FrancieBrady wrote: » Newsnight leading with 'is there a culture of misogyny inside Labour' after Jeremy's muttered comment. UK is really in crisis.
Christy42 wrote: » "Nothing is decided until everything is decided". They also made claims to want to avoid a border and yet have put every piece of bull in the way of that. This gives a bit of security to EU citizens in the UK to sort out their plans if no deal happens.
RobMc59 wrote: » I think you`re a deluded as theresa may:rolleyes
Professor Moriarty wrote: » There was a good discussion on Newsnight about this last night. Essentially, the point was made that immigration continues to be a driving force behind Brexit. However, the waterbed effect is beginning to kick in. So, as they reduce immigration from EU countries decreases, immigration from non-EU countries will increase. Thus rendering Britain "less white" as Emily Maitlis pointed out - which won't go down at all well with many Leave voters.
Phonehead wrote: » You clearly haven't done any research or read/listened to any analysis on the consequences of a full Brexit crash out. Yes Ireland will suffer but the UK will suffer catastrophically. I don't believe you are a genuine contributor to this conversation if I'm honest. You've ignored all well thought out responses to your nonsense and still best the same drum
Capt'n Midnight wrote: » And it may well be the reason why Corbyn wants Brexit. The irony. Both sides in the UK need to look at what's happened in the EU since they triggered Article 50. Italy has rolled back on immigration and fudged a budget. Look at Poland, Hungry , Spain and Germany. It's possible to make small changes to the system from within, the only problem is that there are 27 other countries who also have a say in the process. But it means there aren't abrupt changes out of nowhere.
First Up wrote: » One of the main drivers in creating the Single Market was a lady called Margaret Thatcher.
RobMc59 wrote: » I think it`s a negotiation between two parties-I never suggested it was an advantage for anyone .If there was any spinning it certainly was`nt by me.
prawnsambo wrote: » So instead of both legs being chopped off, only one is, with a stay of execution on the other. Not sure how you can spin this as some kind of advantage for the UK.
RobMc59 wrote: » I think you`re a deluded as theresa may:rolleyes:-it`s negotiation which is in the interests of both parties-purely business-what are you trying to suggest?
Nody wrote: » brickster69 wrote: » Kick the can down the road all they want but eventually they will accept they need access to the City No, all they need is for the existing derivatives to be cleared out and the new once opened in the relevant European legal entities that the banks have opened already. You appear to have missed the part were UK entities will not be allowed to sell any new products into EU; i.e. no new derivatives and EU will allow derivatives to be transferred from UK to a relevant EU regulated entity instead. That's exactly done to ensure minimal disruption while at the same time shutting down the derivative trade for EU countries in London; exactly the opposite of what your conclusion is.
brickster69 wrote: » Kick the can down the road all they want but eventually they will accept they need access to the City
Podge_irl wrote: » The announcement is the closest thing you will see diplomatically to "we'll allow them this once, but the idiots better get their stuff sorted soon". I do not know what about the UK's approach makes you think they would in any way have the capability or desire to engage in such arrangements. This is the EU's contingency plan - the same plan that the UK has only just started to actually look at properly. It is even noted in the document that "This is subject to the UK conferring equivalent rights to EU air carriers, as well as the UK ensuring conditions of fair competition." Nothing has been arranged or agreed with the UK.
Leroy42 wrote: » It is not so much that I think it is a cave in to the UK, I understand (or at least think I do!) the reasons behind it. What it does do, IMO, is show that the EU is indeed willing to bend when it suits them, that all things are possible if the price is right/costs are enough. I fear that it will simply embolden the Brexiteers in the UK, who will see such measures, as they have in all previous cases, as a weaknesses to be exploited. Thus the likes of IDS, JRM etc can claim that they were right that the EU will not carry through on the threat of allowing UK to leave without a deal as the chaos would simply be too much for the EU to handle. As such, the UK simply needs to hold fast and wait for the inevitable last minute negotiations and agreement.
The “no deal + “ fantasy is that if we just had the guts to walk away, refuse to sign the Withdrawal Agreement with the backstop in it, and withhold a good half of the money the Prime Minister promised this time last year, capitals, suddenly realising we were serious, would come running for a series of mini deals which assured full trading continuity in all key sectors on basically unchanged Single Market and Customs Union terms. I don’t know what tablets these people are taking, but I must confess I wish I were on them. It will be said of them as it was said of the Bourbons, I think: “they have learned nothing and they have forgotten nothing”. The reality is that if the deal on the table falls apart because we have said “no”, there will not be some smooth rapid suite of mini side deals – from aviation to fisheries, from road haulage to data, from derivatives to customs and veterinary checks, from medicines to financial services, as the EU affably sits down with this Prime Minister or another one. The 27 will legislate and institute unilaterally temporary arrangements which assure continuity where they need it, and cause us asymmetric difficulties where they can. And a UK Government, which knows the efficacy of most of its contingency planning depends, to a greater or lesser degree on others’ actions out of its control, will then have to react – no doubt with a mixture of inevitable compliance and bellicose retaliation.We already see the next generation of fantasies out there, and it’s now just a matter of time before a Tory leadership contender offers them publicly as the Houdini act. A suite of very rapid legal mini deals, accompanied by the existing Withdrawal Agreement deal on citizen’ rights, the complete dropping of the backstop, and only paying the remainder of the 39billion cheque when the mini deals have turned into the miraculous Canada (with lots of pluses) deal. All of which must happen in months. But of course… To which the EU answer will be a calm but clear “Dream on. You still want a transition? All existing terms and conditions apply. And when it comes to any FTA – deep or shallower – “nothing is agreed till everything is agreed” – and that still includes the fish”. They may put it slightly more politely. But not much, in the circumstances. And to anyone who tells me – and we’ll hear plenty of it in the coming weeks, I assure you – “but the EU stands to lose access to London’s capital markets and their companies will suffer unless they do our quick and dirty “no deal” deal”, I think I would just say “even the last 30 months have evidently still not taught you how the EU functions: try again in another 30…”, If we lurch, despite Parliament wishing to avoid it, towards a “no deal”, with delusions it can be “managed” into a quick and dirty FTA, that will not end happily or quickly.
brickster69 wrote: » So the EU have caved on Derivatives ! Surprise surprise. They left it late because in the next few days the City would of had to give 3 months notice to transfer all positions and the EU take them on themselves. Aside from obviously having to rewrite millions of new contracts ( very expensive ) where would they go ??????????? Kick the can down the road all they want but eventually they will accept they need access to the City
The latest measures fall far short of the “managed no-deal” or mini-deals that Brexit supporters hoped for. The measures “will be temporary in nature, limited in scope and adopted unilaterally by the EU”, the commission said, to underscore it would make decisions in the EU’s interests. Measures include: British airlines would have the right to fly point to point, eg London to Paris and back, but would lose rights to fly between EU airports.EU banks and financial institutions can continue to clear derivatives in London for one year, a step described by the City of London corporation as “vital clarity”, while it lamented the absence of steps to address the “significant risks to data transfers” and protect other contracts. In a softening of approach following pressure from EU governments, British trucks can continue bringing goods into the EU until the end of 2019, as long as the UK grants equivalent rights to EU lorry drivers. The emergency plans will not apply to the British overseas territory of Gibraltar, reflecting the limited nature of the measures, which are done to secure EU interests.
Bit cynical wrote: » Christy42 wrote: » Note that citizen rights are directly dependent on the UK reciprocating. Well I think the UK have already said that EU citizens rights will be protected in the event of no deal some time ago.
Christy42 wrote: » Note that citizen rights are directly dependent on the UK reciprocating.
1st dalkey dalkey wrote: » I see that there has been some kind of agreement on freight crossing each others territory. Once sealed it will not be subject to further customs check. But there has been no agreement on any special treatment for sealed truck at Dover. In fact the UK government has apparently pre-booked space on ferries from Dover for its own providers. This will impact our 'landbridge', leading to huge queues and long waits. Yet our own ferry company, ICG (Irish Ferries), has decided to remove their ferry from Rosslare and operate from Dublin to France instead, a much longer crossing. Wonder what drove that decision.
Sir Ivan Rogers wrote: The reality is that if the deal on the table falls apart because we have said “no”, there will not be some smooth rapid suite of mini side deals – from aviation to fisheries, from road haulage to data, from derivatives to customs and veterinary checks, from medicines to financial services, as the EU affably sits down with this Prime Minister or another one.The 27 will legislate and institute unilaterally temporary arrangements which assure continuity where they need it, and cause us asymmetric difficulties where they can. And a UK Government, which knows the efficacy of most of its contingency planning depends, to a greater or lesser degree on others’ actions out of its control, will then have to react – no doubt with a mixture of inevitable compliance and bellicose retaliation.
downcow wrote: » Maybe an honest analysis of what checks are currently happening where and how these could be developed on all 4 sites with real sensitivity to those who feel their cultures and identity are deeply untwined in these borders ie unionists and nationalists on this island. Rather than the current we only care about nationalists which inevitably creates a we only care about unionists attitude on other side. It has been very badly handled by both sides I think a referendum up in north would now go basically orange and green which was not the case.
1st dalkey dalkey wrote: » Yet our own ferry company, ICG (Irish Ferries), has decided to remove their ferry from Rosslare and operate from Dublin to France instead, a much longer crossing. Wonder what drove that decision.
1st dalkey dalkey wrote: » "Just between EU airports? Would the British Airways flight from London City to New York that stops in Shannon be impacted?" I don't think so. Unless they tried to pick up passengers in Shannon. They can overfly, land and deliver passengers, but not pick up passengers.
