How it Works1 min ago
Finally, The Penny Drops!
106 Answers
https:/
So will they just let no deal happen or start negotiating?
So will they just let no deal happen or start negotiating?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by ToraToraTora. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Just wait until the frogs realise that we are not going to export into their ports, putting the transport into jeopardy of the usual gallic temper tantrums and random bonfires, but intend to route them through Holland or Belgium or anywhere except France. Then the double whammy of our intended reversal of the fishing rights sell out sneaked through by the terminally timid toad Heath. Wait for the wails to become deafening...……..and laugh as you listen.
The 'nay - sayers' always seem to forget that we can reciprocate and, say, buy wine and cars from elsewhere. We buy a lot more from them than they do from us after all. This would cause a lot of disruption and hardship, so it makes sense for the EU to negotiate and avoid it. Cassa333 at 16.03 is quite right. We should have pushed our p.o.v. from the very beginning, but I read that May never mentioned getting rid of the backstop despite Parliament telling her to do so. The rest of the deal is lousy and I find a lot of it unacceptable, but the backstop is something no country could accept. (I read that other E.U. countries also think that no one would accept it and that it is a demand too far.)
I suspect that the EU now feels that too much 'face' would be lost if they backed down, so they'll stick it out. Stupid and damaging all round. Crassly bad negotiation on both sides.
I suspect that the EU now feels that too much 'face' would be lost if they backed down, so they'll stick it out. Stupid and damaging all round. Crassly bad negotiation on both sides.
//Crassly bad negotiation on both sides.//
Absolutely correct. It came as no surprise that the Euromaniacs would try to push for all they could to give the EU all the advantages of being rid of us and none of the pain that goes with it. But Mrs May not only capitulated to their every demand (Jump? How high would you like me to jump?) but she gave them the impression that the UK Parliament would acquiesce as readily as she did. Thankfully she was wrong. The EU, by its own bombastic approach to the so-called negotiations, has painted itself into a corner from which it cannot readily escape without massive loss of face. The UK, because it is now trammelled by a completely unacceptable agreement which is not open to renegotiation has nothing but a No Deal to pursue.
Absolutely correct. It came as no surprise that the Euromaniacs would try to push for all they could to give the EU all the advantages of being rid of us and none of the pain that goes with it. But Mrs May not only capitulated to their every demand (Jump? How high would you like me to jump?) but she gave them the impression that the UK Parliament would acquiesce as readily as she did. Thankfully she was wrong. The EU, by its own bombastic approach to the so-called negotiations, has painted itself into a corner from which it cannot readily escape without massive loss of face. The UK, because it is now trammelled by a completely unacceptable agreement which is not open to renegotiation has nothing but a No Deal to pursue.
I don't know what you mean, Zacs.
Gina Miller ensured that Parliament had its say over the manner of our leaving. She should have been careful what she wished for because had she not intervened it is likely that Mrs May would have agreed on her own to the leaving deal that was put under her nose and that would have been that. Ms Miller would be as happy as she could hope for because that would have meant we had left in name only. Anyway, MPs have had their say - they rejected the deal Mrs May brought back and they've rejected every other option put before them. They've had enough votes to determine a way forward and have failed miserably. So they've had their bit of the democratic process. Parliament itself voted to hold a referendum, it voted to trigger A50 and the 80% of the current Parliament was elected on a manifesto of leaving the EU. So leave we must and since the only deal on offer is unacceptable and not for renegotiation we must leave without a deal.
If MPs conive to thwart that default position I will be unhappy but at the moment I'm content (albeit of the opinion that the last three years has seen a monumental waste of politicians' time).
Gina Miller ensured that Parliament had its say over the manner of our leaving. She should have been careful what she wished for because had she not intervened it is likely that Mrs May would have agreed on her own to the leaving deal that was put under her nose and that would have been that. Ms Miller would be as happy as she could hope for because that would have meant we had left in name only. Anyway, MPs have had their say - they rejected the deal Mrs May brought back and they've rejected every other option put before them. They've had enough votes to determine a way forward and have failed miserably. So they've had their bit of the democratic process. Parliament itself voted to hold a referendum, it voted to trigger A50 and the 80% of the current Parliament was elected on a manifesto of leaving the EU. So leave we must and since the only deal on offer is unacceptable and not for renegotiation we must leave without a deal.
If MPs conive to thwart that default position I will be unhappy but at the moment I'm content (albeit of the opinion that the last three years has seen a monumental waste of politicians' time).
I was of course referring to his revelation that the EU isnt reopening the negotiations, in line with everything they’ve even saying for months.
He still knows Johnson is as unfit to be PM now as he was three years ago, just as Johnson knows the US president is still “stupefyingly ignorant”. For now though a spot of toadying is de rigueur
He still knows Johnson is as unfit to be PM now as he was three years ago, just as Johnson knows the US president is still “stupefyingly ignorant”. For now though a spot of toadying is de rigueur
Whether the last three years were wasted time or not, they were also packed with negotiations. It's therefore naive and frankly insulting to say that the EU refuses to negotiate. They already did, they can say, and perfectly correctly.
On the other hand, they've now negotiated a deal and it has been rejected and they've been told that they have to back down. But all their members are in agreement with the terms of the deal, from their end. The WA has been signed off by the EU Council. Ireland wants the Backstop, and it would be a betrayal of the Irish to buckle on that front.
It seems that the position of the UK now has become one of -- how can I put it? -- trying to pretend that we are bigger than the EU? Or at least the same size. But both of those presumptions are wildly false. It's the origin of the "they need us more than we need them" lie. The EU is ten times our size on nearly every meaningful measure. So how can it ever have been true that we could expect the EU to come to heel, to listen to and to accept our demands?
cassa suggested earlier that "the UK can't have [red lines] it seems". That's not actually true. It's just that red lines also need to be grounded in reality and pragmatism. Right now, the leadership of the UK seems to have lost that. It worries me that people are welcoming, or even celebrating, this.
On the other hand, they've now negotiated a deal and it has been rejected and they've been told that they have to back down. But all their members are in agreement with the terms of the deal, from their end. The WA has been signed off by the EU Council. Ireland wants the Backstop, and it would be a betrayal of the Irish to buckle on that front.
It seems that the position of the UK now has become one of -- how can I put it? -- trying to pretend that we are bigger than the EU? Or at least the same size. But both of those presumptions are wildly false. It's the origin of the "they need us more than we need them" lie. The EU is ten times our size on nearly every meaningful measure. So how can it ever have been true that we could expect the EU to come to heel, to listen to and to accept our demands?
cassa suggested earlier that "the UK can't have [red lines] it seems". That's not actually true. It's just that red lines also need to be grounded in reality and pragmatism. Right now, the leadership of the UK seems to have lost that. It worries me that people are welcoming, or even celebrating, this.
So basically, Jim, what you're suggesting is that we either leave on the EU's terms (for they were never "negotiated" in the true sense of the word) or we don't leave at all.
The problem was with those negotiations that whilst the EU adopted an approach that was "agreed" by all its members (i.e. it was devised by the Euromaniacs and the members were told from the outset what wold be imposed on the UK) Mrs May did not do likewise. As I recall, the first sight her Cabinet had of the deal was when they were locked in at Chequers under the threat of having to get a taxi home if they did not sign up. Until then they had no idea what she had agreed to on their behalf.
This, of course, is no fault of the EU. But the EU must appreciate that their list of demands for a trouble-free withdrawal is simply not acceptable - something that has been obvious for about nine months.
A No Deal Brexit will cause problems on both sides of the Channel and the Irish Sea. But the UK simply cannot capitulate to unreasonable demands because the other party refuses to negotiate further, chanting "the deal is done". It's not.
The problem was with those negotiations that whilst the EU adopted an approach that was "agreed" by all its members (i.e. it was devised by the Euromaniacs and the members were told from the outset what wold be imposed on the UK) Mrs May did not do likewise. As I recall, the first sight her Cabinet had of the deal was when they were locked in at Chequers under the threat of having to get a taxi home if they did not sign up. Until then they had no idea what she had agreed to on their behalf.
This, of course, is no fault of the EU. But the EU must appreciate that their list of demands for a trouble-free withdrawal is simply not acceptable - something that has been obvious for about nine months.
A No Deal Brexit will cause problems on both sides of the Channel and the Irish Sea. But the UK simply cannot capitulate to unreasonable demands because the other party refuses to negotiate further, chanting "the deal is done". It's not.
Retired Supreme court Judge says no chance to stop leaving on 31st Oct. with or without a deal
https:/
https:/
> Mrs May did not do likewise
"Mrs May" is a convenient scapegoat. "We" the people of the UK voted in the Conservative Party that Theresa May led, plus the DUP, and together the Conservatives and DUP formed a Government that negotiated the Brexit deal, and that's the Government we still have - the Conservatives and DUP. So from the EU's point of view "we" are trying to renegotiate something that "we" already agreed and signed! It's hardly surprising that "they" are behaving as they are.
"Mrs May" is a convenient scapegoat. "We" the people of the UK voted in the Conservative Party that Theresa May led, plus the DUP, and together the Conservatives and DUP formed a Government that negotiated the Brexit deal, and that's the Government we still have - the Conservatives and DUP. So from the EU's point of view "we" are trying to renegotiate something that "we" already agreed and signed! It's hardly surprising that "they" are behaving as they are.
Latest Posts
ChatterBank5 mins ago
You Mightn't Be Able To Help Here
ChatterBank9 mins ago
Sunday Express Skeleton 23Rd June
Crosswords65 mins ago