Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
FAO Brexiteers, Brexit Bus Terminus
#11
(05-18-2017, 07:27 AM)Donegal Wrote: Halesowen 1953

The bus must be capable of time travel so people can have their country back

Didn't your lot want your country back for hundreds of years or was the Easter Uprising and the I.R.A.s murderous campaigns just a fig leaf of my dementia?

(sorry, Figment of my imagination)




{Free man not a serf of the European Project}
Reply
#12
(05-18-2017, 03:17 PM)Protheroe Wrote:
(05-18-2017, 03:10 PM)John Osbourne Wrote: For us to have the same access to their markets as they do to ours. Obviously the lower the tariff the better for both parties but if they wish to put a 20% tariff on our £240 billion worth of goods then we reciprocate on their £302 Billion worth into the UK so be it. (2016 figures Full Fact)
I would hope that the negotiators and politicos on both sides would see sense though the rhetoric coming from over the channel, IF reported correctly, does seem to suggest that an element of vindictiveness is the order of their day. Akin to chopping our head off and putting it on a spike at Calais as a warning to others not to dare try and leave.
I can't believe, however, they would risk the £60 Billion per year trade surplus with us.

There doesn't need to be much of a negotiation beyond "we'd like to trade with you on the same basis as before."

I'd genuinely love to hear a good reason why the response would be anything other than yes. The ONLY reasons would be political vindictiveness, which would confirm what a nasty unaccountable organisation the EU is. In almost a year no one has been able to explain another reason why an FTA couldn't be agreed in 5 minutes or less.

Don't be silly. A lot of people in the EU make a lot of money from making things as complicated as they can.
Reply
#13
(05-18-2017, 03:17 PM)Protheroe Wrote:
(05-18-2017, 03:10 PM)John Osbourne Wrote: For us to have the same access to their markets as they do to ours. Obviously the lower the tariff the better for both parties but if they wish to put a 20% tariff on our £240 billion worth of goods then we reciprocate on their £302 Billion worth into the UK so be it. (2016 figures Full Fact)
I would hope that the negotiators and politicos on both sides would see sense though the rhetoric coming from over the channel, IF reported correctly, does seem to suggest that an element of vindictiveness is the order of their day. Akin to chopping our head off and putting it on a spike at Calais as a warning to others not to dare try and leave.
I can't believe, however, they would risk the £60 Billion per year trade surplus with us.

There doesn't need to be much of a negotiation beyond "we'd like to trade with you on the same basis as before."

I'd genuinely love to hear a good reason why the response would be anything other than yes. The ONLY reasons would be political vindictiveness, which would confirm what a nasty unaccountable organisation the EU is. In almost a year no one has been able to explain another reason why an FTA couldn't be agreed in 5 minutes or less.

Are we getting into cake and eat it territory here?
Reply
#14
(05-18-2017, 09:30 AM)Zoltanger Wrote:
(05-18-2017, 09:02 AM)Mandown_Pilt Wrote: Out of the single market and no continuing ECJ jurisdiction or EU legislative competence within the UK.

Do you want favourable access to the single market, if so how much are you are willing to pay for it?

I'm sure a man of your caliber realises how complicated the second part will be.

Access to? Of course. Part of?

Nope.
Reply
#15
(05-18-2017, 03:22 PM)Zoltanger Wrote:
(05-18-2017, 03:17 PM)Protheroe Wrote:
(05-18-2017, 03:10 PM)John Osbourne Wrote: For us to have the same access to their markets as they do to ours. Obviously the lower the tariff the better for both parties but if they wish to put a 20% tariff on our £240 billion worth of goods then we reciprocate on their £302 Billion worth into the UK so be it. (2016 figures Full Fact)
I would hope that the negotiators and politicos on both sides would see sense though the rhetoric coming from over the channel, IF reported correctly, does seem to suggest that an element of vindictiveness is the order of their day. Akin to chopping our head off and putting it on a spike at Calais as a warning to others not to dare try and leave.
I can't believe, however, they would risk the £60 Billion per year trade surplus with us.

There doesn't need to be much of a negotiation beyond "we'd like to trade with you on the same basis as before."

I'd genuinely love to hear a good reason why the response would be anything other than yes. The ONLY reasons would be political vindictiveness, which would confirm what a nasty unaccountable organisation the EU is. In almost a year no one has been able to explain another reason why an FTA couldn't be agreed in 5 minutes or less.

Are we getting into cake and eat it territory here?

Yes, both the UK / EU could have our cake and eat it.
Reply
#16
(05-18-2017, 05:07 PM)Protheroe Wrote:
(05-18-2017, 03:22 PM)Zoltanger Wrote:
(05-18-2017, 03:17 PM)Protheroe Wrote:
(05-18-2017, 03:10 PM)John Osbourne Wrote: For us to have the same access to their markets as they do to ours. Obviously the lower the tariff the better for both parties but if they wish to put a 20% tariff on our £240 billion worth of goods then we reciprocate on their £302 Billion worth into the UK so be it. (2016 figures Full Fact)
I would hope that the negotiators and politicos on both sides would see sense though the rhetoric coming from over the channel, IF reported correctly, does seem to suggest that an element of vindictiveness is the order of their day. Akin to chopping our head off and putting it on a spike at Calais as a warning to others not to dare try and leave.
I can't believe, however, they would risk the £60 Billion per year trade surplus with us.

There doesn't need to be much of a negotiation beyond "we'd like to trade with you on the same basis as before."

I'd genuinely love to hear a good reason why the response would be anything other than yes. The ONLY reasons would be political vindictiveness, which would confirm what a nasty unaccountable organisation the EU is. In almost a year no one has been able to explain another reason why an FTA couldn't be agreed in 5 minutes or less.

Are we getting into cake and eat it territory here?

Yes, both the UK / EU could have our cake and eat it.

What would deter anyone else following suit?
Reply
#17
(05-19-2017, 05:53 AM)Zoltanger Wrote:
(05-18-2017, 05:07 PM)Protheroe Wrote:
(05-18-2017, 03:22 PM)Zoltanger Wrote:
(05-18-2017, 03:17 PM)Protheroe Wrote:
(05-18-2017, 03:10 PM)John Osbourne Wrote: For us to have the same access to their markets as they do to ours. Obviously the lower the tariff the better for both parties but if they wish to put a 20% tariff on our £240 billion worth of goods then we reciprocate on their £302 Billion worth into the UK so be it. (2016 figures Full Fact)
I would hope that the negotiators and politicos on both sides would see sense though the rhetoric coming from over the channel, IF reported correctly, does seem to suggest that an element of vindictiveness is the order of their day. Akin to chopping our head off and putting it on a spike at Calais as a warning to others not to dare try and leave.
I can't believe, however, they would risk the £60 Billion per year trade surplus with us.

There doesn't need to be much of a negotiation beyond "we'd like to trade with you on the same basis as before."

I'd genuinely love to hear a good reason why the response would be anything other than yes. The ONLY reasons would be political vindictiveness, which would confirm what a nasty unaccountable organisation the EU is. In almost a year no one has been able to explain another reason why an FTA couldn't be agreed in 5 minutes or less.

Are we getting into cake and eat it territory here?

Yes, both the UK / EU could have our cake and eat it.

What would deter anyone else following suit?

Because they actually want to remain. If they don't then it sounds like a shit marriage.
Reply
#18
(05-19-2017, 07:11 AM)Strawman Wrote:
(05-19-2017, 05:53 AM)Zoltanger Wrote:
(05-18-2017, 05:07 PM)Protheroe Wrote:
(05-18-2017, 03:22 PM)Zoltanger Wrote:
(05-18-2017, 03:17 PM)Protheroe Wrote: There doesn't need to be much of a negotiation beyond "we'd like to trade with you on the same basis as before."

I'd genuinely love to hear a good reason why the response would be anything other than yes. The ONLY reasons would be political vindictiveness, which would confirm what a nasty unaccountable organisation the EU is. In almost a year no one has been able to explain another reason why an FTA couldn't be agreed in 5 minutes or less.

Are we getting into cake and eat it territory here?

Yes, both the UK / EU could have our cake and eat it.

What would deter anyone else following suit?

Because they actually want to remain. If they don't then it sounds like a shit marriage.

Has euroscepticism been eliminated in France by Macron's victory?
Reply
#19
(05-19-2017, 07:19 AM)Zoltanger Wrote:
(05-19-2017, 07:11 AM)Strawman Wrote:
(05-19-2017, 05:53 AM)Zoltanger Wrote:
(05-18-2017, 05:07 PM)Protheroe Wrote:
(05-18-2017, 03:22 PM)Zoltanger Wrote: Are we getting into cake and eat it territory here?

Yes, both the UK / EU could have our cake and eat it.

What would deter anyone else following suit?

Because they actually want to remain. If they don't then it sounds like a shit marriage.

Has euroscepticism been eliminated in France by Macron's victory?

Doubtful - depends on what happens with him I think. Think there is  a deal of euroscepticism across Europe, not just France. 

The EU needs radically reforming, it had a chance to show it was capable when it was negotiating with Cameron, unfortunately, in my opinion, Cameron basically rolled over and let them tickle his tummy.  If they had given a bit more or Cameron had negotiated harder, rather than assuming a yes vote was a done deal, then remain would have won easily. 

Even Junker has suggested that it needs to reform, but it moves slower than a tortoise with one leg, because it has to consult and find agreement with a number of countries who all have differing agendas and economies. 

If the EU's response to anyone who wants change is simply more EU then it has problem.
Reply
#20
(05-19-2017, 07:50 AM)Strawman Wrote:
(05-19-2017, 07:19 AM)Zoltanger Wrote:
(05-19-2017, 07:11 AM)Strawman Wrote:
(05-19-2017, 05:53 AM)Zoltanger Wrote:
(05-18-2017, 05:07 PM)Protheroe Wrote: Yes, both the UK / EU could have our cake and eat it.

What would deter anyone else following suit?

Because they actually want to remain. If they don't then it sounds like a shit marriage.

Has euroscepticism been eliminated in France by Macron's victory?

Doubtful - depends on what happens with him I think. Think there is  a deal of euroscepticism across Europe, not just France. 

The EU needs radically reforming, it had a chance to show it was capable when it was negotiating with Cameron, unfortunately, in my opinion, Cameron basically rolled over and let them tickle his tummy.  If they had given a bit more or Cameron had negotiated harder, rather than assuming a yes vote was a done deal, then remain would have won easily. 

Even Junker has suggested that it needs to reform, but it moves slower than a tortoise with one leg, because it has to consult and find agreement with a number of countries who all have differing agendas and economies. 

If the EU's response to anyone who wants change is simply more EU then it has problem.

Do you have to post something I  agree with?
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)