Politics

[MancWanderer]

1 hour ago, Winchester White said:

I think folk and the media commentators need to realise that this deal of May's isn't our permanent deal with the EU. It is a deal that allows us to transition out of the EU. We haven't even got to the point of actually negotiating our proper exit deal.

That's probably the fairest point made in the last 237 pages

[gonzo]

Don’t think I like this junker chap

[Spider]

5 minutes ago, gonzo said:

Don’t think I like this junker chap

Herr Flick?

[Spider]

The EU have confirmed that UK residents will need an ETIAS visa to travel freely around the EU after Brexit.

£6.30 each and last 3 years.

I’d chalk that up as a victory for the brexiteers meself.

Edited December 14, 2018 by Spider

[leigh white]

2 minutes ago, Spider said:

The EU have confirmed that UK residents will need an ETIAS visa to travel freely around the EU after Brexit.

£6.30 each and last 3 years.

I’d chalk that up as a victory for the brexiteers meself.

You will get that £ 6.30 back in a few mins if you are AI in an hotel.

[miamiwhite]

11 minutes ago, Spider said:

The EU have confirmed that UK residents will need an ETIAS visa to travel freely around the EU after Brexit.

£6.30 each and last 3 years.

I’d chalk that up as a victory for the brexiteers meself.

Haha....I think we’ll all survive that bout of Project Fear eh pal ?

[Cheese]

3 minutes ago, miamiwhite said:

Haha....I think we’ll all survive that bout of Project Fear eh pal ?

It's not "Project Fear" if it's fucking true is it?

[Spider]

Get a trade deal with Ireland and I’m all in.

 

[Guest]

12 hours ago, Spider said:

Get a trade deal with Ireland and I’m all in.

 

Can we deal with them unilaterally? I don't think so.

 

But, under WTO, we have a deal. So, you're Mr Happy.

[Tonge moor green jacket]

3 minutes ago, boltondiver said:

Can we deal with them unilaterally? I don't think so.

 

But, under WTO, we have a deal. So, you're Mr Happy.

I heard the other day that it was Mr Varadkar that demanded the backstop.

Apparently his predecessor didn't feel the same way.

No doubt fake news, but on the off chance it's true, then I find myself thinking, fuck buying any Irish products.

[Guest]

Just now, Tonge moor green jacket said:

I heard the other day that it was Mr Varadkar that demanded the backstop.

Apparently his predecessor didn't feel the same way.

No doubt fake news, but on the off chance it's true, then I find myself thinking, fuck buying any Irish products.

Theresa agreed it a year ago, I'm reading. But, it seems, didn't share it with many. She should stop trying to win tiny favours from the EU and get back here and put her back into prepping for WTO.

[Mounts Kipper]

2 hours ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

I heard the other day that it was Mr Varadkar that demanded the backstop.

Apparently his predecessor didn't feel the same way.

No doubt fake news, but on the off chance it's true, then I find myself thinking, fuck buying any Irish products.

Every time I see Varadkar,  I seem to end up shouting at the TV don’t know that much about him but maybe it’s because he’s a face like a slapped arse and the flow of shit that comes out of his mouth every time he opens it. 

Edited December 15, 2018 by Mounts Kipper

[MalcolmW]

2 hours ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

I heard the other day that it was Mr Varadkar that demanded the backstop.

Apparently his predecessor didn't feel the same way.

No doubt fake news, but on the off chance it's true, then I find myself thinking, fuck buying any Irish products.

No earlier Irish leader would have taken such a line.

[bwfcfan5]

8 hours ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

I heard the other day that it was Mr Varadkar that demanded the backstop.

Apparently his predecessor didn't feel the same way.

No doubt fake news, but on the off chance it's true, then I find myself thinking, fuck buying any Irish products.

The backstop is required to allow the U.K. and Ireland to comply with their good Friday agreement responsibilities. It’s a legal guarantee. The fact is there isn’t under May’s deal any other way to guarantee this.

[Sweep]

21 hours ago, Spider said:

The EU have confirmed that UK residents will need an ETIAS visa to travel freely around the EU after Brexit.

£6.30 each and last 3 years.

I’d chalk that up as a victory for the brexiteers meself.

We'll be charging them the same as well which is good.

it does mean once they have one though they can come and go without being checked all they want.... Which might be less good.

 

"Freedom of movement" ceases to exist...... And becomes "as much movement as you want for just over a fiver"

 

Result!

[royal white]

21 hours ago, Spider said:

The EU have confirmed that UK residents will need an ETIAS visa to travel freely around the EU after Brexit.

£6.30 each and last 3 years.

I’d chalk that up as a victory for the brexiteers meself.

So after all the tears from certain posters about having our freedom of movement ripped away from us we have now got it back for £6.30...is that right or have I missed something? 

[fatolive]

8 hours ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

I heard the other day that it was Mr Varadkar that demanded the backstop.

Apparently his predecessor didn't feel the same way.

No doubt fake news, but on the off chance it's true, then I find myself thinking, fuck buying any Irish products.

The backstop is for an assurance that no hard border will be introduced should the solution to it not be found during the negotiations, it’s what his public want ( and NI public) so he’s bound to take than position, not sure if it was him who demanded it but he agreed to it

besides, plenty of folk, on here included say the border issue is easily solvable so not sure why the backstop is such an issue, it’s only while the easy problem is solved...

6 hours ago, MalcolmW said:

No earlier Irish leader would have taken such a line.

Which earlier Irish leaders do you mean and what line do you think the would have taken? 

 

[Sweep]

2 minutes ago, royal white said:

So after all the tears from certain posters about having our freedom of movement ripped away from us we have now got it back for £6.30...is that right or have I missed something? 

That's right. 100%

wasn't the issue thougb that we didn't want Johnny Foreigner to have freedom of movement though.... We didn't want them fuckers coming here easily, looks like that's not worked as it might have.

 

Anyway, it'll be a moot point soon anyway, as I reckon we'll end up staying indefinitely (with the promise that we'll leave "soon")

 

[Tonge moor green jacket]

2 minutes ago, fatolive said:

The backstop is for an assurance that no hard border will be introduced should the solution to it not be found during the negotiations, it’s what his public want ( and NI public) so he’s bound to take than position, not sure if it was him who demanded it but he agreed to it

besides, plenty of folk, on here included say the border issue is easily solvable so not sure why the backstop is such an issue, it’s only while the easy problem is solved...

Which earlier Irish leaders do you mean and what line do you think the would have taken? 

 

I'm aware of its purpose.

However, it seems to me that it's more of an obstacle put there by those seeking to prevent brexit.

Plenty of people (including some from Ireland itself) have said that by expanding and modifying current technology to track goods, then no hard border is necessary.

Rather than explore this, it is far too easy for those who don't want to see beyond remain, to just create barriers that aren't necessary.

TM accepted the backstop, and personally I'm not as concerned by it as others, however as simple "no chance- we need to explore technology etc" may well have yielded a more acceptable proposition and the deal been accepted.

Far too few people seem prepared to genuinely negotiate and just want to create issues. An article posted (by bd?) a while ago, voiced the views of one of the (MEPs?) from the Czech Republic if my memory serves me correctly. How it was important to create a solution that genuinely works for all parties, and not to adopt a 'punish Britain' mentality.

Seems they've created a punish everyone situation.

[kent_white]

19 minutes ago, royal white said:

So after all the tears from certain posters about having our freedom of movement ripped away from us we have now got it back for £6.30...is that right or have I missed something? 

You've missed something. And not for the first time

[fatolive]

Just now, Tonge moor green jacket said:

I'm aware of its purpose.

However, it seems to me that it's more of an obstacle put there by those seeking to prevent brexit.

Plenty of people (including some from Ireland itself) have said that by expanding and modifying current technology to track goods, then no hard border is necessary.

Rather than explore this, it is far too easy for those who don't want to see beyond remain, to just create barriers that aren't necessary.

TM accepted the backstop, and personally I'm not as concerned by it as others, however as simple "no chance- we need to explore technology etc" may well have yielded a more acceptable proposition and the deal been accepted.

Far too few people seem prepared to genuinely negotiate and just want to create issues. An article posted (by bd?) a while ago, voiced the views of one of the (MEPs?) from the Czech Republic if my memory serves me correctly. How it was important to create a solution that genuinely works for all parties, and not to adopt a 'punish Britain' mentality.

Seems they've created a punish everyone situation.

The back stop would disappear if the technology was available and could be proved to work. The border is more complex than a usual border as has been done to death, but, if the solution to a hard border was available then the backstop is no issue, that’s my point, people say they can do this and that no problem but don’t they think they can do it in the time frame so see the back stop as an issue.

 

[Tonge moor green jacket]

1 minute ago, fatolive said:

The back stop would disappear if the technology was available and could be proved to work. The border is more complex than a usual border as has been done to death, but, if the solution to a hard border was available then the backstop is no issue, that’s my point, people say they can do this and that no problem but don’t they think they can do it in the time frame so see the back stop as an issue.

 

Perhaps a more positive reflection of it during negotiations wouldn't have gone amiss. Two years or so of talks is quite a long time.

With the right will on both sides this could have been heavily explored and worked on during this time. Together with (an extendable) transition period, that's plenty of time to get something sorted.

The inertia of all this merely reinforces my view that we needed to leave. Still, it gives junker more time for another bottle.

[royal white]

11 minutes ago, kent_white said:

You've missed something. And not for the first time

Go on then what have I missed 

[Tonge moor green jacket]

Yoda is about to train Luke, so I'll continue this later...

[fatolive]

1 minute ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

Yoda is about to train Luke, so I'll continue this later...

In border technology ?