Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

The influence of the EU on Britain.

18182848687607

Comments

  • Southbank said:

    I’ll bang Seth’s drum here. I havn't heard one single credible suggestion over the border issue. On Peston the conservative MP Nadhim Zahawi is saying that a border decision can’t be decided until a trade deal is agreed because what type of border will ultimately depend on that trade deal. A logic of sorts until you accept the fact that our negotiating partners do not accept this. It is May and Davis saying that there needs to be flexibility. If indeed they do really want to move the negotiations on when the two parties meet in two weeks I suggest that this critical issue is a decent starting point.

    There can be no practical solution to the border issue outside of a new trade agreement, surely that is blindingly obvious to even the most ardent remainer. Or to put it another way, do you think the final border arrangement between the UK and France can be decided now as well? The EU is encouraging the Irish to put pressure on the UK to effectively overturn the referendum result. It is incredibly irresponsible to raise the stakes in this way and to use the Irish as a pawn in the bigger game.

  • edited November 2017
    It's childish crap like this...

    Ireland is like the weakest kid in the playground sucking up to the EU bullies.

    — Gerard Batten MEP (@GerardBattenMEP) 26 November 2017


    ...that seems to be forming a large part of the line that is being pushed on here and elsewhere. It's clear to me that the penny's dropped with the government, the press and now many Leavers that we are not going get the "cake and eat it" deal that was promised, so they are now playing a blame game.

    I don't know if it's the effect of Trump tweeting his every "thought" or whatever but it's hard to believe we have people in this country prepared to elect someone so unsuitable for office in my view. And that's applicable across the political spectrum.
  • Southbank said:

    I’ll bang Seth’s drum here. I havn't heard one single credible suggestion over the border issue. On Peston the conservative MP Nadhim Zahawi is saying that a border decision can’t be decided until a trade deal is agreed because what type of border will ultimately depend on that trade deal. A logic of sorts until you accept the fact that our negotiating partners do not accept this. It is May and Davis saying that there needs to be flexibility. If indeed they do really want to move the negotiations on when the two parties meet in two weeks I suggest that this critical issue is a decent starting point.

    There can be no practical solution to the border issue outside of a new trade agreement, surely that is blindingly obvious to even the most ardent remainer. Or to put it another way, do you think the final border arrangement between the UK and France can be decided now as well? The EU is encouraging the Irish to put pressure on the UK to effectively overturn the referendum result. It is incredibly irresponsible to raise the stakes in this way and to use the Irish as a pawn in the bigger game.

    Re your last para. Had you listened to R4 Today Programme this morning you you would not have written the last 2 sentences, which is arrant hate filled nonsense. The Irish are driving this, not what you call "the EU".

    https://www.ft.com/content/9e11bdcc-c585-11e7-b2bb-322b2cb39656

    So the EU is not behind this at all? A little naive again I think ,Prague. You really are letting your prejudices get in the way.
    And what about my first point? Hiow could it be sorted outside of a trade deal?
  • Southbank said:

    I’ll bang Seth’s drum here. I havn't heard one single credible suggestion over the border issue. On Peston the conservative MP Nadhim Zahawi is saying that a border decision can’t be decided until a trade deal is agreed because what type of border will ultimately depend on that trade deal. A logic of sorts until you accept the fact that our negotiating partners do not accept this. It is May and Davis saying that there needs to be flexibility. If indeed they do really want to move the negotiations on when the two parties meet in two weeks I suggest that this critical issue is a decent starting point.

    There can be no practical solution to the border issue outside of a new trade agreement, surely that is blindingly obvious to even the most ardent remainer. Or to put it another way, do you think the final border arrangement between the UK and France can be decided now as well? The EU is encouraging the Irish to put pressure on the UK to effectively overturn the referendum result. It is incredibly irresponsible to raise the stakes in this way and to use the Irish as a pawn in the bigger game.

    Close to a Hoeyesque grasp of the realities. The border between France and the U.K. is not really an issue is it ? We’re taking back control of our borders aren’t we ? May has confirmed that there is no intention to remain in the customs union so there is by definition a hard border along with all the problems at the channel ports. Do the French really care ? I think not. They will get on with living with our stupidity. Does the Irish border matter to the people’s of both the north and south ? You bet it does. The ROI want guarantees that there will be no hard border and want detail of how that will work. The British Government have failed completely to give detail of how they think that will work. It’s completely reasonable for the Irish to demand that detail before they allow Brexit negotiations to move on. The border is very much part of the fragile peace process. Hoey and it seems you don’t grasp the fundamentals of the problem.

    How can you work out how a trade deal will work before you have a trade deal?
  • Southbank said:

    I’ll bang Seth’s drum here. I havn't heard one single credible suggestion over the border issue. On Peston the conservative MP Nadhim Zahawi is saying that a border decision can’t be decided until a trade deal is agreed because what type of border will ultimately depend on that trade deal. A logic of sorts until you accept the fact that our negotiating partners do not accept this. It is May and Davis saying that there needs to be flexibility. If indeed they do really want to move the negotiations on when the two parties meet in two weeks I suggest that this critical issue is a decent starting point.

    There can be no practical solution to the border issue outside of a new trade agreement, surely that is blindingly obvious to even the most ardent remainer. Or to put it another way, do you think the final border arrangement between the UK and France can be decided now as well? The EU is encouraging the Irish to put pressure on the UK to effectively overturn the referendum result. It is incredibly irresponsible to raise the stakes in this way and to use the Irish as a pawn in the bigger game.

    There you have it - someone has said it at last.
    "We are free to revoke the common travel area"

    Obv this will not be popular, so ROI/UK/EU27 better get round a table and cut out the brinkmanship.
  • edited November 2017
    Southbank said:

    Southbank said:

    I’ll bang Seth’s drum here. I havn't heard one single credible suggestion over the border issue. On Peston the conservative MP Nadhim Zahawi is saying that a border decision can’t be decided until a trade deal is agreed because what type of border will ultimately depend on that trade deal. A logic of sorts until you accept the fact that our negotiating partners do not accept this. It is May and Davis saying that there needs to be flexibility. If indeed they do really want to move the negotiations on when the two parties meet in two weeks I suggest that this critical issue is a decent starting point.

    There can be no practical solution to the border issue outside of a new trade agreement, surely that is blindingly obvious to even the most ardent remainer. Or to put it another way, do you think the final border arrangement between the UK and France can be decided now as well? The EU is encouraging the Irish to put pressure on the UK to effectively overturn the referendum result. It is incredibly irresponsible to raise the stakes in this way and to use the Irish as a pawn in the bigger game.

    Close to a Hoeyesque grasp of the realities. The border between France and the U.K. is not really an issue is it ? We’re taking back control of our borders aren’t we ? May has confirmed that there is no intention to remain in the customs union so there is by definition a hard border along with all the problems at the channel ports. Do the French really care ? I think not. They will get on with living with our stupidity. Does the Irish border matter to the people’s of both the north and south ? You bet it does. The ROI want guarantees that there will be no hard border and want detail of how that will work. The British Government have failed completely to give detail of how they think that will work. It’s completely reasonable for the Irish to demand that detail before they allow Brexit negotiations to move on. The border is very much part of the fragile peace process. Hoey and it seems you don’t grasp the fundamentals of the problem.

    How can you work out how a trade deal will work before you have a trade deal?
    What part of the exit strategy was well thought out?
  • se9addick said:

    The UK government don't want to give a border solution, or a guarantee on EU citizens rights because they appreciate we are in the weaker position for trade deals. Therefore they wish to offer favourable solutions to both those problems as part of trade deal negotiations in the hope of getting a better trade deal. You can say the same about the divorce payment too, they don't want to agree that as they'd rather use the size of any offer as part of the leverage on a trade deal.

    That whole "nothing's decided until everything's decided" approach would only make sense if we hadn't already decided that membership of the single market and customs union are not he ruled out. Surely either everything's up for negotiation or it's not ?
    In fairness, I think that membership of the single market has been ruled out because the EU have said we can't retain membership without guaranteeing continued free movement of EU citizens to the UK.

    I really can't see a way through on the Ireland/NI border issue unless the EU allow ROI to negotiate directly with the UK on trade terms (which it won't).

  • Jints said:

    se9addick said:

    The UK government don't want to give a border solution, or a guarantee on EU citizens rights because they appreciate we are in the weaker position for trade deals. Therefore they wish to offer favourable solutions to both those problems as part of trade deal negotiations in the hope of getting a better trade deal. You can say the same about the divorce payment too, they don't want to agree that as they'd rather use the size of any offer as part of the leverage on a trade deal.

    That whole "nothing's decided until everything's decided" approach would only make sense if we hadn't already decided that membership of the single market and customs union are not he ruled out. Surely either everything's up for negotiation or it's not ?
    In fairness, I think that membership of the single market has been ruled out because the EU have said we can't retain membership without guaranteeing continued free movement of EU citizens to the UK.

    I really can't see a way through on the Ireland/NI border issue unless the EU allow ROI to negotiate directly with the UK on trade terms (which it won't).

    So why has that been ruled out ? Surely if the best deal on leaving the EU means accepting freedom of movement in exchange for full access to the single market that's what we should do ?
  • edited November 2017
    Jints said:

    se9addick said:

    The UK government don't want to give a border solution, or a guarantee on EU citizens rights because they appreciate we are in the weaker position for trade deals. Therefore they wish to offer favourable solutions to both those problems as part of trade deal negotiations in the hope of getting a better trade deal. You can say the same about the divorce payment too, they don't want to agree that as they'd rather use the size of any offer as part of the leverage on a trade deal.

    That whole "nothing's decided until everything's decided" approach would only make sense if we hadn't already decided that membership of the single market and customs union are not he ruled out. Surely either everything's up for negotiation or it's not ?
    In fairness, I think that membership of the single market has been ruled out because the EU have said we can't retain membership without guaranteeing continued free movement of EU citizens to the UK.

    I really can't see a way through on the Ireland/NI border issue unless the EU allow ROI to negotiate directly with the UK on trade terms (which it won't).

    You can be a single market member and have restrictions on freedom of movement, as you can now as a EU member, by putting restrictions on people who don't find jobs in the first 3 months of coming to that country. If the UK wanted that, I suspect they could pay through the nose for tougher restrictions and banking access.

    May dropped a fucking huge bollock by red lining the ECJ, SM and CU in her nuts conference speech in 2016, now she can't backtrack.
  • Sponsored links:


  • https://order-order.com/2017/11/27/10-people-whove-been-driven-mad-by-brexit/
    This is for the Leavers on this thread. Please do not read it if you are a Remainer as it will only upset you.
  • Southbank said:

    https://order-order.com/2017/11/27/10-people-whove-been-driven-mad-by-brexit/
    This is for the Leavers on this thread. Please do not read it if you are a Remainer as it will only upset you.

    Shit dawg, Guido Fawkes being a massive tax dodging troll, I'm stunned.
  • se9addick said:

    Jints said:

    se9addick said:

    The UK government don't want to give a border solution, or a guarantee on EU citizens rights because they appreciate we are in the weaker position for trade deals. Therefore they wish to offer favourable solutions to both those problems as part of trade deal negotiations in the hope of getting a better trade deal. You can say the same about the divorce payment too, they don't want to agree that as they'd rather use the size of any offer as part of the leverage on a trade deal.

    That whole "nothing's decided until everything's decided" approach would only make sense if we hadn't already decided that membership of the single market and customs union are not he ruled out. Surely either everything's up for negotiation or it's not ?
    In fairness, I think that membership of the single market has been ruled out because the EU have said we can't retain membership without guaranteeing continued free movement of EU citizens to the UK.

    I really can't see a way through on the Ireland/NI border issue unless the EU allow ROI to negotiate directly with the UK on trade terms (which it won't).

    So why has that been ruled out ? Surely if the best deal on leaving the EU means accepting freedom of movement in exchange for full access to the single market that's what we should do ?
    Regarded as political suicide I suppose. It seems pretty clear that immigration was the single biggest concern of those voting Leave and I expect the Tory party would have a proper split.

  • I posted this on another thread, ooops

    Stephen Bush on the Irish issue is excellent.

    Good morning. Over before Christmas? The question of the Irish border shows no sign of being answered or even, as the British government would like, parked until negotiations move on from legacy issues to the future relationship.

    Is Liam Fox right to say that the question of the Irish border cannot be resolved until the terms of trade between the United Kingdom and the European Union are? Well, yes and no. The exact operation of the border between the Republic and Northern Ireland hinges on what the exact final relationship.

    But we already know that under the terms of Theresa May's Lancaster House speech, we are heading for a hard border between the two nations, as we are leaving the customs union and seeking regulatory divergence from EU27, which means that there will have to be physical and infrastructure and customs checks, whether in the Irish sea or on the island of Ireland. That means that as far as the Irish government goes, whoever is in power, their political interests remain the same: to make certain that hard border is at sea, not on land. That means using their veto power, whether in December or in March 2019.

    I don't wish to go over the ins and outs of the problem - after all, I did that last week - but it is worth noting one additional element to all this: which is that the question of the Irish border was the most predictable of all the difficulties of Brexit. We are leaving a free trade area, and the nation we share a land border with is not.

    The historic sensitivities of this particular border ought to have focused minds, yes, but that Brexit would require navigating an exit in which Ireland could always wield its veto should have meant that the Brexiteers had a workable solution in their back pocket for years, even if the worst thing ever to happen on the Irish border had been some raised voices over the proper care of a few hedgerows.

    The simple truth is that if Brexit comes unstuck because of the Irish border it will be because the Brexit elite simply wasn't serious.
  • It's childish crap like this...

    Ireland is like the weakest kid in the playground sucking up to the EU bullies.

    — Gerard Batten MEP (@GerardBattenMEP) 26 November 2017


    ...that seems to be forming a large part of the line that is being pushed on here and elsewhere. It's clear to me that the penny's dropped with the government, the press and now many Leavers that we are not going get the "cake and eat it" deal that was promised, so they are now playing a blame game.

    I don't know if it's the effect of Trump tweeting his every "thought" or whatever but it's hard to believe we have people in this country prepared to elect someone so unsuitable for office in my view. And that's applicable across the political spectrum.


    Is "late night tweets" now a euphemistic way of saying drunken ramblings that would embarrass a 6th Former?
  • se9addick said:

    Jints said:

    se9addick said:

    The UK government don't want to give a border solution, or a guarantee on EU citizens rights because they appreciate we are in the weaker position for trade deals. Therefore they wish to offer favourable solutions to both those problems as part of trade deal negotiations in the hope of getting a better trade deal. You can say the same about the divorce payment too, they don't want to agree that as they'd rather use the size of any offer as part of the leverage on a trade deal.

    That whole "nothing's decided until everything's decided" approach would only make sense if we hadn't already decided that membership of the single market and customs union are not he ruled out. Surely either everything's up for negotiation or it's not ?
    In fairness, I think that membership of the single market has been ruled out because the EU have said we can't retain membership without guaranteeing continued free movement of EU citizens to the UK.

    I really can't see a way through on the Ireland/NI border issue unless the EU allow ROI to negotiate directly with the UK on trade terms (which it won't).

    So why has that been ruled out ? Surely if the best deal on leaving the EU means accepting freedom of movement in exchange for full access to the single market that's what we should do ?
    Because many leavers want an end to freedom of movement (like me).
  • Jints said:

    se9addick said:

    Jints said:

    se9addick said:

    The UK government don't want to give a border solution, or a guarantee on EU citizens rights because they appreciate we are in the weaker position for trade deals. Therefore they wish to offer favourable solutions to both those problems as part of trade deal negotiations in the hope of getting a better trade deal. You can say the same about the divorce payment too, they don't want to agree that as they'd rather use the size of any offer as part of the leverage on a trade deal.

    That whole "nothing's decided until everything's decided" approach would only make sense if we hadn't already decided that membership of the single market and customs union are not he ruled out. Surely either everything's up for negotiation or it's not ?
    In fairness, I think that membership of the single market has been ruled out because the EU have said we can't retain membership without guaranteeing continued free movement of EU citizens to the UK.

    I really can't see a way through on the Ireland/NI border issue unless the EU allow ROI to negotiate directly with the UK on trade terms (which it won't).

    So why has that been ruled out ? Surely if the best deal on leaving the EU means accepting freedom of movement in exchange for full access to the single market that's what we should do ?
    Regarded as political suicide I suppose. It seems pretty clear that immigration was the single biggest concern of those voting Leave and I expect the Tory party would have a proper split.

    Because leaving the EU means leaving the EU and the EU having no jurisdiction over UK policy on immigration or anything else. It is what sovereignty means. Nobody on the EU side has ever said we could pick and chose between the 4 freedoms, so if we are out we are out of all of them, and if we are in we are in all of them.
  • Southbank said:

    Jints said:

    se9addick said:

    Jints said:

    se9addick said:

    The UK government don't want to give a border solution, or a guarantee on EU citizens rights because they appreciate we are in the weaker position for trade deals. Therefore they wish to offer favourable solutions to both those problems as part of trade deal negotiations in the hope of getting a better trade deal. You can say the same about the divorce payment too, they don't want to agree that as they'd rather use the size of any offer as part of the leverage on a trade deal.

    That whole "nothing's decided until everything's decided" approach would only make sense if we hadn't already decided that membership of the single market and customs union are not he ruled out. Surely either everything's up for negotiation or it's not ?
    In fairness, I think that membership of the single market has been ruled out because the EU have said we can't retain membership without guaranteeing continued free movement of EU citizens to the UK.

    I really can't see a way through on the Ireland/NI border issue unless the EU allow ROI to negotiate directly with the UK on trade terms (which it won't).

    So why has that been ruled out ? Surely if the best deal on leaving the EU means accepting freedom of movement in exchange for full access to the single market that's what we should do ?
    Regarded as political suicide I suppose. It seems pretty clear that immigration was the single biggest concern of those voting Leave and I expect the Tory party would have a proper split.

    Because leaving the EU means leaving the EU and the EU having no jurisdiction over UK policy on immigration or anything else. It is what sovereignty means. Nobody on the EU side has ever said we could pick and chose between the 4 freedoms, so if we are out we are out of all of them, and if we are in we are in all of them.
    Better not do any trade deals, be part of any international organisation like the UN, WTO or Nato, because they all involve a dilution of sovereignty.
  • se9addick said:

    Jints said:

    se9addick said:

    The UK government don't want to give a border solution, or a guarantee on EU citizens rights because they appreciate we are in the weaker position for trade deals. Therefore they wish to offer favourable solutions to both those problems as part of trade deal negotiations in the hope of getting a better trade deal. You can say the same about the divorce payment too, they don't want to agree that as they'd rather use the size of any offer as part of the leverage on a trade deal.

    That whole "nothing's decided until everything's decided" approach would only make sense if we hadn't already decided that membership of the single market and customs union are not he ruled out. Surely either everything's up for negotiation or it's not ?
    In fairness, I think that membership of the single market has been ruled out because the EU have said we can't retain membership without guaranteeing continued free movement of EU citizens to the UK.

    I really can't see a way through on the Ireland/NI border issue unless the EU allow ROI to negotiate directly with the UK on trade terms (which it won't).

    So why has that been ruled out ? Surely if the best deal on leaving the EU means accepting freedom of movement in exchange for full access to the single market that's what we should do ?
    Because many leavers want an end to freedom of movement (like me).
    http://uk.businessinsider.com/britain-must-accept-immigration-post-brexit-trade-deals-india-liam-fox-2017-11?r=US&IR=T
  • Southbank said:

    https://order-order.com/2017/11/27/10-people-whove-been-driven-mad-by-brexit/
    This is for the Leavers on this thread. Please do not read it if you are a Remainer as it will only upset you.

    You can certainly swap those names for others.
  • Sponsored links:


  • se9addick said:

    Jints said:

    se9addick said:

    The UK government don't want to give a border solution, or a guarantee on EU citizens rights because they appreciate we are in the weaker position for trade deals. Therefore they wish to offer favourable solutions to both those problems as part of trade deal negotiations in the hope of getting a better trade deal. You can say the same about the divorce payment too, they don't want to agree that as they'd rather use the size of any offer as part of the leverage on a trade deal.

    That whole "nothing's decided until everything's decided" approach would only make sense if we hadn't already decided that membership of the single market and customs union are not he ruled out. Surely either everything's up for negotiation or it's not ?
    In fairness, I think that membership of the single market has been ruled out because the EU have said we can't retain membership without guaranteeing continued free movement of EU citizens to the UK.

    I really can't see a way through on the Ireland/NI border issue unless the EU allow ROI to negotiate directly with the UK on trade terms (which it won't).

    So why has that been ruled out ? Surely if the best deal on leaving the EU means accepting freedom of movement in exchange for full access to the single market that's what we should do ?
    Because many leavers want an end to freedom of movement (like me).
    http://uk.businessinsider.com/britain-must-accept-immigration-post-brexit-trade-deals-india-liam-fox-2017-11?r=US&IR=T
    Freedom of movement is not the same as a controlled immigration policy, in fact it is the opposite.
  • edited November 2017

    Southbank said:

    https://order-order.com/2017/11/27/10-people-whove-been-driven-mad-by-brexit/
    This is for the Leavers on this thread. Please do not read it if you are a Remainer as it will only upset you.

    You can certainly swap those names for others.
    Rather be on the same side as those 10 then Thomas Mair, Katie Hopkins and Nigel Farage.
  • Rothko said:

    Southbank said:

    https://order-order.com/2017/11/27/10-people-whove-been-driven-mad-by-brexit/
    This is for the Leavers on this thread. Please do not read it if you are a Remainer as it will only upset you.

    You can certainly swap those names for others.
    Rather be on the same side as those 10 then Thomas Mair, Katie Hopkins and Nigel Farage.
    Sure, your choice.
  • Rothko said:

    Southbank said:

    Jints said:

    se9addick said:

    Jints said:

    se9addick said:

    The UK government don't want to give a border solution, or a guarantee on EU citizens rights because they appreciate we are in the weaker position for trade deals. Therefore they wish to offer favourable solutions to both those problems as part of trade deal negotiations in the hope of getting a better trade deal. You can say the same about the divorce payment too, they don't want to agree that as they'd rather use the size of any offer as part of the leverage on a trade deal.

    That whole "nothing's decided until everything's decided" approach would only make sense if we hadn't already decided that membership of the single market and customs union are not he ruled out. Surely either everything's up for negotiation or it's not ?
    In fairness, I think that membership of the single market has been ruled out because the EU have said we can't retain membership without guaranteeing continued free movement of EU citizens to the UK.

    I really can't see a way through on the Ireland/NI border issue unless the EU allow ROI to negotiate directly with the UK on trade terms (which it won't).

    So why has that been ruled out ? Surely if the best deal on leaving the EU means accepting freedom of movement in exchange for full access to the single market that's what we should do ?
    Regarded as political suicide I suppose. It seems pretty clear that immigration was the single biggest concern of those voting Leave and I expect the Tory party would have a proper split.

    Because leaving the EU means leaving the EU and the EU having no jurisdiction over UK policy on immigration or anything else. It is what sovereignty means. Nobody on the EU side has ever said we could pick and chose between the 4 freedoms, so if we are out we are out of all of them, and if we are in we are in all of them.
    Better not do any trade deals, be part of any international organisation like the UN, WTO or Nato, because they all involve a dilution of sovereignty.
    The EU is unique in being a body which overrides sovereignty, it does not share it as the other international organisations do that you have cited. It is a supranational organisation, not an international one, and hence essentially and irredeemably undemocratic.

    This unique nature of the EU is not accepted of course by many Leavers, who insist it is democratic, something that even EU officials would blush to hear.
  • se9addick said:

    se9addick said:

    Jints said:

    se9addick said:

    The UK government don't want to give a border solution, or a guarantee on EU citizens rights because they appreciate we are in the weaker position for trade deals. Therefore they wish to offer favourable solutions to both those problems as part of trade deal negotiations in the hope of getting a better trade deal. You can say the same about the divorce payment too, they don't want to agree that as they'd rather use the size of any offer as part of the leverage on a trade deal.

    That whole "nothing's decided until everything's decided" approach would only make sense if we hadn't already decided that membership of the single market and customs union are not he ruled out. Surely either everything's up for negotiation or it's not ?
    In fairness, I think that membership of the single market has been ruled out because the EU have said we can't retain membership without guaranteeing continued free movement of EU citizens to the UK.

    I really can't see a way through on the Ireland/NI border issue unless the EU allow ROI to negotiate directly with the UK on trade terms (which it won't).

    So why has that been ruled out ? Surely if the best deal on leaving the EU means accepting freedom of movement in exchange for full access to the single market that's what we should do ?
    Because many leavers want an end to freedom of movement (like me).
    Fair enough, but we didn't have a referendum on whether or not we should end freedom of movement; we had a referendum on whether we should leave the EU. The two are not mutually exclusive even if they are in your mind.
    Well actually they are, as the EU will not accept an end to freedom of movement for any member state. They may be prepared to tinker with the rules, but that is all. If they were to accept it then they would be effectively signalling an end to the project of creating closer and closer union.
  • Southbank said:

    Southbank said:

    I’ll bang Seth’s drum here. I havn't heard one single credible suggestion over the border issue. On Peston the conservative MP Nadhim Zahawi is saying that a border decision can’t be decided until a trade deal is agreed because what type of border will ultimately depend on that trade deal. A logic of sorts until you accept the fact that our negotiating partners do not accept this. It is May and Davis saying that there needs to be flexibility. If indeed they do really want to move the negotiations on when the two parties meet in two weeks I suggest that this critical issue is a decent starting point.

    There can be no practical solution to the border issue outside of a new trade agreement, surely that is blindingly obvious to even the most ardent remainer. Or to put it another way, do you think the final border arrangement between the UK and France can be decided now as well? The EU is encouraging the Irish to put pressure on the UK to effectively overturn the referendum result. It is incredibly irresponsible to raise the stakes in this way and to use the Irish as a pawn in the bigger game.

    Re your last para. Had you listened to R4 Today Programme this morning you you would not have written the last 2 sentences, which is arrant hate filled nonsense. The Irish are driving this, not what you call "the EU".

    https://www.ft.com/content/9e11bdcc-c585-11e7-b2bb-322b2cb39656

    So the EU is not behind this at all? A little naive again I think ,Prague. You really are letting your prejudices get in the way.
    And what about my first point? Hiow could it be sorted outside of a trade deal?
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b09gbn0c#play

    01.53- 01.58, Laura Kuenssberg and especially Katya Adler. Listen carefully. Katya Adler is neither naive nor is she "pro-EU" in this argument although as a consummate professional she rarely reveals that.

    I think others have admirably answered your first question, you are behind with your responses, and anyway I wasted enough time digging out that clip in the probably vain hope that you might learn something from it.
  • edited November 2017
    Southbank said:

    https://order-order.com/2017/11/27/10-people-whove-been-driven-mad-by-brexit/
    This is for the Leavers on this thread. Please do not read it if you are a Remainer as it will only upset you.

    Carole Cadwallader is far from mad. She is a diligent journalist who is very close to fully exposing Aaron Banks true role in the referendum. And now she is on Mr Staines' case too, so no surprise he resorts to abuse.



    Tell me @Southbank, does Mr Banks and his lovely Russian wife speak for you?


This discussion has been closed.

Roland Out Forever!