Politics Today

[Alistair20000]

So if I offered you 2m for your business, we signed the contract - which was bona -fide - and then I decided that I only wanted to pay you 1.75m
for whatever reason, how would you reply?

a. Sorry, mate. You signed the contract. I'll sue if you don't pay ... or
b. OK. Lets sit down and renegotiate

I would say pay me or I will sue you. So what is the EU’s loss in this matter ?

 

[RedPaul]

As you are so madly in love with the EU you would say that wouldn’t you.

Let us remember that the NI protocol within the WA was predicated on a plain vanilla Canada-Japan-Korea trade deal which Barnier indicated would be on the table. Now the EU wants to offer something much worse. They still don’t get that we have left.

The Irish border and the GFA was always a trumped up argument to try to persuade us to cancel Brexit. Just replay all the urgings of Tusk and Barnier related thereto. Even if there were a border with customs checks was that really going to lead to the Irish going back to violence and killing each other ?

It really defies any logic to argue that a hard electronic border on the island of Ireland is a bigger threat to peace than a near identical tariff border down the Irish Sea. There is some real rubbish for you.

The EU is now not even offering anything like a bare bones Canada deal. They are offering nothin and wanting lots. That is bad faith.

Time to pack up the negotiations and move to WTO terms.

Would you now like me to make you a list of examples where the EU has ignored International law and its own laws ? It will be a long one.

Eloquently put Al.

I sympathise with much of it, especially the fact that the EU do not get the fact that the Country voted to leave, and has left.

However I do not see what is achieved by Johnson trying to pass a bill that breaks the law, a law that he himself took through parliament under 12 months ago. It gives justifiable grist to the mill of those who think Johnson is nothing more than an untrustworthly charlatan, and demeans the office that he holds.

He should be on the front foot, calmly setting out what he wants from the FTA and why he feels the EU are being intransigent about not agreeing to it. He needs to spell out the consequences (winners and losers) of no deal. At the moment, there is nothing but bombast and childish insults.

 

[IndoMike]

Eloquently put Al.

I sympathise with much of it, especially the fact that the EU do not get the fact that the Country voted to leave, and has left.

However I do not see what is achieved by Johnson trying to pass a bill that breaks the law, a law that he himself took through parliament under 12 months ago. It gives justifiable grist to the mill of those who think Johnson is nothing more than an untrustworthly charlatan, and demeans the office that he holds.

He should be on the front foot, calmly setting out what he wants from the FTA and why he feels the EU are being intransigent about not agreeing to it. He needs to spell out the consequences (winners and losers) of no deal. At the moment, there is nothing but bombast and childish insults.

BREXIT was purely a nationalistic, ideological and frankly gung ho business where the process and consequences were not thought out clearly. As a result withdrawing has been an amateurish and confused affair.
In effect it was "let's BREXIT and we'll worry about the consequences later".
One result is that we still don't know how to solve the Irish question but signed a deal which now Johnson and his mates are saying will lead to the break-up of the UK.
So either Johnson is lying about the break-up or was ignorant of the details of the agreement which he signed. This is classic Johnson : lying or too lazy to inform himself of the details. He has grandiose ideas but absolutely no idea how to implement them
So to talk about how Johnson should be negotiating now is absurd, a few months before the deadline All of that should have been done a long time ago. You don't sign an agreement and start to worry about the details of it later.
Finally, some are saying that it doesn't matter if we renege on the agreement. Let me out it this way : if a 2nd hand car dealer sold you a duff car would you go back there later and buy another one?

 

[Rosencrantz]

As you are so madly in love with the EU you would say that wouldn’t you.

Let us remember that the NI protocol within the WA was predicated on a plain vanilla Canada-Japan-Korea trade deal which Barnier indicated would be on the table. Now the EU wants to offer something much worse. They still don’t get that we have left.

The Irish border and the GFA was always a trumped up argument to try to persuade us to cancel Brexit. Just replay all the urgings of Tusk and Barnier related thereto. Even if there were a border with customs checks was that really going to lead to the Irish going back to violence and killing each other ?

It really defies any logic to argue that a hard electronic border on the island of Ireland is a bigger threat to peace than a near identical tariff border down the Irish Sea. There is some real rubbish for you.

The EU is now not even offering anything like a bare bones Canada deal. They are offering nothin and wanting lots. That is bad faith.

Time to pack up the negotiations and move to WTO terms.

Would you now like me to make you a list of examples where the EU has ignored International law and its own laws ? It will be a long one.

Didn't Barnier say it was the only kind of trade deal model left given UK red lines, no single market, no customs union etc. He didn't mention EU red lines. It was Tusk who was touting the Canada+++ which Boris and the ERG pounced on to ditch Theresa May's Chequers negotiations.

If this was so, why did Boris and his negotiators not get it into at least the political declaration. Even if it is not bound by law, it gives the direction of travel which you can then go on about good faith. Instead they pared the political declaration back from Theresa May's version thinking they could just ignore it anyway, such good faith.

Even if you take the good faith line, it still means that Boris and crew have not attended to the detail again, gone ahead and trumpeted what a great deal it was and claimed a victory lap, all along with the EU laughing up their sleeves at the naivety and incompetence of a bunch of chancers who think they can wing it. Or they had no intention of keeping the agreement in the first place and misled the country in their manifesto.

As for the NI problem, towards the bottom of this article https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.theweek.co.uk/96907/eu-offers-uk-canada-brexit-deal?amp there was someone who could look into the future and predict what was coming with the Irish border. She wasn't a good PM but even she could see the direction of travel that the complacent current government seemingly didn't.

And the only way they can see out of it now is to threaten to break international law. But then law is what seemingly only applies to others than this government.

The EU are seasoned at this kind of thing and it often gets brutal. But the US are just as brutal if not more so. It doesn't bode well of this is the best we can come up with.

 

[lamrobhero]

She wasn't a good PM but even she could see the direction of travel that the complacent current government seemingly didn't.

I think that the current Government did see it but acted cynically. This Government cannot even "act in good faith" towards it's own electorate.

 

[Rosencrantz]

I think that the current Government did see it but acted cynically. This Government cannot even "act in good faith" towards it's own electorate.

Everyone could really see it, but if anyone is giving the current government the benefit of doubt of clutching at skirts and being shocked at the nasty EU...

Let's face it. The vast majority of the UK don't really care about NI's situation when it comes to Brexit and it is something the government think they can play fast and loose with.

 

[IndoMike]

I think that the current Government did see it but acted cynically. This Government cannot even "act in good faith" towards it's own electorate.

Yes. That is another very possible scenario

 

[IndoMike]

i got this via the Guardian. Ed Miliband making Johnson look the chancer that he is.

 

[IndoMike]

Crace on Miliband taunting

What followed was one highlight after another. Serial incompetence of a man who couldn’t remember it was his deal he was reneging on. The list of politicians who agreed that the deal had protected the Northern Ireland protocol. The observation there was already a dispute resolution procedure that didn’t involve the failed state option. But the collector’s item was his invitation for Boris to back up his assertion that the withdrawal agreement imposed a blockade on GB goods into Northern Ireland.

“Come on,” Ed said, his voice laced with condescension. “I know you’re a details man. Show me the blockade. I will give way to you.” Boris remained almost immobile, the blood draining from his face. He was so, so busted.

 

[IndoMike]

Can you name one company that has moved to the UK because of Brexit?

The London Economic | Can you name one company that has moved to the UK because of Brexit? | Business and Economics

www.thelondoneconomic.com

There is also a long list of major companies that have abandoned the UK.

The writer asks : if BREXIT is such a great idea why have so many companies left and why are foreign companies not coming in?
Oh yeah. I forgot. Johnson and Cummings are taking back control. That's a good 'un