CelticRambler wrote: » I can quite believe that Downing Street might be thinking along those lines, already planning to flagrantly ignore the "Irish Border" part of the WA, and expecting the EU to blink at the 11th hour. What they won't be expecting is for the EU to remind them, at 1 minute to midnight on the 31st of December, that (a) the WA also included commitments regarding the status of UK and EU citizens in their respective host countries, which immediately become void if one part of the treaty is torn up; (b) the EU has decided to unilaterally apply certain concessions to UK-based operators, e.g. in respect of cross-channel transport by truck and plane, which can [and will] be suspended with effect from 00:01 01/01/2021; and (c) if the UK cannot be trusted to stand by agreements it has already signed, then it will be treated as an untrustworthy third country in respect of every aspect of ongoing arrangements. This'll have the effect of pissing off one hell of a lot of British voters, trying to travel or do business over and into the New Year, with or without children and animals, and you can be damn sure that the EU will have its spokespeople primed to say to every UK journalist: "We had an agreement, and Boris Johnson tore it up. If we can't trust him with a simple three-point treaty, there's no point in discussing things further." Don't forget: the EU has 'form' in this regard - ask Switzerland!
Capt'n Midnight wrote: » Besides it's not an EU court. European Court of Human Rights includes Greenland and Russian
Jizique wrote: » Brit public will not believe the EU
listermint wrote: » I'm actually not even sure what they are up to at this stage. I mean who's the audience now? Domestic stuff was won. Is this guff for international audience... The ones they want to do deals with.... It's absolutely perplexing if anything I'd firmly believe it's to make as much money out of disaster capitalism and then jaunt off into the sunset.
Speaking to reporters in Belfast, ahead of his meetings at Stormont House, he said that there would be no border down the Irish Sea after the Brexit transition period. Mr Lewis said: "The United Kingdom is going to be one area and all will be able to benefit from our future global trade deals. "I appreciate what Michel Barnier says, he's a very good man trying to do a good job for the EU. "But this is also the man who said we couldn't open the Withdrawal Agreement. "Our Prime Minister got that agreement open, got a new agreement. We've got it through parliament, we've left the European Union. "And we're going to build for a better economy for the whole of the United Kingdom as one. "We are absolutely clear. As a UK government, we will not be having a border down the Irish Sea."
interlocked wrote: » The UK imports 30% of its food from the EU and another 10% from countries that has an agreement with the EU. I'm not even mentioning JIT for the likes of the motor industry. The EU can destroy the UK economy within a month by simple checks on the border. The UK doesn't have a leg to stand on. Reality is either going to hit them between the eyes or Cummings is completely off the reservation.
Leroy42 wrote: » Fine, but when dealing with a crazy person what is the normal course of action? It isn't to intensify the situation but to try to calm it down.And the UK see the EU last ditch change, through Leo's intervention, as proof that pushing things to the limit will work. I think fundamentally, the UK don't believe the EU will risk a crash out. And it's not either WA and FTA or No Deal. The UK want better terms that what is being offered, know they have little traditional leverage and so need to do something unconventional. They are factoring in that the EU will not want a trade war, and they know they cal rely on the likes of the Express and Telegraph, not to mention LauraK, to get their spin out. They then are 'forced' to sign a less than perfect, but still brilliant, trade deal with the US to start afresh given how badly treated they were by the undemocratic EU than simply punished the UK for daring to listen to the will of the people.
interlocked wrote: » The UK imports 30% of its food from the EU and another 10% from countries that has an agreement with the EU.
swampgas wrote: » Possibly, and I'm speculating wildly here, they are counting on the basic decency of the EU side and trying to use it as leverage? Surely (they might imagine) the EU wouldn't inflict food shortages on the British people, just because of a political disagreement?
CelticRambler wrote: » I can quite believe that Downing Street might be thinking along those lines, already planning to flagrantly ignore the "Irish Border" part of the WA, and expecting the EU to blink at the 11th hour. What they won't be expecting is for the EU to remind them, at 1 minute to midnight on the 31st of December, that (a) the WA also included commitments regarding the status of UK and EU citizens in their respective host countries, which immediately become void if one part of the treaty is torn up; (b) the EU has decided to unilaterally apply certain concessions to UK-based operators, e.g. in respect of cross-channel transport by truck and plane, which can [and will] be suspended with effect from 00:01 01/01/2021; and (c) if the UK cannot be trusted to stand by agreements it has already signed, then it will be treated as an untrustworthy third country in respect of every aspect of ongoing arrangements. Don't forget: the EU has 'form' in this regard - ask Switzerland!
swampgas wrote: » ... Surely (they might imagine) the EU wouldn't inflict food shortages on the British people, just because of a political disagreement?
lawred2 wrote: » What's the point making any agreements with this UK government. They've repeatedly shown their word to be meaningless.
gooch2k9 wrote: » I suppose someone has to be the grown up in this exchange. Making fair agreements and being the one the live up to their commitments reflects well in the EU's negotiations with others, and conversely for the UK. Others here have alluded to the fact Boris and co can rely on the Telegraph et al to give the message they want to the pupulace. I'm thankful the internet is here now and people have the opportunity to access other viewpoints. Many won't use that opportunity but nonetheless, being able to falsely control the narrative has led to war previously.
Kermit.de.frog wrote: » If so the commission should come out with the strongest statement on Monday and halt all talks until the UK confirms it's obligations under what is an international treaty. How deluded is this?
lawred2 wrote: » Yeah but it's also fair for the EU to say that they will only make agreements with those that they believe to be operating in good faith.
ThePanjandrum wrote: » Name one foodstuff that the UK cannot import from outside the EU. Lettuce, for example, has been flown in from California.
gooch2k9 wrote: » As reslfj has said, it's not that the food won't come from the EU, it's that it will cost more. Also lettuce from Europe would be fresher than lettuce from USA I would assume.
Sam Russell wrote: » It is surprising how fresh things keep with a spray of chlorine - it kills 99% of germs. Works on chicken too.
correct horse battery staple wrote: » But the carbon footprint...
ThePanjandrum wrote: » It's the EU that uses chlorine wash on pre-packed salad, at a higher concentration that the USA uses on chicken too. But then, the EU has no scientific objection to chlorine wash, it just uses it as a non tariff barrier. We might be safer using it.
fash wrote: » A wonderful example of a brexiter deliberately misleading statement: the chlorine washed chicken issue is regarding the absolutely horrifyingly filthy conditions in which the chicken is kept such that dunking it in chlorine is the hope (but as it turns out not reality) that it will make the cob chicken edible. You've been told this time and time again yet you continue with your deliberately deceptive statements on this.
