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

First Up

There's enough material here for Channel 4 to put out a programme about people so miserable and bereft of a real argument that they seize on and keep repeating something of incalculable insignificance to justify their existence.

davedanon

blinding - when you were an EU member, I would have been more than happy to help you solve the Great C4 Election Night Coverage Mystery.

However, now that you're a 3rd country, I couldn't be arsed.


Hope this helps.

blinding

I believe “ The Great Lefty Re-Mainer Jimmy Carr “ was on that Night.

Only a few years ago Jimmy Carr was caught playing every manoeuvre possible to try to get as near to paying Zero Tax as possible !

Jimmy Carr had / has all the Lefty spiel but when it came to the Spondulicks Jimmy was as Right Wing as he could go ! ! !

If only the Channel 4 footage was available then I could give a run through on the Celebrity Luvvies , Champagne Socialists , Virtue Signallers, SJW and Ultimately Bunch of Losers (on the night )

I see that your man that plays Alan Partridge ( Steve Coogan ) has furloughed staff at his Mansion.

Steve is another Virtue Signalling Leftie ( until it hits him in the pocket ) Remainer. I don’t know if Steve was on that night but he had been making a Plonker of Himself on Channel 4 in the run up to the Election. Lets put it this way, he is exactly the type they had on if he was not on ! Steve has been doing a great job of destroying his career lately.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8342093/Steve-Coogan-furloughs-gardener-housekeeper-4million-mansion.html

blinding

davedanon wrote: »

blinding - when you were an EU member, I would have been more than happy to help you solve the Great C4 Election Night Coverage Mystery.

However, now that you're a 3rd country, I couldn't be arsed.


Hope this helps.

I am sure Brussels has a copy as Channel 4 was Channel Brussels through despite being part funded by “ All British Taxpayers “


Not exactly a level playing field.

eagle eye

blinding wrote:

If only the Channel 4 footage was available then I could give a run through on the Celebrity Luvvies , Champagne Socialists , Virtue Signallers, SJW and Ultimately Bunch of Losers (on the night )

Channel 4, Channel 4, Channel 4, Channel 4, Channel 4, Channel 4, Channel 4, Channel 4, Channel 4, Channel 4, Channel 4, Channel 4, Channel 4, Channel 4, Channel 4, Channel 4, Channel 4, Channel 4, Channel 4, Channel 4

Donald Trump

blinding wrote: »

I am sure Brussels has a copy as Channel 4 was Channel Brussels through despite being part funded by “ All British Taxpayers “


Not exactly a level playing field.

Sure I heard that Barnier et. al. regularly meet up to watch their copy while laughing and sipping on their goblets of childrens' blood. I'm not sure if they revert to lizard form or not first.



And you are right, they were very concerned when Steve Coogan was exposed recently. They had to have a few emergency meetings in Brussels. All of the Eastern European leaders had to be expedited in in the middle of the night to avoid being detected for breaching corona regulations. But they were eventually able to leverage off their Channel 4 power to have it covered it.


And the rest of us eejits used to think that Channel 4 was only good for the odd few pre-internet boobs. How naive were we!!

ancapailldorcha

First Up wrote: »

There's enough material here for Channel 4 to put out a programme about people so miserable and bereft of a real argument that they seize on and keep repeating something of incalculable insignificance to justify their existence.

I don't know, like. I really just do not know. It's like a certain section of the Brexiters and nationalist right just can't seem to grow or evolve.

Once the 2019 result was in, that was it. GG. Onto the negotiating period and talks. Granted, the pandemic disrupted this process but that's where a lot of people are now except, ironically the "You lost, we won, get over it" brigade who're still trotting out the same nonsense that they were spewing in 2017.

theological

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I don't know, like. I really just do not know. It's like a certain section of the Brexiters and nationalist right just can't seem to grow or evolve.

Once the 2019 result was in, that was it. GG. Onto the negotiating period and talks. Granted, the pandemic disrupted this process but that's where a lot of people are now except, ironically the "You lost, we won, get over it" brigade who're still trotting out the same nonsense that they were spewing in 2017.

Honestly, I'm past that also.

What we need is for this matter to be settled and move on. Extensions would simply prolong this more than is necessary. Either it is settled in December with an arrangement, or the UK falls onto WTO terms and adjusts to this.

ancapailldorcha

theological wrote: »

Honestly, I'm past that also.

What we need is for this matter to be settled and move on. Extensions would simply prolong this more than is necessary. Either it is settled in December with an arrangement, or the UK falls onto WTO terms and adjusts to this.

That's disingenuous. There will be no "extensions". The UK may ask for one and one only for either one or two years. That's it and common sense would dictate that this should have been done the second the lockdown began if not in February.

Leroy42

theological wrote: »

Honestly, I'm past that also.

What we need is for this matter to be settled and move on. Extensions would simply prolong this more than is necessary. Either it is settled in December with an arrangement, or the UK falls onto WTO terms and adjusts to this.

What are the comparative costs the each of these scenarios?

Timberrrrrrrr

blinding wrote: »

I believe “ The Great Lefty Re-Mainer Jimmy Carr “ was on that Night.

Only a few years ago Jimmy Carr was caught playing every manoeuvre possible to try to get as near to paying Zero Tax as possible !

Jimmy Carr had / has all the Lefty spiel but when it came to the Spondulicks Jimmy was as Right Wing as he could go ! ! !

If only the Channel 4 footage was available then I could give a run through on the Celebrity Luvvies , Champagne Socialists , Virtue Signallers, SJW and Ultimately Bunch of Losers (on the night )

I see that your man that plays Alan Partridge ( Steve Coogan ) has furloughed staff at his Mansion.

Steve is another Virtue Signalling Leftie ( until it hits him in the pocket ) Remainer. I don’t know if Steve was on that night but he had been making a Plonker of Himself on Channel 4 in the run up to the Election. Lets put it this way, he is exactly the type they had on if he was not on ! Steve has been doing a great job of destroying his career lately.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8342093/Steve-Coogan-furloughs-gardener-housekeeper-4million-mansion.html

More waffle and bollòx in this post, just so everyone understands, this is not how the average British person thinks/speaks. Blinding is definitely in the tiniest of minorities.

Timberrrrrrrr

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

More waffle and bollòx in this post, just so everyone understands, this is not how the average British person thinks/speaks. Blinding is definitely in the tiniest of minorities.

I wonder if it is intentional that both named celebrities are from Irish backgrounds with Irish passports.

theological

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

That's disingenuous. There will be no "extensions". The UK may ask for one and one only for either one or two years. That's it and common sense would dictate that this should have been done the second the lockdown began if not in February.

Ah sorry, I didn't realise a simple opinion that the UK shouldn't extend would be "disingenuous".


There's no point extending if there's no willingness on the EU side to work with the UK proposals. The UK should just leave on WTO terms if there's no appetite for a deal in June.


If there is no deal in the works then there's no point for saying 2 more years.

blinding

Deleted User wrote: »

I wonder if it is intentional that both named celebrities are from Irish backgrounds with Irish passports.

Pure coincidence that they are Two Hypocrites with their Lefty Spiel and completely different in their own business dealings. I wonder why Channel 4 are so Embarrassed / Ashamed of the Lot they had on their Election Night Special.

Some Chickens came home to roost ! ! !

Padre_Pio

The news cycle must be bad if all you have to talk about is old C4 news footage.

Melanchthon

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

That's disingenuous. There will be no "extensions". The UK may ask for one and one only for either one or two years. That's it and common sense would dictate that this should have been done the second the lockdown began if not in February.

I have not understood why the extension of current terms has to be a year or two? Is it formally declared somewhere but I am curious about this point which I have seen similar elsewhere.

Not much point in arguing about negotiations on this thread as it's pretty one sided but you all get that frost's letter wasn't just off the cuff it was in response to Barnier's speech. Think no deal is getting more likely and it's going to harm the UK and EU but will be as bad for Ireland, the very pro-EU people here were saying that EU would intervene to help mitigate any impacts, this seems unlikely to happen now considering the current issues.

https://euobserver.com/coronavirus/148419

This article is relevant before posters who don't actually follow European news start talking about shared debts and massively increased budgets, source is generally pretty pro-EU as well in case that's an issue.

blinding

Padre_Pio wrote: »

The news cycle must be bad if all you have to talk about is old C4 news footage.

It is now believed to be resting; With Lord Lucan and Shergar ! Can all three ride / rise again ? ?

ancapailldorcha

theological wrote: »

Ah sorry, I didn't realise a simple opinion that the UK shouldn't extend would be "disingenuous".

You said extensions as if it's somehow possible to maintain the status quo indefinitely when this is legally impossible. This is what's disingenuous.

Peregrinus

Melanchthon wrote: »

I have not understood why the extension of current terms has to be a year or two? Is it formally declared somewhere but I am curious about this point which I have seen similar elsewhere.

It's in the Withdrawal Agreement. There's a provision for transition to continue until 31 December 2020, but a mechanism whereby the Joint Committee (which is made up of equal numbers of representatives from the UK and the EU) can decide to extend the transition for either one year or two years. They can only make that decision once, and only before 1 July 2020.

An extension for a different period, or an extension agreed after 1 July 2020, would require an amendment to the Withrdrawal Agreement, which would be a new treaty, and would require unanimous consent by, and ratification by the parliaments of, each of the Member States (as well as the UK) in accordance with their domestic constitutional requirements. It ain't gonna happen.

Peregrinus

theological wrote: »

There's no point extending if there's no willingness on the EU side to work with the UK proposals. The UK should just leave on WTO terms if there's no appetite for a deal in June.

There certainly is a point in extending. It would give the UK time to come up with proposals that stand some chance of being accepted, and the UK badly needs acceptable proposals.

Remember, Brexit Day itself was repeatedly deferred, and but for those deferrals Johnson would never have had the time or opportunity to come up with his famous "oven-ready deal", which met with such acclaim. Is it impossible that he might be able to do something like that again, or are you convinced he is a one-trick pony?

2u2me

Melanchthon wrote: »

Not much point in arguing about negotiations on this thread as it's pretty one sided

Just my opinion but hearing the 'opinions' about britain leaving the EU in this thread, remind me of the greath lengths cults take to stop their members from leaving.

• Some groups have specific derogatory labels for persons who criticize the cult, and they train their members to avoid or harass these stated "enemies."
• Another fear that comes from believing that if you leave, you will be doomed to live a life of unenlightenment, will never be psychologically whole, never spiritually fulfilled, never healthy or able to live in peace.
• Former members may worry indefinitely about their inner "ticking bomb" or the cult leader's dire predictions of the horrible events that will befall them and their families.
• Upon leaving the group, a person usually discovers that the group practices shown toward outsiders are now turned on him or her - that is, he or she is scorned and ostricized. Leaving is a final door slam: the past is behind, and the exiting cult member is heading forward - but alone - toward an uncharted future in which the former member has to start all over at creating a friendship network.

https://culteducation.com/group/1273-recovery/17912-cults-in-our-midst-leaving-a-cult-and-recoverings.html

Melanchthon

Peregrinus wrote: »

It's in the Withdrawal Agreement. There's a provision for transition to continue until 31 December 2020, but a mechanism whereby the Joint Committee (which is made up of equal numbers of representatives from the UK and the EU) can decide to extend the transition for either one year or two years. They can only make that decision once, and only before 1 July 2020.

An extension for a different period, or an extension agreed after 1 July 2020, would require an amendment to the Withrdrawal Agreement, which would be a new treaty, and would require unanimous consent by, and ratification by the parliaments of, each of the Member States (as well as the UK) in accordance with their domestic constitutional requirements. It ain't gonna happen.

Took a skim again at this but I am still a bit confused as to why extension of transition is only talked about for 1 or 2 years, the relevant text is this right

Extension of the transition period

1. Notwithstanding Article 126, the Joint Committee may, before 1 July 2020, adopt a single decision extending the transition period for up to. 1 or 2 years (*2)

now doesn't that imply that that this is an extension of not more than 2 years, I find the strange EU English easy to misinterpret though, but in terms of normal English you wouldn't say up to you would say Either. as its two discreet value that can be chosen , up to refers to a choice in a continuous range?

Joe_ Public

Melanchthon wrote: »

Took a skim again at this but I am still a bit confused as to why extension of transition is only talked about for 1 or 2 years, the relevant text is this right



now doesn't that imply that that this is an extension of not more than 2 years, I find the strange EU English easy to misinterpret though, but in terms of normal English you wouldn't say up to you would say Either. as its two discreet value that can be chosen , up to refers to a choice in a continuous range?

Exactly what it says: an extension not more than 2 years, meaning they can take as long as they need up to two years. Dont have to take the full extension if it's not required, that's all i'd read into it.

Melanchthon

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Exactly what it says: an extension not more than 2 years, meaning they can take as long as they need up to two years. Dont have to take the full extension if it's not required, that's all i'd read into it.

Thats my thinking too but its always talked about as either a one or two year extension, this is important as I think that a long extension is deeply unpalatable to the Tories and arguably unpalatable to unpalatable to the UK electorate considering the election result, however a 6 month extension would be a lot more viable but no-one ever seems to talk about this option.

fash

2u2me wrote: »

Just my opinion but hearing the 'opinions' about britain leaving the EU in this thread, remind me of the greath lengths cults take to stop their members from leaving.

Not quite the same though is it:
Leavers said they could have all of the benefits and none of the costs, unfettered and friction free access, no loss of jobs, no impact on NI, £350 million for the NHS etc.,
They've already had significant job losses, no money for the NHS, a currency drop of 25%, an economic cost of about 3% so far plus estimated overall cost of 7-8%, a border between GB & NI, loss of freedom of movement rights, now guaranteed exporting/importing frictions which will destroy several JIT industries, likely loss of food standards already being discussed, FTAs which are demonstrably worse than those obtained through the EU - and negotiations at least contemplated (with e.g. Japan) where roll overs will be rejected have already been announced - all for the "easiest trade deal in history". How is that coming along?

theological

Peregrinus wrote: »

There certainly is a point in extending. It would give the UK time to come up with proposals that stand some chance of being accepted, and the UK badly needs acceptable proposals.

Remember, Brexit Day itself was repeatedly deferred, and but for those deferrals Johnson would never have had the time or opportunity to come up with his famous "oven-ready deal", which met with such acclaim. Is it impossible that he might be able to do something like that again, or are you convinced he is a one-trick pony?

It seems like you think there's an infinite amount of moving space and that should be automatically acceptable to the UK.

If the EU are willing to go with an agreement that respects Britain's status as a third country (ala Canada) then I'd say sign it tomorrow.

Any suggestion of auto-copying of EU rules into infinity should be responded to with a simple no.

Joe_ Public

Melanchthon wrote: »

Thats my thinking too but its always talked about as either a one or two year extension, this is important as I think that a long extension is deeply unpalatable to the Tories and arguably unpalatable to unpalatable to the UK electorate considering the election result, however a 6 month extension would be a lot more viable but no-one ever seems to talk about this option.

You're correct and i certainly think a 2 year extension, whatever about anything else, is a non starter. But it is what it is. These were decisions that were made some time back with probably little enough heed to tory optics. Hard to think of every little detail, i imagine.

Peregrinus

theological wrote: »

It seems like you think there's an infinite amount of moving space and that should be automatically acceptable to the UK.

If the EU are willing to go with an agreement that respects Britain's status as a third country (ala Canada) then I'd say sign it tomorrow.

Any suggestion of auto-copying of EU rules into infinity should be responded to with a simple no.

All the EU's agreements with third countries respect the status of those countries as third countries; they wouldn't have signed them otherwise. There's nothing unique about the Canada deal in that regard.

The UK's position seems to be (and you seem to uncritically accept) that the UK has the right to pick-and-mix bits from every agreement that the EU has ever made with any third county, ignoring the fact that the UK is very differently situated to those countries, and then to assemble those bits into a unique agreement which the EU has never made with any country, and to expect this to be accepted by the EU, and to complain that if the EU doesn't comply it is failing to respect the UK's status as a third country.

This is nonsense, and dangerous nonsense; it will seriously damage the UK by preventing it from entertaining the possiblity of a trade deal to which the EU might conceivably agree (and this may indeed be the purpose of some who espouse this position). The UK could benefit enormously from an extension if it gives them the time to appreciate that it is nonsense, and to come up with an approach to the negotiations capable of accommodating a mutually beneficial trade deal. The only reason for dismissing an extension is if you think the UK is incapable of this. I have not quite reached that point of despair.

fly_agaric

(Re all that stuff about "lefty" luvvies & channel 4)...Think what this thread needs is nurse on call to dispense some soothing medication [maybe NHS can provide one for any exiled Brits posting far from home!] :pac:

Melanchthon

Peregrinus want to weigh in on the extension thing as your holding yourself as an authority on this, and stating that an extension is a good idea in your posts but it doesn't seem your post in reply to me was accurate? Am I misreading the text or can a shorter extension or extension of say a year and a half be allowed.