Brexit discussion thread III

Leroy42

So yesterday we had a minister state that the 40bn settlement would have to be paid regardless of the final deal.

We had head of HRMC state that based on an admin charge of £32.50 per shipment, under the max fac system favoured by Boris and Gove would cost in the region of £20bn per annum to UK business.

The day before we had the head of the bank of England state that average household income had fallen £900 per annum already due to the fall-off from forecasts.

At what point are people going to wake up and realise that, even if Brexit was good as an idea, the way that it is being undertaken is utterly disastrous? Why are people still calling for this to continue?

At no point has anybody been able to show, with anything close to detail, what the benefits of all this are going to be.

The Aus/NZ trade talks were mentioned yesterday. Australia would be one of the bigger targets for any UK trade deal (given that Canada recently signed a trade deal with the EU anyway). I was amazed that apparently the level of trade between AUS and UK is £9bn, £4bn services and £4.6bn in goods. https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Joint/Foreign_Affairs_Defence_and_Trade/tradewithUK/Interim_Report/section?id=committees%2Freportjnt%2F024101%2F25066

Even if you double that it comes nowhere close to the losses or even the additional costs of doing business with the EU.

We had that really interesting call on the James O'Brien LBC radio show whereby a van driver that works bringing goods from the Eu into the UK detailed out the additional costs and waiting times of getting rid of the frictionless borders. He talked about sometimes 7 hour wait in Switzerland, on a good day its 40 minutes, and the impact that even that relatively short delay will have on the costs of him running his business and then the costs on the manufacturing plants based on the UK.

J Mysterio

It truly gets more unbelievable by the day. Surreal.

Nody

Leroy42 wrote: »

At what point at people going to wake up and realise that, even if Brexit was good as an idea, the way that it is being undertaken is utterly disastrous? Why are people still calling for this to continue?

Project Fear! We need no experts; see how wrong they were about the major loss to economy after the Brexit vote! All experts are wrong anyway!

At no point has anybody been able to show, with anything close to detail, what the benefits of all this are going to be.

Aah but the countries are out there lining up to trade with the UK and UK will no longer be some willy nilly pencil pusher but a roaring lion setting the standards for how free trade is done! You just wait when UK takes back controls of the Fishing policy there are billions unlocked there waiting stolen by EU and the red tape created with bendy bananas are worth hundreds of billions. Once free of the shackles of EU Trump will sign a hundred billion trade deal with us and China is begging us for a trade deal. You just wait and see; yes there will be some minor short term pain like a needle stick but the future belongs to the great empire and we'll show a stiff upper lip and come out successful at the other end; after all the worlds needs us more than we need them!

Peregrinus

Leroy42 wrote: »

At no point has anybody been able to show, with anything close to detail, what the benefits of all this are going to be.

You're forgetting about the blue passports, Leroy.

Peregrinus

[Sorry, wrong thread.] :rolleyes:

Leroy42

Peregrinus wrote: »

You're forgetting about the blue passports, Leroy.

Yes, you are correct, I totally forgot about that.

The thing that gets me is the seeming lack of any urgency or uproar from the British people in all of this. They have bought this line of "nothing is agreed..." as if everything will just happen in one day.

Of course the final agreement won't be agreed until the final handshake, but they agree the individual parts throughout the negotiations. So the £40bn settlement deal. Of course the UK could walk away but then the whole deal is off.

The polls in the UK seem to indicate that there is little movement in peoples opinions. Any change is small and probably margin of error stuff.

As each of the claims and promises turn out to be false, there is hardly a murmur. The latest, the minister stating that the £40bn which payable regardless. This was the same person who before the ref claimed any claims of a settlement was just Project Fear and in fact the UK would be taking money out of the EU upon leaving.

But it is simply accepted. She pays no price for either lying or being incompetent, nobody even asks why she was so wrong in the first place and what does that mean for all the other claims.

Davies claim or being in Berlin the day after the vote. Fox claiming it would be the easiest deal in history. And yet still the Tories maintain relatively good support.

I simply do not understand it.

Peregrinus

I think it's because they are not Brexit tragics like us.

They've had the referendum. It was a painful experience. Whether they liked the result or not, they have broadly accepted it. The great majority of people think that Brexit will happen, and they really don't want to have to think about it any more. It is a hugely complex issue with lots of different aspects and many complex arguments, and people are just over it. They don't want to engage.

And in a sense they are right. It really is not the job of voters to be micromanaging these issues. In a parliamentary democracy it is not the job of parliamentarians to find out what voters want, and then do it; it is their job to make decisions in the interests of voters that voters lack the time, resources or commitment to engage with. So if Brexit is going to be a train wreck and should not proceed, it is the job of Parliament to point this out.

It's not unreasonable for voters to expect Parliament to do its job. Since Parliament isn't saying "this is a disaster which must not proceed", voters see the view that it's a disaster which must not proceed as something of a fringe position. They're not going to get excited about it, by and large; they feel they've spent too much time and energy on this question as it is.

Is this a failure of the British constitutional system? In a sense, yes it is. The whole idea of holding a referendum is a novelty in the UK system; they have held very few, and I think this is the first time where a government has held a referendum seeking a mandate for a policy which (a) it did not wish to pursue, and (b) it had no idea how to pursue. It's extremely clear now that this was a shockingly bad idea and I think it will be long time before any UK government does anything so criminally stupid again, but we are where we are and we are now finding out how the UK political system and political culture deals with this situation. Which turns out to be, very badly. But until it directly impacts a frustrated and alienated electorate, they won't see quite how badly.

farmchoice

i have thought long and hard about what the UK cabinet are at. at first i thought they had a plan, then i though in fact they have no plan, then i thought they had a number of very bad plans.


on the face of it its a complete shambles nothing but lies and spin and a collection of bizarre comic book characters.



however i have come to the conclusion that they are in fact working to what they consider a cunning plan and this i believe is it.


the leave campaign predicted that any future negotiations with the EU would be very straight forward because at the end of the day it came down to simple economics and the UK was a huge market and the city of London vital to the financial services sector of the entire EU.


throughout the campaign david davis repeatedly quoted a figure stating showing that the eu exported more to the uk then vis a versa therefore a FTA was inevitable.


i believe that through italll they have clung to this belief and are now working to the assumption that by engaging in brinkmanship they will get their deal at the last minute because the consequences for the EU are serious enough to force them to capitulate.


they truly believe they hold the stronger hand and all the rest is the EU bluffing.

EdgeCase

You also have to factor in that the debate in the UK is largely happening in the tabloids with an imaginary EU and between newspaper editors and factions in the two bit parties.

Their negotiations with the real EU have been an utter shambles.

LuckyLloyd

Leroy42 wrote: »

So yesterday we had a minister state that the 40bn settlement would have to be paid regardless of the final deal.

We had head of HRMC state that based on an admin charge of £32.50 per shipment, under the max fac system favoured by Boris and Gove would cost in the region of £20bn per annum to UK business.

The day before we had the head of the bank of England state that average household income had fallen £900 per annum already due to the fall-off from forecasts.

At what point are people going to wake up and realise that, even if Brexit was good as an idea, the way that it is being undertaken is utterly disastrous? Why are people still calling for this to continue?

At no point has anybody been able to show, with anything close to detail, what the benefits of all this are going to be.

The Aus/NZ trade talks were mentioned yesterday. Australia would be one of the bigger targets for any UK trade deal (given that Canada recently signed a trade deal with the EU anyway). I was amazed that apparently the level of trade between AUS and UK is £9bn, £4bn services and £4.6bn in goods. https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Joint/Foreign_Affairs_Defence_and_Trade/tradewithUK/Interim_Report/section?id=committees%2Freportjnt%2F024101%2F25066

Even if you double that it comes nowhere close to the losses or even the additional costs of doing business with the EU.

We had that really interesting call on the James O'Brien LBC radio show whereby a van driver that works bringing goods from the Eu into the UK detailed out the additional costs and waiting times of getting rid of the frictionless borders. He talked about sometimes 7 hour wait in Switzerland, on a good day its 40 minutes, and the impact that even that relatively short delay will have on the costs of him running his business and then the costs on the manufacturing plants based on the UK.

Because the same forces that drove up anti EU sentiment over a period of two decades and delivered Brexit continue to hammer home a constant three pronged message:

- all the negative predictions and wrangling over the border or complications are just remoaners trying to obfuscate the will of the people
- Brexit means Brexit and the will of the people must be respected
- the EU is in major trouble and will soon experience a split / structural turmoil

And that just bulldozes away the possibility of genuine reflection and assessment of the negotiation process to date. This message is underpinned by a vocal minority that comprises those who see their narrow business / financial / political interests enhanced by Brexit and / or those who will subsist on "free at last, free at last" as justification for Brexit irrespective of far reaching negative economic consequences. When the softer Brexit body politic actually experience those negative economic and social outcomes it will of course be too late to reverse course.

An Ciarraioch

Corbyn continues to prevaricate in relation to Brexit - says he wants to remain in "a" customs union, but refuses to commit to the Single Market:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2018/may/24/senior-tory-tells-may-any-nhs-funding-increase-worth-less-than-4-could-be-disastrous-politics-live

briany

Between the hard-line Tories, semi-hard-line Labour and the Ned Flanders of UK politics, the Lib Dems, it seems like young pro-Remain voters in the UK haven't got any decent political representation at the moment.

Will we hear another round of "Oh, Jeremy Corbyn!" at the next UK GE, I wonder?

joeysoap

I long come to the conclusion that May and Corbyn deserve each other.

J Mysterio

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Corbyn continues to prevaricate in relation to Brexit - says he wants to remain in "a" customs union, but refuses to commit to the Single Market:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2018/may/24/senior-tory-tells-may-any-nhs-funding-increase-worth-less-than-4-could-be-disastrous-politics-live

This is the biggest issue that has face the UK aince WWII. Corbyns efforts have been a disgrace.

Lemming

Leroy42 wrote: »

So yesterday we had a minister state that the 40bn settlement would have to be paid regardless of the final deal.

We had head of HRMC state that based on an admin charge of £32.50 per shipment, under the max fac system favoured by Boris and Gove would cost in the region of £20bn per annum to UK business.

The day before we had the head of the bank of England state that average household income had fallen £900 per annum already due to the fall-off from forecasts.

At what point are people going to wake up and realise that, even if Brexit was good as an idea, the way that it is being undertaken is utterly disastrous? Why are people still calling for this to continue?

Don't forget this mornings estimates of reports requiring an extra £2000 per household across the UK to maintain NHS funding (i.e. more taxes). That's at current levels of revenue/expenditure, so god knows how that'll pan out with all of the above competing for treasury dept. monies.

An Ciarraioch

Brexiteers conceding on the CU?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-eu-customs-union-uk-stay-2020-tory-mps-jacob-rees-mogg-a8367001.html

Zubeneschamali

Leroy42 wrote: »

The thing that gets me is the seeming lack of any urgency or uproar from the British people in all of this.

Keep Calm and Carry On.

briany

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Keep Calm and Carry On.

Keep Calm and Carry On Toward the Cliff Edge. There's tea, crumpets and freedom at the bottom.

Professor Moriarty

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Brexiteers conceding on the CU?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-eu-customs-union-uk-stay-2020-tory-mps-jacob-rees-mogg-a8367001.html

They agree that staying in the CU until the next decade is the only viable option. However, the next decade is only 19 months away.

LeinsterDub

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

They agree that staying in the CU until the next decade is the only viable option. However, the next decade is only 19 months away.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-theresa-may-extra-transition-2023-eu-northern-ireland-backstop-a8367106.html

Theresa May is set to ask the European Union for an extra transition period that would see full Brexit delayed until around seven years after the vote to Leave.

Looks like brexit mean brexit ....eventually , maybe , it depends . We'll see

The latest plan for a longer transition is intended as a replacement for the border “backstop” agreed by negotiators in December under which the UK would “maintain full alignment” with the single market if no other solution could be found, to remove the need for border checks.

Of course the EU will reject this out of hand , the backstop isn't going anywhere .

Professor Moriarty

LeinsterDub wrote: »

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-theresa-may-extra-transition-2023-eu-northern-ireland-backstop-a8367106.html



Looks like brexit mean brexit .... eventually , maybe , it depends . We'll see

Yes, but does that transition period include remaining in the CU for seven years? JRM would go ballistic.

Zubeneschamali

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Of course the EU will reject this out of hand , the backstop isn't going anywhere .

It's all so predictable. Back in September I said :

I expect that the "transition period" from 2019 will effectively be continued membership of everything under existing rules with some language to placate the Brexiteers.

It may begin with a two-year duration, but there will be a clause in there to extend it if the difficulties with having cake and eating it have not been resolved.

Two extra years will not be enough to get the job done.

briany

The thing that's easy to forget about a pivot into remaining-in-all-but-name, or going into a transitional period of no strictly defined length is that there's a very vocal subset of the Conservative government who'll cry bloody murder if anything less than a hard line is followed. Many press outlets will double up on this, fomenting anger among the general Brexit-voting populace. Wiggle room is precious little, here.

LeinsterDub

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Yes, but does that transition period include remaining in the CU for seven years? JRM would go ballistic.

If it's like the current transition period deal the only exclusion is they are allowed to negotiate (but not implement) new trade deals but I'm open to correction on this.

Professor Moriarty

LeinsterDub wrote: »

If it's like the current transition period deal the only exclusion is they are allowed to negotiate (but not implement) new trade deals but I'm open to correction on this.

Yeah, that's right I think.

flutered

EdgeCase wrote: »

You also have to factor in that the debate in the UK is largely happening in the tabloids with an imaginary EU and between newspaper editors and factions in the two bit parties.

Their negotiations with the real EU have been an utter shambles.

the average english person know that both the cons and lab are for leaving, therefore all is well, add to the the daily mantra from the red top and the torygraph, plus an uninsisive bbc

flutered

J Mysterio wrote: »

This is the biggest issue that has face the UK aince WWII. Corbyns efforts have been a disgrace.

corybn has his own requirements from brexit, its called cakeism

flutered

J Mysterio wrote: »

Pressure will build between now and then. The government will be defeated on a number of these votes, and May will resign. She has to.

i believe that all the votes will be individual, if she loses some she is hopefull of winning some, all leave is cancelled for the goverment party during the first two weeks in june, with corybn's wishy washy idea of brexit he may well try to whip his party into abstaining in most votes, this is something may is hoping for

flutered

briany wrote: »

I've heard that the UK government/PM won't last beyond (date) since their last GE. At this point I'm just seeing what happens.

But supposing May does go - what follows? Who follows? Is it any good that she goes only to be replaced by someone more hard line about Brexit?

if she goes, could it be that whatever she agrees is not respected by the next goverment, what then

An Ciarraioch

So, Varadkar hasn't heard any more about the Border since Sofia, and the general mood music suggests there's no prospect of a deal:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/may/24/uk-chasing-a-fantasy-in-brexit-talks-top-eu-official-warns

Enzokk

LeinsterDub wrote: »

If it's like the current transition period deal the only exclusion is they are allowed to negotiate (but not implement) new trade deals but I'm open to correction on this.

Even if they are able to negotiate trade deals, no country worth trading with will be able to offer anything until there is clarity on the customs union and single market access for the UK. I mean if Brazil negotiates a deal where they are able to sell meat without tariffs to the UK but their standards doesn't meet EU standards it means the UK cannot be in the CU or SM without a border (NI again, DOH!), so they will be in a holding pattern in any case until they have their EU relationship sorted, which may take years and even then the odds are they will join the CU and SM which will mean they cannot have their own trade deals.

Nody

Oh dear; more details are coming out on the new brave view of Mrs May...

One senior EU official said the UK still lacked negotiating positions on a wide variety of issues and that in others it was “chasing the fantasy of denying the consequences of Brexit in a given policy area”.

EU negotiators complain that the British side “do not understand” that Britain will not be able to use the European arrest warrant after Brexit, with Theresa May again having pledged to stay in the system just three months ago.

There are member states that simply cannot extradite their own nationals to a non-member of the EU. This is a constraint that unfortunately will apply once the UK is outside,” the senior official said.

“The European arrest warrant is simply not available. I don’t think you can expect member states to change their constitutions in order to continue extraditing their nationals to the UK.

“These are not bureaucratic issues. We are talking here about the lives and liberty of citizens. This is not something that can easily be done.”

Though officials say Britain could potentially still use the system, they do not want to give British defence firms the right to build or run parts of it because they say that would effectively give the UK, a third country, the power to turn off the EU system for member states.

Officials also pointed out that the UK itself had signed off the security rules restricting non-EU countries from running parts of system, as one of the 28 European Council members, before it knew it was going to leave.

I think someone needs to bring in a dictionary to explain to UK what being a third party country means and that there is no 1.5 or 2nd part country definitions either....

Enzokk

Nody wrote: »

Oh dear; more details are coming out on the new brave view of Mrs May...

I think someone needs to bring in a dictionary to explain to UK what being a third party country means and that there is no 1.5 or 2nd part country definitions either....

From the link in your post we have the following quote that seems to sum up where we find ourselves in the negotiations at the moment,

Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief negotiator, has said Theresa May's red lines mean Britain can only get a free trade agreement similar to the ones the EU has with Canada and South Korea, but the UK said today that this “shallow level of cooperation” was “inconsistent with our ambition”, which would require “a more formal and deeper institutional structure”.

So basically the EU has listened to the UK and is respecting it's red lines. The UK dismisses this and still aims for the stars without wanting to change their red lines. I think it is clear why we haven't seen any progress so long after the vote.

Nody

Enzokk wrote: »

So basically the EU has listened to the UK and is respecting it's red lines. The UK dismisses this and still aims for the stars without wanting to change their red lines. I think it is clear why we haven't seen any progress so long after the vote.

UK is simply trying to follow Boris Brexit strategy of eating cake and keeping it; reality never was a requirement for policy after all.

Capt'n Midnight

The road to Indyref2 starts tomorrow. Scotland has had about 0.8% growth last year, way less than England. A question to ask is there a reason for them to stay in the UK when there isn't going to be any Brexit bonus up there.
From https://sluggerotoole.com/2018/05/24/meanwhile-in-scotland-courtesy-of-brexit-the-long-march-to-indyref2-is-about-to-begin/

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/16245577.SNP_unveils_independence_blueprint_to_match_best_small_economies/?ref=ebln

AN independent Scotland can emulate the world’s 12 best-performing small economies, a long-awaited SNP blueprint will claim.

The party’s Growth Commission report – due to be published tomorrow – will also argue that independence will be worth an extra £4,100 per person if Scotland is able to match the success of similarly sized nations, such as Finland and New Zealand.

briany

flutered wrote: »

if she goes, could it be that whatever she agrees is not respected by the next goverment, what then

I'm thinking there'd be more chaos. The UK government pretty divided as it is, and their electorate even more so. There's a hurting in store any way they turn.

Capt'n Midnight

EU reminding the UK that you can't continue to enjoy the benefits if you leave the club. It's embarrassing.


https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/may/24/uk-chasing-a-fantasy-in-brexit-talks-top-eu-official-warns

However, in a forthright point-by-point deconstruction of the UK’s negotiating positions, the EU official:

Warned that it would not allow the UK the access it wants post-Brexit to the Galileo satellite programme as it would give Downing Street the ability to “switch off the signal for the EU”.

Ruled out the UK retaining use of the European arrest warrant, as it could put in jeopardy “the lives and liberty of citizens”.

Responded to UK complaints that the EU’s proposed free-trade deal was insufficient by pointing out that the UK was asking for a more trusted position than that enjoyed by the member states, which are held accountable by the ECJ and the EU institutions, which the official described as “a big ask” and “not where the European council is at”.

Noted that the UK had suggested it could try to change the EU’s rules from inside before it leaves to gain access to its programmes post-Brexit, ominously warning that the commission’s negotiators would report back to the member states on the development.

J Mysterio

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Noted that the UK had suggested it could try to change the EU’s rules from inside before it leaves to gain access to its programmes post-Brexit, ominously warning that the commission’s negotiators would report back to the member states on the development.

This has to be a joke. I mean really?

Infini

EU should consider breaking off negotiations if this keeps up. It's obvious from everyone for the last 2 years that the lunatics are running the asylum and the bullshyteers are the one's driving a complete failure of a policy in their deluded attempts to try and relive the glory days of the old empire. Those days are gone never to return and no amount of whinging or huffing and puffing will change that. They're a small country going up against one of the 2 biggest economic blocks on the entire PLANET and the one which has been so sucessful that they're effectively the ones setting the standards for several trade deals. Truth is I feel the only way they'll ever change is when they're staring down the abyss and do some SERIOUS soul searching over why they're even playing this game they dont need. Sadly the leadership needed to pull themselves out of this joke of a situation is nonexistent with one a 5th column Brexiteer and the other hopelessly paralysed by indecision and hesistation. There's no way they'll get anywhere unless they sell out the bullshyteers at this point and call them out for what they are: Incompetent, Impotent, Pathetic and Delusional with no working plan or ideas and a failed ideology.

When I see this all going so badly, and wonder why, I go to the Express's website to see what's up.. It's just comical.

I'd love an AMA with the journalists there who've sold their souls.

Zubeneschamali

Deleted User wrote: »

I go to the Express's website to see what's up.. It's just comical.

I'd love an AMA with the journalists there who've sold their souls.

You have to imagine they are laughing at their readers as they write that stuff.

EdgeCase

Nody wrote: »

Oh dear; more details are coming out on the new brave view of Mrs May...

I think someone needs to bring in a dictionary to explain to UK what being a third party country means and that there is no 1.5 or 2nd part country definitions either....

I keep hearing this from people I speak to in England too. They seem to think they can just maintain “business as usual” and continue operating as a de facto EU country on all of the “nice bits” and talk as if they’ve done absolute right to regain access to all of this while simultaneously ranting and raving about “Brussels” and how it’s some kind of evil empire, ironically ignoring their own imperial history and all too often being nostalgic about some kind of sanitized imaginary version of it.

cml387

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

You have to imagine they are laughing at their readers as they write that stuff.

The Express is now owned by Trinity Mirror.
So the owner can have both bases covered and still rake in the cash (The Mirror is broadly soft Brexit and recommended remain in the referendum)..

ambro25

EdgeCase wrote: »

I keep hearing this from people I speak to in England too. They seem to think they can just maintain “business as usual” and continue operating as a de facto EU country on all of the “nice bits” and talk as if they’ve done absolute right to regain access to all of this while simultaneously ranting and raving about “Brussels” and how it’s some kind of evil empire, ironically ignoring their own imperial history and all too often being nostalgic about some kind of sanitized imaginary version of it.

Anecdotes like this only comfort me in my belief, that the U.K. needs to Brexit, for the average Brit to take stock of what good the EU ever did for them.

Besides, more hopefully, prompting some capacity to think objectively and educating themselves, away from the MSM.

I was attending a start-up event in France yesterday, and one of the exhibitors quizzed me about Brexit. I won’t profess that he’s representative of the typical French view of things, but his take on the U.K. -and particularly BoJo- was highly entertaining. The U.K. does not feature very highly as a potential export market in his business plan (online ‘timeshare platform’ for high-ticket, low-use consumer equipment).

J Mysterio

May due to 'announce' her already failed and rejected customs union plan 'in the coming weeks'. What about the June deadline? What about the fact that this has already been rejected, as should have been clear over a year ago. It really is a fantasy land they are in. Embarassing.

"Another Brussels official close to talks told The Independent they had been warned internally that there would probably be no progress by the June meeting of the European Council – which would throw off the timetable and raise the risk of a disastrous “no deal”.

News that Theresa May wants to align the whole UK with the customs union and single market on a time-limited basis until 2023 as a backstop to solve the Irish border issue was particularly poorly received in Brussels.

The Prime Minister is due to actually announce the new policy in the comings weeks, but people familiar with the talks confirmed it had already been raised by UK negotiators. The European Commission’s negotiators have already rejected the plan before its public announcement, as first revealed by The Independent earlier this week"

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-latest-uk-eu-customs-plan-northern-ireland-theresa-may-a8368101.html

Amazingly, apparently the UK negotiating team have claimed the EU have 'insulted' them. Maybe stop insulting iur intelligence with your ridiculous 'cake-ist' proposals! FFS!

J Mysterio

Absolutely amazing comments from UK here also in relation to the UK being told that they can have a FTA like Canada or Norway:

the UK said today that this “shallow level of cooperation” was “inconsistent with our ambition”, which would require “a more formal and deeper institutional structure”.

Like what? The EU?

BonnieSituation

cml387 wrote: »

The Express is now owned by Trinity Mirror.
So the owner can have both bases covered and still rake in the cash (The Mirror is broadly soft Brexit and recommended remain in the referendum)..

In fairness, TrinityMirror have only just recently bought the Express.

It'll be a while before either editorial line will change. Besides last thing you want is to lose all your readers in one foul swoop by becoming another "Remoaner rag".

BonnieSituation

BonnieSituation wrote: »

In fairness, TrinityMirror have only just recently BOUGHT the EXPRESS.

It'll be a while before either editorial line will CHANGE. Besides last thing you want is to LOSE all your readers in one foul SWOOP by becoming another "REMOANER rag".

I think we should have a rule that this is how we type when we mention the Express.

CelticRambler

UK will build own satellite system if frozen out of EU's Galileo

The chancellor, Philip Hammond, has warned that the UK will build its own satellite navigation system to rival the European Union’s €10bn (£9bn) Galileo project if Brussels carries out its threat to block access.


The shadow chancellor, John McDonnell, said: “On the same day the Office for National Statistics has confirmed that UK economic growth is the weakest it’s been in six years, it’s not surprising the chancellor is looking to focus on matters in outer space.

“Working people will be rightly angry that Philip Hammond can find billions of pounds at the drop of a hat for a space programme, yet is not prepared to find the money our vital public services like the NHS desperately need.

“It’s time the chancellor came down to Earth, to prove he is on the same planet as the rest of us by recognising what he is putting people in our country through with his austerity cuts.”

I'm not convinced that even with their own £8b satellite navigation system, the Tories would be able to steer HMS Brexit towards any particular destination! :pac:

CelticRambler

CelticRambler wrote: »

I'm not convinced that even with their own £8b satellite navigation system, the Tories would be able to steer HMS Brexit towards any particular destination! :pac:

If it came crashing back to Earth, that would be a very good start.