independence, but only increase the demand.
    You are clearly a diehard Remainer for whom the only validity in the Union is within the EU.

    Tough, even last year after the Brexit vote 55% of Brits still did not vote Conservative and the majority voted for Remain parties. 2014 was a once in a generation referendum, except for a material change in circumstance.

    If it rained tomorrow the SNP would stay that was a mandate for independence, I could not care less what the Scottish people think or their overwhelming vote in their own country
    Actually, I favour the EEA. However, I've fixed the rest of your message.

    45% is on no definition 'an overwhelming vote'
    Nor then is the 26% who voted for Brexit.

    Can't have it both ways sunshine. If you want to play with numbers like that it'll come and bite you in the ass.
  • HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    Mr. Carnyx, because one involves the absence of a land border and the other the imposition of one? Also, Northern Ireland and Scotland do have ever so slightly different political histories and present circumstances.

    As an aside, the border down the Irish Sea is ****ing stupid. That was one thing May got right.

    Undoubtedly different histories. Nevertheless, historical contingencies, and the demonstrated possibility of such a dual situation, are different things.
    Scotland has no border with another EU nation and Scotland voted to stay in the UK in the once in a generation 2014 referendum.

    Scotland has no greater right to special arrangements than Remain voting London, Winchester, Bath, St Albans, Esher and Walton, Guildford, Tunbridge Wells, Cardiff, Oxford and Cambridge etc have
    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    Mr. Carnyx, because one involves the absence of a land border and the other the imposition of one? Also, Northern Ireland and Scotland do have ever so slightly different political histories and present circumstances.

    As an aside, the border down the Irish Sea is ****ing stupid. That was one thing May got right.

    Undoubtedly different histories. Nevertheless, historical contingencies, and the demonstrated possibility of such a dual situation, are different things.
    Scotland has no border with another EU nation and Scotland voted to stay in the UK in the once in a generation 2014 referendum.

    Scotland has no greater right to special arrangements than Remain voting London, Winchester, Bath, St Albans, Esher and Walton, Guildford, Tunbridge Wells, Cardiff, Oxford and Cambridge etc have
    Scotland has lots of borders - with Ireland, Scandinavia, Netherlands, etc. etc. as shown by ferry and air routes.

    Or are people and trade only allowerd to move on land?
    You can fly from Remain voting London and Newcastle to the continent, that does not mean they have a land border with the EU.

    Scotland will be treated exactly the same as the rest of GB as Scots confirmed they were happy with when they voted 55% to stay in the UK in the once in a generation 2014 vote
    And 62% of Scots voted to stay in the EU.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,344
    Yorkcity said:

    So what does David Cameron feel now ?

    Does he wonder what would have happened if he had actually negotiated with the EU instead of thinking it was 'too much of a faff' ?

    He should feel ashamed.
    Deep, deep, lifelong embarrassment I should think.

    The EU just never believed he would walk away. Failure of Negotiating 1.01
    And then May, Hammond and Robbins repeated that mistake.

    Some here may belittle Boris as a clown but cometh the hour, cometh the man and he was exactly the kind of unpredictable leader that was needed.
    Maybe but can you explain why Johnson voted for Mays deal then ?
    His short-term advantage?
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,661
    Pssst
    Nothing is agreed.
    Until everything is agreed.


  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 41,947
    Foxy said:

    kinabalu said:

    Morning all -

    So, deal. Wahay. A good deal compared to no deal, a bad deal compared to membership, but since neither of those were on the table let’s just call it the deal. The substance is what it was always going to be, given the macro economic and political imperatives of the 2 sides. FOM ends and we start to take back our fish. Those were our red lines. The EU protects the integrity of their SM. We can diverge from LPF but at a price. That was their red line.

    It’s positive news, here on Christmas Eve, but I will be a trifle disappointed if I see lots of “relief” being expressed. A recurring theme of my Brexit postings over the piece has been to share the insight that the insanity on every level of “WTO” Brexit was never a real world option for the UK. It was a near 0% probability outcome under any PM other than a genuine hardcore BritNat such as a Redwood or a Cash. Or of course the man himself, the Big Daddy of Brexit, Nigel Farage.

    Boris Johnson is not such an individual. He is not a genuine hardcore anything except opportunist. He was never going to pull the pin on the no deal grenade. He has an 80 seat majority won on the basis of getting Brexit done with a trade deal. It’s come very very late partly because that’s how things go – they expand to fill the time available – but mainly because it works politically for Johnson. This is deemed more important than the anxiety and chaos caused.

    The ‘last minute’ aspect works for him domestically in a number of ways. (i) An atmosphere of relief, fed by all the no deal hyping, is conducive to selling the deal. (ii) It provides the optics of “Boris battling to the wire for Britain”. See today’s softhead tabloids for the early fruits of this. (iii) It makes detailed prolonged examination of the deal pre-implementation impossible. This last, I think, is a particular boon. This is not a PM who relishes scrutiny and debate.

    Cheers.

    Yes, you called it right all along.
    Thank you, Foxy. That's really nice of you to let me know it was noticed.

    Stops me going all ratty and frustrated. :smile:
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,503
    nichomar said:

    So the pathetic game of who ‘won’ the negotiations begins along with all the other things we have to prove we are better the Europe at. Leaving the EU will not stop this silly. Game it. Will make. It worse as. Everything wi lol be viewed by some as how bad it would have been if we still were. Let’s drop this shit and get on with the new world as best we can.

    Yes, that's my view. I'm an ultra-Remainer and think Brexit is nuts. But I honestly can't be bothered to read the rival "who won/who lost" claims. I was in favour of Labour abstaining, but I've come to feel we should just vote for the deal and move on.
  • stjohn said:

    Why wouldn't Labour MPs support the deal?

    From a Remainer point of view? Remain is not an option. It's either this Deal or No Deal.

    From a Brexiteer point of view? There are Labour MPs who want to Brexit with No Deal? Who are they are? And how does No Deal help their constituents?

    Because it appears to be a poor deal (unless one believes Guido).

    Abstention allows the deal to go through without confirmation.

    In twelve months time,

    Starmer: "The trade deal has proven to be a failure, all the car manufacturers have moved to mainland Europe"

    Johnson: " Well it's your fault, you supported the deal".

    The question would not be framed around a deal. It would be: "You promised car workers in the UK a bright future with more opportunities, there is now no car industry in the UK. Why have you let them down and what are you going to do now to mitigate the disaster for them and their communities of those jobs going?" No need to mention the deal at all.

    And that's the point. This government has made a series of very explicit promises. It must to be held to account on their delivery
    What does Starmer want? I don't know, but I guess:

    1 That The Deal happens, because the alternative doesn't bear thinking about
    2 That the gap between Brexit promise and Brexit reality is on the government
    3 That the sting of "Remainer Keir" is neutralised
    4 That the splits in the Conservative party are made as clear as possible by maximising the ERG rebellion

    I think that means speaking against ("this isn't what you promised"), using as much judo-move as possible ("this is how I would use the paragraph on page 751 to move to a beneficially closer relationship") and then vote yes to "prevent the disaster of No Deal, which I am glad the Prime Minister has finally realised is the worst deal of all".

    Yes, it will be an emotional wench for many Labour MPs to do this, and some might need a doctor's note. But I don't think he can sit this one out.

    I don't think it will matter that much, but I agree that Labour is likely to whip in favour of the deal. I suspect a fair few Labour MPs will rebel and that there may be some front bench resignations. But almost no-one will notice and very quickly the focus will come to be on holding the Tories to account for the reality as opposed tot he promises that were made.

  • Yorkcity said:

    stjohn said:

    Why wouldn't Labour MPs support the deal?

    From a Remainer point of view? Remain is not an option. It's either this Deal or No Deal.

    From a Brexiteer point of view? There are Labour MPs who want to Brexit with No Deal? Who are they are? And how does No Deal help their constituents?

    Because it appears to be a poor deal (unless one believes Guido).

    Abstention allows the deal to go through without confirmation.

    In twelve months time,

    Starmer: "The trade deal has proven to be a failure, all the car manufacturers have moved to mainland Europe"

    Johnson: " Well it's your fault, you supported the deal".
    You're absolutely delusional if you think a deal will ever be Starmers fault. This is Boris's deal.
    There is a trap though for Labour. The Brexit deal - once we get through the hubris to the detail - won't be the magic bullet it was sold as. The realities of a shit ton of red tape and increased costs and delays and lack of freedoms will impact onto people already sick of a lack of freedom and increased cost of living.

    Let me give you an example. We appear to have dodged the (self-threatened) tariff on cars and car parts. So all we suffer now are the costs of reams of paperwork and lengthy transit through formerly open borders. If - as suggested by their COO - that is enough for Nissan to pull the plug then the workforce in the North East aren't going to just blame Boris. They will blame Labour for not protecting them from it.

    This is Keith's conundrum. People need to be protected from something that they have falsely been promised will benefit them. If he protects them they will be outraged now. If he doesn't protect them they will be outraged later.

    No-one ever blamed the Tories for the Iraq War.

    True rochdale just has a downer on Labour by his childish name calling of sks. He needs to grow up.
    imho it will be a catastrophic political error by Starmer to vote for this deal.

    He must be free to say 'look how crap it all is' in a year or two's time.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,639
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Starry said:

    HYUFD said:

    Starry said:

    Mr. Starry, you're a former No voter who thinks the SNP should've had an influence on the negotiations?

    Foreign policy isn't and cannot be devolved.

    Doesn't matter the Party in charge. If a country's government is completely excluded and it's voice unheard, despite an overwhelming vote from its electorate, then the political union cannot stand.
    Scotland's sovereign government is Westminster and has been since 1707 as confirmed in the once in a generation 2014 vote.

    Holyrood correctly is purely for domestic matters within Scotland
    If you remember, the SNP manifesto said a once in a generation vote unless there is a material change in circumstances, which explicitly states Scotland being taken out of the EU against the wishes of her people. The people then elected the SNP both to the Scottish and UK Parliament on this manifesto. Denying the stated will of the people will not subdue the desire for independence, but only increase the demand.
    You are clearly a diehard Remainer for whom the only validity in the Union is within the EU.

    Tough, even last year after the Brexit vote 55% of Scots still did not vote SNP. 2014 was a once in a generation referendum, end of conversation.

    If it rained tomorrow the SNP would say that was a mandate for independence, I could not care less what the SNP think or their latest whinge
    You showed just how wrong you are about many things during the Presidential Election and I thought it might have brought some contrition.

    The argument that '55% of Scots did not vote SNP' is surely not one that you would like to press unless you are going all Trumpesque on us? After all, if you want to play that kindergarten game, 74% of the the United Kingdom did not vote for Brexit :smiley::smiley::smiley::smiley::smiley:
    On what grounds? I alternated between a narrow Biden victory and a narrow Trump victory, it was the former with Trump being the first losing presidential candidate to also hold onto Ohio and Florida since 1960.

    52% of UK voters voted for Brexit, only 45% of Scottish voters voted for the SNP last year after the Brexit vote
    Nows that is a whacking, erm, but only becvause I am being polite, terminological inexactitude. 52% of UK voters did not vote for Brexit.
  • F1: Ladbrokes has a special on Mick Schumacher winning a race by 2023.

    It's 1.8, which is terrible value as next year he'll be at Haas who are unlikely to be winning races next year.

    Intrigued to see how he does, though.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,480
    Roger said:

    Brexit phone-in on radio 5.

    Interviewer-So you're pleased we're finally leaving the EU. Why is that?

    Caller-The EU never did anything for my business...

    Interviewer-Why is that?

    Caller-Well we had to follow their rules..
    .
    Interviewer-What's your business?

    Caller- I run a Golf Course...

    Interviewer-How do their rules affect your running the golf course?

    Caller-Well we had to let people in wheelchairs play golf all day

    Interviewer-Was that all?

    Caller-No we had to have ramps so they could get from one hole to the next....

    The Equalities Act was UK legislation, and only requires "reasonable adjustment" so doubly wrong. Apart from that, a good call...
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,851
    stjohn said:

    stjohn said:

    Why wouldn't Labour MPs support the deal?

    From a Remainer point of view? Remain is not an option. It's either this Deal or No Deal.

    From a Brexiteer point of view? There are Labour MPs who want to Brexit with No Deal? Who are they are? And how does No Deal help their constituents?

    Because it appears to be a poor deal (unless one believes Guido).

    Abstention allows the deal to go through without confirmation.

    In twelve months time,

    Starmer: "The trade deal has proven to be a failure, all the car manufacturers have moved to mainland Europe"

    Johnson: " Well it's your fault, you supported the deal".
    Grievously mistaken thinking.
    I agree. It doesn't work like that. The fact that Iraq became the most unpopular happening for decades and the Tories were far more supportive than Labour; it was always Blair's disaster
  • kle4 said:

    I think kinabalu in particular has kept a cool head on likely outcomes. Accidental no deal I do think was possible, but time and again people allowed hatred of Boris to mean he wanted no deal, when it looks like he really didn't. The difficulties in agreeing come down to competence and calculation.

    I must say, with hindsight, I am disappointed in kinabalu's analysis. Taking his logic that one step further, he should have been able to predict with equal confidence that the deal would not only be made, but made specifically on Christmas Eve. It fits the theatre perfectly.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,270

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    Mr. Carnyx, because one involves the absence of a land border and the other the imposition of one? Also, Northern Ireland and Scotland do have ever so slightly different political histories and present circumstances.

    As an aside, the border down the Irish Sea is ****ing stupid. That was one thing May got right.

    Undoubtedly different histories. Nevertheless, historical contingencies, and the demonstrated possibility of such a dual situation, are different things.
    Scotland has no border with another EU nation and Scotland voted to stay in the UK in the once in a generation 2014 referendum.

    Scotland has no greater right to special arrangements than Remain voting London, Winchester, Bath, St Albans, Esher and Walton, Guildford, Tunbridge Wells, Cardiff, Oxford and Cambridge etc have
    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    Mr. Carnyx, because one involves the absence of a land border and the other the imposition of one? Also, Northern Ireland and Scotland do have ever so slightly different political histories and present circumstances.

    As an aside, the border down the Irish Sea is ****ing stupid. That was one thing May got right.

    Undoubtedly different histories. Nevertheless, historical contingencies, and the demonstrated possibility of such a dual situation, are different things.
    Scotland has no border with another EU nation and Scotland voted to stay in the UK in the once in a generation 2014 referendum.

    Scotland has no greater right to special arrangements than Remain voting London, Winchester, Bath, St Albans, Esher and Walton, Guildford, Tunbridge Wells, Cardiff, Oxford and Cambridge etc have
    Scotland has lots of borders - with Ireland, Scandinavia, Netherlands, etc. etc. as shown by ferry and air routes.

    Or are people and trade only allowerd to move on land?
    You can fly from Remain voting London and Newcastle to the continent, that does not mean they have a land border with the EU.

    Scotland will be treated exactly the same as the rest of GB as Scots confirmed they were happy with when they voted 55% to stay in the UK in the once in a generation 2014 vote
    And 62% of Scots voted to stay in the EU.
    70% of Oxford residents voted to stay in the EU, so what? Nobody is arguing for special circumstances for Oxford.

    Scots voted to stay in the UK in 2014 and will do what the rest of the UK does.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,639
    Foxy said:

    Roger said:

    Brexit phone-in on radio 5.

    Interviewer-So you're pleased we're finally leaving the EU. Why is that?

    Caller-The EU never did anything for my business...

    Interviewer-Why is that?

    Caller-Well we had to follow their rules..
    .
    Interviewer-What's your business?

    Caller- I run a Golf Course...

    Interviewer-How do their rules affect your running the golf course?

    Caller-Well we had to let people in wheelchairs play golf all day

    Interviewer-Was that all?

    Caller-No we had to have ramps so they could get from one hole to the next....

    The Equalities Act was UK legislation, and only requires "reasonable adjustment" so doubly wrong. Apart from that, a good call...
    It's very odd because he has to allow for golf buggies anyway - so what's the problem? Hardly any adjustment needed, except maybe a ramp to the 19th hole.
  • HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    Mr. Carnyx, because one involves the absence of a land border and the other the imposition of one? Also, Northern Ireland and Scotland do have ever so slightly different political histories and present circumstances.

    As an aside, the border down the Irish Sea is ****ing stupid. That was one thing May got right.

    Undoubtedly different histories. Nevertheless, historical contingencies, and the demonstrated possibility of such a dual situation, are different things.
    Scotland has no border with another EU nation and Scotland voted to stay in the UK in the once in a generation 2014 referendum.

    Scotland has no greater right to special arrangements than Remain voting London, Winchester, Bath, St Albans, Esher and Walton, Guildford, Tunbridge Wells, Cardiff, Oxford and Cambridge etc have
    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    Mr. Carnyx, because one involves the absence of a land border and the other the imposition of one? Also, Northern Ireland and Scotland do have ever so slightly different political histories and present circumstances.

    As an aside, the border down the Irish Sea is ****ing stupid. That was one thing May got right.

    Undoubtedly different histories. Nevertheless, historical contingencies, and the demonstrated possibility of such a dual situation, are different things.
    Scotland has no border with another EU nation and Scotland voted to stay in the UK in the once in a generation 2014 referendum.

    Scotland has no greater right to special arrangements than Remain voting London, Winchester, Bath, St Albans, Esher and Walton, Guildford, Tunbridge Wells, Cardiff, Oxford and Cambridge etc have
    Scotland has lots of borders - with Ireland, Scandinavia, Netherlands, etc. etc. as shown by ferry and air routes.

    Or are people and trade only allowerd to move on land?
    You can fly from Remain voting London and Newcastle to the continent, that does not mean they have a land border with the EU.

    Scotland will be treated exactly the same as the rest of GB as Scots confirmed they were happy with when they voted 55% to stay in the UK in the once in a generation 2014 vote
    And 62% of Scots voted to stay in the EU.
    70% of Oxford residents voted to stay in the EU, so what? Nobody is arguing for special circumstances for Oxford.

    Scots voted to stay in the UK in 2014 and will do what the rest of the UK does.
    Because Oxford isn't a country.
  • Yorkcity said:

    So what does David Cameron feel now ?

    Does he wonder what would have happened if he had actually negotiated with the EU instead of thinking it was 'too much of a faff' ?

    He should feel ashamed.
    Deep, deep, lifelong embarrassment I should think.

    The EU just never believed he would walk away. Failure of Negotiating 1.01
    And then May, Hammond and Robbins repeated that mistake.

    Some here may belittle Boris as a clown but cometh the hour, cometh the man and he was exactly the kind of unpredictable leader that was needed.
    Maybe but can you explain why Johnson voted for Mays deal then ?
    He was wrong to do so in my opinion.

    Any other questions?
  • HYUFD said:

    Starry said:

    HYUFD said:

    Starry said:

    Mr. Starry, you're a former No voter who thinks the SNP should've had an influence on the negotiations?

    Foreign policy isn't and cannot be devolved.

    Doesn't matter the Party in charge. If a country's government is completely excluded and it's voice unheard, despite an overwhelming vote from its electorate, then the political union cannot stand.
    Scotland's sovereign government is Westminster and has been since 1707 as confirmed in the once in a generation 2014 vote.

    Holyrood correctly is purely for domestic matters within Scotland
    If you remember, the SNP manifesto said a once in a generation vote unless there is a material change in circumstances, which explicitly states Scotland being taken out of the EU against the wishes of her people. The people then elected the SNP both to the Scottish and UK Parliament on this manifesto. Denying the stated will of the people will not subdue the desire for independence, but only increase the demand.
    You are clearly a diehard Remainer for whom the only validity in the Union is within the EU.

    Tough, even last year after the Brexit vote 55% of Scots still did not vote SNP. 2014 was a once in a generation referendum, end of conversation.

    If it rained tomorrow the SNP would say that was a mandate for independence, I could not care less what the SNP think or their latest whinge
    Because you have no interest in democracy. "What the SNP think" is what the Scottish people think. There was a majority vote for independence parties in the last Holyrood elections and it will be greater again next year.

    Why not just be clear and admit that the people of Scotland have no right to their own thoughts and must stay under the yoke of England. Because thats what you are saying.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,270

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    Mr. Carnyx, because one involves the absence of a land border and the other the imposition of one? Also, Northern Ireland and Scotland do have ever so slightly different political histories and present circumstances.

    As an aside, the border down the Irish Sea is ****ing stupid. That was one thing May got right.

    Undoubtedly different histories. Nevertheless, historical contingencies, and the demonstrated possibility of such a dual situation, are different things.
    Scotland has no border with another EU nation and Scotland voted to stay in the UK in the once in a generation 2014 referendum.

    Scotland has no greater right to special arrangements than Remain voting London, Winchester, Bath, St Albans, Esher and Walton, Guildford, Tunbridge Wells, Cardiff, Oxford and Cambridge etc have
    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    Mr. Carnyx, because one involves the absence of a land border and the other the imposition of one? Also, Northern Ireland and Scotland do have ever so slightly different political histories and present circumstances.

    As an aside, the border down the Irish Sea is ****ing stupid. That was one thing May got right.

    Undoubtedly different histories. Nevertheless, historical contingencies, and the demonstrated possibility of such a dual situation, are different things.
    Scotland has no border with another EU nation and Scotland voted to stay in the UK in the once in a generation 2014 referendum.

    Scotland has no greater right to special arrangements than Remain voting London, Winchester, Bath, St Albans, Esher and Walton, Guildford, Tunbridge Wells, Cardiff, Oxford and Cambridge etc have
    Scotland has lots of borders - with Ireland, Scandinavia, Netherlands, etc. etc. as shown by ferry and air routes.

    Or are people and trade only allowerd to move on land?
    You can fly from Remain voting London and Newcastle to the continent, that does not mean they have a land border with the EU.

    Scotland will be treated exactly the same as the rest of GB as Scots confirmed they were happy with when they voted 55% to stay in the UK in the once in a generation 2014 vote
    And 62% of Scots voted to stay in the EU.
    70% of Oxford residents voted to stay in the EU, so what? Nobody is arguing for special circumstances for Oxford.

    Scots voted to stay in the UK in 2014 and will do what the rest of the UK does.
    Because Oxford isn't a country.
    It is part of the same sovereign country as Scotland, the UK, that Scots voted to stay part of in the once in a generation 2014 vote
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,480

    Yorkcity said:

    stjohn said:

    Why wouldn't Labour MPs support the deal?

    From a Remainer point of view? Remain is not an option. It's either this Deal or No Deal.

    From a Brexiteer point of view? There are Labour MPs who want to Brexit with No Deal? Who are they are? And how does No Deal help their constituents?

    Because it appears to be a poor deal (unless one believes Guido).

    Abstention allows the deal to go through without confirmation.

    In twelve months time,

    Starmer: "The trade deal has proven to be a failure, all the car manufacturers have moved to mainland Europe"

    Johnson: " Well it's your fault, you supported the deal".
    You're absolutely delusional if you think a deal will ever be Starmers fault. This is Boris's deal.
    There is a trap though for Labour. The Brexit deal - once we get through the hubris to the detail - won't be the magic bullet it was sold as. The realities of a shit ton of red tape and increased costs and delays and lack of freedoms will impact onto people already sick of a lack of freedom and increased cost of living.

    Let me give you an example. We appear to have dodged the (self-threatened) tariff on cars and car parts. So all we suffer now are the costs of reams of paperwork and lengthy transit through formerly open borders. If - as suggested by their COO - that is enough for Nissan to pull the plug then the workforce in the North East aren't going to just blame Boris. They will blame Labour for not protecting them from it.

    This is Keith's conundrum. People need to be protected from something that they have falsely been promised will benefit them. If he protects them they will be outraged now. If he doesn't protect them they will be outraged later.

    No-one ever blamed the Tories for the Iraq War.

    True rochdale just has a downer on Labour by his childish name calling of sks. He needs to grow up.
    imho it will be a catastrophic political error by Starmer to vote for this deal.

    He must be free to say 'look how crap it all is' in a year or two's time.
    He should vote for the Deal, and promise that Labour will improve it when next in power. No need to whip though, let anyone abstain or even vote against without penalty.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,270
    edited December 2020

    HYUFD said:

    Starry said:

    HYUFD said:

    Starry said:

    Mr. Starry, you're a former No voter who thinks the SNP should've had an influence on the negotiations?

    Foreign policy isn't and cannot be devolved.

    Doesn't matter the Party in charge. If a country's government is completely excluded and it's voice unheard, despite an overwhelming vote from its electorate, then the political union cannot stand.
    Scotland's sovereign government is Westminster and has been since 1707 as confirmed in the once in a generation 2014 vote.

    Holyrood correctly is purely for domestic matters within Scotland
    If you remember, the SNP manifesto said a once in a generation vote unless there is a material change in circumstances, which explicitly states Scotland being taken out of the EU against the wishes of her people. The people then elected the SNP both to the Scottish and UK Parliament on this manifesto. Denying the stated will of the people will not subdue the desire for independence, but only increase the demand.
    You are clearly a diehard Remainer for whom the only validity in the Union is within the EU.

    Tough, even last year after the Brexit vote 55% of Scots still did not vote SNP. 2014 was a once in a generation referendum, end of conversation.

    If it rained tomorrow the SNP would say that was a mandate for independence, I could not care less what the SNP think or their latest whinge
    Because you have no interest in democracy. "What the SNP think" is what the Scottish people think. There was a majority vote for independence parties in the last Holyrood elections and it will be greater again next year.

    Why not just be clear and admit that the people of Scotland have no right to their own thoughts and must stay under the yoke of England. Because thats what you are saying.
    Rubbish, 55% of Scottish voters did not vote SNP at the 2019 general election, what the SNP think is not what most Scots think.
  • I remember when Remainers used to say it would take 7 years to negotiate a trade agreement, this one has been done in just 11 months.

    So despite all the high drama was this perhaps ... The easiest trade deal in history?
  • Mr. Pioneers, English fish quotas?

    Could be wrong, but don't Wales and Scotland and Northern Ireland have fishermen too?

    The rest of the fishing fleets didn't sell theirs. The war over fish was to take back control of something sold by the English to the foreigners who had obviously stolen them.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,639
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Starry said:

    HYUFD said:

    Starry said:

    Mr. Starry, you're a former No voter who thinks the SNP should've had an influence on the negotiations?

    Foreign policy isn't and cannot be devolved.

    Doesn't matter the Party in charge. If a country's government is completely excluded and it's voice unheard, despite an overwhelming vote from its electorate, then the political union cannot stand.
    Scotland's sovereign government is Westminster and has been since 1707 as confirmed in the once in a generation 2014 vote.

    Holyrood correctly is purely for domestic matters within Scotland
    If you remember, the SNP manifesto said a once in a generation vote unless there is a material change in circumstances, which explicitly states Scotland being taken out of the EU against the wishes of her people. The people then elected the SNP both to the Scottish and UK Parliament on this manifesto. Denying the stated will of the people will not subdue the desire for independence, but only increase the demand.
    You are clearly a diehard Remainer for whom the only validity in the Union is within the EU.

    Tough, even last year after the Brexit vote 55% of Scots still did not vote SNP. 2014 was a once in a generation referendum, end of conversation.

    If it rained tomorrow the SNP would say that was a mandate for independence, I could not care less what the SNP think or their latest whinge
    Because you have no interest in democracy. "What the SNP think" is what the Scottish people think. There was a majority vote for independence parties in the last Holyrood elections and it will be greater again next year.

    Why not just be clear and admit that the people of Scotland have no right to their own thoughts and must stay under the yoke of England. Because thats what you are saying.
    Rubbish, 55% of Scots did not vote SNP at the 2019 generation election, what the SNP think is not what most Scots think.
    Now that is another whacking inexactitude.
  • Mr. Pioneers, English fish quotas?

    Could be wrong, but don't Wales and Scotland and Northern Ireland have fishermen too?

    The rest of the fishing fleets didn't sell theirs. The war over fish was to take back control of something sold by the English to the foreigners who had obviously stolen them.
    No it wasn't. That misunderstanding has been corrected repeatedly.

    English quotas owned by Europeans are still English quotas. That is not what was being fought over.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,639

    HYUFD said:

    Starry said:

    HYUFD said:

    Starry said:

    Mr. Starry, you're a former No voter who thinks the SNP should've had an influence on the negotiations?

    Foreign policy isn't and cannot be devolved.

    Doesn't matter the Party in charge. If a country's government is completely excluded and it's voice unheard, despite an overwhelming vote from its electorate, then the political union cannot stand.
    Scotland's sovereign government is Westminster and has been since 1707 as confirmed in the once in a generation 2014 vote.

    Holyrood correctly is purely for domestic matters within Scotland
    If you remember, the SNP manifesto said a once in a generation vote unless there is a material change in circumstances, which explicitly states Scotland being taken out of the EU against the wishes of her people. The people then elected the SNP both to the Scottish and UK Parliament on this manifesto. Denying the stated will of the people will not subdue the desire for independence, but only increase the demand.
    You are clearly a diehard Remainer for whom the only validity in the Union is within the EU.

    Tough, even last year after the Brexit vote 55% of Scots still did not vote SNP. 2014 was a once in a generation referendum, end of conversation.

    If it rained tomorrow the SNP would say that was a mandate for independence, I could not care less what the SNP think or their latest whinge
    Because you have no interest in democracy. "What the SNP think" is what the Scottish people think. There was a majority vote for independence parties in the last Holyrood elections and it will be greater again next year.

    Why not just be clear and admit that the people of Scotland have no right to their own thoughts and must stay under the yoke of England. Because thats what you are saying.
    He's also including DNVs, children, babies, prisoners, and dements within his calculations of who did and didn't vote - invariably to his favour, except that it wrecks his argument.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 28,795
    edited December 2020
    Yorkcity said:

    stjohn said:

    Why wouldn't Labour MPs support the deal?

    From a Remainer point of view? Remain is not an option. It's either this Deal or No Deal.

    From a Brexiteer point of view? There are Labour MPs who want to Brexit with No Deal? Who are they are? And how does No Deal help their constituents?

    Because it appears to be a poor deal (unless one believes Guido).

    Abstention allows the deal to go through without confirmation.

    In twelve months time,

    Starmer: "The trade deal has proven to be a failure, all the car manufacturers have moved to mainland Europe"

    Johnson: " Well it's your fault, you supported the deal".
    You're absolutely delusional if you think a deal will ever be Starmers fault. This is Boris's deal.
    There is a trap though for Labour. The Brexit deal - once we get through the hubris to the detail - won't be the magic bullet it was sold as. The realities of a shit ton of red tape and increased costs and delays and lack of freedoms will impact onto people already sick of a lack of freedom and increased cost of living.

    Let me give you an example. We appear to have dodged the (self-threatened) tariff on cars and car parts. So all we suffer now are the costs of reams of paperwork and lengthy transit through formerly open borders. If - as suggested by their COO - that is enough for Nissan to pull the plug then the workforce in the North East aren't going to just blame Boris. They will blame Labour for not protecting them from it.

    This is Keith's conundrum. People need to be protected from something that they have falsely been promised will benefit them. If he protects them they will be outraged now. If he doesn't protect them they will be outraged later.

    No-one ever blamed the Tories for the Iraq War.

    True rochdale just has a downer on Labour by his childish name calling of sks. He needs to grow up.
    I throw names at everyone. Have openly described the leadership of Swinson as the "flight of Icarus".

    I would take a Labour government led by Starmer in a heartbeat over this lot. But the problem is that Sir Keir (better?) just isn't very good. A brilliant lawyer, but a cardboard politician. He would do very well in a country like Italy that has had a succession of technocrat PMs, but he is struggling against Johnson despite Shagger being an abject liar, hypocrite and failure on his own terms.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,851
    Foxy said:

    Roger said:

    Brexit phone-in on radio 5.

    Interviewer-So you're pleased we're finally leaving the EU. Why is that?

    Caller-The EU never did anything for my business...

    Interviewer-Why is that?

    Caller-Well we had to follow their rules..
    .
    Interviewer-What's your business?

    Caller- I run a Golf Course...

    Interviewer-How do their rules affect your running the golf course?

    Caller-Well we had to let people in wheelchairs play golf all day

    Interviewer-Was that all?

    Caller-No we had to have ramps so they could get from one hole to the next....

    The Equalities Act was UK legislation, and only requires "reasonable adjustment" so doubly wrong. Apart from that, a good call...
    That doesn't surprise me at all! But a good illustration of where Brexiteers are coming from (or crawling out of)
  • HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Starry said:

    HYUFD said:

    Starry said:

    Mr. Starry, you're a former No voter who thinks the SNP should've had an influence on the negotiations?

    Foreign policy isn't and cannot be devolved.

    Doesn't matter the Party in charge. If a country's government is completely excluded and it's voice unheard, despite an overwhelming vote from its electorate, then the political union cannot stand.
    Scotland's sovereign government is Westminster and has been since 1707 as confirmed in the once in a generation 2014 vote.

    Holyrood correctly is purely for domestic matters within Scotland
    If you remember, the SNP manifesto said a once in a generation vote unless there is a material change in circumstances, which explicitly states Scotland being taken out of the EU against the wishes of her people. The people then elected the SNP both to the Scottish and UK Parliament on this manifesto. Denying the stated will of the people will not subdue the desire for independence, but only increase the demand.
    You are clearly a diehard Remainer for whom the only validity in the Union is within the EU.

    Tough, even last year after the Brexit vote 55% of Scots still did not vote SNP. 2014 was a once in a generation referendum, end of conversation.

    If it rained tomorrow the SNP would say that was a mandate for independence, I could not care less what the SNP think or their latest whinge
    Because you have no interest in democracy. "What the SNP think" is what the Scottish people think. There was a majority vote for independence parties in the last Holyrood elections and it will be greater again next year.

    Why not just be clear and admit that the people of Scotland have no right to their own thoughts and must stay under the yoke of England. Because thats what you are saying.
    Rubbish, 55% of Scottish voters did not vote SNP at the 2019 general election, what the SNP think is not what most Scots think.
    You are an embarrassment to the party and to democracy.

    The SNP were duly elected.
  • Time to build a wall, well walls...


  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382

    Yorkcity said:

    stjohn said:

    Why wouldn't Labour MPs support the deal?

    From a Remainer point of view? Remain is not an option. It's either this Deal or No Deal.

    From a Brexiteer point of view? There are Labour MPs who want to Brexit with No Deal? Who are they are? And how does No Deal help their constituents?

    Because it appears to be a poor deal (unless one believes Guido).

    Abstention allows the deal to go through without confirmation.

    In twelve months time,

    Starmer: "The trade deal has proven to be a failure, all the car manufacturers have moved to mainland Europe"

    Johnson: " Well it's your fault, you supported the deal".
    You're absolutely delusional if you think a deal will ever be Starmers fault. This is Boris's deal.
    There is a trap though for Labour. The Brexit deal - once we get through the hubris to the detail - won't be the magic bullet it was sold as. The realities of a shit ton of red tape and increased costs and delays and lack of freedoms will impact onto people already sick of a lack of freedom and increased cost of living.

    Let me give you an example. We appear to have dodged the (self-threatened) tariff on cars and car parts. So all we suffer now are the costs of reams of paperwork and lengthy transit through formerly open borders. If - as suggested by their COO - that is enough for Nissan to pull the plug then the workforce in the North East aren't going to just blame Boris. They will blame Labour for not protecting them from it.

    This is Keith's conundrum. People need to be protected from something that they have falsely been promised will benefit them. If he protects them they will be outraged now. If he doesn't protect them they will be outraged later.

    No-one ever blamed the Tories for the Iraq War.

    True rochdale just has a downer on Labour by his childish name calling of sks. He needs to grow up.
    imho it will be a catastrophic political error by Starmer to vote for this deal.

    He must be free to say 'look how crap it all is' in a year or two's time.
    I disagree no deal would be disastrous.
    People in general want to move on especially during a pandemic.
    Nobody gave a shit that the conservatives were more keen on invading Iraq , than Labour.
    With hundreds of Labour Mps voting against Blair in parliament.
    This is Johnson deal and if it goes well he deserves the praise and the opposite if it causes major problems,
    No one blamed Labour when we fell out of the ERM even though John Smith and Labour supported it.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,480
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Starry said:

    HYUFD said:

    Starry said:

    Mr. Starry, you're a former No voter who thinks the SNP should've had an influence on the negotiations?

    Foreign policy isn't and cannot be devolved.

    Doesn't matter the Party in charge. If a country's government is completely excluded and it's voice unheard, despite an overwhelming vote from its electorate, then the political union cannot stand.
    Scotland's sovereign government is Westminster and has been since 1707 as confirmed in the once in a generation 2014 vote.

    Holyrood correctly is purely for domestic matters within Scotland
    If you remember, the SNP manifesto said a once in a generation vote unless there is a material change in circumstances, which explicitly states Scotland being taken out of the EU against the wishes of her people. The people then elected the SNP both to the Scottish and UK Parliament on this manifesto. Denying the stated will of the people will not subdue the desire for independence, but only increase the demand.
    You are clearly a diehard Remainer for whom the only validity in the Union is within the EU.

    Tough, even last year after the Brexit vote 55% of Scots still did not vote SNP. 2014 was a once in a generation referendum, end of conversation.

    If it rained tomorrow the SNP would say that was a mandate for independence, I could not care less what the SNP think or their latest whinge
    Because you have no interest in democracy. "What the SNP think" is what the Scottish people think. There was a majority vote for independence parties in the last Holyrood elections and it will be greater again next year.

    Why not just be clear and admit that the people of Scotland have no right to their own thoughts and must stay under the yoke of England. Because thats what you are saying.
    Rubbish, 55% of Scottish voters did not vote SNP at the 2019 general election, what the SNP think is not what most Scots think.
    Yes but requiring a majority in the popular vote is not how elections work. Otherwise we wouldn't have either PM BoZo or President Trump.

    There looks to be nailed on SNP majority in Holyrood, and the pro Indy Scottish Greens would likely give a supermajority for independence. Considering the recent fratricide in SNP ranks as court politrix that will be an astonishing performance.
  • Foxy said:

    Roger said:

    Brexit phone-in on radio 5.

    Interviewer-So you're pleased we're finally leaving the EU. Why is that?

    Caller-The EU never did anything for my business...

    Interviewer-Why is that?

    Caller-Well we had to follow their rules..
    .
    Interviewer-What's your business?

    Caller- I run a Golf Course...

    Interviewer-How do their rules affect your running the golf course?

    Caller-Well we had to let people in wheelchairs play golf all day

    Interviewer-Was that all?

    Caller-No we had to have ramps so they could get from one hole to the next....

    The Equalities Act was UK legislation, and only requires "reasonable adjustment" so doubly wrong. Apart from that, a good call...
    And this is the black hole that Boris's victory will fall into. People have No Idea what the EU is or what it does. "Brexit" is whatever their own particular gripe is, whether that is too many muslims, "sovrinty" ("whatever that is") or in his case the bloody EU forcing him to be a decent human being and making his facility accessible to paying customers.

    When these issues don't magically resolve, when Tory ministers are sent on to explain that its UK legislation or that not being allowed to live in your holiday home is a good thing or that we didn't need Nissan anyway, these people are going to have a fit.

    And then vote for Farage.
  • I notice Dishy Rishi has disappeared from view over the past few weeks.
  • Foxy said:

    Roger said:

    Brexit phone-in on radio 5.

    Interviewer-So you're pleased we're finally leaving the EU. Why is that?

    Caller-The EU never did anything for my business...

    Interviewer-Why is that?

    Caller-Well we had to follow their rules..
    .
    Interviewer-What's your business?

    Caller- I run a Golf Course...

    Interviewer-How do their rules affect your running the golf course?

    Caller-Well we had to let people in wheelchairs play golf all day

    Interviewer-Was that all?

    Caller-No we had to have ramps so they could get from one hole to the next....

    The Equalities Act was UK legislation, and only requires "reasonable adjustment" so doubly wrong. Apart from that, a good call...
    Takes us back to the conversation yesterday about the tension between those who wish the UK was more like it was in the past, and those who quite like how it is now.

    EU or not, a lot of the things that nostalgic Brexit supporters want aren't coming back.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,480
    edited December 2020

    Mr. Pioneers, English fish quotas?

    Could be wrong, but don't Wales and Scotland and Northern Ireland have fishermen too?

    The rest of the fishing fleets didn't sell theirs. The war over fish was to take back control of something sold by the English to the foreigners who had obviously stolen them.
    No it wasn't. That misunderstanding has been corrected repeatedly.

    English quotas owned by Europeans are still English quotas. That is not what was being fought over.
    Yes, though about as English as Manchester City FC just badge engineering.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 41,947
    MaxPB said:

    So what does David Cameron feel now ?

    Does he wonder what would have happened if he had actually negotiated with the EU instead of thinking it was 'too much of a faff' ?

    He should feel ashamed.
    Deep, deep, lifelong embarrassment I should think.

    The EU just never believed he would walk away. Failure of Negotiating 1.01
    And then May, Hammond and Robbins repeated that mistake.

    Some here may belittle Boris as a clown but cometh the hour, cometh the man and he was exactly the kind of unpredictable leader that was needed.
    I think it was @Casino_Royale that made the point on the aggressive fishing waters stance in no deal concentrating minds in the EU.

    Those tough stances have ensured the EU compromised and did a deal realising the UK would force the no deal to mean no deal on both sides of it. They knew with May and Robbins they'd still get preferential access to the UK without needing to give anything in return in the no deal scenario.
    "The EU caved on big points because we made them truly fear No Deal" -

    This will be a key part of the Johnson spin on the deal over the next few days and weeks. Let's see how it holds up.
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382

    Yorkcity said:

    So what does David Cameron feel now ?

    Does he wonder what would have happened if he had actually negotiated with the EU instead of thinking it was 'too much of a faff' ?

    He should feel ashamed.
    Deep, deep, lifelong embarrassment I should think.

    The EU just never believed he would walk away. Failure of Negotiating 1.01
    And then May, Hammond and Robbins repeated that mistake.

    Some here may belittle Boris as a clown but cometh the hour, cometh the man and he was exactly the kind of unpredictable leader that was needed.
    Maybe but can you explain why Johnson voted for Mays deal then ?
    His short-term advantage?
    Yes hard to see any other reason.
  • Hello, police, I would like to report an assault...

    https://twitter.com/LukePowell88/status/1342026302845579264?s=20
This discussion has been closed.