EU strategy to destroy the Chequers ‘agreement’... | Vital Forums

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

Trashbat

Vital Reserves Team
#1
...appears to be to say nothing!

The Tory’s are doing a great job of ripping it apart themselves.

Barnier, Tusk et al would be laughing if it wasn’t all so serious.
 

jokerman

Vital Squad Member
#2
It is all rather entertaining in a grim way. What I do not understand is all this incredible fine tuning on our side, when their side is signaling that they cannot/will not budge from their starting position, not least because they'd all have to agree to shift. I expect that we will "crash" out but with a host of temporary stays and extensions agreed to by all parties straight after the deadline.
 

Wayne.Kerr

Vital 1st Team Regular
#3
The problem with a 'no deal' is that the UK would effectively be jumping off a cliff with no parachute; plus, trade deals don't grow on trees - they can take months even years to be concluded, eg a country will not commit itself to purchasing UK goods and services unless there is trade in the other direction. Trump modified his stance and said he could conclude a trade deal with the UK but, with his America First policy and already a big trade deficit in the UK's favour, that's a bit of a non-starter.

I keep hearing people and politicians saying they didn't vote for this or that; they didn't vote for anything except 'leave' and they certainly didn't vote for how that would be achieved. Surely, even to the thickest some sort of transition into oblivion rather than confronting it from day one after Brexit has to make sense.

Those that subsequently lose jobs as a consequence of Brexit is a high price to pay for not wanting to be under the jurisdiction of the ECJ, which had little or no bearing on their daily lives; at least, they will have the spiritual upper hand.

It's not up to the EU to suggest or concede; we're leaving the club; the EU negotiators have certainly been consistent, which might suggest the UK will come around to their way of thinking in order to secure future trade deals with such a huge market on our doorstep. The EU has shown no signs of cracking and we haven't yet heard any member states breaking rank because they fear a collapse of their economy if the UK market collapses.

Theresa May screwed herself when she called that snap election; it backfired big time and the Tory coalition is now showing signs of big cracks. Anothrt election could see them once again in opposition; the last time it was for thirteen years.
 

Arthurly

Vital Reserves Team
#4
The Tories deserve to go back into opposition - and for a very long time.

I'm no fan of Corbyn but I suspect his policies will be toned down when in Government. It would be likely that he'd need some LibDems and maybe Scottish Nationalists in order to govern. Just maybe, these minorities could insist on another referendum of some description.
 

RotherhitheGill

Vital Reserves Team
#6
No, it was right when I first looked at it without knowing the full details. Keep on with the purchase no matter what the cost. I cannot now be seen to be wrong with my first uninformed decision, bang on it could all come right.

Women gets engaged to a bloke after a years relationship. Later finds out he's an alcoholic, who's spent all her savings and has been shagging her mum and best mate. Still not to worry, was correct when they go engaged, that was the decision then, cannot go back on it now. FFS.
 

shotshy

Vital Reserves Team
#7
All who voted remain were 100% correct.
All who voted leave were 100% correct.
Neither side seems to show any willingness to change their mind.

So, what if this hypothetical 'people's vote' produced the same result, say 51/49% to leave?
What next?
Rock, Paper, Scissors ?
Best of three?

One thing that we can all agree on is that May has managed to make a monumental F8ck up of it all, but then who would appoint a Project Manager who doesn't agree with the project?
The Tory party, that's who.
Corbyn would go for a much cleaner Brexit, having been staunch anti EU all of his life. Maybe he is the guy to see it through.
 

Trashbat

Vital Reserves Team
#8
Th
All who voted remain were 100% correct.
All who voted leave were 100% correct.
Neither side seems to show any willingness to change their mind.

So, what if this hypothetical 'people's vote' produced the same result, say 51/49% to leave?
What next?
Rock, Paper, Scissors ?
Best of three?

One thing that we can all agree on is that May has managed to make a monumental F8ck up of it all, but then who would appoint a Project Manager who doesn't agree with the project?
The Tory party, that's who.
Corbyn would go for a much cleaner Brexit, having been staunch anti EU all of his life. Maybe he is the guy to see it through.
I think the other thing to add is that even if we were to remain in the EU now, a considerable amount of damage has already been done to the economy. A lot of business are already relocating and I suspect that they wouldn’t reverse their investment plans with the political situation in the UK.
 

markinkent

Vital Squad Member
#9
We've had an offer accepted on the house which we liked the look of, we've since got the survey and realised there's serious damp and structural issues that we were previously unaware of that will cost an utter fortune, so the natural decision is to move on keep looking.
Good analogy except 52% of your family (lets say the children who don't really understand global economics) still have their heart set on that place, so although the natural decision would be to move on you cannot ignore the 52% and you should buy it and suffer the consequences ;-)
 

nitram77

Vital Squad Member
#10
It isn't May who has screwed this up, it's all the people trying to overturn the will of the people, all the non-elected privileged people who sit around in the house of Lords doing sweet FA apart from protect their business interests and to hell with the UK. The politicians who have spat their dummy out because the vote didn't go their way, and will do anything to disrupt the negotiations. With a little bit of support and solidarity for May the EU would be more willing to keep an open mind at the negotiations, with the remain camp trying to force their views on the majority the EU can just sit back and watch the UK destroy itself.
 

jogills

Vital Squad Member
#12
Oh please at least try and acknowledge the facts and don't just make up stuff. Solidarity with May was blown apart by........ The Brexiters in her own party. Those, who have spent 30 years and more banging on about it and shouting that they had all the answers and it would be easy. They got all the jobs dealing with the blessed thing and have achieved nothing and know nothing. First rule: own your own crap.

Gove now admitting the Turkish immigration line was a dishonourable lie and that 5.2 million muslim immigrants would not have been arriving in 2020. On the immigration front numbers overall are up. Net migration from the EU is still around 100,000 but overall net migration has increased to 288,000 most of the increase coming from Asia. Who voted for that?
 

Trashbat

Vital Reserves Team
#13
It isn't May who has screwed this up, it's all the people trying to overturn the will of the people, all the non-elected privileged people who sit around in the house of Lords doing sweet FA apart from protect their business interests and to hell with the UK. The politicians who have spat their dummy out because the vote didn't go their way, and will do anything to disrupt the negotiations. With a little bit of support and solidarity for May the EU would be more willing to keep an open mind at the negotiations, with the remain camp trying to force their views on the majority the EU can just sit back and watch the UK destroy itself.
May was always in for a hiding. The writing was on the wall when:
- Brexit was never defined;
- The whole referendum was full of distrust because of lies;
- The electorate was split nearly 50:50;
- There was no commons majority;
- There is a vocal minority of Eurosceptics in the Tory party who were finally given a voice because of the referendum.

But she has made a lot of big mistakes, which she has intentionally done to prolong her stay as PM:
- triggering A50 before there was a plan;
- satisficing her party when some home truths needed to be told;
- creating a catalogue of red lines that were ill thought out and boxed her in to a corner;
- procrastinating on a Brexit white paper;
- churning out bullshit one liners like “Brexit means Brexit” and “Deep and Special Relationship”
 

valenciagill

Vital Squad Member
#14
Trump explained why Brexit took place , Immigration.
Farage reminded us , with that poster of a snaking column of 'refugees'
The EU will disintergrate , and we need out of it.
There won't be a second referendum , or people's vote.
Populist conservatism will succeed.
In the UK and throughout the western world.
 

Therealwaldo

Vital Reserves Team
#15
Just wet myself laughing reading the Office for Budget Responsibility setting out the time bomb in the public finances, even without the direct effect of Brexit. Taxes are going to have to massively rise because of two things,

(a) the rising percentage of older people in the population and their rising health care needs now and into the future and the consequent lower percentage of economically active within the population to support them,

(b) lower levels of younger, economically active migrants in the medium term.

Never let a good prejudice get in the way of an inconvenient truth, eh !
 

GillsBluenose

Vital Squad Member
#19
Could one of you sages explain one thing for me. What exactly is a trade deal with a country or a body like the EU? No, I am not joking.

The only plausible description would be for instance when we supply or buy items used and paid for by government departments, military, public services, etc in other countries.

Surely that would be dwarfed by deals done between, say, individual French companies and individual British companies. Why should a "deal" need to be done between governments for that practice to take place or indeed continue if both parties wish it to? Surely there would be some outrage about interference by the state if that was prevented.

I was thinking about that when it was said on the news that we have a substantial trade surplus with the USA already (despite being in the EU), so we (or our businesses) must already be trading heavily with them, whereas we have a heavy trade deficit with the EU:
https://fullfact.org/economy/trade-deficit-surplus-USA-EU/

Is the answer that these national "trade deals" are in fact just agreements about what tariffs will be charged if any?