Will Britain piss off and get on with Brexit II (mod warning in OP)

Dr Cockhound · 28-12-2020 1:00pm

A post I can only agree with Francie.
If it all works out as most hope, the UK will prosper through new markets for services etc. in the Far East and the EU will continue to prosper in Europe with Ireland uniquely positioned to benefit from both.
Only time will tell.

First Up · 28-12-2020 1:22pm

Dr Cockhound wrote:

A post I can only agree with Francie. If it all works out as most hope, the UK will prosper through new markets for services etc. in the Far East and the EU will continue to prosper in Europe with Ireland uniquely positioned to benefit from both. Only time will tell.

What makes markets in the Far East "new"?

JeffKenna · 28-12-2020 1:23pm

Bambi wrote: »

It's more a weird hatred for the fact that the Brits want out of the EU rather than the Brits themselves.

Expect that to intensify as it appears the Brits didnt do too badly in the horse trading even though the EU was meant to be holding all the cards

Burn everything British except their coal!

cryptocurrency · 28-12-2020 1:34pm

First Up wrote: »

What makes markets in the Far East "new"?

HK, they are very popular there these days

Dr Cockhound · 28-12-2020 1:35pm

First Up wrote: »

What makes markets in the Far East "new"?

I was thinking in terms of the potential opportunities afforded by membership of the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP).

Leroy42 · 28-12-2020 2:12pm

Dr Cockhound wrote: »

I was thinking in terms of the potential opportunities afforded by membership of the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP).

So to get this win, brexit UK needs to hand over sovereignty to a new organisation?

Dr Cockhound · 28-12-2020 2:21pm

The short answer would be no.

It's purely a trading partnership and not a political partnership.

A very rough comparison would be more like the old EEC rather than the EU.
It couldn't work as a political partnership, it would make as much sense as Brazil applying to join the EU.

First Up · 28-12-2020 2:49pm

Dr Cockhound wrote: »

I was thinking in terms of the potential opportunities afforded by membership of the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP).

Nothing "new" there. The UK already trades with all the CPTPP countries - in the case of seven of them, under trade agreements negotiated by the EU. We will see if membership of CPTPP opens any of those doors any wider.

We will also see how much of the business the UK is going to lose in the EU will be replaced by markets on the other side of the planet. Trade agreements allow you to do business. You still have to go out and win it.

fly_agaric · 28-12-2020 2:55pm

cryptocurrency wrote: »

The fact the came out this well and are able to gloat is an utter failure of the EU team.
If they can't win these battles with all the cards then what hope do they have. I am starting to slowly dislike the EU now too...much more so since they lost this battle,

Crypto, you've deluked/popped in again now another red letter day approaches for Brexit! You always strongly disliked (hated...) the EU based on content of your posts.

The UK government/Brexiters have to "gloat" now regardless of the agreement. Brexit/politics demands that. The deal has to be a great success for now (like the UK EU withdrawal agreement was before it). When its safely passed through and being implemented next year, they can start to piss and moan about how the EU scammed them, or is being completely unfair about some element or other of it.

As regards the agreement being an EU failure..if the UK prospers outside the EU (was it 50 years that UK MP Rees-Mogg mentioned as the timeframe) fair fúcks to them.
The UK can't be outside the EU with no obligations while they pull a fast one and avail themselves of the benefits of membership. If the "deal" ensures that, it is a success from point of view of the EU and EU members regardless of the UKs future. In fact the UK failing very badly economically, or getting more politically unstable etc. as a result of Brexit is (IMO) a very bad outcome for the EU. That would have all been more likely if UK government had followed the path it seemed to be on over last few weeks and exited transition period with no agreement.

edit: The language of "battles" and "wars" where an enemy is defeated reflects a problem with how people currently running the UK (Eurosceptics who spent their whole political careers working to get the UK "out") view the EU + the obsessions they have about it.
Hopefully now the UK has really left for good or ill it will take some oxygen from it and things can simmer down a bit. Maybe a vain hope though.

28-12-2020 3:04pm

This is a particularly egregious example of tabloid reality vs. actual reality.

Article posted today citing this former MEP from before the deal was concluded:

What she's been posting on Twitter:

https://twitter.com/june_mummery/status/1343134724907278337?s=20

https://twitter.com/june_mummery/status/1343229407473897474?s=20

You'd almost have to feel sorry for people like crypto who take these articles at face value and are completely unaware that they're being fed complete bullshlt every day of their lives.

cryptocurrency · 28-12-2020 3:09pm

Deleted User wrote: »

This is a particularly egregious example of tabloid reality vs. actual reality.

Article posted today citing this former MEP from before the deal was concluded:

What she's been posting on Twitter:

https://twitter.com/june_mummery/status/1343134724907278337?s=20

https://twitter.com/june_mummery/status/1343229407473897474?s=20

You'd almost have to feel sorry for people like crypto who take these articles at face value and are completely unaware that they're being fed complete bullshlt every day of their lives.

What bullshlt? I see mummery is mad about fish

28-12-2020 3:17pm

cryptocurrency wrote: »

What bullshlt? I see mummery is mad about fish

Yes, she is clearly very mad, and has been complaining about the deal since the 24th when details started to come out. On the 28th, the Express runs a story quoting her from before 24th as if her comments then have any relevance now. They run this as a piece saying Brexit will be great for fishing while ignoring her views that it's not.

It is bullshlt and it should make you lose all faith in what the Express has to say.

cryptocurrency · 28-12-2020 3:19pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Yes, she is clearly very mad, and has been complaining about the deal since the 24th when details started to come out. On the 28th, the Express runs a story quoting her from before 24th as if her comments then have any relevance now. They run this as a piece saying Brexit will be great for fishing while ignoring her views that it's not.

It is bullshlt and it should make you lose all faith in what the Express has to say.

It's fish, it is meaningless outside of her world. WHo cares.

28-12-2020 3:21pm

cryptocurrency wrote: »

It's fish, it is meaningless outside of her world. WHo cares.

I'm talking about the credibility of your source of news. I'm not talking about fish.

Padre_Pio · 28-12-2020 3:21pm

cryptocurrency wrote: »

It's fish, it is meaningless outside of her world. WHo cares.

A lot of people in Britain care, for some reason.
It was a sticking point right to the end of negotiations.

Leroy42 · 28-12-2020 3:22pm

Dr Cockhound wrote: »

The short answer would be no.

It's purely a trading partnership and not a political partnership.

A very rough comparison would be more like the old EEC rather than the EU.
It couldn't work as a political partnership, it would make as much sense as Brazil applying to join the EU.

So no agreed rules, no agreed standards? No meeting of the heads of state to agree on areas to concentrate on?

Everything is political! Want access to a market, what are you offering? What freedom from tariffs, what do we get in return?

Fish isn't political but it certainly became the main political issue in Brexit.

You think Brazil joining EU in a nonsense, but isn't the exact same true of UK joining some Far East partnership?

For Forks Sake · 28-12-2020 3:26pm

Brexit Bonus, return of the Booze Cruise.

https://twitter.com/DarranMarshall/status/1343548108731514881

Eric Cartman · 28-12-2020 4:00pm

For Forks Sake wrote: »

Brexit Bonus, return of the Booze Cruise.

https://twitter.com/DarranMarshall/status/1343548108731514881

ohh sweet baby Jesus hallelujah , never paying full price for a carton of smokes again. Mr O'leary, ill be seeing you monthly.

RobMc59 · 28-12-2020 4:42pm

Leroy42 wrote: »

So no agreed rules, no agreed standards? No meeting of the heads of state to agree on areas to concentrate on?

Everything is political! Want access to a market, what are you offering? What freedom from tariffs, what do we get in return?

Fish isn't political but it certainly became the main political issue in Brexit.

You think Brazil joining EU in a nonsense, but isn't the exact same true of UK joining some Far East partnership?

Comparing Brazil and the UK isn't a very good comparison(no disrespect to Brazil btw)
The UK,permanent member of the UN security council,founder member of NATO,fifth largest world economy not to mention part of the Commonwealth and five eyes alliance(four members of this alliance have the Queen as head of state)

Dr Cockhound · 28-12-2020 5:22pm

I agree, a rather clumsy analogy, it was intended more as a geographical comparison.

Leroy42 · 28-12-2020 5:23pm

RobMc59 wrote: »

Comparing Brazil and the UK isn't a very good comparison(no disrespect to Brazil btw)
The UK,permanent member of the UN security council,founder member of NATO,fifth largest world economy not to mention part of the Commonwealth and five eyes alliance(four members of this alliance have the Queen as head of state)

Ah, so we are back to English excepualism.

But even with that, again it is inherent in your response that the UK will have to offer something. Access to security, defence, state aid. Whatever form it takes, the UK will face the same issues they faced in the EU.

But we know from Brexiteers that no partnerships can be entered into, no alignments. For to do so is to give up sovereignty.

So either they will never be able to join any future partnerships or, more likely, that this entire sovereignty thing is just a ruse because they had no actual facts to argue.

Dr Cockhound · 28-12-2020 5:33pm

Leroy42 wrote: »

Ah, so we are back to English excepualism.

But even with that, again it is inherent in your response that the UK will have to offer something. Access to security, defence, state aid. Whatever form it takes, the UK will face the same issues they faced in the EU.

But we know from Brexiteers that no partnerships can be entered into, no alignments. For to do so is to give up sovereignty.

So either they will never be able to join any future partnerships or, more likely, that this entire sovereignty thing is just a ruse because they had no actual facts to argue.

I'm somewhat confused Leroy, a trade deal is literally that, a trade deal.

Thus far, the UK has rolled over some of the trade agreements with third party countries, that it previously enjoyed via its membership of the EU, with no additional loss of sovereignty.

https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/1632/idt2/idt2/d013c890-07b5-4987-ac9a-af15a3276a8c/image/816

Professor Moriarty · 28-12-2020 5:37pm

RobMc59 wrote: »

Comparing Brazil and the UK isn't a very good comparison(no disrespect to Brazil btw)
The UK,permanent member of the UN security council,founder member of NATO,fifth largest world economy not to mention part of the Commonwealth and five eyes alliance(four members of this alliance have the Queen as head of state)

9% of Britain's trade is with the Commonwealth. 43% was with the EU.

Regarding the UK being the 5th largest economy, the IMF, using a more stable methodology, would disagree and places Britain in 9th place. Behind Brazil ironically.

Their place on the Security Council is thanks to the US. Britain's importance on the world stage has plummeted since they were put on it. Regarding the Five Eyes, I would much rather share intelligence with my 450,000,000 closest neighbours.

Having the Queen as head of state is an anachronistic rubber stamp.

Professor Moriarty · 28-12-2020 5:41pm

Dr Cockhound wrote: »

I'm somewhat confused Leroy, a trade deal is literally that, a trade deal.

Thus far, the UK has rolled over some of the trade agreements with third party countries, that it previously enjoyed via its membership of the EU, with no additional loss of sovereignty.

https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/1632/idt2/idt2/d013c890-07b5-4987-ac9a-af15a3276a8c/image/816

Hmmm. No India, China, Russia, USA, Brazil, Indonesia... I'm sure they'll be sorted in no time. It's not like any of these countries will take advantage of the fact that Britain desperately needs these trade agreements asap.

Dr Cockhound · 28-12-2020 5:50pm

Indeed, that is the very nature of the negotiation of a business deal.
There have to be mutual advantages otherwise, no deal can be struck however, no deal is for life and as circumstances change, renegotiation will probably be re-visited.

First Up · 28-12-2020 5:53pm

Dr Cockhound wrote:

I'm somewhat confused Leroy, a trade deal is literally that, a trade deal.

A trade deal includes whatever the parties want. It is expected (to virtual certainty) that India will put UK visas on their list of bargaining chips.

Dr Cockhound · 28-12-2020 5:54pm

I think that's a very fair assumption.

Professor Moriarty · 28-12-2020 5:57pm

Dr Cockhound wrote: »

Indeed, that is the very nature of the negotiation of a business deal.
There have to be mutual advantages otherwise, no deal can be struck however, no deal is for life and as circumstances change, renegotiation will probably be re-visited.

Indeed. However, if you are negotiating with a country many times smaller than you, rather than a bloc that is of equal size, that places you in a very advantageous position. Britain has very many big trade agreements to do in a very short time. Each of its negotiating partners will be focusing on one. And so they are in no rush. Both of these factors place Britain at a serious disadvantage.

Eric Cartman · 28-12-2020 6:36pm

First Up wrote: »

A trade deal includes whatever the parties want. It is expected (to virtual certainty) that India will put UK visas on their list of bargaining chips.

if they do that then its all been for nothing. Or relations will break down a lot.

First Up · 28-12-2020 8:43pm

Eric Cartman wrote:

if they do that then its all been for nothing. Or relations will break down a lot.

Well India (like everyone else) knows that the UK is desperate and in no position to argue. Besides, the UK will need someone to replace all those nasty Poles and Romanians that the Brexiteers wanted out.

Will Britain piss off and get on with Brexit II (mod warning in OP)

Comments