Politics

[Guest]

14 minutes ago, Sweep said:

True, its getting dull now.

A deal is being signed, let's just crack on, and see what happens

Life’s what you make it

[birch-chorley]

Free Trade on goods (deficit in the EU’s favour) 

No free trade on services (deficit in our favour) 

Given services is such a big part of our economy that’s a massive let down, it will mean a smaller economy as jobs will need to be ‘based’ within the EU to avoid tariffs (particularly damaging for financial services) 

What’s the upside, a potential free trade with the US? This UK:EU deal makes a UK:US deal less likely as we could essentially become a back door into the US for EU goods, that won’t be acceptable to the yanks by any stretch of the imagination 

As of January 1st we will have a worse set of trade deals than we have now, for GDP growth anyway, how long should we expect to be waiting until our trade deals are making a positive contribution? (which is what it was meant to be all about)

Also makes me laugh that we have ridded ourselves of the ECJ (which had both British and European judges in it don’t forget) to a new court (yet to be named) that will have both British & European judges presiding over issues involving U.K.:EU trade 

The Emperors New Clothes springs to mind 

 

 

Edited December 24, 2020 by birch-chorley

[leigh white]

50 minutes ago, birch-chorley said:

Free Trade on goods (deficit in the EU’s favour) 

No free trade on services (deficit in our favour) 

Given services is such a big part of our economy that’s a massive let down, it will mean a smaller economy as jobs will need to be ‘based’ within the EU to avoid tariffs (particularly damaging for financial services) 

What’s the upside, a potential free trade with the US? This UK:EU deal makes a UK:US deal less likely as we could essentially become a back door into the US for EU goods, that won’t be acceptable to the yanks by any stretch of the imagination 

As of January 1st we will have a worse set of trade deals than we have now, for GDP growth anyway, how long should we expect to be waiting until our trade deals are making a positive contribution? (which is what it was meant to be all about)

Also makes me laugh that we have ridded ourselves of the ECJ (which had both British and European judges in it don’t forget) to a new court (yet to be named) that will have both British & European judges presiding over issues involving U.K.:EU trade 

The Emperors New Clothes springs to mind 

 

 

Give the leavers a moment today to bask in glory.

[Casino]

3 hours ago, boltondiver said:

If he signs, then he has to take responsibility 

Not really

He has few choices here

He cant vote against as that might allow your mongy mates in the ERG to royally fuck us over

He could abstain, but the tories will use that against him in an effort to win the red wall seats again

Voting for the deal pretty much kills labour in scotland

Hes in a very difficult place

Anyway, this is the tories deal

If its shit, its on them, nobody else

[Mounts Kipper]

9 hours ago, birch-chorley said:

Free Trade on goods (deficit in the EU’s favour) 

No free trade on services (deficit in our favour) 

Given services is such a big part of our economy that’s a massive let down, it will mean a smaller economy as jobs will need to be ‘based’ within the EU to avoid tariffs (particularly damaging for financial services) 

What’s the upside, a potential free trade with the US? This UK:EU deal makes a UK:US deal less likely as we could essentially become a back door into the US for EU goods, that won’t be acceptable to the yanks by any stretch of the imagination 

As of January 1st we will have a worse set of trade deals than we have now, for GDP growth anyway, how long should we expect to be waiting until our trade deals are making a positive contribution? (which is what it was meant to be all about)

Also makes me laugh that we have ridded ourselves of the ECJ (which had both British and European judges in it don’t forget) to a new court (yet to be named) that will have both British & European judges presiding over issues involving U.K.:EU trade 

The Emperors New Clothes springs to mind 

 

 

I know the passporting of financial services isn’t part of this free trade deal, and if that does not form part of future negotiations it looks like a massive cock up on our part, be interesting if some journalist ask the question. 

[jules_darby]

10 hours ago, boltondiver said:

Life’s what you make it

...it is but this is “usually” spotted by those who know they’ve just manoeuvred themselves into a worse position, no?

Otherwise why were you so arsed on the first place?

[kent_white]

It's Christmas bastard Day! 😁

[jules_darby]

11 hours ago, Mounts Kipper said:

He’s irrelevant, he’d have gifted the EU an open goal in negotiations, just to be sure I’ll listen when I’ve nowt else to do. 

I distinctly remember you bemoaning the lack of quality Labour leadership under Corbyn, stating you wanted a strong opposition 

So do you care about the leadership or is starmer irrelevant? Can’t have it both ways

Edited December 25, 2020 by jules_darby

[Mounts Kipper]

2 minutes ago, jules_darby said:

I distinctly remember you bemoaning the lack of quality Labour leadership under Corbyn, stating you wanted a strong opposition 

So do you care about the leadership or is starmer irrelevant? Can’t have it both ways

I don’t rate Starmer, I don’t think he’s the man to get Labour back in power, so he’s irrelevant.  

[jules_darby]

9 minutes ago, Mounts Kipper said:

I don’t rate Starmer, I don’t think he’s the man to get Labour back in power, so he’s irrelevant.  

Sorry, no dice 

You wanted a strong opposition leader; ergo the person in that position and therefore their strength is relevant

If he’s not the man to get them back in power, this still holds relevance

It’s just more nonsense 

[Mounts Kipper]

59 minutes ago, jules_darby said:

Sorry, no dice 

You wanted a strong opposition leader; ergo the person in that position and therefore their strength is relevant

If he’s not the man to get them back in power, this still holds relevance

It’s just more nonsense 

I want to see a Labour leader who resonates with the traditional Labour voter that have defected, in my opinion he ain’t that man. Anyhow wishing you and your family a very happy Christmas. ⛄️🎄⛄️🎄

Edited December 25, 2020 by Mounts Kipper

[masi 51]

16 hours ago, paulhanley said:

Allison Pearson, The Telegraph

Brexit means Brexit.” Goodness, how innocent we were all those centuries ago when Theresa May and her chief EU negotiator, Olly Robbins, were still asking the Brussels mafia what price they would accept for allowing us to leave the European Union. And Donald Tusk posted a picture on Instagram of Mrs May admiring some cakes with the caption, “A piece of cake, perhaps? Sorry, no cherries.”

The then-president of the European Council treated the then British prime minister not just disrespectfully but with jaw-dropping insolence for what he saw as her attempt to “cherry-pick” access to the Single Market. To be fair to Tusk, he perfectly captured the tone of the negotiations for a trade deal between the EU and its second highest-contributing member: arrogant, vengeful, obstructive, sneaky, spiteful and downright bloody rude.

Like a sociopathic jilted fiance, the EU wasn’t content to just get the ring back. It wanted to humiliate the UK, shave our head and send us to a nunnery so we would never enjoy relations with anyone else ever again.       

It took an exhausting, nerve-shredding, Remainer-dodging 1,317 days from the referendum result on June 23 2016 to get out. And another 327 days until a trade deal was finally agreed. This time, there is none of that air-punching WE DID IT! sense which millions of us felt on January 31 when Union Jacks fluttered in the Mall and I heard a Geordie girl crying with happiness on the radio because we were finally leaving.   

Instead, there will be quiet satisfaction that our negotiating team, led by the terriertastic David Frost, hung in there and held its nerve as Michel Barnier announced, yet again, that “the cliff edge” was near and the “clock is ticking”. All well-worn, coded EU threats designed to panic the hated Brits into taking whatever crumbs off the table the other 27 deigned to give us.

Kudos also to the PM. It feels like another lifetime when Buoyant Boris was balm to our souls, delivering a stonking general election victory on a promise to Get Brexit Done. Covid seemed to make him half the man, and not just because he lost weight. As Tennyson said of Ulysses, “We are not now that strength which in old days/ Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are/Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will.”

There was a calculated bravura in the PM’s claim that a no-deal Brexit was “now a strong probability”. His bold assertion that it would be a “good outcome” if we left without a deal came before President Macron, his petulant inner Napoleon never far from the surface, closed the French border and lorries queued up the M20 into the corona badlands of the Medway towns. Put it this way, Robert Robinson would have made Boris team captain on Call My Bluff.

Each side will claim the other blinked first. At first glance, though, it looks like we did a lot better than was predicted. Zero tariffs and zero quotas mean a better deal than any other country. Yes, the EU can impose tariffs if we make a molehill in their level playing field, but at least there is no role at all for the European Court of Justice which over-ruled the laws voted for by the British people.

In the next few days, purists will pore over the small print, wrinkle their noses and declare this is BRINO – Brexit In Name Only. Most of us will just heave a huge sigh of relief and rejoice that we don’t have an aggrieved EU holding up vaccines and satsumas to add to our Covid worries.

Look at it this way, we will never again need to hear the six glummest words in the English language: “Over to Katya Adler in Brussels.”

The United Kingdom just became the first country to honour the result of a referendum which defied the wishes of the European autocracy. It walked away with its own borders, its own laws and (eventually) the best part of our own seas. There is great pride to be taken in that. The EU revealed its true colours in the negotiations. We made the right decision. We’re on our own now. Some noble work may yet be done. Over the last four and a half long, bruising years of bartering for our freedom we’ve shown that we have the character to do it. To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield. Brexit meant Brexit. But we knew that, didn’t we? 

Well said Allison Pearson.....Pretty much how i see it

[Mounts Kipper]

1 hour ago, masi 51 said:

Well said Allison Pearson.....Pretty much how i see it

Agreed, as long as the passporting does not make a mess of it. 

[Spider]

There are some unhappy hardcore brexit bods on Twitter to say the least.

But it’s Xmas day and I’m fucked if I’m getting involved.

 

[jules_darby]

3 hours ago, Mounts Kipper said:

I want to see a Labour leader who resonates with the traditional Labour voter that have defected, in my opinion he ain’t that man. Anyhow wishing you and your family a very happy Christmas. ⛄️🎄⛄️🎄

And always to you. Feliz Navidad, enjoy a lovely Rioja 🎄

[Tonge moor green jacket]

16 hours ago, birch-chorley said:

Free Trade on goods (deficit in the EU’s favour) 

No free trade on services (deficit in our favour) 

Given services is such a big part of our economy that’s a massive let down, it will mean a smaller economy as jobs will need to be ‘based’ within the EU to avoid tariffs (particularly damaging for financial services) 

 

I've downloaded the summary. Its hard going, and I'm only having a quick glance whilst the spuds crisp up- however from what I can see, there aren't restrictions on services. 

Not finished it, not fully understand it yet, but seems to allow trade of services each way without tariffs.

[Escobarp]

12 minutes ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

I've downloaded the summary. Its hard going, and I'm only having a quick glance whilst the spuds crisp up- however from what I can see, there aren't restrictions on services. 

Not finished it, not fully understand it yet, but seems to allow trade of services each way without tariffs.

financial services are regulated that’s the issue. 

[ex_midlandwhite]

As things stand a financial services company wanting to do business in the EU now will have to apply to the regulators in each individual country, that's a lot of legal fees. 

I'm told that Sunak gave free access to EU companies to offer financial services in the UK last month without needing to be regulated by the FCA, presumably as a sweetner. Maybe it will be reciprocated.

Edited December 25, 2020 by ex_midlandwhite
Typo

[Tonge moor green jacket]

Section 6 - Financial Services 
57.The Agreement includes provisions on cross-border trade in financial services 
and investment that will secure continued market access. The Agreement
provides protections that will ensure that our regulatory and supervisory 
authorities will be able to act to ensure financial stability, market integrity and 
protect investors and consumers.
58.The Parties have agreed a joint declaration setting out their commitment to 
these shared objectives and have agreed to enhanced cooperation as well as 
information sharing and bilateral dialogue in order to establish a durable and 
stable relationship. 
59.The declaration reaffirms the integrity of our respective, autonomous
equivalence frameworks. The Parties will discuss how we move forward on 
specific equivalence determinations. The Parties will codify the framework for 
regulatory cooperation in a Memorandum of Understanding.

Still ironing out some parts, but looks like they're going to finalise something.

[Escobarp]

1 minute ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

Section 6 - Financial Services 
57.The Agreement includes provisions on cross-border trade in financial services 
and investment that will secure continued market access. The Agreement
provides protections that will ensure that our regulatory and supervisory 
authorities will be able to act to ensure financial stability, market integrity and 
protect investors and consumers.
58.The Parties have agreed a joint declaration setting out their commitment to 
these shared objectives and have agreed to enhanced cooperation as well as 
information sharing and bilateral dialogue in order to establish a durable and 
stable relationship. 
59.The declaration reaffirms the integrity of our respective, autonomous
equivalence frameworks. The Parties will discuss how we move forward on 
specific equivalence determinations. The Parties will codify the framework for 
regulatory cooperation in a Memorandum of Understanding.

Still ironing out some parts, but looks like they're going to finalise something.

It’s down to the regulators. Same with law. They can provide an over arching agreement that it can happen per se but it will be down to the various regulators. Including the FCA. 

[Winchester White]

7 hours ago, masi 51 said:

Well said Allison Pearson.....Pretty much how i see it

Jingoistic bullshit in my opinion however she is entitled to her views.

Allison Pearson is an awful human being.

[Mounts Kipper]

1 hour ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

Section 6 - Financial Services 
57.The Agreement includes provisions on cross-border trade in financial services 
and investment that will secure continued market access. The Agreement
provides protections that will ensure that our regulatory and supervisory 
authorities will be able to act to ensure financial stability, market integrity and 
protect investors and consumers.
58.The Parties have agreed a joint declaration setting out their commitment to 
these shared objectives and have agreed to enhanced cooperation as well as 
information sharing and bilateral dialogue in order to establish a durable and 
stable relationship. 
59.The declaration reaffirms the integrity of our respective, autonomous
equivalence frameworks. The Parties will discuss how we move forward on 
specific equivalence determinations. The Parties will codify the framework for 
regulatory cooperation in a Memorandum of Understanding.

Still ironing out some parts, but looks like they're going to finalise something.

Sounds promising, I’d be surprised if we’d left the financial services aspect of the deal wide open to allow and encourage companies to move away from the U.K. 

[Mounts Kipper]

You have to laugh.

 

[Tonge moor green jacket]

2 hours ago, Escobarp said:

It’s down to the regulators. Same with law. They can provide an over arching agreement that it can happen per se but it will be down to the various regulators. Including the FCA. 

The second sentence in paragraph 59 hopefully sorts that out with the equivalence bit.

A mutual set of rules, a bit like those with standards?

Some thrashing out to do, but it doesn't rule out a fuller agreement which is good.

They can get that sorted in the new year once the turkey and sherry have worn off.

[Mounts Kipper]

2 minutes ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

The second sentence in paragraph 59 hopefully sorts that out with the equivalence bit.

A mutual set of rules, a bit like those with standards?

Some thrashing out to do, but it doesn't rule out a fuller agreement which is good.

They can get that sorted in the new year once the turkey and sherry have worn off.

Doesn’t it need to be in place 4th January when business resumes.