comment by red_evils (U19878)
posted 3 minutes ago
Still a declaration made by Boris, wonder why EU can't trust him to follow the standard when accessing to EU market.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
and it's not a standard that he's attempted to renege from, albeit that it was non-binding in the first place. the UK is quite happy to have a level playing field mechanism, it just doesn't want to agree to a mechanism whereby it can be dictated to by the EU in law changes that are just protectionism.
The EU is trying to impose a totally one sided treaty, that's the issue. The UK is absolutely right to walk away from the offer of being a 2nd class prisoner of the EU, controlled from Brussels.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
comment by Okeydokey (U22516)
posted 49 seconds ago
comment by red_evils (U19878)
posted 3 minutes ago
Still a declaration made by Boris, wonder why EU can't trust him to follow the standard when accessing to EU market.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
and it's not a standard that he's attempted to renege from, albeit that it was non-binding in the first place. the UK is quite happy to have a level playing field mechanism, it just doesn't want to agree to a mechanism whereby it can be dictated to by the EU in law changes that are just protectionism.
The EU is trying to impose a totally one sided treaty, that's the issue. The UK is absolutely right to walk away from the offer of being a 2nd class prisoner of the EU, controlled from Brussels.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's incorrect. The EU dictate their standard, UK don't need to follow. Whatever part UK don't want to follow that standard, UK will have to pay tariff. So if UK standard is higher, then it shouldn't be a problem. I don't see anything wrong with that principal
comment by Tarrico_sees_red (U5595)
posted 1 minute ago
We only have to follow their regulations to sell into their market.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
whereas with a no deal we don't have to do even that.
comment by red_evils (U19878)
posted 49 seconds ago
comment by Okeydokey (U22516)
posted 49 seconds ago
comment by red_evils (U19878)
posted 3 minutes ago
Still a declaration made by Boris, wonder why EU can't trust him to follow the standard when accessing to EU market.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
and it's not a standard that he's attempted to renege from, albeit that it was non-binding in the first place. the UK is quite happy to have a level playing field mechanism, it just doesn't want to agree to a mechanism whereby it can be dictated to by the EU in law changes that are just protectionism.
The EU is trying to impose a totally one sided treaty, that's the issue. The UK is absolutely right to walk away from the offer of being a 2nd class prisoner of the EU, controlled from Brussels.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's incorrect. The EU dictate their standard, UK don't need to follow. Whatever part UK don't want to follow that standard, UK will have to pay tariff. So if UK standard is higher, then it shouldn't be a problem. I don't see anything wrong with that principal
----------------------------------------------------------------------
how do you know that ?
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Am guessing this arrangement is reciprocal is it, as proposed by the EU ? They're happy to pay tariffs if they don't meet the UK's standards ?
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
comment by Okeydokey (U22516)
posted 20 seconds ago
comment by red_evils (U19878)
posted 49 seconds ago
comment by Okeydokey (U22516)
posted 49 seconds ago
comment by red_evils (U19878)
posted 3 minutes ago
Still a declaration made by Boris, wonder why EU can't trust him to follow the standard when accessing to EU market.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
and it's not a standard that he's attempted to renege from, albeit that it was non-binding in the first place. the UK is quite happy to have a level playing field mechanism, it just doesn't want to agree to a mechanism whereby it can be dictated to by the EU in law changes that are just protectionism.
The EU is trying to impose a totally one sided treaty, that's the issue. The UK is absolutely right to walk away from the offer of being a 2nd class prisoner of the EU, controlled from Brussels.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's incorrect. The EU dictate their standard, UK don't need to follow. Whatever part UK don't want to follow that standard, UK will have to pay tariff. So if UK standard is higher, then it shouldn't be a problem. I don't see anything wrong with that principal
----------------------------------------------------------------------
how do you know that ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Gather information from different sources of course. What do you understand from Ursula's statement regarding EU position? She made that very clear UK doesn't have to follow EU standard, but you will pay tariff in EU market when the standard are different. You want to access to the club, follow the club rules.
comment by red_evils (U19878)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Okeydokey (U22516)
posted 20 seconds ago
comment by red_evils (U19878)
posted 49 seconds ago
comment by Okeydokey (U22516)
posted 49 seconds ago
comment by red_evils (U19878)
posted 3 minutes ago
Still a declaration made by Boris, wonder why EU can't trust him to follow the standard when accessing to EU market.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
and it's not a standard that he's attempted to renege from, albeit that it was non-binding in the first place. the UK is quite happy to have a level playing field mechanism, it just doesn't want to agree to a mechanism whereby it can be dictated to by the EU in law changes that are just protectionism.
The EU is trying to impose a totally one sided treaty, that's the issue. The UK is absolutely right to walk away from the offer of being a 2nd class prisoner of the EU, controlled from Brussels.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's incorrect. The EU dictate their standard, UK don't need to follow. Whatever part UK don't want to follow that standard, UK will have to pay tariff. So if UK standard is higher, then it shouldn't be a problem. I don't see anything wrong with that principal
----------------------------------------------------------------------
how do you know that ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Gather information from different sources of course. What do you understand from Ursula's statement regarding EU position? She made that very clear UK doesn't have to follow EU standard, but you will pay tariff in EU market when the standard are different. You want to access to the club, follow the club rules.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
IF that's the case (and tbf you did assert earlier that this was part of the WA), then it's probably being used as a negotiation tool against the EU's absurdly unreasonable positions on fishing and on the dispute mechanism.
comment by Okeydokey (U22516)
posted 2 minutes ago
Am guessing this arrangement is reciprocal is it, as proposed by the EU ? They're happy to pay tariffs if they don't meet the UK's standards ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't just read the Sun.
Ursula quote: We would simply adapt the condition for access to our market accordingly to the decision of UK and this would apply vice-versa
comment by red_evils (U19878)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Okeydokey (U22516)
posted 2 minutes ago
Am guessing this arrangement is reciprocal is it, as proposed by the EU ? They're happy to pay tariffs if they don't meet the UK's standards ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't just read the Sun.
Ursula quote: We would simply adapt the condition for access to our market accordingly to the decision of UK and this would apply vice-versa
----------------------------------------------------------------------
and every Boris and Gove quote is gospel is it ?
comment by Okeydokey (U22516)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by red_evils (U19878)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Okeydokey (U22516)
posted 20 seconds ago
comment by red_evils (U19878)
posted 49 seconds ago
comment by Okeydokey (U22516)
posted 49 seconds ago
comment by red_evils (U19878)
posted 3 minutes ago
Still a declaration made by Boris, wonder why EU can't trust him to follow the standard when accessing to EU market.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
and it's not a standard that he's attempted to renege from, albeit that it was non-binding in the first place. the UK is quite happy to have a level playing field mechanism, it just doesn't want to agree to a mechanism whereby it can be dictated to by the EU in law changes that are just protectionism.
The EU is trying to impose a totally one sided treaty, that's the issue. The UK is absolutely right to walk away from the offer of being a 2nd class prisoner of the EU, controlled from Brussels.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's incorrect. The EU dictate their standard, UK don't need to follow. Whatever part UK don't want to follow that standard, UK will have to pay tariff. So if UK standard is higher, then it shouldn't be a problem. I don't see anything wrong with that principal
----------------------------------------------------------------------
how do you know that ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Gather information from different sources of course. What do you understand from Ursula's statement regarding EU position? She made that very clear UK doesn't have to follow EU standard, but you will pay tariff in EU market when the standard are different. You want to access to the club, follow the club rules.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
IF that's the case (and tbf you did assert earlier that this was part of the WA), then it's probably being used as a negotiation tool against the EU's absurdly unreasonable positions on fishing and on the dispute mechanism.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That I agree with you to a certain degree. Fishing is just the French playing hard ball, Macron needs that. Personally, I think it is a small issue economically to give up free trade deal just because of that. Some sort of agreement to reduce the quota gradually could help resolve it. However, as others pointed out, UK fishermen need to sell fish to EU market so a no deal Brexit will not make a lot of benefit regardless of how much fish UK can get.
comment by Okeydokey (U22516)
posted 35 seconds ago
comment by red_evils (U19878)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Okeydokey (U22516)
posted 2 minutes ago
Am guessing this arrangement is reciprocal is it, as proposed by the EU ? They're happy to pay tariffs if they don't meet the UK's standards ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't just read the Sun.
Ursula quote: We would simply adapt the condition for access to our market accordingly to the decision of UK and this would apply vice-versa
----------------------------------------------------------------------
and every Boris and Gove quote is gospel is it ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What did Boris and Gove said about our position to standard? Apart from EU want to dictate the standard which is not true. We only can compare the statements of both sides, which EU is much clearer in my opinion
Through the early weeks of next year brexiteer's.will slowly come to realise the folly of their ways, even with a deal, but particularly, as looks likely, there is no deal.
They will then have to endure the biggest and the longest 'we told you so' moment in this country's history.
comment by Pâî§Lë¥'š _P䆆ê®ÑëÐ_ÐrÊåm§ (U1541)
posted 1 minute ago
Through the early weeks of next year brexiteer's.will slowly come to realise the folly of their ways, even with a deal, but particularly, as looks likely, there is no deal.
They will then have to endure the biggest and the longest 'we told you so' moment in this country's history.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I doubt that. It will just be a short term pain for a long term gain. How short is that to be defined, then they just keep moving the goal post. It's Boris tactic for everything.
PS: I still think we'll get a deal, might be a bad deal, still better than No deal (or Australian style deal) after all
comment by Pâî§Lë¥'š _P䆆ê®ÑëÐ_ÐrÊåm§ (U1541)
posted 6 minutes ago
Through the early weeks of next year brexiteer's.will slowly come to realise the folly of their ways, even with a deal, but particularly, as looks likely, there is no deal.
They will then have to endure the biggest and the longest 'we told you so' moment in this country's history.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
tbh those whose best contribution to make to the country is "we told you so", are the real reason the country is in decline
comment by Okeydokey (U22516)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Pâî§Lë¥'š _P䆆ê®ÑëÐ_ÐrÊåm§ (U1541)
posted 6 minutes ago
Through the early weeks of next year brexiteer's.will slowly come to realise the folly of their ways, even with a deal, but particularly, as looks likely, there is no deal.
They will then have to endure the biggest and the longest 'we told you so' moment in this country's history.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
tbh those whose best contribution to make to the country is "we told you so", are the real reason the country is in decline
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Here we go - blame the EU, blame Remoaner, blame everyone else
comment by red_evils (U19878)
posted 15 seconds ago
comment by Okeydokey (U22516)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Pâî§Lë¥'š _P䆆ê®ÑëÐ_ÐrÊåm§ (U1541)
posted 6 minutes ago
Through the early weeks of next year brexiteer's.will slowly come to realise the folly of their ways, even with a deal, but particularly, as looks likely, there is no deal.
They will then have to endure the biggest and the longest 'we told you so' moment in this country's history.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
tbh those whose best contribution to make to the country is "we told you so", are the real reason the country is in decline
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Here we go - blame the EU, blame Remoaner, blame everyone else
----------------------------------------------------------------------
my focus is on getting on with things as best i can, as should be the focus of everyone else. unfortunately half the country want to lie back in their own tsos gloating at the country's decline and blaming it on "the tories".
comment by Okeydokey (U22516)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by red_evils (U19878)
posted 15 seconds ago
comment by Okeydokey (U22516)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Pâî§Lë¥'š _P䆆ê®ÑëÐ_ÐrÊåm§ (U1541)
posted 6 minutes ago
Through the early weeks of next year brexiteer's.will slowly come to realise the folly of their ways, even with a deal, but particularly, as looks likely, there is no deal.
They will then have to endure the biggest and the longest 'we told you so' moment in this country's history.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
tbh those whose best contribution to make to the country is "we told you so", are the real reason the country is in decline
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Here we go - blame the EU, blame Remoaner, blame everyone else
----------------------------------------------------------------------
my focus is on getting on with things as best i can, as should be the focus of everyone else. unfortunately half the country want to lie back in their own tsos gloating at the country's decline and blaming it on "the tories".
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I can't get behind anyone who say we are ready for No deal. Sorry, leaving till this last minute without telling business about what deal we will have next year is suicide.
comment by red_evils (U19878)
posted 34 seconds ago
comment by Pâî§Lë¥'š _P䆆ê®ÑëÐ_ÐrÊåm§ (U1541)
posted 1 minute ago
Through the early weeks of next year brexiteer's.will slowly come to realise the folly of their ways, even with a deal, but particularly, as looks likely, there is no deal.
They will then have to endure the biggest and the longest 'we told you so' moment in this country's history.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I doubt that. It will just be a short term pain for a long term gain. How short is that to be defined, then they just keep moving the goal post. It's Boris tactic for everything.
PS: I still think we'll get a deal, might be a bad deal, still better than No deal (or Australian style deal) after all
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think Boris wants a deal and could well fold because the alternative is unthinkable. His recklessness of believing the EU would fold on their core principals and allow cherry picking of their single market is is just another of his government's costly mistakes.
It's a solid granite hard Brexit with a deal,but obviously a deal would be preferable. A no deal may wake people up imo, but a deal will have to be done at some point, but it won't be on the same terms we could get now. The EU will tighten the terms as the UKs desperation sets in.
There are benefits to a no deal, although they aren't things that will be immediately felt by business or the public.
Sovereignty being the key factor, people who voted to leave the EU would have done so on the understanding we reclaim sovereignty over our own laws. Not really the with the deal on hand.
comment by Busby (U19985)
posted 3 minutes ago
There are benefits to a no deal, although they aren't things that will be immediately felt by business or the public.
Sovereignty being the key factor, people who voted to leave the EU would have done so on the understanding we reclaim sovereignty over our own laws. Not really the with the deal on hand.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The 'immediate things that will be felt by business and the public' in a no deal scenario will make a lot of people very unhappy. The Government's own findings suggest civil disorder. Possible food shortages, medicine shortages and thousands of job losses will be hard to spin. Although I accept that the particularly dense will fall for it's the EU's fault (German's fault, French fault) ec which will undoubtedly follow. This will be the new NHS bus and bendy banana in a post Brexit Britain.
However, if there is a no deal, as I said earlier I expect a lot of people to wake up too.
comment by Okeydokey (U22516)
posted 3 hours, 1 minute ago
comment by sandy (U20567)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Okeydokey (U22516)
posted 30 minutes ago
comment by sandy (U20567)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Okeydokey (U22516)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by sandy (U20567)
posted 2 minutes ago
The biggest act of self harm in Britain`s history in all probability will be leaving without any deal
----------------------------------------------------------------------
not even close. for a start there's entering into WW1 and allowing the rise of irish republicanism a few years later.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well yes, WW1 was a massive self harm, I will agree, all caused by Queen Victoria`s relations wanting to have a small skirmish. The British have a lot to answer for.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
aside from having the cause of WW1 completely wrong, the British have a lot to answer to whom for ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wasn`t the Kaiser, Queen Vics Grandson, wasn`t our leader one of Queen Vic`s grandsons. Wasn`t the Tsar of Russia related in someway to the the British Monarchy. First World War was a basically a dust up by descendants of Queen Victoria.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
what's your point ? Queen Victoria was dead. The Kind didn't decide to go to war the government did. And it wasn't out of an aspiration to have a bit of a dust up as you've claimed, or some kind of family argument and to suggest it was is absolute nonsense and with no semblance of reality.
I think you're being a little bit unsavoury and cavalier with your comments tbh bearing in mind the scale of loss of life that occurred and the devastating consequences it had for the country.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bit like the leaders then they were very cavalier. In reality they didn`t care less about loss of life, they encouraged young people to sign up, knowing they were almost certainly signing up to their death. Blame them not me fella.
Sign in if you want to comment
Anybody else getting fed up with the
Page 3 of 5
posted on 14/12/20
comment by red_evils (U19878)
posted 3 minutes ago
Still a declaration made by Boris, wonder why EU can't trust him to follow the standard when accessing to EU market.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
and it's not a standard that he's attempted to renege from, albeit that it was non-binding in the first place. the UK is quite happy to have a level playing field mechanism, it just doesn't want to agree to a mechanism whereby it can be dictated to by the EU in law changes that are just protectionism.
The EU is trying to impose a totally one sided treaty, that's the issue. The UK is absolutely right to walk away from the offer of being a 2nd class prisoner of the EU, controlled from Brussels.
posted on 14/12/20
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 14/12/20
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 14/12/20
comment by Okeydokey (U22516)
posted 49 seconds ago
comment by red_evils (U19878)
posted 3 minutes ago
Still a declaration made by Boris, wonder why EU can't trust him to follow the standard when accessing to EU market.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
and it's not a standard that he's attempted to renege from, albeit that it was non-binding in the first place. the UK is quite happy to have a level playing field mechanism, it just doesn't want to agree to a mechanism whereby it can be dictated to by the EU in law changes that are just protectionism.
The EU is trying to impose a totally one sided treaty, that's the issue. The UK is absolutely right to walk away from the offer of being a 2nd class prisoner of the EU, controlled from Brussels.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's incorrect. The EU dictate their standard, UK don't need to follow. Whatever part UK don't want to follow that standard, UK will have to pay tariff. So if UK standard is higher, then it shouldn't be a problem. I don't see anything wrong with that principal
posted on 14/12/20
comment by Tarrico_sees_red (U5595)
posted 1 minute ago
We only have to follow their regulations to sell into their market.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
whereas with a no deal we don't have to do even that.
posted on 14/12/20
comment by red_evils (U19878)
posted 49 seconds ago
comment by Okeydokey (U22516)
posted 49 seconds ago
comment by red_evils (U19878)
posted 3 minutes ago
Still a declaration made by Boris, wonder why EU can't trust him to follow the standard when accessing to EU market.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
and it's not a standard that he's attempted to renege from, albeit that it was non-binding in the first place. the UK is quite happy to have a level playing field mechanism, it just doesn't want to agree to a mechanism whereby it can be dictated to by the EU in law changes that are just protectionism.
The EU is trying to impose a totally one sided treaty, that's the issue. The UK is absolutely right to walk away from the offer of being a 2nd class prisoner of the EU, controlled from Brussels.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's incorrect. The EU dictate their standard, UK don't need to follow. Whatever part UK don't want to follow that standard, UK will have to pay tariff. So if UK standard is higher, then it shouldn't be a problem. I don't see anything wrong with that principal
----------------------------------------------------------------------
how do you know that ?
posted on 14/12/20
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 14/12/20
Am guessing this arrangement is reciprocal is it, as proposed by the EU ? They're happy to pay tariffs if they don't meet the UK's standards ?
posted on 14/12/20
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 14/12/20
comment by Okeydokey (U22516)
posted 20 seconds ago
comment by red_evils (U19878)
posted 49 seconds ago
comment by Okeydokey (U22516)
posted 49 seconds ago
comment by red_evils (U19878)
posted 3 minutes ago
Still a declaration made by Boris, wonder why EU can't trust him to follow the standard when accessing to EU market.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
and it's not a standard that he's attempted to renege from, albeit that it was non-binding in the first place. the UK is quite happy to have a level playing field mechanism, it just doesn't want to agree to a mechanism whereby it can be dictated to by the EU in law changes that are just protectionism.
The EU is trying to impose a totally one sided treaty, that's the issue. The UK is absolutely right to walk away from the offer of being a 2nd class prisoner of the EU, controlled from Brussels.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's incorrect. The EU dictate their standard, UK don't need to follow. Whatever part UK don't want to follow that standard, UK will have to pay tariff. So if UK standard is higher, then it shouldn't be a problem. I don't see anything wrong with that principal
----------------------------------------------------------------------
how do you know that ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Gather information from different sources of course. What do you understand from Ursula's statement regarding EU position? She made that very clear UK doesn't have to follow EU standard, but you will pay tariff in EU market when the standard are different. You want to access to the club, follow the club rules.
posted on 14/12/20
comment by red_evils (U19878)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Okeydokey (U22516)
posted 20 seconds ago
comment by red_evils (U19878)
posted 49 seconds ago
comment by Okeydokey (U22516)
posted 49 seconds ago
comment by red_evils (U19878)
posted 3 minutes ago
Still a declaration made by Boris, wonder why EU can't trust him to follow the standard when accessing to EU market.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
and it's not a standard that he's attempted to renege from, albeit that it was non-binding in the first place. the UK is quite happy to have a level playing field mechanism, it just doesn't want to agree to a mechanism whereby it can be dictated to by the EU in law changes that are just protectionism.
The EU is trying to impose a totally one sided treaty, that's the issue. The UK is absolutely right to walk away from the offer of being a 2nd class prisoner of the EU, controlled from Brussels.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's incorrect. The EU dictate their standard, UK don't need to follow. Whatever part UK don't want to follow that standard, UK will have to pay tariff. So if UK standard is higher, then it shouldn't be a problem. I don't see anything wrong with that principal
----------------------------------------------------------------------
how do you know that ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Gather information from different sources of course. What do you understand from Ursula's statement regarding EU position? She made that very clear UK doesn't have to follow EU standard, but you will pay tariff in EU market when the standard are different. You want to access to the club, follow the club rules.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
IF that's the case (and tbf you did assert earlier that this was part of the WA), then it's probably being used as a negotiation tool against the EU's absurdly unreasonable positions on fishing and on the dispute mechanism.
posted on 14/12/20
comment by Okeydokey (U22516)
posted 2 minutes ago
Am guessing this arrangement is reciprocal is it, as proposed by the EU ? They're happy to pay tariffs if they don't meet the UK's standards ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't just read the Sun.
Ursula quote: We would simply adapt the condition for access to our market accordingly to the decision of UK and this would apply vice-versa
posted on 14/12/20
comment by red_evils (U19878)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Okeydokey (U22516)
posted 2 minutes ago
Am guessing this arrangement is reciprocal is it, as proposed by the EU ? They're happy to pay tariffs if they don't meet the UK's standards ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't just read the Sun.
Ursula quote: We would simply adapt the condition for access to our market accordingly to the decision of UK and this would apply vice-versa
----------------------------------------------------------------------
and every Boris and Gove quote is gospel is it ?
posted on 14/12/20
comment by Okeydokey (U22516)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by red_evils (U19878)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Okeydokey (U22516)
posted 20 seconds ago
comment by red_evils (U19878)
posted 49 seconds ago
comment by Okeydokey (U22516)
posted 49 seconds ago
comment by red_evils (U19878)
posted 3 minutes ago
Still a declaration made by Boris, wonder why EU can't trust him to follow the standard when accessing to EU market.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
and it's not a standard that he's attempted to renege from, albeit that it was non-binding in the first place. the UK is quite happy to have a level playing field mechanism, it just doesn't want to agree to a mechanism whereby it can be dictated to by the EU in law changes that are just protectionism.
The EU is trying to impose a totally one sided treaty, that's the issue. The UK is absolutely right to walk away from the offer of being a 2nd class prisoner of the EU, controlled from Brussels.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's incorrect. The EU dictate their standard, UK don't need to follow. Whatever part UK don't want to follow that standard, UK will have to pay tariff. So if UK standard is higher, then it shouldn't be a problem. I don't see anything wrong with that principal
----------------------------------------------------------------------
how do you know that ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Gather information from different sources of course. What do you understand from Ursula's statement regarding EU position? She made that very clear UK doesn't have to follow EU standard, but you will pay tariff in EU market when the standard are different. You want to access to the club, follow the club rules.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
IF that's the case (and tbf you did assert earlier that this was part of the WA), then it's probably being used as a negotiation tool against the EU's absurdly unreasonable positions on fishing and on the dispute mechanism.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That I agree with you to a certain degree. Fishing is just the French playing hard ball, Macron needs that. Personally, I think it is a small issue economically to give up free trade deal just because of that. Some sort of agreement to reduce the quota gradually could help resolve it. However, as others pointed out, UK fishermen need to sell fish to EU market so a no deal Brexit will not make a lot of benefit regardless of how much fish UK can get.
posted on 14/12/20
comment by Okeydokey (U22516)
posted 35 seconds ago
comment by red_evils (U19878)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Okeydokey (U22516)
posted 2 minutes ago
Am guessing this arrangement is reciprocal is it, as proposed by the EU ? They're happy to pay tariffs if they don't meet the UK's standards ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't just read the Sun.
Ursula quote: We would simply adapt the condition for access to our market accordingly to the decision of UK and this would apply vice-versa
----------------------------------------------------------------------
and every Boris and Gove quote is gospel is it ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What did Boris and Gove said about our position to standard? Apart from EU want to dictate the standard which is not true. We only can compare the statements of both sides, which EU is much clearer in my opinion
posted on 14/12/20
Through the early weeks of next year brexiteer's.will slowly come to realise the folly of their ways, even with a deal, but particularly, as looks likely, there is no deal.
They will then have to endure the biggest and the longest 'we told you so' moment in this country's history.
posted on 14/12/20
comment by Pâî§Lë¥'š _P䆆ê®ÑëÐ_ÐrÊåm§ (U1541)
posted 1 minute ago
Through the early weeks of next year brexiteer's.will slowly come to realise the folly of their ways, even with a deal, but particularly, as looks likely, there is no deal.
They will then have to endure the biggest and the longest 'we told you so' moment in this country's history.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I doubt that. It will just be a short term pain for a long term gain. How short is that to be defined, then they just keep moving the goal post. It's Boris tactic for everything.
PS: I still think we'll get a deal, might be a bad deal, still better than No deal (or Australian style deal) after all
posted on 14/12/20
comment by Pâî§Lë¥'š _P䆆ê®ÑëÐ_ÐrÊåm§ (U1541)
posted 6 minutes ago
Through the early weeks of next year brexiteer's.will slowly come to realise the folly of their ways, even with a deal, but particularly, as looks likely, there is no deal.
They will then have to endure the biggest and the longest 'we told you so' moment in this country's history.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
tbh those whose best contribution to make to the country is "we told you so", are the real reason the country is in decline
posted on 14/12/20
comment by Okeydokey (U22516)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Pâî§Lë¥'š _P䆆ê®ÑëÐ_ÐrÊåm§ (U1541)
posted 6 minutes ago
Through the early weeks of next year brexiteer's.will slowly come to realise the folly of their ways, even with a deal, but particularly, as looks likely, there is no deal.
They will then have to endure the biggest and the longest 'we told you so' moment in this country's history.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
tbh those whose best contribution to make to the country is "we told you so", are the real reason the country is in decline
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Here we go - blame the EU, blame Remoaner, blame everyone else
posted on 14/12/20
comment by red_evils (U19878)
posted 15 seconds ago
comment by Okeydokey (U22516)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Pâî§Lë¥'š _P䆆ê®ÑëÐ_ÐrÊåm§ (U1541)
posted 6 minutes ago
Through the early weeks of next year brexiteer's.will slowly come to realise the folly of their ways, even with a deal, but particularly, as looks likely, there is no deal.
They will then have to endure the biggest and the longest 'we told you so' moment in this country's history.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
tbh those whose best contribution to make to the country is "we told you so", are the real reason the country is in decline
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Here we go - blame the EU, blame Remoaner, blame everyone else
----------------------------------------------------------------------
my focus is on getting on with things as best i can, as should be the focus of everyone else. unfortunately half the country want to lie back in their own tsos gloating at the country's decline and blaming it on "the tories".
posted on 14/12/20
comment by Okeydokey (U22516)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by red_evils (U19878)
posted 15 seconds ago
comment by Okeydokey (U22516)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Pâî§Lë¥'š _P䆆ê®ÑëÐ_ÐrÊåm§ (U1541)
posted 6 minutes ago
Through the early weeks of next year brexiteer's.will slowly come to realise the folly of their ways, even with a deal, but particularly, as looks likely, there is no deal.
They will then have to endure the biggest and the longest 'we told you so' moment in this country's history.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
tbh those whose best contribution to make to the country is "we told you so", are the real reason the country is in decline
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Here we go - blame the EU, blame Remoaner, blame everyone else
----------------------------------------------------------------------
my focus is on getting on with things as best i can, as should be the focus of everyone else. unfortunately half the country want to lie back in their own tsos gloating at the country's decline and blaming it on "the tories".
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I can't get behind anyone who say we are ready for No deal. Sorry, leaving till this last minute without telling business about what deal we will have next year is suicide.
posted on 14/12/20
comment by red_evils (U19878)
posted 34 seconds ago
comment by Pâî§Lë¥'š _P䆆ê®ÑëÐ_ÐrÊåm§ (U1541)
posted 1 minute ago
Through the early weeks of next year brexiteer's.will slowly come to realise the folly of their ways, even with a deal, but particularly, as looks likely, there is no deal.
They will then have to endure the biggest and the longest 'we told you so' moment in this country's history.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I doubt that. It will just be a short term pain for a long term gain. How short is that to be defined, then they just keep moving the goal post. It's Boris tactic for everything.
PS: I still think we'll get a deal, might be a bad deal, still better than No deal (or Australian style deal) after all
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think Boris wants a deal and could well fold because the alternative is unthinkable. His recklessness of believing the EU would fold on their core principals and allow cherry picking of their single market is is just another of his government's costly mistakes.
It's a solid granite hard Brexit with a deal,but obviously a deal would be preferable. A no deal may wake people up imo, but a deal will have to be done at some point, but it won't be on the same terms we could get now. The EU will tighten the terms as the UKs desperation sets in.
posted on 14/12/20
There are benefits to a no deal, although they aren't things that will be immediately felt by business or the public.
Sovereignty being the key factor, people who voted to leave the EU would have done so on the understanding we reclaim sovereignty over our own laws. Not really the with the deal on hand.
posted on 14/12/20
comment by Busby (U19985)
posted 3 minutes ago
There are benefits to a no deal, although they aren't things that will be immediately felt by business or the public.
Sovereignty being the key factor, people who voted to leave the EU would have done so on the understanding we reclaim sovereignty over our own laws. Not really the with the deal on hand.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The 'immediate things that will be felt by business and the public' in a no deal scenario will make a lot of people very unhappy. The Government's own findings suggest civil disorder. Possible food shortages, medicine shortages and thousands of job losses will be hard to spin. Although I accept that the particularly dense will fall for it's the EU's fault (German's fault, French fault) ec which will undoubtedly follow. This will be the new NHS bus and bendy banana in a post Brexit Britain.
However, if there is a no deal, as I said earlier I expect a lot of people to wake up too.
posted on 14/12/20
comment by Okeydokey (U22516)
posted 3 hours, 1 minute ago
comment by sandy (U20567)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Okeydokey (U22516)
posted 30 minutes ago
comment by sandy (U20567)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Okeydokey (U22516)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by sandy (U20567)
posted 2 minutes ago
The biggest act of self harm in Britain`s history in all probability will be leaving without any deal
----------------------------------------------------------------------
not even close. for a start there's entering into WW1 and allowing the rise of irish republicanism a few years later.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well yes, WW1 was a massive self harm, I will agree, all caused by Queen Victoria`s relations wanting to have a small skirmish. The British have a lot to answer for.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
aside from having the cause of WW1 completely wrong, the British have a lot to answer to whom for ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wasn`t the Kaiser, Queen Vics Grandson, wasn`t our leader one of Queen Vic`s grandsons. Wasn`t the Tsar of Russia related in someway to the the British Monarchy. First World War was a basically a dust up by descendants of Queen Victoria.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
what's your point ? Queen Victoria was dead. The Kind didn't decide to go to war the government did. And it wasn't out of an aspiration to have a bit of a dust up as you've claimed, or some kind of family argument and to suggest it was is absolute nonsense and with no semblance of reality.
I think you're being a little bit unsavoury and cavalier with your comments tbh bearing in mind the scale of loss of life that occurred and the devastating consequences it had for the country.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bit like the leaders then they were very cavalier. In reality they didn`t care less about loss of life, they encouraged young people to sign up, knowing they were almost certainly signing up to their death. Blame them not me fella.
Page 3 of 5