Consequences Of Brexit [Part 9] Read First Post Before Posting

[tinfoilhat]

27 minutes ago, West 77 said:

I more or less agree.

An amusing contribution. 

 

I remember the EU telling Britain the WA supported by Theresa May couldn't be changed or amended.  I understand how the real World works.   

Yeah, Boris agreed to a previously suggested deal that May dismissed.

[L00b]

4 hours ago, West 77 said:

An amusing contribution. 

That it? Cat got your tongue?

4 hours ago, West 77 said:

I remember the EU telling Britain the WA supported by Theresa May couldn't be changed or amended.  I understand how the real World works.   

Then you must also remember that the WA supported by Theresa May was less advantageous to the EU, than Johnson's "oven ready" version?

 

I sure hope your memory is not too selective 

[whiteowl]

A lot has been said over the last 4 years about free trade agreements with Australia and New Zealand (I assume as some throwback to empire or commonwealth or something).

 

I see they've joined the RCEP trading bloc today - I wonder what effect that will have on the above.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-54949260

Edited November 15, 2020 by whiteowl

[tinfoilhat]

8 hours ago, West 77 said:

Don't you mean Boris voted in favour of Theresa May's agreement with the EU? 

 

If you do mean that, then Boris and many Tory MPs voted in favour of the original WA which they had previously voted against because there was a danger that no Brexit would happen when it became clear the Parliament at the time would block a no deal which was the default legal position.,

No, I don’t mean that. 

 

Theresa May was offered a deal that involved a customs border along the Irish Sea and she dismissed it for fear of breaking up the union. Boris thought that was a good idea, until he decided it wasn’t and break the deal he signed.

[Car Boot]

8 hours ago, whiteowl said:

A lot has been said over the last 4 years about free trade agreements with Australia and New Zealand (I assume as some throwback to empire or commonwealth or something).

 

I see they've joined the RCEP trading bloc today - I wonder what effect that will have on the above.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-54949260

Does the RCEP have its own currency, flag, anthem, four freedoms for business, common agricultural policy, parliament, council,  court, five presidents, commissioners, bank, political integration and geographical expansionist agenda of the explicitly capitalist EU?

Edited November 16, 2020 by Car Boot

[El Cid]

9 hours ago, whiteowl said:

I see they've joined the RCEP trading bloc today - I wonder what effect that will have on the above.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-54949260

Boris probably waited until Trump was kicked out of office, we wouldnt want to upset the USA.

[Cyclecar]

A serious - non partisan - question regarding the fishing issue.  And I do understand the territorial waters law.

 

If we get to Jan 1st and there is NO DEAL, then will there be NO FISHING by EU boats outside their own teritorial waters?

Edited November 16, 2020 by Cyclecar
Spelling

[L00b]

1 hour ago, Cyclecar said:

A serious - non partisan - question regarding the fishing issue.  And I do understand the territorial waters law.

 

If we get to Jan 1st and there is NO DEAL, then will there be NO FISHING by EU boats outside their own teritorial waters?

Why could EU boats not fish in international waters?

 

If you meant 'no fishing by EU boats in UK territorial waters', that makes sense...but then, besides remembering who owns the bulk of UK fishing rights (EU owners -Dutch & Spanish IIRC- plus the five 'Rich List' families): fishing really is an inconsequential side-show. It's a 0.1% drop in the 99.9% ocean of UK economy (0.1% is actual ratio quoted in articles)...and relies on fast and frictionless access to the EU for selling the vast majority of the catch! (80%, as I recall).

 

[/non-partisan answer] 

 

If the UK really wants a deal, it needs to do it this week. So look for movement by the end of the week...or if no (or still insufficient) movement and no-deal looking still more of a certainty, then confirmation that Johnson & Co. have been playing the no-deal clock all along (as I've been suspecting since 2017, and still suspect now).

 

 

Edited November 16, 2020 by L00b

[Magilla]

17 minutes ago, West 77 said:

Lets be honest the Northern Ireland situation has been used by both the Remainers and the EU in order to attempt to keep the whole of the UK imprisoned inside the EU.

Brexit means there has to be a border, why don't you tell us where you thought it was going to be?

 

The reality,  leavers are bitter because the Northern Ireland situation highlights just how clueless they are and how they really never had the remotest clue what they were voting for.

 

17 minutes ago, West 77 said:

Agreements already made are open to misinterpretation which is one of the reasons Boris thought it was necessary to bring in the Internal Market bill.

There is no misinterpretation. Boris lied and then realised his lies were about to go down in a ball of flames.

 

The IM bill makes it impossible to ensure the integrity of the IM. A complete own goal.

 

[Car Boot]

4 minutes ago, Magilla said:

Brexit means there has to be a border, why don't you tell us where you thought it was going to be?

 

The reality,  leavers are bitter because the Northern Ireland situation highlights just how clueless they are and how they really never had the remotest clue what they were voting for.

 

There is no misinterpretation. Boris lied and then realised his lies were about to go down in a ball of flames.

 

The IM bill makes it impossible to ensure the integrity of the IM. A complete own goal.

 

There will be no hard border in Ireland. 

 

The British are not going to impose a hard border.

 

We will see if the EU erects a hard border to protect the profits of Thatcher's Single Market.