Brexit negotiations thread

[Benfleet A1]

once they know they figures they should let the public know so we can decide if that is acceptible

So no-one knows. Then someone please explain to me how it can possibly be a stumbling block if no figures are on the table.

 

[Massimo Giovanni]

Junker spelt out, stated in his opening address to the EU last month that the Euro was to become the currency for business across the Eurozone. Did he not? Without control on money supply (single currency) and a central budget the greater unification and federalism that the EU politicos would be impossible, ergo the £ would be made to "disappear" and fade away,
So you agree about the taxation, armed forces, EU expansion etc and still think remaining is a good idea?
The answer to the conclusion of Brexit, good or bad, is guessing; however remaining a (powerless/puppet) part of THIS EU is also a very risky business for National and International reason.
As many have said some real concessions and statesmanship by EU bosses and remaining could happen BUT the threats and un-realistic manifesto need to soften for any chance of that to happen.

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

So no-one knows. Then someone please explain to me how it can possibly be a stumbling block if no figures are on the table.

I think the reason no one seems to know is complacency / incompetence / laziness - what is due will be in the numerous agreements that were in place before the referendum - they should have employed people to analyse those and come up with a total figure prior to the referendum - it's Cameron again assuming a Remain result so not thinking he had to put these things in place

 

[Massimo Giovanni]

I think the reason no one seems to know is complacency / incompetence / laziness - what is due will be in the numerous agreements that were in place before the referendum - they should have employed people to analyse those and come up with a total figure prior to the referendum - it's Cameron again assuming a Remain result so not thinking he had to put these things in place

Surely the person (EU) in any situation that believes money is owed states what the price is? Why won't they, the EU, state what it is they believe they are owed/due?
Or could it be that keeping the threats and trying to scare the UK is their policy?

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

Surely the person (EU) in any situation that believes money is owed states what the price is? Why won't they, the EU, state what it is they believe they are owed/due?
Or could it be that keeping the threats and trying to scare the UK is their policy?

absolutely the EU should know, but presumably their interpretation is high so they want to see how close UK will get to that - with justification of the figures. But that is them, a bit out of our hands. What is in our hands is the UK's interpretation of the agreements - which should have been known in advance of the referendum so that the public knew what they were voting on. A situation has now been created where a vote has been based on missing or incorrect information - so common sense dictates that if the final deal is far removed from what was implied pre-vote (as is looking very likely) then a new vote should be held with full disclosure on the two outcomes.

 

[Massimo Giovanni]

absolutely the EU should know, but presumably their interpretation is high so they want to see how close UK will get to that - with justification of the figures. But that is them, a bit out of our hands. What is in our hands is the UK's interpretation of the agreements - which should have been known in advance of the referendum so that the public knew what they were voting on. A situation has now been created where a vote has been based on missing or incorrect information - so common sense dictates that if the final deal is far removed from what was implied pre-vote (as is looking very likely) then a new vote should be held with full disclosure on the two outcomes.

Another vote? why not just keep having votes until you lot get the "remain" vote? :nope:

And what two outcomes are there when there are endless possibilities based on endless scenarios and futures? if judging the economy was so simple and accurate would not the casino of stocks/shares/currency and bank rates not exist?

And again the "remainers" NEVER answer questions about how the EU would be in the future or UK "inclusion" into Junker & Co's unelected manifesto? - could it be a case of people only caring about money, not British society and "knowing the price for everything but the value of nothing".
How is it we (the UK) are not "allowed" to make plans for trade etc before the 29/03/19; it is crazy that we are expected NOT to be starting doing so.......or would that be TOO fair?:whistling: This isn't a game of cricket for heaven's sake.:angry:

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

Another vote? why not just keep having votes until you lot get the "remain" vote? :nope:

And what two outcomes are there when there are endless possibilities based on endless scenarios and futures? if judging the economy was so simple and accurate would not the casino of stocks/shares/currency and bank rates not exist?

And again the "remainers" NEVER answer questions about how the EU would be in the future or UK "inclusion" into Junker & Co's unelected manifesto? - could it be a case of people only caring about money, not British society and "knowing the price for everything but the value of nothing".
How is it we (the UK) are not "allowed" to make plans for trade etc before the 29/03/19; it is crazy that we are expected NOT to be starting doing so.......or would that be TOO fair?:whistling: This isn't a game of cricket for heaven's sake.:angry:

because before the vote we were told the UK would gain £350m a week from a Leave vote but now it is agreed that figure was a fabrication and we will need to spend £60 billion or whatever the latest guess is to leave. I'm not saying have another vote now on the latest guesses, I'm saying have a vote when the actual figures are available. A vote on made up data can not be binding, that goes against common sense. If Leave still makes sense with the actual figures available then people will vote Leave - there should be no fear of a 2nd vote.

 

[Massimo Giovanni]

because before the vote we were told the UK would gain £350m a week from a Leave vote but now it is agreed that figure was a fabrication and we will need to spend £60 billion or whatever the latest guess is to leave. I'm not saying have another vote now on the latest guesses, I'm saying have a vote when the actual figures are available. A vote on made up data can not be binding, that goes against common sense. If Leave still makes sense with the actual figures available then people will vote Leave - there should be no fear of a 2nd vote.

Still no answer about Junker's manifesto, greater integration etc, is it just "all about the money" ?:facepalm::whistling::zzzzz::tumbleweed:
And for what it is worth many reports have the "leave" camp growing because of the EU's bullying ways.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

Still no answer about Junker's manifesto, greater integration etc, is it just "all about the money" ?:facepalm::whistling::zzzzz::tumbleweed:
And for what it is worth many reports have the "leave" camp growing because of the EU's bullying ways.

Juncker's speech was clearly an aspiration.It won't be happening any time soon (if ever,much as he and I would both like to see it).

Move along please,there's nothing to see here.

 

[Pubey]

And for what it is worth many reports have the "leave" camp growing because of the EU's bullying ways.

link please

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

Still no answer about Junker's manifesto, greater integration etc, is it just "all about the money" ?:facepalm::whistling::zzzzz::tumbleweed:
And for what it is worth many reports have the "leave" camp growing because of the EU's bullying ways.

I've been at work all day and not heard / read Junker's speech but whatever he said that too will make up new information on which to make their decision. When you voted were you aware of a cost to leave that would run into the tens of billions? I certainly wasn't.
Do you accept that there were lots of details on the practicalities of leaving that were either not known or not aired at the time of the referendum?

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

I think it's fair to say that we have a lot of ground to cover in the leaving the EU process. Whatever progress may or may not have been made we have no answers to any of the main questions yet. So why has May announced her intention of setting the Leave date into law?


Why does she keep making the same mistakes? Picking a date then hoping everything falls into place.


She kept having to move the date for triggering Article 50 by fighting unnecessary court cases. She called an unnecessary election but had no pre-planned policies and kept delaying the manifesto before issuing something that had no costing, the wrong graphs, and policies that were backtracked on before the election. Then kept having to delay the Queens Speech because she struggled to persuade another right wing party to promise to back right wing policies.


Why set another date that will cause herself untold problems trying to hit it. Does she not realise that moving dates back is what she always does and by setting it in stone she is setting herself up for the ultimate fail.

 

[yogi bear up the cagire]

We appear to have some game of poker going on here!.................and just look at the stakes!!! Who exactly is bluffing who? I've been told this is all just negotiating posturing and though it may come down to the wire, a settlement will be pulled out of the fire in the end......................but will it??????
My understanding is that the UK is required (and I won't even mention Ireland) to make a promise honouring it's debts and future expenditure on projects. the exact figure is not specified but suffice to say, figures have been bandied around, it is rather higher than May suggested in her Florence speech. It is not exactly clear what the UK will receive for this sum (not that government appears clear to what kind future agreement it actually wants with the EU.........and probably the kind of deal it would want won't be available!) it would just permit negotiations to progress to the next level.
Even if May decides to bite the bullet and agree to pay, how is she going to sell it to the hard Brexiteers in her own party? That vociferous minority are already starting to squeal at the idea of paying anything more. They appear to still believe that the EU is bluffing and that they need us more than we need them. It now looks as though things are finally coming to a head and in two weeks will we find out who holds all the aces and who has a busted flush?

 

[Lord Football]

Good point, well Lord Football, how much is it then?

Well, Shrimpers Are Magic, the commonly regarded figure is £20bn if you are UK, €60bn if you are EU.

No one has actually agreed what needs to be included to get a figure, hence, no exact figure exists.

May has said we will pay what we owe and and what have agreed to pay into within the financial cycle (up to 2020). Working out what that is, like with most things Brexit, is something far more complicated than can be worked out on the back of a fag packet.

 

[Lord Football]

Still no answer about Junker's manifesto, greater integration etc, is it just "all about the money" ?:facepalm::whistling::zzzzz::tumbleweed:
And for what it is worth many reports have the "leave" camp growing because of the EU's bullying ways.

Rubbish. I've not seen a single report to suggest that is the case. You should know by now that a report run by the Guardian and Independent will have "many people want to change their mind" and a report run by the Mail and Express will have "more people want to leave".

The ONLY way you will actually get a proper representative view of the people would be to hold a second referendum. And you and I both know that isn't happening.

And "EU's bullying ways". When will people understand you get what you sow. You were told (ok, you don't listen to experts) that the EU would extract a price if we voted to leave. Anyone who knew anything about the EU were telling you that. But we voted to leave. The EU are now extracting that price, so it shouldn't come as a surprise.

But... actually, its not an issue. What's €40bn between friends? What was on the bus? "we'd save £350m a day". So a €40bn payment would take approximately 3 months to clear if were indeed saving £350m a day.

 

[Massimo Giovanni]

Rubbish. I've not seen a single report to suggest that is the case. You should know by now that a report run by the Guardian and Independent will have "many people want to change their mind" and a report run by the Mail and Express will have "more people want to leave".

The ONLY way you will actually get a proper representative view of the people would be to hold a second referendum. And you and I both know that isn't happening.

And "EU's bullying ways". When will people understand you get what you sow. You were told (ok, you don't listen to experts) that the EU would extract a price if we voted to leave. Anyone who knew anything about the EU were telling you that. But we voted to leave. The EU are now extracting that price, so it shouldn't come as a surprise.

But... actually, its not an issue. What's €40bn between friends? What was on the bus? "we'd save £350m a day". So a €40bn payment would take approximately 3 months to clear if were indeed saving £350m a day.

And another Remainer chants on about money, money, money. Answer the point on the future of the EU with the direction Junker and co are (quoting Barna) aspiring.
Are you sure you are a Lord? maybe as the House of Lords does have a certain reputation.

 

[Bielzibubz]

And that's a point I think hasn't been made as often as it should. Sometimes it's not all about money. Sometimes it's about a lot more than that. Sometimes it's about looking to the National long term future, not the short to medium term monetary costs. Sometimes it's about national identity, sovereign rights, self determination and being able to make, change and abide by the laws that WE decide WE want to make, amend and abide by. The argument against closer financial and political integration, amongst other issues voted for at the Referendum, are becoming somewhat lost in this constant squabble about the divorce bill.

If we as a country can afford the £55.2 billion cost of HS2 then I'm quite happy to pay £30 billion or so to the EU to leave.

 

[MK Shrimper]

And that's a point I think hasn't been made as often as it should. Sometimes it's not all about money. Sometimes it's about a lot more than that. Sometimes it's about looking to the National long term future, not the short to medium term monetary costs. Sometimes it's about national identity, sovereign rights, self determination and being able to make, change and abide by the laws that WE decide WE want to make, amend and abide by. The argument against closer financial and political integration, amongst other issues voted for at the Referendum, are becoming somewhat lost in this constant squabble about the divorce bill.

If we as a country can afford the £55.2 billion cost of HS2 then I'm quite happy to pay £30 billion or so to the EU to leave.

HS2 is being funded by private companies on the whole. Not a good comparison.

 

[Massimo Giovanni]

HS2 is being funded by private companies on the whole. Not a good comparison.

As you state MK, perhaps not a good example.

BUT once again another Remainer fails, ignores, refuses or simply CAN NOT answer the main issues that a lot of Leavers believe, that is, the direction of the not so good ship EUtanic is heading in would be a long term disaster.

 

[MK Shrimper]

As you state MK, perhaps not a good example.

BUT once again another Remainer fails, ignores, refuses or simply CAN NOT answer the main issues that a lot of Leavers believe, that is, the direction of the not so good ship EUtanic is heading in would be a long term disaster.

Project fear MG?