EU strategy to destroy the Chequers ‘agreement’... | Page 668 | Vital Football

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

mehmets_curlies said:
You will need a written affadavit from Gove on that for Tarian to believe it.
Click to expand...
Yes.
It was an industry estimate.
https://www.bifa.org/news/articles/...exit-target-for-customs-agents-warns-industry
"Cabinet office minister Michael Gove endorsed the 50,000 industry estimate in parliament"

As to whether Gove actually "endorsed" that estimate, I await proof.

But I think I've been proved right# on most EU matters !:halo:

#I'm sure I've been a million or two out on things like the £96 billion Trade Deficit with the EU....
.... and maybe whether the UK's annual payment to the EU was £17 billion or £18 billion.:(
And its arguable whether there were 22,000 Single Market laws or 23,000.
And I concede that the EU Reg was not about cucumbers that were "bent" - merely "abnormal curvature"
 
Last edited:
mehmets_curlies said:
So, you're saying there won't be many jobs created in border control?
Click to expand...

Post 13,352 >>
Tarian said:
Added for context:>
"The Border Force is recruiting 1,000 extra Border Force agents to ensure the agency is ready to inspect goods and immigration documents at ports and minimise disruption as goods are transported into the country. There were 8,197 in place last year."

By all means bemoan the extra Border Staff .... but please can we get the context and scale correct.
Thank you. ;)
Click to expand...
Just inviting readers of the Guardian and other anti-Brexit organs to listen very carefully to exactly what they are reporting ......
...and not swallow the anti-Brexit spin on stories such as the "50,000 border staff" when really they are "Customs Agents" ... who would be private sector ... and it was an estimate.
Just saying....:oops:
 
So just a 1000. When I saw 50000, I thought, "fantastic". There's some of the decent levels of job creation indicated by leavers, but, no, it's only 1000! FMOB, you ain't selling this brexit mallarkey very well, are you?
 
Tarian said:
Yes.
It was an industry estimate.
https://www.bifa.org/news/articles/...exit-target-for-customs-agents-warns-industry
https://www.bifa.org/news/articles/...exit-target-for-customs-agents-warns-industry
"Cabinet office minister Michael Gove endorsed the 50,000 industry estimate in parliament"

As to whether Gove actually "endorsed" that estimate, I await proof.

But I think I've been proved right# on most EU matters !:halo:

#I'm sure I've been a million or two out on things like the £96 billion Trade Deficit with the EU....
.... and maybe whether the UK's annual payment to the EU was £17 billion or £18 billion.:(
And its arguable whether there were 22,000 Single Market laws or 23,000.
And I concede that the EU Reg was not about cucumbers that were "bent" - merely "abnormal curvature"
Click to expand...
I doubt that yiu have been proven right on anything other than you know how to cut and paste
 
mehmets_curlies said:
I doubt that yiu have been proven right on anything other than you know how to cut and paste
Click to expand...
Please. Can you accept that the "50,000" story was about "Customs Agents" (who process shipment notifications) and not "border" staff ?

IMO, the "story" was deliberately mis-represented by one presenter / reporter as "border staff" ....
...and others jumped on the bandwagon . (whether anti-Brexit or just lazy, who knows.)

On "proof". Unlike arch-Remainers (who are so certain they can predict the future, it is astonishing that they are not all millionaires), I try to stick to known facts about the past and present......
.....and occasionally suggest that the near future seems more likely to be close to the present than some extreme "cliff-edge".

Take today's announcement by the EU of "no-deal planning".....
....a six month grace period for various transit arrangements.
(Much as some of us suggested after hearing the concerns of the Mayor of Calais and the Calais Port boss.)
So the EU can be reasonable. !
 
Gills 58 said:
Why? Your claim contains no reasoning.
Click to expand...

1607754395489.jpeg

Red tape is an idiom referring to regulations or conformity to formal rules or standards which are claimed to be excessive, rigid or redundant, or to bureaucracy claimed to hinder or prevent action or decision-making. It is usually applied to governments, corporations, and other LARGE organizations.
 
I see that Bozza asked Von der Leyen whether it was OK to speak to Merkel and Macron direct and she gave her permission but they have chosen instead to hide behind her skirts. Fair enough.

As far as I understand, Merkel is now in a coalition and Macron is even more likely to be dead meat at the election if he can not deliver for his fisherman, which will also apply with a no deal.

So, if some of our exporters see Johnson as a failure for not being able to secure a deal despite his best efforts, how are the German and French exporters going to see their own Eminem for not having been willing to talk when they end up paying tariffs and taxes and having possible quotas on their huge excess export market to the UK?

Will be interesting.
 
Unfortunately most of this mess was predicted, still we get our sovereignty back.:( To be honest, the "pure" Brexiteers always wanted a no deal Brexit anyway (at least they will be happy).

Nice to see the Brexiteer who was going to build the Grenadier (I think that it what its called) is moving proposed production from Bridgend to France, citing logistics problems caused by us leaving.
 
Last edited:
This is still very solvable as it’s really the future governance issues that are the main sticking points.
Fishing is easy as we have already offered a three year transition period.
Level playing field is obviously not going to work in perpetuity because the whole point was to diverge.
So, when the U.K. diverges, what is the mechanism used to solve it?
Surely an agreed fully independent arbitration service is the answer.
Neither side having control over it.
 
shotshy said:
This is still very solvable as it’s really the future governance issues that are the main sticking points.
Fishing is easy as we have already offered a three year transition period.
Level playing field is obviously not going to work in perpetuity because the whole point was to diverge.
So, when the U.K. diverges, what is the mechanism used to solve it?
Surely an agreed fully independent arbitration service is the answer.
Neither side having control over it.
Click to expand...

Makes sense. Clearly the UK sent the wrong people to negotiate.
The whole thing has been 'very solvable' if you negotiate in good faith with compromise and an understanding that some of your demands may be unrealistic for the other side.
 
Gilles Lingam said:
anonymous & unverified but credible, methinks
View attachment 44160
Click to expand...
I don’t doubt any of that.
It is however totally irrelevant to agreeing a trade deal.
When you buy a new car, you don’t try to befriend the salesman.
It’s a business transaction.

When you look at the situation, Barnier has had one single job to do for over four years and up to now, he has failed miserably.

At the end of the day, both sides have something that the other side wants.
A negotiated deal should be possible.

Both sides have misjudged the others stance but maybe it will take no deal to drive home the importance for both sides.

What we have in common is that both sides need free access to each other’s markets.
The Eu have the advantage on this.

The U.K. has the advantage on finance, security and fishing.
Up to December 31st all of the waters are Eu and they can dictate the terms.
From 1st January our territorial waters belong 100% to us and we dictate the terms.
Then there is the advantage of the ransom strip for Ireland.
They need to cross our garden to get to their front door.

So both sides have to give and take.
So far, it appears that the concessions have come from our side.
 
Gilles Lingam said:
anonymous & unverified but credible, methinks
Click to expand...

Possible but, if so, it flies in the face of others that are implying that Johnson is the one who is becoming desperate - if he is being light hearted when the EU are saying how serious it is becoming for them.

Glad he is not bothered about causing offence if the EU reps started by expecting him to "make peace" when they are the side that have been showing no respect for our future sovereignty and independence. Personally, I find that offensive.
 
Just one look at the blustering buffoon trying to tell us that the Australian (NO DEAL) option would be great for the UK and we can already see the game is up. His body language was telling. Stories of his embarrassing attempts to circumvent the process by asking for Barnier's removal and plead with Macron and Merkel privately are just too believable based on his dishonest track record.
No deal has obviously always been the aim of the small cabal of ideologists and hedge fund Tory donors. Our negotiators were hamstrung with too many red lines from day one. We have wasted the time of the EU negotiators for years and now we must face the reality and cost of what No Deal actually means.
Of course, the EU was blamed for everything that was wrong with the UK five years ago to encourage us too leave. Now of course they are also being blamed for us leaving without a deal. Pathetic. We have been conned and worse. our kids and grandkids have been left with the bill.
 
Not as big of a bill than if we were still Eu members.
Germany’s annual contribution has gone up to 40 billion.
Then there is the payback on the covid relief fund.
European citizens will be paying back for a hundred years.
Well, some will.
Others get away scot free.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.