Brexit discussion thread XIV (Please read OP before posting)

See now that is very different to your angry little rant about how anyone choosing a supplier from outside side the EU "should not be in business".

For some it is not possible or beneficial to switch from the UK to EU so it is a factor in a new trade deal.

Nobody here is suggesting that any changes should not be mutually beneficial but the idea the UK have "nothing to offer" is wrong. It might turn out they don't have or won't offer enough to get the EU back to the table though.

@breezy1985 "your angry little rant"

Still no idea what you are talking about . But I will let you have the last word.

There are very different takes on Starmer's position on re-negotiating the TCA in the various news reports of his meeting with Macron.

The independent seem to see an invitation from France and Germany to encourage UK to become an associate member of the EU

France and Germany plot EU ‘inner circle’ – leaving door open for Britain

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-britain-rejoin-eu-keir-starmer-b2414299.html

The countries have tabled a blueprint for closer integration among willing member states, which includes a new membership ‘even for the UK’

They make much of a Franco/German paper published earlier this year.

"France and Germany are pushing plans to offer Britain and other European countries “associate membership” of the EU in a move that could rebuild the UK’s ties with the bloc. The two countries have tabled a blueprint that would create four new tiers, with the most aligned states forming an “inner circle”. Associate members, who would form the bloc’s first “outer tier”, could include members of the single market who are not in the EU, such as Switzerland, or “even the UK”, a paper put forward by France and Germany stated. Associate membership would not include a customs union, allowing Britain to keep an independent trade policy."

Meanwhile the BBC report is much tamer,

"A report out today by UK in a Changing Europe, a think tank, concludes that the scope for changing the Brexit deal - the Trade and Cooperation Agreement to give it its full title - is limited. It argues the EU's current mindset is to leave it pretty much as it is, as Brussels is fed up of talking about Brexit and has bigger priorities."

And the Tánaiste too seems to see difficulties in trying to renegotiate the TCA .

Obviously, it can be seen as positive that Starmer is willing to talk about Brexit. Bit, as far as I can see, the official Labour position is still to make Brexit work. Obviously, it would not be the role of the EU to aid with that policy

Finance minister McGrath expressed a note of caution. "The progress that we have made has been hard fought. And for now, I think the priority has to be to bed in the changes that have been agreed,”

“So I think we will be forgiven for saying that our focus for now is on ensuring that the agreement that we have is fully implemented, and that it operates smoothly and efficiently."

The EU doesn't want another Switzerland type relationship, so it's TCA or full membership.

The UK wasn't happy when it had opt outs, and giving them opt ins is unfair to all non EU/EEA.

Well in the British legal definition of itself the head of state is god's anointed representative on earth, and parliament are sovereign on the monarchs behalf, ergo gods government.

Labour may be handed a massive majority at the next election, but I wonder will a further to the right wing party take the Tory's place?

He's right, though - there is no case for going back into the EU. The reasons for leaving - primarily xenophobic isolationism - are still alive and well in Britain. Just because a growing number of people realise that Brexit came with a (not particularly well) hidden cost, doesn't mean they're ready to sign up for Freedom of Movement, for example, so as to be part of the Single Market again.

Phil Moorehouse regularly points out that "demanding" the UK gets back into the EU is counterproductive, because it will be decades before the EU is ready to even consider an application. The way forward is first to work with the crappy deal agreed by the Tories, then to introduce dynamic alignment in areas where it is not especially contentious, followed by areas where it might be contentious but is at least advantageous for Britain, and only after that's done to start working on a membership application.

Fine. But much like in the US the upcoming GE is a straight decision between Sunak, and the Tories, or Starmer.

After 13 years of Tory government almost every metric is worse than when they took over.

So the choice is to continue with something that is clearly not working or giving something else a try.

You can dislike Starmer all you want, but he is the only alternative available

If EU freedom of movement was to blame for low growth since 2008 who is the British public going to blame for another decade of low growth free of the EU?

The EU was the external enemy, I guess they'll seek an internal enemy next.