Brexit and EU general chit chat

When making a post, please ensure it complies with this site's Main Rules at all times.
  • I'm the opposite Fidget. If we're to abide by common rules, we might as stay in the EU where we can shape them.

    Let's be realistic. For one thing, it isn't possible without the agreement of the EU countries, and that would come with a very high price that would make membership even less attractive than it is at present.

    Secondly, it would destroy democracy in the UK.

    Thirdly, it wouldn't solve anything at all. The discontent would still be there and it would grow, as it is in other EU countries.

    Mark Twain — 'Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.'

  • I'm gradually going through the document, but in the first section, it says we have a £96bn trade deficit with the EU. Everything should be up for debate considering we also pay so much into their coffers, so I agree that staying in the EU is not a realistic option, but disagree that we should just put up with May's option. Absolutely not!

  • I learned more about overcoming the stumbling block of an EU rule book straitjacketing trade deals with non-EU countries from a single suggestion from Donald Trump than from all the rest of the media, forums and politicians put together.

    It is this: to insist that we always have the option of a "carve out" when agreeing an export or import trade deal with a non-EU country. After all, it is no skin off the EU's nose. Indeed, it is none of their business. If the US wants us to sell them a product that we already sell to the EU but which the US wants made to a different spec, one which diverges from EU standards, that's our business, not the EU's. We must insist on the choice of saying to that non-EU country ......

    1) "no, we are content to stick with the EU specification, either because your spec is too low a standard or the value of your order isn't big enough to justify tooling up for a separate run (.... or whatever)

    or

    2) Yes, we'll supply you to that spec


    The same choice should also work for what we import from the US

    1) Sorry but we can buy it because it doesn't meet UK's own specification

    or

    2) Yes, we're okay with that specification

    May on Marr today was incapable of giving a straight answer to this major question. Then again, Marr was unwilling or unable to override her weasel bullshit and persist with the question. It's taken one heck of long time for the majority of the British people to finally realise what a turd of a leader she is.

  • I learned more about overcoming the stumbling block of an EU rule book straitjacketing trade deals with non-EU countries from a single suggestion from Donald Trump than all the rest of the media, forums and politicians put together. It is this: to ensure that we always have the option of a "carve out" when agreeing an export or import trade deal with a non-EU country.

    Yes, that would be nice except it would totally undermine the common market if each EU country could do its own thing with the rest of the world, if it suited. Hence, the EU will never agree.

    As per your golf club comments earlier, we are leaving the club and should be leaving the rules too that govern that club, instead we'll still get access to the green but "Out of hours" still pay fees to the club and won't have access to the bar at the end of a golfing session. Why bother using this club, especially as we're leaving it?

    You lost me on your 7d/7c comments etc. If you're quoting something from the white paper, then quote it. Stick it in a quote box. All your comments make no sense without context.

  • I loved the Sunday politics presenter asking one of May's minions about vacuum cleaners and whether we would be able to buy more powerful ones soon , after mountains of bull shit it became apparent, the answer is NO , we will on all matters it seems be beholding to our EU masters,so much for independence Mrs May.

    Mr Rees-Mogg also gave her a good kicking and it seems come the conference we will see all out civil war .

  • Or even starting tomorrow with votes on the trade and customs bills.

    On the vacuum cleaners etc, this is a clear illustration as any, that after Brexit if we go with May's plan, we will stay stay fully harmonised with EU rules and stay under the jurisdiction of the European court. That's not what I voted for.

    Up to page 30 of the white paper. It's slow going, its too far too muggy to be reading that rubbish.

  • Yes, that would be nice except it would totally undermine the common market if each EU country could do its own thing with the rest of the world, if it suited. Hence, the EU will never agree.

    As per your golf club comments earlier, we are leaving the club and should be leaving the rules too that govern that club, instead we'll still get access to the green but "Out of hours" still pay fees to the club and won't have access to the bar at the end of a golfing session. Why bother using this club, especially as we're leaving it?

    You lost me on your 7d/7c comments etc. If you're quoting something from the white paper, then quote it. Stick it in a quote box. All your comments make no sense without context.

    Sorry about 7d/7c. I had this crazy notion that you might have had a passing curiosity in taking a look at the White Paper by clicking on the link provided by Fidget. Besides which , Fidget had already spelled out 7c and d yesterday. And didn't you say you'd mull over the White Paper over the weekend (as if we were all waiting on tenterhooks for your verdict!). Is it just the heat or are trying to flex your muscles as "Moderator-In-Chief"?!

    re the Golf Club analogy, I suppose it only makes sense if you like the course. As for the bar, some clubs are happy to take your money and, if necessary, turn a blind eye to whether you're a member. Not sure of the context your are making when referring to "out of hours".; I haven't come across an out-of-hours restriction when paying green fees when using a club away from home where I'm a non-member

    re carve out a trade deal with a non-EU country: I agree that the EU won't abide by this. But think about it second: it means we can't sell a car to America unless the EU has approved the specification. And in Nigel Brook's import example, we can't buy a vacuum cleaner from Japan or China unless the EU has approved the specification. Surely we were completely crazy to be under the EU's thumb in that way and it is still crazy to even be considering staying under under the new "Brexit In Name Only" agreement. It's okay for Germany because it always was their own industry specification anyway. What percentage of British citizens realise it has always been that way for our membership of the EU and will continue under the new BINO? I'd guess only 10% max.

  • Sorry about 7d/7c. I had this crazy notion that you might have had a passing curiosity in taking a look at the White Paper by clicking on the link provided by Fidget. Besides which , Fidget had already spelled out 7c and d yesterday. And didn't you say you'd mull over the White Paper over the weekend (as if we were all waiting on tenterhooks for your verdict!). Is it just the heat or are trying to flex your muscles as "Moderator-In-Chief"?!

    We all have off days...:saint: And as for waiting on tenterhooks, better make them comfortable hooks, it could be a long wait.:P Fidget may have got through the paper in under a day, but it'll probably take me a week or longer.

    re carve out a trade deal with a non-EU country: I agree that the EU won't abide by this. But think about it second: it means we can't sell a car to America unless the EU has approved the specification. And in Nigel Brook's import example, we can't buy a vacuum cleaner from Japan or China unless the EU has approved the specification. Surely we were completely crazy to be under the EU's thumb in that way and it is still crazy to even be considering staying under under the new "Brexit In Name Only" agreement. It's okay for Germany because it always was their own industry specification anyway. What percentage of British citizens realise it has always been that way for our membership of the EU and will continue under the new BINO? I'd guess only 10% max.

    Exactly.

    If we abide by EU rules, that means applying those same rules to trade with other non-EU countries. They'll never allow us a "carve out."

    Of the bits of white paper I have read, it makes clear. We will be in full harmonisation with EU rules aka the common rule book aka the shared rule book, or whatever other tosh can be used to describe it. And despite the White Paper carping on about it being the UK parliament which will decide whether it abides by these rules or not, that is all nonsense too. Right at the beginning of the paper it says the UK, by treaty, will abide by EU rules. Our parliament cannot and will not be allowed to change the rules which govern 27 other countries.

  • If you look at this web page, there are lots of sections of 'The Alternative White Paper', by David Davis and his team.

    I haven't read them all yet but surely anything will be an improvement on May's version.

    Links to the Alternative White Paper

    I note that UKIP has also had a resurgence of support. Brexit isn't dead ... yet!

    Mark Twain — 'Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.'

  • I'm just on the second excerpt of DD's version of the paper and you can tell its written by him. It's Brexit. The first excerpt talks about "mutual recognition" whereas May's version talks about the "common/shared rule book." A "slight" difference...X/

    May's version hasn't just been written in the last few days, this has obviously been ongoing for months. DD must feel sick. He's been used as a donkey and taken for a total fool by May. Why did she employ him, if she wasn't going to allow him to do his job?

    The fact that DD's main Brexit negotiator was taken out of his department last year and drafted to No10, showed which way this was going even then.

    I feel sorry for DD. He must feel totally betrayed by May. There are little white lies, then there is total betrayal. DD worked in the SAS and their motto was, "who dares, wins." He's not, despite his outwardly gentile nature, is someone I would want to piss off.

  • That second excerpt is interesting. It talks about "outcome equivalence" and you can see DD's thinking here. Here's the quote about it:

    Outcome equivalence is when two parties agree to achieve the same outcome with flexibility as to the method by which that outcome is achieved.

    Not abiding by the common rule book, but saying that ours and the EU's standards are high and we want to keep them high, but we make go about things differently. That's Brexit in a nutshell:!:

  • Not abiding by the common rule book, but saying that ours and the EU's standards are high and we want to keep them high, but we may go about things differently. That's Brexit in a nutshell:!:

    That's an insightful summing up.

    It is hideously demonstrated in reverse, by that smug treasury fink on Sunday's politics show, who countered the Leavers' argument that we were being forced to comply with EU standards/specifications when importing and exporting to non-EU countries, by claiming that Britain contributed to the development of the EU standards and seeks proudly to maintain those standards.

    What a creepy post-rationalisation for political-economic imprisonment. Talk about sleeping with the enemy!

    The consequence of this demented hypocrisy is that, for example, if we invented a light bulb that, compared with the current enforced EU standard, was brighter for longer,yet consumed only 5% more energy (offset by a longer life), we would not be permitted to sell it to non-EU countries without EU approval.

    This is Germany (and maybe Macron's France too) commercially lobotomising EU member states that might be too competitive; in other words, a cartel of winners within a cartel of losers. It's one thing for Britain to be forcibly lobotomised but quite another to pursue a DIY lobotomy.

    Thus, Theresa May's contribution to Britain is to have turned the joke about turkeys voting for Christmas into a reality.

  • This isn't over by a long shot. The remainers have cried wolf too often to be believed again, ie. instant recession and economic armageddon if we voted Leave. It has continued to this day. Brexiters won't give up, just as remainers will never up. The EU itself will ensure that Brexiters increase in number, as they are doing throughout the whole EU.

    If we are forced to choose between full EU or full non-EU, then common sense and logic says we would be better following our biggest trading partners (ie. non-EU) and kick the declining trade with the EU into touch.

    In business, your best customer gets the best terms. It appears to work in reverse with the EU, ie. the best customers pay the most!

    The EU policy is unsustainable where a few countries pay and the remainder get paid to be members but still retain all the same 'benefits'. It guarantees that (eventually) they will all be bankrupted together, or the donor countries will leave as the EU expansionism continues and more recipients (costs) are added in their lust for power and control.

    As for the UK losing jobs (in the event of a hard Brexit), that is what happens now while in the EU. At least Brexit would prevent UK taxpayers being the ones who pay the bribes and cheap loans that enable these dirty tactics.

    Mark Twain — 'Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.'

  • The consequence of this demented hypocrisy is that, for example, if we invented a light bulb that, compared with the current enforced EU standard, was brighter for longer,yet consumed only 5% more energy (offset by a longer life), we would not be permitted to sell it to non-EU countries without EU approval.

    That's right, which is why Trump's idea of a carve up under May's plan is nonsense. We either abide by single market rules which May has renamed the common/shared rule book, or we don't.

    When was the last time you could read under a decent light? I still have a dozen old lightbulbs left.:)

  • This is Germany (and maybe Macron's France too) commercially lobotomising EU member states that might be too competitive; in other words, a cartel of winners within a cartel of losers. It's one thing for Britain to be forcibly lobotomised but quite another to pursue a DIY lobotomy.

    I'm going to read all the rest of the alternative white paper excepts today, but the language between the two documents is very different. May's document talks about respecting the integrity of the single market and customs union, DD's document talks about doing what is in the UK's best interests to reach a mutually beneficial agreement. Says it all really.

  • The EU policy is unsustainable where a few countries pay and the remainder get paid to be members but still retain all the same 'benefits'. It guarantees that (eventually) they will all be bankrupted together, or the donor countries will leave as the EU expansionism continues and more recipients (costs) are added in their lust for power and control.

    It all went wrong with the ascension of the Eastern European countries into the EU. Before they joined, the Western European countries were broadly equal-ish. Germany was paying for its reunification then and so was not as dominate as it is today.

    As much as Britons love to go to France, Spain etc for a holiday, there aren't millions of us who want to live on the continent permanently and vice-versa. But Eastern Europe was under the Russian yolk for half a century and in so many ways, including economically, the Eastern European countries were behind the western ones. Therein lies the problem.

    At that point, the EU became about lifting the eastern countries up to the standard of the western ones and while Germany and France and others put temporary seven year controls on Eastern European migration, Tony Blair had other ideas... The rest is history.

  • I still have a dozen old lightbulbs left.

    Whilst I would encourage the use of lower energy bulbs, especially LED, we should be free to make or import old fasioned incandescents if there's a demand for them. Some demand is regulatory in that rotating machinery HAS to be lit with incandescents to prevent strobe effect from making a machine appear stationary when it is actually running.

    Same goes for vacuum cleaners with high power motors and powerful ovens.

    We only need to make a product the EU standard if we're ACTUALLY going to sell it in the EU. Otherwise we should be free to make it to the standard that the customer wants, that might be CE or it might be something else entirely. e.g. UL and FCC.

    On the practical side manufacturers that sell world-wide make their products to pass all the main certifications as it's often just simpler and more cost effective. It doesn't need to be made a law.

  • I watched May on Andrew Marr, and she was pathetic. She more or less said that everything is non-negotiable with the EU.

    It may cause short term hardship on the UK (and even harder on the EU), but it's time we walked away from the EU. It would also stand us in good stead when negotiating with other countries, that we will not accept a bad deal ... from anyone!

    Most of our trade is done under WTO, and the taxpayer funded perks obtained by the 5% of UK businesses that trade with the EU is coming to an end. It will help our non-EU trade (which is the majority of our trade) enormously.

    Saw the Marr programmable last night.:thumbdown:

    Although Rob Alka didn't think Marr did a good job, I disagree with him. May did not want to answer his question when the alternative plan was devised.

    As Trump demonstrated with his hand holding her again, she is too weak. She ain't no Thatcher.

  • We only need to make a product the EU standard if we're ACTUALLY going to sell it in the EU. Otherwise we should be free to make it to the standard that the customer wants, that might be CE or it might be something else entirely. e.g. UL and FCC.

    I fully agree, but under May's plan that won't happen as we'll be tied into the newly renamed "common" or "shared" (which is nothing of the sort) rulebook aka EU rules.

Participate now!

Don’t have an account yet? Register yourself now and be a part of our community!