Consequences Of Brexit [Part 8] Read First Post Before Posting

[Tony]

27 minutes ago, L00b said:

UK votes to leave the EU primarily for ending the EU freedom of movement principle that permits (allegedly so many) 'unskilled' EU27 migrants to come to the UK, besides promising the international trading moon on an 'Empire2.0' stick post-Brexit. UK accordingly submits an FTA proposal including UK<>AU FoM to AU...

 

...which AU rejects because that would permit (potentially so many) unskilled UK migrants to come to AU.

 

And you don't see the irony in this outcome?

 

OK 

 

 

Not really in the way you seem to. The irony is that you seem to be  laughing that the UK can implement similar immigration controls to Australia's, which was a major plank of the Leave campaign.  

 

In this case the irony is on you  for bringing it up L00b. There is no reason to think that the UK is entitled to any exceptionalism beyond that which can be agreed between two willing negotiating partners such as the UK and Australia, or the UK and the EU27. Whatever is agreed can suit the circumstances of the individual nations with compromise as appropriate to the overall negotiating objectives. It's strange to imagine that all UK citizens should be able to wander in and out of Australia without Australia agreeing to it, but it's not ironic.

[L00b]

1 hour ago, Tony said:

Not really in the way you seem to. The irony is that you seem to be  laughing that the UK can implement similar immigration controls to Australia's, which was a major plank of the Leave campaign.  

Nice strawman, champ.

 

I'm not laughing at the notion that "the UK can implement similar immigration controls to Australia", particularly since the UK has had exactly that in place since 2008 in respect of third country nationals.

 

I'm laughing at the UK getting a dose of well-deserved karma.

2 hours ago, Tony said:

In this case the irony is on you  for bringing it up L00b. 

You'd like it to be so, I'm sure. Regrettably, however:

2 hours ago, Tony said: There is no reason to think that the UK is entitled to any exceptionalism beyond that which can be agreed between two willing negotiating partners such as the UK and Australia, or the UK and the EU27. Whatever is agreed can suit the circumstances of the individual nations with compromise as appropriate to the overall negotiating objectives. It's strange to imagine that all UK citizens should be able to wander in and out of Australia without Australia agreeing to it, but it's not ironic.

So strange, and clearly beyond the realms of imagination... 

 

...that your Ministers have long been pushing it openly as part of their post-Brexit strategy, and duly embodied it in that FTA proposal which Australia just rejected.

 

 

 

[lottiecass]

6 hours ago, L00b said:

Nice strawman, champ.

 

I'm not laughing at the notion that "the UK can implement similar immigration controls to Australia", particularly since the UK has had exactly that in place since 2008 in respect of third country nationals.

 

I'm laughing at the UK getting a dose of well-deserved karma.

You'd like it to be so, I'm sure. Regrettably, however:

So strange, and clearly beyond the realms of imagination... 

 

...that your Ministers have long been pushing it openly as part of their post-Brexit strategy, and duly embodied it in that FTA proposal which Australia just rejected.

 

 

 

Australia has had this immigration rule for a long time, they don't want/need unskilled labour and it applies to every country.

[Tony]

 

21 hours ago, L00b said:

Nice strawman, champ.

 

I'm not laughing at the notion that "the UK can implement similar immigration controls to Australia", particularly since the UK has had exactly that in place since 2008 in respect of third country nationals.

 

I'm laughing at the UK getting a dose of well-deserved karma.

You'd like it to be so, I'm sure. Regrettably, however:

So strange, and clearly beyond the realms of imagination... 

 

...that your Ministers have long been pushing it openly as part of their post-Brexit strategy, and duly embodied it in that FTA proposal which Australia just rejected.

 

 

 

It's crystal clear really L00b. There is no karma, it's no more than two nations deciding what they feel is best for themselves which they may or may not adapt depending on a forthcoming negotiation.

 

You might also want to read those articles again because neither of them say that the UK expects free movement  UK<>AUS and both of them say that Australia won't be giving it, both two days ago and in September. You seem to be in the hard and fast predictions game which is a bit ambitious given the experience of the last few years and an inability to read the articles you're using to make the predictions.  

Edited January 8, 2020 by Tony

[L00b]

1 hour ago, Tony said:

 

It's crystal clear really L00b. There is no karma, it's no more than two nations deciding what they feel is best for themselves which they may or may not adapt depending on a forthcoming negotiation.

If it's so crystal clear, then how did your Trade Minister get it so wrong?

1 hour ago, Tony said:

You might also want to read those articles again because neither of them say that the UK expects free movement  UK<>AUS and both of them say that Australia won't be giving it, both two days ago and in September. 

I read them just fine then, and again yesterday, that's why I posted them:

Quote

Tories’ Liz Truss expects UK to secure two-way trade and visa-free work deals after Brexit

You realise that 'visa-free work' means the exact same thing as 'free movement', right?

 

Then again perhaps not, since e.g. you seemingly weren't aware of the UK's own, 11 year-old Australia-style immigration rules.

1 hour ago, Tony said:

You seem to be in the hard and fast predictions game which is a bit ambitious given the experience of the last few years and an inability to read the articles you're using to make the predictions.  

No ambition, nor any credit required: a basic understanding of Law, premised on an acknowledgement of the equally-basic fact that the EU is a legal rules-based construct, makes it fairly easy to predict consequences and outcomes, based on which type/variant of Brexit is sought by the UK.

 

In that context, suffice to say nothing (Brexit-related) in the last few years, least of all the serial brickwall-headbutting of British governments and politicians against 'leaving the EU', has come as a surprise here. Alright, bar perhaps how much rope the EU27 have given May and Johnson since March '19...

 

...but that should now thankfully run out in a little over 3 weeks, when the gloves finally come off (again no ambition nor any credit to that prediction: it's the plain amd unavoidable consequence of the UK becoming a third party country at that point, through loss of relevance and applicability of TEU/ECJ etc., i.e. a competitor rather than a member).

 

 

Edited January 8, 2020 by L00b

[Tony]

This is why many people don't bother here any more. Any chance of conversation is met with a salami-sliced response that reinterprets, distorts and misrepresents in order to win some point that the other person didn't make and cares even less about. It's playground hair pulling and definitely not Oxford Union debate.

 

The simple truth is that UK <> AUS free movement of any kind is a matter for negotiation, always was, always will be.  It's negotiation. Anyone outside the negotiation who is making predictions or having hard expectations really should have a look at themselves, especially on SF. 

 

Find me somebody (apart from you and your point scoring) who cares about AUS travel not being visa free post Brexit and I'll buy you a pint.

 

For what it's worth I would be very surprised if there was not some form of free movement negotiated for certain professions and / or sectors depending on what the other is looking for. 

Edited January 8, 2020 by Tony

[Gormenghast]

36 minutes ago, Tony said:

This is why many people don't bother here any more. Any chance of conversation is met with a salami-sliced response that reinterprets, distorts and misrepresents in order to win some point that the other person didn't make and cares even less about. It's playground hair pulling and definitely not Oxford Union debate.

 

[L00b]

1 hour ago, Tony said:

This is why many people don't bother here any more. Any chance of conversation is met with a salami-sliced response that reinterprets, distorts and misrepresents in order to win some point that the other person didn't make and cares even less about. It's playground hair pulling and definitely not Oxford Union debate.

 

The simple truth is that UK <> AUS free movement of any kind is a matter for negotiation, always was, always will be.  It's negotiation. Anyone outside the negotiation who is making predictions or having hard expectations really should have a look at themselves, especially on SF. 

 

Find me somebody (apart from you and your point scoring) who cares about AUS travel not being visa free post Brexit and I'll buy you a pint.

 

For what it's worth I would be very surprised if there was not some form of free movement negotiated for certain professions and / or sectors depending on what the other is looking for. 

Who's been "reinterpreting, distorting and misrepresenting" in order to win some point that the other person I didn't make and care even less about, here?

 

I made a simple point about the irony of the UK deciding to leave the EU to stop EU27 unskilled moving there under the EU FoM, then rocking up to Oz with an FTA proposal including UK-Oz FoM, only for Oz to turn around and go 'thanks but no, we don't want UK unskilled moving here'.

 

The rest ever since, is down to your deflecting. Feel free to stop deflecting, at which time I'll be more than happy to engage your arguments.

 

I've not made any predictions about UK-Oz FoM (or FTA, for that matter), btw. Couldn't care less about how the UK and Oz go about resuming trade: this is the consequences of Brexit thread, wherein the UK's double standards about FoM makes it worth a mention.

 

I've not made any predictions about UK-EU27 FoM post-Brexit either, AFAIR. As you rightly note, that is still all up for negotiation at this time.

 

However I can easily predict that the UK will not enjoy FoM of capital (freely moving £s in/out of EU), nor FoM of services (freely selling UK services into the EU) without maintaining FoM of persons for EU27: under EU primary legislation, they are not dissociable from each other, it's all-or-nothing.

 

A (really basic) point repeatedly made to the UK by Barnier for 3+ years now, and again today by Von der Leyden: that's exactly how and why cakeism (Brexited UK maintaining FoM of goods/capital/services without FoM of people), that was so very publicly and loudly promised by Leavers during the referendum campaign in 2016, could be confidently predicted to fail at the time, has failed ever since, and can be confidently predicted to continue failing for as long as the EU remains based on these 4 pillars.

 

Brexit means Brexit: you knew what you were voting for 

Edited January 8, 2020 by L00b

[Tony]

See what I mean? 

 

Probably not.

[L00b]

7 minutes ago, Tony said:

See what I mean? 

 

Probably not.

Which is it this time, Tony: too playgroundesque or too Oxfordian?