Did May say 80 billion? If this has been widely reported it has passed me by. @Dippenhall this business about setting out pre conditions, didn't the UK agree to them a while ago? If I run with the idea that the issue of money is a delaying tactic, and it is resolved easily, where does that leave the issue of the Laws, the EU/UK citizens all over the place, and yes you guessed it, the Irish border? If you are suggesting those issues will be easily resolved once the money issue is resolved then my first thought is resolve the money issues then, and proceed to the stuff that really matters. Could it be that the UK does not actually want the money issue resolved, because then it would have to address the other issues, and it doesn't have a clue how to do it? Maybe it is the UK that wants to drive everything towards a situation where time has run out and nothing is agreed because the UK is incapable of sorting out a solution, it is too difficult to actually do (or at least too difficult for the jokers in charge at the moment)?
Thanks @Imissthepeanutman any side intent on effective settlement of an agreement would agree the principles and then argue over the detail.
The UK have tried to put on the agenda agreement on the principles which will determine how the UKs exit bill is calculated. That would allow progress to be made, with the number being calculated as and when. The EU will not agree that, it will cramp their ability to extort the maximum figure.
The blame game seems of more interest than resolving the problem. Make excuses, and justify the EU's position but please recognise the EU modus operandi. Make preconditions to discussing an agenda item, make them impossible to meet and blame lack of progress on the other side.
Just saying the problems to be resolved as a result of Brexit are for the UK to fix is crass and simply underscores the impression that point scoring and winning the blame game is a higher priority than fixing the problem. If I broke your window and you told me to fix it but you can't use a ladder to get to it who do you blame for the draught blowing through the hole?
Sorry, if you have broken my window, I will still blame you for any draught...
I'm nice like that.
And, in fairness, I may not be willing to let you use my ladder because, in these litigious times, I could find myself liable should you injure yourself (even if you were not using the ladder safely).
If you take a look at the EU position papers on the financial settlement, it is clear that they had put forward their proposals for the principles/methodology to determine the amount in May and June of this year.
I've looked on the UK's Article 50 and negotiations with the EU page (publication scheme): https://gov.uk/government/collections/article-50-and-negotiations-with-the-eu. Unlike the EU, the UK has not published any position papers on what it views as the principles and, reading David Davis' statements and closing remarks, in the Speeches and Statements section, it seems unlikely that there is any position paper on the principles of the financial settlement. What the UK has been doing, and, until the most recent meetings, David Davis seemed remarkably keen to stress, was seeking to pick apart the EU principles and concentrate on (clearly important) technical questions, rather than putting forward alternative proposals.
So I am not sure that I would agree that the UK have, actually, tried to put on the agenda agreement on how the exit bill is calculated - but there has definitely been an attempt to blur the lines between the exit bill and payments, if any, associated with the future relationship.
Not interested in fixing the window, happier being able to bitch about the draught and win the blame game.
May gave all 27 states notice that 80bn Euro would secure an exit agreement, no pretence it's a scientific or legally accountable amount and no methodology.
The EU uses the term "methodology" as opposed to principles,legal obligations or duties, since none exist. The EU has tried to pretend from day 1 that there was an obligation on the UK to pay an exit bill, rather than admit the fact that it was a matter of mutual agreement under the Article 50 agreement. This was to ensure they didn't have to enter into an holistic Article 50 agreement, but artificially separate the issues.
The UK is willing to horse trade, which is what will eventually happen, but you can't horse trade if the other side refuses to let you see their horse and demands you first tell them how much you will pay for it.
Like I said - set out pre-conditions and artificial barriers to talks that are merely delaying tactics and blame the other side for lack of progress.
Not so much not interested in fixing the window, as not willing to create greater problems.
Are you sure T May gave notice that 80Bn Euro would secure an exit agreement?
I thoought that rough estimates, from her Florence speech, were for c£20Bn.
I am conscious that our departure causes another type of uncertainty for the remaining member states and their taxpayers over the EU budget.
Some of the claims made on this issue are exaggerated and unhelpful and we can only resolve this as part of the settlement of all the issues I have been talking about today.
Still I do not want our partners to fear that they will need to pay more or receive less over the remainder of the current budget plan as a result of our decision to leave. The UK will honour commitments we have made during the period of our membership.
And as we move forwards, we will also want to continue working together in ways that promote the long-term economic development of our continent.
This includes continuing to take part in those specific policies and programmes which are greatly to the UK and the EU’s joint advantage, such as those that promote science, education and culture – and those that promote our mutual security.
And as I set out in my speech at Lancaster House, in doing so, we would want to make an ongoing contribution to cover our fair share of the costs involved.
All aspects of Article 50 are about coming to a mutual exit agreement, because the Article mandates negotiation for such an agreement. But if terms cannot be agreed, there will be no agreement.
I'm confused that you believe that the EU is artifically seeking to separate the issues regarding Article 50 negotiations. The holistic agreement, under Article 50, relates only to the terms of departure.
What has happened, however, is the EU has stated is that negotiations on a future relationship cannot begin until "sufficient progress" has been made on the three key areas they have identified for any exit terms. The future relationship was always intended, under the Treaty, to be a separate process.
If the UK Government decides that it wishes to engage or not with the agreed structures in the negotiaitons is up to it. The Government has accepted that it does have legal obligations to pay what it has committed to fund, and further moral obligations - but seems curiously unwilling to engage with the principles outlined by the EU in May and June. As you say, it's negotiation/horse trading, why not address the other side's interpretations of the principles, it's not at a stage where amounts must be nailed down?
There is provision for taking into account the outline future framework of the relationship between the EU27 and the exiting state; but no requirement to agree it as part of Article 50. All Article 50 is is a means of determining whether a member state leaves on agreed terms, or on none. But, I will say that, easily as important as the potential financial settlement is the Irish border, because the type of realistic solution (if any) put forward by the UK Government will determine what, or whether any, trade deal may be on the cards.
Is this 'preferred methodology' in the public domain? I would like to see it and understand some of the base elements.
Interesting ONS stats on the front page of the times showing Eu workers in the uk at a higher level now than pre referendum. I am not displeased with that personally albeit I do feel longer term action is required to have some controls in place.
Anyone got a link to the actual stats? That seems to go against all recent reports on the matter.
Well I looked for myself. And I did not find. Not on the Times website, and certainly not in any other articles that come up on Google.
here is the most comprehensive recent presentation of the stats I could find, from 30th August. It shows migration from the EU on the way down, the decline led by those from the most recent accession countries.
I also read that the next ONS figures are out on 30. November. So heaven knows what the Times might have been on about. But it's full of Brexiteers so it could come out with anything. It hasn't come out with £80bn., though...
So what’s the crack now? We pay a bit more on the divorce bill and are able to begin trade talks in Jan?
I just can’t see a deal. For me a deal would involve an element of being part of the EU in some way shape or form, and I get the feeling those that voted Brexit, won’t want that.
I’m getting more confused by the day when surely we should be getting clarity
Is this 'preferred methodology' in the public domain? I would like to see it and understand some of the base elements.
Interesting ONS stats on the front page of the times showing Eu workers in the uk at a higher level now than pre referendum. I am not displeased with that personally albeit I do feel longer term action is required to have some controls in place.
Anyone got a link to the actual stats? That seems to go against all recent reports on the matter.
Well I looked for myself. And I did not find. Not on the Times website, and certainly not in any other articles that come up on Google.
here is the most comprehensive recent presentation of the stats I could find, from 30th August. It shows migration from the EU on the way down, the decline led by those from the most recent accession countries.
I also read that the next ONS figures are out on 30. November. So heaven knows what the Times might have been on about. But it's full of Brexiteers so it could come out with anything. It hasn't come out with £80bn., though...
Can't wait. What with nobody wanting to come to UK when the jobs dry up, and unemployment now being "in effect" zero. When the figures come out, I am ready to either eat my hat or push for a quick hard Brexit because of the queue at Tesco.
One senior official said that Brussels, just before the British snap election on June 8, shared a document with the 27 capitals that suggested €80 billion — more or less — would buy the U.K.’s way through the exit turnstile.
Is this 'preferred methodology' in the public domain? I would like to see it and understand some of the base elements.
Interesting ONS stats on the front page of the times showing Eu workers in the uk at a higher level now than pre referendum. I am not displeased with that personally albeit I do feel longer term action is required to have some controls in place.
Anyone got a link to the actual stats? That seems to go against all recent reports on the matter.
Well I looked for myself. And I did not find. Not on the Times website, and certainly not in any other articles that come up on Google.
here is the most comprehensive recent presentation of the stats I could find, from 30th August. It shows migration from the EU on the way down, the decline led by those from the most recent accession countries.
I also read that the next ONS figures are out on 30. November. So heaven knows what the Times might have been on about. But it's full of Brexiteers so it could come out with anything. It hasn't come out with £80bn., though...
Well it came up on the BBC papers review this morning. Article by Richard ford and Philip Aldrick. 2.37 m an increase of 112,000. Mainly from Romania and Bulgaria. Reductions from Poland and Czech Republic. Ons stats released on 15 Nov. Probably Fake news!!
So what’s the crack now? We pay a bit more on the divorce bill and are able to begin trade talks in Jan?
I just can’t see a deal. For me a deal would involve an element of being part of the EU in some way shape or form, and I get the feeling those that voted Brexit, won’t want that.
I’m getting more confused by the day when surely we should be getting clarity
Some of those who voted Brexit wanted out of everything. A large majority of the electorate want us to stay in the Customs Union which would also solve the Irish border question.
As per the link from @Red_in_SE8 if the UK government rejects the Customs Union, Single Market and EEA (for services) they get buttons for the UK.
@Dippenhall is parroting the Telegrapgh line that none of this is the government's fault but the fact is that we are moving towards the cliff edge.
The closer we get, the more volatile the political situation. And Labour are talking sense but that's another story.
Is this 'preferred methodology' in the public domain? I would like to see it and understand some of the base elements.
Interesting ONS stats on the front page of the times showing Eu workers in the uk at a higher level now than pre referendum. I am not displeased with that personally albeit I do feel longer term action is required to have some controls in place.
Anyone got a link to the actual stats? That seems to go against all recent reports on the matter.
Well I looked for myself. And I did not find. Not on the Times website, and certainly not in any other articles that come up on Google.
here is the most comprehensive recent presentation of the stats I could find, from 30th August. It shows migration from the EU on the way down, the decline led by those from the most recent accession countries.
I also read that the next ONS figures are out on 30. November. So heaven knows what the Times might have been on about. But it's full of Brexiteers so it could come out with anything. It hasn't come out with £80bn., though...
Oh dear another accidentally leaked document to the Guardian to show how the EU are entering negotiations with an open mind.
It’s actually called having a coherent plan and negotiating stance.
Something May and Davis should take note of.
Our plan should be based on a recognition that,as per this briefing, the EU will offer us nothing worth paying for. They are suckering us into making a commitment to pay them. Once we have, they will offer us the Canada deal and tell us to lump it. We should walk away now, offer no money but 2 years initial tariff free trade from our side and all EU citizens already here can stay and bring their immediate families if they want. If the EU wants to reciprocate they can, or we will take our business elsewhere and impose tariffs on their goods. We are led by weak Remainer politicians who do not want to leave the EU and who are being taken for a ride by the EU. No party speaks for the 52%, a massive democratic deficit which needs to change.
Oh dear another accidentally leaked document to the Guardian to show how the EU are entering negotiations with an open mind.
It’s actually called having a coherent plan and negotiating stance.
Something May and Davis should take note of.
Our plan should be based on a recognition that,as per this briefing, the EU will offer us nothing worth paying for. They are suckering us into making a commitment to pay them. Once we have, they will offer us the Canada deal and tell us to lump it. We should walk away now, offer no money but 2 years initial tariff free trade from our side and all EU citizens already here can stay and bring their immediate families if they want. If the EU wants to reciprocate they can, or we will take our business elsewhere and impose tariffs on their goods. We are led by weak Remainer politicians who do not want to leave the EU and who are being taken for a ride by the EU. No party speaks for the 52%, a massive democratic deficit which needs to change.
Oh dear another accidentally leaked document to the Guardian to show how the EU are entering negotiations with an open mind.
It’s actually called having a coherent plan and negotiating stance.
Something May and Davis should take note of.
Our plan should be based on a recognition that,as per this briefing, the EU will offer us nothing worth paying for. They are suckering us into making a commitment to pay them. Once we have, they will offer us the Canada deal and tell us to lump it. We should walk away now, offer no money but 2 years initial tariff free trade from our side and all EU citizens already here can stay and bring their immediate families if they want. If the EU wants to reciprocate they can, or we will take our business elsewhere and impose tariffs on their goods. We are led by weak Remainer politicians who do not want to leave the EU and who are being taken for a ride by the EU. No party speaks for the 52%, a massive democratic deficit which needs to change.
Certainly no party speaks for you - and thank the Lord for that.
How many as a percentage of the population do you think share your view that this is what we should do? Or put it easier - how many of the 52%?
Oh dear another accidentally leaked document to the Guardian to show how the EU are entering negotiations with an open mind.
It’s actually called having a coherent plan and negotiating stance.
Something May and Davis should take note of.
Our plan should be based on a recognition that,as per this briefing, the EU will offer us nothing worth paying for. They are suckering us into making a commitment to pay them. Once we have, they will offer us the Canada deal and tell us to lump it. We should walk away now, offer no money but 2 years initial tariff free trade from our side and all EU citizens already here can stay and bring their immediate families if they want. If the EU wants to reciprocate they can, or we will take our business elsewhere and impose tariffs on their goods. We are led by weak Remainer politicians who do not want to leave the EU and who are being taken for a ride by the EU. No party speaks for the 52%, a massive democratic deficit which needs to change.
Certainly no party speaks for you - and thank the Lord for that.
How many as a percentage of the population do you think share your view that this is what we should do? Or put it easier - how many of the 52%?
You would rather we got screwed by the EU? But I guess you are a Remainer so maybe you do, or that the whole thing would just go away.
Oh dear another accidentally leaked document to the Guardian to show how the EU are entering negotiations with an open mind.
It’s actually called having a coherent plan and negotiating stance.
Something May and Davis should take note of.
Our plan should be based on a recognition that,as per this briefing, the EU will offer us nothing worth paying for. They are suckering us into making a commitment to pay them. Once we have, they will offer us the Canada deal and tell us to lump it. We should walk away now, offer no money but 2 years initial tariff free trade from our side and all EU citizens already here can stay and bring their immediate families if they want. If the EU wants to reciprocate they can, or we will take our business elsewhere and impose tariffs on their goods. We are led by weak Remainer politicians who do not want to leave the EU and who are being taken for a ride by the EU. No party speaks for the 52%, a massive democratic deficit which needs to change.
Certainly no party speaks for you - and thank the Lord for that.
How many as a percentage of the population do you think share your view that this is what we should do? Or put it easier - how many of the 52%?
You would rather we got screwed by the EU? But I guess you are a Remainer so maybe you do, or that the whole thing would just go away.
I would rather we didn’t commit economic suicide. Yes I voted remain and believe the leavers are wrong. But I accept the result and always have.
Now, are you going to answer my question? Thought not.
Your version of brexit as you have described it would be a view held by the extreme barmy brexiteers - a tiny proportion of the population.
Oh dear another accidentally leaked document to the Guardian to show how the EU are entering negotiations with an open mind.
It’s actually called having a coherent plan and negotiating stance.
Something May and Davis should take note of.
Our plan should be based on a recognition that,as per this briefing, the EU will offer us nothing worth paying for. They are suckering us into making a commitment to pay them. Once we have, they will offer us the Canada deal and tell us to lump it. We should walk away now, offer no money but 2 years initial tariff free trade from our side and all EU citizens already here can stay and bring their immediate families if they want. If the EU wants to reciprocate they can, or we will take our business elsewhere and impose tariffs on their goods. We are led by weak Remainer politicians who do not want to leave the EU and who are being taken for a ride by the EU. No party speaks for the 52%, a massive democratic deficit which needs to change.
Certainly no party speaks for you - and thank the Lord for that.
How many as a percentage of the population do you think share your view that this is what we should do? Or put it easier - how many of the 52%?
You would rather we got screwed by the EU? But I guess you are a Remainer so maybe you do, or that the whole thing would just go away.
I would rather we didn’t commit economic suicide. Yes I voted remain and believe the leavers are wrong. But I accept the result and always have.
Now, are you going to answer my question? Thought not.
Your version of brexit as you have described it would be a view held by the extreme barmy brexiteers - a tiny proportion of the population.
My view of Brexit makes more sense than the current car crash. A lot of people would agree with that.
Is this 'preferred methodology' in the public domain? I would like to see it and understand some of the base elements.
Interesting ONS stats on the front page of the times showing Eu workers in the uk at a higher level now than pre referendum. I am not displeased with that personally albeit I do feel longer term action is required to have some controls in place.
Anyone got a link to the actual stats? That seems to go against all recent reports on the matter.
Well I looked for myself. And I did not find. Not on the Times website, and certainly not in any other articles that come up on Google.
here is the most comprehensive recent presentation of the stats I could find, from 30th August. It shows migration from the EU on the way down, the decline led by those from the most recent accession countries.
I also read that the next ONS figures are out on 30. November. So heaven knows what the Times might have been on about. But it's full of Brexiteers so it could come out with anything. It hasn't come out with £80bn., though...
Here it is,with link to ONS report. Amazing what with Brexit Britain being a racist hellhole that so many more are prepared to brave it out.
Fair enough, that is clearly the ONS talking. Seems to be at odds with previous figures, I will of course try to get my head around the apparent discrepancy, but right now I am getting stuck into Robert Peston's book.
One senior official said that Brussels, just before the British snap election on June 8, shared a document with the 27 capitals that suggested €80 billion — more or less — would buy the U.K.’s way through the exit turnstile.
Ah but I was not the only one to infer from your remark that you thought May had offered €80m. The above certainly does not say that she has done so.
Oh dear another accidentally leaked document to the Guardian to show how the EU are entering negotiations with an open mind.
It’s actually called having a coherent plan and negotiating stance.
Something May and Davis should take note of.
Our plan should be based on a recognition that,as per this briefing, the EU will offer us nothing worth paying for. They are suckering us into making a commitment to pay them. Once we have, they will offer us the Canada deal and tell us to lump it. We should walk away now, offer no money but 2 years initial tariff free trade from our side and all EU citizens already here can stay and bring their immediate families if they want. If the EU wants to reciprocate they can, or we will take our business elsewhere and impose tariffs on their goods. We are led by weak Remainer politicians who do not want to leave the EU and who are being taken for a ride by the EU. No party speaks for the 52%, a massive democratic deficit which needs to change.
Certainly no party speaks for you - and thank the Lord for that.
How many as a percentage of the population do you think share your view that this is what we should do? Or put it easier - how many of the 52%?
You would rather we got screwed by the EU? But I guess you are a Remainer so maybe you do, or that the whole thing would just go away.
I would rather we didn’t commit economic suicide. Yes I voted remain and believe the leavers are wrong. But I accept the result and always have.
Now, are you going to answer my question? Thought not.
Your version of brexit as you have described it would be a view held by the extreme barmy brexiteers - a tiny proportion of the population.
My view of Brexit makes more sense than the current car crash. A lot of people would agree with that.
I would suggest you need to add ‘In my opinion’ at the start of your first sentence otherwise it reads like you are stating a fact that your view makes more sense - which it most certainly is not.
So we do things on the basis of the views of ‘a lot’ of people - fine democratic principles if I may say so. Still didn’t answer the question - is ‘a lot’ all of the 52% in your opinion?
Remind us what the headlines were when 172, yes I checked, one hundred and seventy two, Labour MP's physically voted that they had no confidence in Jeremy Corbyn in June 2016. He is still there and doing much better than expected. Total non story peddled for the eager gullible.
I forget what your comments were then.
Not sure I understand your point. You are referring, I think to an internal Labour Party leadership contest. That's quite different to an HoC vote, which makes laws and stuff.
LOL. It takes a special kind of vision not to see the similarity between an article saying there are less than 40 MP's thinking about signing ( but in fact have not actually done anything) a letter of no confidence in their leader, and 172 MP's who did Vote against their leader in a vote of no confidence.
No wonder you fail to understand it.
You probably missed the 'Labour rift' article referenced on the front page, too.
One senior official said that Brussels, just before the British snap election on June 8, shared a document with the 27 capitals that suggested €80 billion — more or less — would buy the U.K.’s way through the exit turnstile.
Ah but I was not the only one to infer from your remark that you thought May had offered €80m. The above certainly does not say that she has done so.
One senior official said that Brussels, just before the British snap election on June 8, shared a document with the 27 capitals that suggested €80 billion — more or less — would buy the U.K.’s way through the exit turnstile.
Ah but I was not the only one to infer from your remark that you thought May had offered €80m. The above certainly does not say that she has done so.
Independent Theresa May has come under pressure from Tory bankbenchers over claims she privately agreed to pay the EU a bigger divorce bill to speed up the Brexit talks.
Comments
@Dippenhall this business about setting out pre conditions, didn't the UK agree to them a while ago?
If I run with the idea that the issue of money is a delaying tactic, and it is resolved easily, where does that leave the issue of the Laws, the EU/UK citizens all over the place, and yes you guessed it, the Irish border?
If you are suggesting those issues will be easily resolved once the money issue is resolved then my first thought is resolve the money issues then, and proceed to the stuff that really matters.
Could it be that the UK does not actually want the money issue resolved, because then it would have to address the other issues, and it doesn't have a clue how to do it? Maybe it is the UK that wants to drive everything towards a situation where time has run out and nothing is agreed because the UK is incapable of sorting out a solution, it is too difficult to actually do (or at least too difficult for the jokers in charge at the moment)?
Are you sure T May gave notice that 80Bn Euro would secure an exit agreement?
I thoought that rough estimates, from her Florence speech, were for c£20Bn.
I am conscious that our departure causes another type of uncertainty for the remaining member states and their taxpayers over the EU budget.
Some of the claims made on this issue are exaggerated and unhelpful and we can only resolve this as part of the settlement of all the issues I have been talking about today.
Still I do not want our partners to fear that they will need to pay more or receive less over the remainder of the current budget plan as a result of our decision to leave. The UK will honour commitments we have made during the period of our membership.
And as we move forwards, we will also want to continue working together in ways that promote the long-term economic development of our continent.
This includes continuing to take part in those specific policies and programmes which are greatly to the UK and the EU’s joint advantage, such as those that promote science, education and culture – and those that promote our mutual security.
And as I set out in my speech at Lancaster House, in doing so, we would want to make an ongoing contribution to cover our fair share of the costs involved.
All aspects of Article 50 are about coming to a mutual exit agreement, because the Article mandates negotiation for such an agreement. But if terms cannot be agreed, there will be no agreement.
I'm confused that you believe that the EU is artifically seeking to separate the issues regarding Article 50 negotiations. The holistic agreement, under Article 50, relates only to the terms of departure.
What has happened, however, is the EU has stated is that negotiations on a future relationship cannot begin until "sufficient progress" has been made on the three key areas they have identified for any exit terms. The future relationship was always intended, under the Treaty, to be a separate process.
If the UK Government decides that it wishes to engage or not with the agreed structures in the negotiaitons is up to it. The Government has accepted that it does have legal obligations to pay what it has committed to fund, and further moral obligations - but seems curiously unwilling to engage with the principles outlined by the EU in May and June. As you say, it's negotiation/horse trading, why not address the other side's interpretations of the principles, it's not at a stage where amounts must be nailed down?
There is provision for taking into account the outline future framework of the relationship between the EU27 and the exiting state; but no requirement to agree it as part of Article 50. All Article 50 is is a means of determining whether a member state leaves on agreed terms, or on none. But, I will say that, easily as important as the potential financial settlement is the Irish border, because the type of realistic solution (if any) put forward by the UK Government will determine what, or whether any, trade deal may be on the cards.
You may find this research paper (from February of last year) of interest: europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2016/577971/EPRS_BRI(2016)577971_EN.pdf.
here is the most comprehensive recent presentation of the stats I could find, from 30th August. It shows migration from the EU on the way down, the decline led by those from the most recent accession countries.
I also read that the next ONS figures are out on 30. November. So heaven knows what the Times might have been on about. But it's full of Brexiteers so it could come out with anything. It hasn't come out with £80bn., though...
I just can’t see a deal. For me a deal would involve an element of being part of the EU in some way shape or form, and I get the feeling those that voted Brexit, won’t want that.
I’m getting more confused by the day when surely we should be getting clarity
What with nobody wanting to come to UK when the jobs dry up, and unemployment now being "in effect" zero.
When the figures come out,
I am ready to either eat my hat or push for a quick hard Brexit because of the queue at Tesco.
Politico 17 August 2017
One senior official said that Brussels, just before the British snap election on June 8, shared a document with the 27 capitals that suggested €80 billion — more or less — would buy the U.K.’s way through the exit turnstile.
As per the link from @Red_in_SE8 if the UK government rejects the Customs Union, Single Market and EEA (for services) they get buttons for the UK.
@Dippenhall is parroting the Telegrapgh line that none of this is the government's fault but the fact is that we are moving towards the cliff edge.
The closer we get, the more volatile the political situation. And Labour are talking sense but that's another story.
Something May and Davis should take note of.
Here it is,with link to ONS report. Amazing what with Brexit Britain being a racist hellhole that so many more are prepared to brave it out.
We should walk away now, offer no money but 2 years initial tariff free trade from our side and all EU citizens already here can stay and bring their immediate families if they want. If the EU wants to reciprocate they can, or we will take our business elsewhere and impose tariffs on their goods.
We are led by weak Remainer politicians who do not want to leave the EU and who are being taken for a ride by the EU. No party speaks for the 52%, a massive democratic deficit which needs to change.
How many as a percentage of the population do you think share your view that this is what we should do? Or put it easier - how many of the 52%?
But I guess you are a Remainer so maybe you do, or that the whole thing would just go away.
Spot on!
Now, are you going to answer my question? Thought not.
Your version of brexit as you have described it would be a view held by the extreme barmy brexiteers - a tiny proportion of the population.
So we do things on the basis of the views of ‘a lot’ of people - fine democratic principles if I may say so. Still didn’t answer the question - is ‘a lot’ all of the 52% in your opinion?
No wonder you fail to understand it.
You probably missed the 'Labour rift' article referenced on the front page, too.
Carry on, the world is ending soon.
...and this reaction to it is telling
Theresa May has come under pressure from Tory bankbenchers over claims she privately agreed to pay the EU a bigger divorce bill to speed up the Brexit talks.