Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
Bud the Baker

Brexit Negotiations

Recommended Posts


5 hours ago, DougJamie said:

To be fair....... every pre vote banter  is a load of rubbish..................

Promises on both sides of GE, Brexit and Indy ........................ Trouble is people buy it, decisions have always been based on lies

 

As Churchill said - Lies damn lies and statitistics ......................... and he was a pretty good liar to

 

 

Disraeli. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, DougJamie said:

Cant disagree with any of the above , I was SNP but now find them pathetic and weak, missing every target they set themselves and then blaming everyone else   also ................ Torys are abmismal creatures, Labour cant agree on the colour of sh"te, Libs are irrelevent , and Greens are one of your five a day........

So Brexit, to stay with a bunch of foreign lying b8stards , or stay  with a country totally divided, in just about everything

Where is "None of the Above" on an election slip when u need one :huh: 

 

It is one of the problems with allowing any old mug off the street to stand for election.

There is no entry barrier to such an important and well paid role and so it inevitably attracts all sorts of deluded village idiot who thinks they can run the country.  We then get people in charge of IT security strategy at government level who think it is OK to share their computer passwords with all their staff including summer students because "I dont access nuffink important".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Turns out all those Brexit impact assessments don't actually exist after all.
I'm waiting on the official opposition to call on Davis to resign for lying (repeatedly?) to parliament.
As John profumo did after denying in parliament that he had been shagging Christine Keeler. I was reminded of this as she died earlier.
These days it seems awfully old fashioned for a politician to fall on their sword - especially if the government has a minority.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They really haven't got a clue what they're doing. They mention carrying out  "sectorial analyses", because "guessing" what will happen won't do any good.:lol:

Quote

Mr Davis probably didn't help his own reputation by telling the committee he had been handed two chapters of the 850 pages of analysis but hadn't read them.

What reputation? Being an inept tit of a man?:lol:

Timeline

Quote

 

October 2016, asked what assessment the government had made of the impact of Brexit on the economy: "We currently have in place an assessment of 51 sectors of the economy. We are looking at those one by one, but the aim at the end is that this will inform the negotiating approach so that no one gets hurt."

December 2016, to the Brexit Committee: "We are in the midst of carrying out about 57 sets of analyses, each of which has implications for individual parts of 85% of the economy… everything except sectors that are not affected by international trade."

February 2017, in a statement to MPs: "We continue to analyse the impact of our exit across the breadth of the UK economy, covering more than 50 sectors - I think it was 58 at the last count - to shape our negotiating position."

June 2017, on the Andrew Marr Show:"That data's being gathered, we've got 50, nearly 60 sector analyses already done, we've got planning work going on in the customs, we've got planning work going on 22 other issues which are critical, 127 all told."

 

They would have got away for with it if it wasn't for that pesky statement in February 2017.:rolleyes:

Edited by FTOF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suspect if engerlund said everyone was fecking off to join the Scientology brigade or the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, the DUP / nornawerland want to go to. Can we not just cut them loose, let them float off somewhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, melmac said:

I suspect if engerlund said everyone was fecking off to join the Scientology brigade or the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, the DUP / nornawerland want to go to. Can we not just cut them loose, let them float off somewhere.

Eh?????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, FTOF said:

They really haven't got a clue what they're doing. They mention carrying out  "sectorial analyses", because "guessing" what will happen won't do any good.:lol:

What reputation? Being an inept tit of a man?:lol:

Timeline

They would have got away for with it if it wasn't for that pesky statement in February 2017.:rolleyes:

The work has clearly been done and no amount of semantics should convince anyone otherwise.

I'm not one for conspiracy theories :rolleyes: but the only reasonable assumption for trying to keep the information secret is that it suggests the country will be worse off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bud the Baker said:

The work has clearly been done and no amount of semantics should convince anyone otherwise.

I'm not one for conspiracy theories :rolleyes: but the only reasonable assumption for trying to keep the information secret is that it suggests the country will be worse off.

Far more likely is that the tolerance on the results is so bad that it simply isn't possible to make meaningful conclusions.

Not one of us can be certain about what will happen after we leave the EU. IMO, impact assessments are a complete waste of time at this stage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, oaksoft said:

Far more likely is that the tolerance on the results is so bad that it simply isn't possible to make meaningful conclusions.

Not one of us can be certain about what will happen after we leave the EU. IMO, impact assessments are a complete waste of time at this stage.

Economics is not a science the answers are always open to interpretation, economic forecasts are published, scrutinized and ripped to shreds in the media on a regular basis and it's not even as if the implications of Brexit are in the long term - it's barely a year till Article 50 comes into effect. Anyway I remember as far back as, oh October 2017, when the reason given for not publishing them was that it would undermine our negotiating strategy! :lol 

This is what Davis said six weeks ago, no mention of the work being a "waste of time".

Quote

Mr Davis told the select committee that the House of Commons had decided not to publish anything that would "undermine national interest".

He said releasing industry-specific information was the equivalent of "giving a price list to the other side".

Here's what Chancellor Phillip Hammond said yesterday

Quote

Later, Chancellor Philip Hammond was asked whether the Treasury had produced analysis of the potential economic impact of Brexit.

He said his department had "modelled and analysed a whole range of potential alternative structures between the EU and the UK, potential alternative arrangements and agreements that might be made".

Appearing before the Treasury Select Committee, he suggested these could be made public when a Brexit deal has been agreed, but said to do so at this stage would be "deeply unhelpful to the negotiation".

He doesn't seem to think the models are a "waste of time" he's giving the reason Davis was giving six weeks ago.

******************************

Like I said it's only economics and there is room for many opinions, mine are that Davis is lucky he's a real boy and not made of wood, and that however much a "waste of time" the economic models are the real reason for keeping them secret is that they do not predict good times ahead for the UK.

Edited by Bud the Baker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, smcc said:

Eh?????

The northern part of ireland are so entrenched in wanting to be british and not irish that they insist in wanting to walk off the edge of the financial cliff with the rest of the dodo's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Bud the Baker said:

Economics is not a science the answers are always open to interpretation, economic forecasts are published, scrutinized and ripped to shreds in the media on a regular basis and it's not even as if the implications of Brexit are in the long term - it's barely a year till Article 50 comes into effect. Anyway I remember as far back as, oh October 2017, when the reason given for not publishing them was that it would undermine our negotiating strategy! :lol 

This is what Davis said six weeks ago, no mention of the work being a "waste of time".

Here's what Chancellor Phillip Hammond said yesterday

He doesn't seem to think the models are a "waste of time" he's giving the reason Davis was giving six weeks ago.

******************************

Like I said it's only economics and there is room for many opinions, mine are that Davis is lucky he's a real boy and not made of wood, and that however much a "waste of time" the economic models are the real reason for keeping them secret is that they do not predict good times ahead for the UK.

If you were in charge of negotiating with the EU over a Brexit deal (leaving aside the fact that you don't support Brexit), would you want your opponents to see exactly what your cards were? That would be a very odd strategy to take. :blink:

As for the economics of the situation, you may be right or you may be wrong. The only fact is that the decision has been made to exit the EU so unless a major change happens somewhere (and I still think it will), we are leaving the EU. The economic argument is therefore been rendered completely irrelevant by that one fact. Whatever happens, the country will just need to find a way of dealing with it. It is WAY too late for arguing over this stuff now.

Edited by oaksoft

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

If you were in charge of negotiating with the EU over a Brexit deal (leaving aside the fact that you don't support Brexit), would you want your opponents to see exactly what your cards were? That would be a very odd strategy to take. :blink:

As for the economics of the situation, you may be right or you may be wrong. The only fact is that the decision has been made to exit the EU so unless a major change happens somewhere (and I still think it will), we are leaving the EU. The economic argument is therefore been rendered completely irrelevant by that one fact. Whatever happens, the country will just need to find a way of dealing with it. It is WAY too late for arguing over this stuff now.

I wouldn't be all that worried about what the other side at the negotiating table know, chances are they're using the same "waste of time" economic models as us.

The only surprise in these negotiations is that everyone forgot the DUP were coming from the 17th century.

You are correct tho' that it's all done & dusted now, the UK will take whatever the EU give us. I suppose there's always the possibility the Tories will implode and we can beg to get the whole thing called off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just watched the Junker/May press conference, it was all a bit vague and contained contradictory statements about which courts would have the ultimate responsibility - May said the UK courts, Junker the European ones. :wacko:

Details to follow........................

**************

Ah it's a bit clearer now.

On Citizens Rights UK courts to decide but with EU oversight.

On the Irish border, a soft one, but a seat for the DUP at the negotiating table when issues arise giving the DUP opportunities to dip into the pork barrel in years to come.

On the Divorce Bill, the EU can whistle for it & Boris will send the cash over.

Edited by Bud the Baker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An admission to one of the (many) lies that the 'No' campaign propogated in 2014? Fences and guards would be needed because Scotland would be outside the EU and rUK inside.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's all clear now...............

Quote

Canadian model 'basis' for UK-EU talks says Barnier

Michel Barnier concluded his press conference by talking about the all-important question of the UK's future relationship with the EU.

He says there are a "range of models" that so-called third party countries have with the EU, mentioning Norway, Turkey, Ukraine and Canada, which all have a "balance of rights and responsibilities".

He suggests the UK's "red lines" in the negotiation - Theresa May has said the UK will leave the customs union and the single market - rule out a number of the possibilities.

Where does that leave the UK, he hypothesises?

Just one thing - a free trade agreement on the Canadian model. It is not us, it is the British government, which is indicating these red lines that is closing certain doors. That is the model we are going to have to work on."

This is highly significant.

Let's all take a deep breath and listen to the our new national anthem...................

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎23‎/‎06‎/‎2017 at 10:20 AM, Bud the Baker said:

Well that's us less than a week in and the UK government has already caved in over the sequence of talks wrt the "divorce bill" and citizens rights being sorted before trade discussions begin in October.

The eventual deal will be whatever the EU wants with the UK being left to "take it or leave it" and does anyone really doubt we'll take it?

My next successful prediction is a Saints win today! :holiday

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

The government has been narrowly defeated in a key vote on its Brexit bill after a rebellion by Tory MPs.

In a blow to Prime Minister Theresa May, MPs voted to give Parliament a legal guarantee of a vote on the final Brexit deal struck with Brussels.

The government had argued this would jeopardise its chances of delivering a smooth Brexit.

The amendment to the EU Withdrawal Bill tabled by ex-Attorney General Dominic Grieve was backed by 309 to 305.

The government's first Commons defeat on its Brexit strategy came after opposition parties joined forces with Conservative rebels during a heated debate in the Chamber.

 

Critics accused those behind the amendment - which was championed by pro-Remain campaigners - of trying to "frustrate" Brexit and tying the government's hands.

But it was backed by the Commons, meaning a new Act of Parliament will have to be passed before ministers can implement the withdrawal deal struck with Brussels.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

×