EU strategy to destroy the Chequers ‘agreement’... | Page 157 | Vital Football

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

Wayne.Kerr said:
As long as we leave, it'll all be much better even though we could be damaged financially for some time to come but it won't be short term for sure.

I wonder if,................ you could explain where all these new opportunities will come from .......l enjoy post-Brexit and please, please, PLEASE don't say we'll do much better without EU shackles unless you can explain how that works too.

I challenged GBN to list 20 EU 'rules' that impacted negatively on his daily life and give £1 to charity for each genuine item - are you up for that? ........

And I'll double it if, for £1 an item, you can give me 20 benefits for leaving the EU, eg new tangible trade deals not semantics like bringing back control, but I won't allow freedom of street lamp spacing
Click to expand...

"could" be damaged.
That's all hard-line Remainers have.
They imply "bad" has a 50/50 likelihood.
Even arch-Remainer Mark Carney had to acknowledge that the BoE was discussing "scenarios"" incl. "worst case".
Councils like Kent do disaster planning - in case an airplane crashes. That doesn't mean "probable".

Far more likely is "business-as-usual" (in the broadest sense) - with a few wrinkles for particular businesses.
On 30th March 2019, how many people will notice the difference ?

"opportunities" would (subject to Canada plus or WTO - but no S.M.) come from:
a) being free to unwind / amend the more egregious EU / S.M rules

b) being free to agree bi-lateral trade deals with many countries, tailored to our mutual benefits rather than an EU28 compromise.

As for "Rules that impact daily lives" .....
You know I can quote the exact Rule numbers for "curvature" of fruit and veg.
I can also quote GDPR.
For the rest of the 15,000 plus non-trade rules (out of 22,000+) I'll summarise with:
- flood defences (e.g rule against disposing of silt on riverbanks)
- local councils (e.g. lamp post distances, procurement)
- home extension (e.g. soffits, ventilation)
- local shops (e.g. annual inspection of hairdryers)
- OTT investor protection rules (curiously inapplicable to betting ! )
- preventing safe but powerful vacuum cleaners

And of course the biggest impact by far:
"Freedom of Movement" i.e. the Right to Settle.
Faster population increase has raised house prices 2 1/2 times retail inflation ....
..... hence "ordinary" people feeling no benefit from coming out of recession as living standards squeezed by having less to spend on other stuff.

Plus the stress of:
- finding a school place
- waiting longer for a doctor's appointment
- longer journey times
- higher density housing
- fewer, quiet open spaces to relax in.

"tangible trade deals"
Define "tangible" ?
EU/S.M. rules prevent the UK from actually signing any trade deals.
But plenty of countries have signalled a desire for "business-as-usual PLUS" i.e. continuing existing arrangements plus tailoring for mutual benefit.
Why wouldn't they ???

How dare you dismiss "bringing back control" as "semantics" ? :mad:
"Control" of decision-making - including the ability to respond to whatever "surprises" occur - is fundamentally different to the inability to take decisions - or respond quickly (independently) to events.
Taking back "control" does NOT prevent co-operation - it enhances it.
 
‘Bringing back control’ IS semantics. Under WTO rules, disputes are settled by a panel of appointed civil servants with a representative appointed by each WTO member. All it’s decisions are taken behind closed doors. How the fxxx is that ‘taking back control’.
 
Vambogills said:
So your arguments seem to point to you preferring a hard Brexit? You presumably would also argue that our kids struggling to raise their own families will all be better off if that happens?
Click to expand...

The only "hard" Brexit" is the one where Teresa May makes it hard to actually Leave.

Referendum :> Leave ?? or Remain ??
The "Leaves" had it - so we could have "left" asap.
The UK would have agreed to "business-as-usual" for a couple of years to try and get a free-trade deal - without the extra Single Market baggage.

Even an EU determined to "punish" the UK could have gone along with a 2 year trade negotiation after actually leaving.
The EU could have stuck to its guns.
Meanwhile the UK was agreeing trade deals with some countries - and planning for (already familiar) WTO terms for the others.

Instead we've had two years with civil servants covertly constructing a convoluted 585 page document that ties the UK into the EU in perpetuity - with all the extra costs - but with a front cover labelled "Leaving the EU".

" kids struggling to raise their own families will all be better off ......"
when housing costs reduce ....
....which will happen mainly if the population stabilises.
The UK Govt. will have ~£10 billion net, from not paying to the EU - so less pressure on taxes.
Otherwise, improvement will be incremental and over time.
 
Wayne.Kerr said:
He doesn't care; he's so traumatised by the distance between street lamps that escaping from the EU is all to him and sod everyone else.
Click to expand...

"sod everyone else"'
Always (mis-)characterising people you disagree with.:(

ON THE ECONOMICS .......
I believe that the vast majority of UK citizens will be better off outside the UK.
I cannot "prove" that - any more you can "prove" that 30th March will see the M20 clogged with lorries.
 
Last edited:
Therealwaldo said:
‘Bringing back control’ IS semantics. Under WTO rules, disputes are settled by a panel of appointed civil servants with a representative appointed by each WTO member. All it’s decisions are taken behind closed doors. How the fxxx is that ‘taking back control’.
Click to expand...

As pretty much ANY dispute resolution involves a specific but limited giving up of "control"..... this is moving towards "strawman" territory.

What matter is whether the Arbitrators follow rules - or make it up as they go along.
(How do UK judges work ???)

Reading the WTO website their procedure looks similar to a local Council's Licensing (pubs) Committee -and not "all" decisions "behind closed doors".

Hearings are clearly not in secret - but maybe the deliberations and recommendation are in secret. It isn't clear.
i.e. all parties can read and hear the other's case - including 3rd parties and witnesses - and rebut / challenge submissions.

The WTO's aim is to "settle" disputes - including compromises.
Does the latter count as "losing control" ??

But the final decision is NOT "behind closed doors":
QUOTE:
"First rulings are made by a panel and endorsed (or rejected) by the WTO’s full membership"

...... unless you define a meeting of all, but only WTO members as "behind closed doors" ??
 
Tarian, you're beginning to sound positively deranged ! Your defence of the WTO could equally apply to the ECJ except all their deliberations are in public and yet you seem to despise them. You really do sound like you're tying yourself up in knots.
 
jogills said:
" There are lots of good things associated with it, but you do not need It to deliver most of those good things, and it is starting to look like a mid-20th century answer to late 20th century problems. "

Nothing about Brexit as presently advertised looks anything remotely to do with the current century. It's leaders belong in a costume drama and its attitudes in fiction. This is all about who we want to be surely and little to do with grand alliances, long history, or facts.
Click to expand...

I agree.
 
Tarian said:
As pretty much ANY dispute resolution involves a specific but limited giving up of "control"..... this is moving towards "strawman" territory.

What matter is whether the Arbitrators follow rules - or make it up as they go along.
(How do UK judges work ???)

Reading the WTO website their procedure looks similar to a local Council's Licensing (pubs) Committee -and not "all" decisions "behind closed doors".

Hearings are clearly not in secret - but maybe the deliberations and recommendation are in secret. It isn't clear.
i.e. all parties can read and hear the other's case - including 3rd parties and witnesses - and rebut / challenge submissions.

The WTO's aim is to "settle" disputes - including compromises.
Does the latter count as "losing control" ??

But the final decision is NOT "behind closed doors":
QUOTE:
"First rulings are made by a panel and endorsed (or rejected) by the WTO’s full membership"

...... unless you define a meeting of all, but only WTO members as "behind closed doors" ??
Click to expand...
Your dislike of the EU is beyond anything rational and is all far too perfect to be convincing, ie not convincing in the sense that your rebuttals seem like a cut and paste job from a We Hate the EU pamphlet........ all too perfect. What makes it more worrying is that so much really has no affect on your daily life but, rather, it's a summary of the combined dislike of the EU by many.
 
Tarian, I also think you are somewhat deranged.

Your apparent loathing of the EU is irrational. I'm no big fan of it but you come across as hysterical. I'm still yet to find a law that I seriously disagree with. I would feel sorry for you were it not for the fact that the likes of you are endangering the future of my children.
 
Gills 58 said:
Tarian, I also think you are somewhat deranged.

Your apparent loathing of the EU is irrational. I'm no big fan of it but you come across as hysterical. I'm still yet to find a law that I seriously disagree with. I would feel sorry for you were it not for the fact that the likes of you are endangering the future of my children.
Click to expand...

Your children will be fine 58, as will everyone else's.
Folk on here should be far more concerned with the rise of the far right all across Europe that the poxy EU.
Do a bit of reading and research.
It's frightening that a country that is held up as a bastion of European civilisation like Sweden has more that 20% of it's parliament controlled by far right. Denmark, Austria, Italy, Hungary, Germany and many more have huge right wing influence
That actually will endanger your children's future should it continue to rise.
 
shotshy said:
Your children will be fine 58, as will everyone else's.
Folk on here should be far more concerned with the rise of the far right all across Europe that the poxy EU.
Do a bit of reading and research.
It's frightening that a country that is held up as a bastion of European civilisation like Sweden has more that 20% of it's parliament controlled by far right. Denmark, Austria, Italy, Hungary, Germany and many more have huge right wing influence
That actually will endanger your children's future should it continue to rise.
Click to expand...
The far right comes and goes but, ultimately, trade determines politics.
 
Was helping to man a stool in Canterbury yesterday re wanting a People's Vote. Started talking to a German couple who love coming over here to look at the shops sites etc. She works for the EU in Brussels and at present working on preparing for a No Deal Brexit. They said how much they love coming over here. The wife was nearly in tears.
 
shotshy said:
Your children will be fine 58, as will everyone else's.
Folk on here should be far more concerned with the rise of the far right all across Europe that the poxy EU.
Do a bit of reading and research.
It's frightening that a country that is held up as a bastion of European civilisation like Sweden has more that 20% of it's parliament controlled by far right. Denmark, Austria, Italy, Hungary, Germany and many more have huge right wing influence
That actually will endanger your children's future should it continue to rise.
Click to expand...
And what if Brexit - particularly a no-deal - goes horribly wrong, just suppose. Don't you think the far right would make hay out of it? Even a difficult 3, 4 or 5 years could be enough for the right to blame it all on Johnny Foreigner and gain momentum. And Brexit could mean more non-EU migrants coming here [that'll please the far-right] and, before you say we'll be controlling our borders, the Govt will bow to pressure from the NHS, agriculture and the leisure industry etc to allow them to recruit outside the UK.
 
As the politicians debate what happens next one scenario has not been aired. Why is TM campaigning around the country? It seems very disingenuous to go to the people but refuse another referendum! So is she gambling with surviving as party leader and then having an election - with her deal in the Conservative manifesto instead??
 
Straightbat said:
As the politicians debate what happens next one scenario has not been aired. Why is TM campaigning around the country? It seems very disingenuous to go to the people but refuse another referendum! So is she gambling with surviving as party leader and then having an election - with her deal in the Conservative manifesto instead??
Click to expand...
Personally I think the plan Theresa May appears to have is if she losses the vote in the commons.Then I think she may well go for a people's vote .But I suspect there may well be just two choices my deal or no Deal?
That of course I believe could be her plan to get us to back her.The thing with that is it depends on if she can hold on to power and take her party with her.A lot of if's but I do think there is something else to this country wide tour that she has undertaken that we have not been told.
 
I have been to many different demos. In my experience the organisers always overestimate the numbers whilst the police always underestimate.

For today's marches the police haven't (yet) provided an estimate.

A UKIP spokesman has said that "quite a few thousand" turned up.

A spokeswoman for the counter demonstration claimed, "Even with the UKIP machine in tow, he [Robinson] only managed to bring a few thousand supporters out on the streets while we mobilised nearly 15,000 to march against his racism and bigotry "

Sounds to me that even the combined total of the (almost certainly) overestimated numbers is pretty fcking low.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46495595
 
Low turn-out may well have had something to do with the strong possibility of violence. Both lots (marches) of extremists are as bad as one another imo. Undoubtedly cost the taxpayers a fortune, hope both groups felt it was worthwhile. I dare say there was a mass of media there also. Some of whom no doubt hoping or baying for violence to make their news reports more "interesting".
 
Most of the Remain effort at the weekend was re an Action day on Saturday - stalls in towns and cities all over the country.

Some Remain groups are organising a gathering at Parliament Square on Tuesday at 5PM. They are talking about big screens being erected. I'm not sure whether that could lead to violence to be honest. In any case there's a chance that the bill might not go through Parliament that day.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.