EU strategy to destroy the Chequers ‘agreement’... | Page 621 | Vital Football

EU strategy to destroy the Chequers ‘agreement’...

RotherhitheGill said:
Shotshy - "so maybe the Eu are ok with no deal?".

It's not something they want or would prefer, but they could and would understand it. In the process they would acknowledge the problems it would cause them. In our case, it's what many brexiteers happy, but we would not be prepared for it. Shambles mate, F****** shambles.
You don’t know that mate.
Maybe it’s their tactic to dissuade other disaffected members.
Hotel California syndrome.
As with this Government, it keeps being exposed as all mouth, no trousers :cry:
Click to expand...
 
Gills 58 said:
I'm in shock. Are you saying Johnson blithely made a promise that was convenient at the time to get what he wanted without intending to keep to it?
Surely not.
Click to expand...
Personally I was always unhappy at the W.A....
.... because I was pretty sure how the ECJ would define "level playing field".
i.e. a 'field' that continued to cover the UK, so justifying 22,000 + EU laws still applying to internal domestic matters.

But we were reassured by Boris & Co that the 'field' would be limited to cross-border trade.
So that would limit EU laws to a bit over 6,000.

Subject to that not limiting the UK's ability to make different arrangements with RoW, that's probably OK.
 
Wayne.Kerr said:
For example, I know someone who has no problem with immigration or the single market but didn't like Brussels control; that view doesn't gel with others on here.
Click to expand...

That is a bit of a jumbled view as Brussels were the creator of the single market concept and control it, and have laid down the main thing that is bad about it - that it must include free movement aka uncontrolled immigration.

Remainers are always going to make out that Brexiteers are against any immigration, rather than being allowed control of numbers which is the reality.
 
Wayne.Kerr said:
I voted Remain because with my economist's hat on I believed Brexit would be a disaster especially if it was predicated on the grounds of (say) 'bring back control' and other Little Englander mantras instead of real opportunities and new markets. I'm still at a loss to know where these new markets etc are that we haven't already tapped into through various EU treaties. As for immigration - this country can only survive by augmenting its workforce from outside - I'd rather have it from Europe knowing that the majority would return home or move to other countries as the respective member nations' economies waxe and wayne. My politics are not extreme enough to have strong views one way or the other but strong enough never to vote Tory and strong enough to believe that certain industries should remain in public ownership albeit perhaps run by Govt. owned corporations rather than Ministries and unaccountable quangos. As for state intervention not being allowed under EU rules; well, the answer to that is to re-nationalise; plus, transport itself is exempt from state aid under EU rules. In 2023, the EU wants to bring in an element of private enterprise to the railways but in competition with the state railways unlike the farce we have in the UK where completion is limited to a few limited routes.
Click to expand...
'My politics are not extreme enough to have strong views....
....strong enough to never vote Tory..."
:clown: :lol:
 
Today Theresa May asked Johnson to guarantee that UK Police and Border forces will retain access to incoming passenger data from the EU, post transition. Johnson declined saying that would depend on the result of the trade negotiations.
More evidence that leaving without a deal is of little concern to those in control (and Johnson).
 
Vambogills said:
Today Theresa May asked Johnson to guarantee that UK Police and Border forces will retain access to incoming passenger data from the EU, post transition. Johnson declined saying that would depend on the result of the trade negotiations.
More evidence that leaving without a deal is of little concern to those in control (and Johnson).
Click to expand...
Look up the 'Prum Convention' ..... agreement about co-operation between police forces.

Why should co-operation change much ?

Even now it depends on willingness by local Police.
How great were the Portuguese in the early days of Madeline McCann ?
 
Vambogills said:
Today Theresa May asked Johnson to guarantee that UK Police and Border forces will retain access to incoming passenger data from the EU, post transition. Johnson declined saying that would depend on the result of the trade negotiations.
More evidence that leaving without a deal is of little concern to those in control (and Johnson).
Click to expand...

Yes, that is hardly surprising and sums up the difference between May's attitude to Brexit negotiations and Johnson's own.

I would presume that UK Police and Border forces would need EU co-operation to obtain access to that data and the EU would likely ask a high price for that in negotiations, which May would have been willing to pay.

Like Grieve and the other old blockers, May could not see that we must show the EU we mean business rather than allow them to walk all over us. They must accept that there is a point where we can decide to walk away.

Even May said no deal is better than a bad deal. Unfortunately, she didn't mean it.
 
Johnson had his ear bent by Trump and has now changed his mind by dropping the multi £billion Huawei/UK deal. Today the UK government votes to accept US chlorinated chicken (depending on tarriffs).
Is this a coincidence or part of a clever courtship to lure the USA into a position of feeling dominant before we strike and embarrass them into giving us the most fantastic trade deal ever.... It's brilliant. It's huge. Huge. Everyone says so. Obama couldn't have got it. etc etc.
 
jogills said:
..... but as Rees Mogg has told us we will have to wait half a century to decide; .
Click to expand...
It is so tedious having to correct anti-Brexit misquotes ..... but here goes.
(Not having a go at you jo - just those who invent the fake news - which supposedly reputable commentators repeat)

The short version
Rees-Mogg:
"The overwhelming opportunity for Brexit is over the next 50 years."
i.e. assessment would be a continuing process.


Yet again, anti-Brexit or anti-Conservative forces come up with inventive ways to mis-quote.
If only Facebook or Twitter would "fact-check" such mis-reporting !! :rolleyes:


Full exchange
R-M
"We've just discussed that we may not know for years to come whether....."(interrupted)

C4
"We'll know by the end of next year whether the economies taken a downturn"

R-M
"Leaving the EU is going to be the greatest opportunity economically for this country"

C4
"And I'm asking you. What if you're wrong?"

R-M
"I've accepted that anybody could be wrong."

C4
"So why don't you say; "If I'm wrong I'll resign". "

R-M
"Because you're proposing a very simple question on a very complex set of circumstances.
We will know at some point. Yes of course we will.
But it's a question of timescale."

C4
"So how long have you got?"

R-M
"We won't know the full economic consequences for a very long time."

C4
"Come on"

R-M
"We really won't."

C4
"Of course not, but we'll have an indication.
We'll know whether there's been chaos.
We'll know whether there's been job losses."

R-M
"The overwhelming opportunity for Brexit is over the next 50 years."
(not "at" 50 years)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.