Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Ketara wrote:

nfe wrote:
Constant reiterations? What, twice in a couple months?

I'd say three posts on one page within 24 hours justifies the phrase 'constant reiterations'. Certainly it's more accurate than your use of the phrase 'brazenly and openly'.

Two of them are replying to you talking about the first!

I'm out.

Herzlos wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:


And the EU seem to think that Britain is some kind of magic money tree. I've always said that Britain has a duty to honour treaty obligations and pay any money that is owed.

The EU seem to be pulling numbers from thin air.

Personally, I'd put 25 billion on the table and tell the EU to take it or leave it.

Did you just accuse the EU of pulling numbers from thin air, and then pull a number from thin air?

The EU gave us an estimate of what we owe, we've yet to provide any alternative between "go swivel" and "we're not paying". Why haven't we said "Well, our calculations make it $x, rather than the $y you want, and heres why".

Anything else is posturing and wasting time.

My 25 billion is based on a reasonable estimate of what we pay now, up until 2019.

Barnier is banging on about deadlock, which is EU code for give us more money.

Like I keep saying, let's stop wasting time with this sham of a negotiation.

I'll take my chances with the Yanks and WTO terms.

But we only pay ~£8.5bn now, so you'd be offering £15bn.

Are you considering anything we've committed to beyond 2019?

I agree we need to stop wasting time, team UK needs to get it's finger out.

I really can't see WTO helping us here, though.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/international-trade-secretary-dr-liam-fox-convenes-a-new-board-of-trade-to-ensure-the-benefits-of-free-trade-are-spread-throughout-the-uk

International Trade Secretary Dr Liam Fox convenes a new Board of Trade to ensure the benefits of free trade are spread throughout the UK


Dr Liam Fox will convene a new Board of Trade which will bring together prominent business and political figures from each part of the UK

...

Case Studies
England
Cheltenham-based fragrance house Marmalade of London is celebrated success in Canada following 2 orders over the summer and anticipated sales of almost £1.4 million over the next 5 years
murder mystery company Red Herring Games of Grimsby is opening previously unreachable markets, with Amazon US predicting orders totalling £200,000 for the next 5 years
Scotland
Livingston-based company Highlander Outdoor secured a significant contract win with the United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) in Geneva, providing reflective foam sleeping mats for humanitarian response efforts
Glasgow-based luxury knitwear company Green Thomas recently securing export wins in Japan, totalling 70% of the company’s order book
Wales
Cardiff and Vale College (CAVC), one of the largest colleges in the UK, is exploring plans to open its second International Centre of Education in Hefei, China
Welsh business Concrete Canvas is celebrating another record breaking year of exports, with 85% of turnover directly resulting from overseas sales
Northern Ireland
Northern Ireland manufacturer, BlueMAC, has seen their annual turnover increase by 50% since embarking on their exporting journey 3 years ago, going on to secure export wins in the UAE, Australia, France and China

... so what we're reading then is that trading whilst being a member of the EU is pretty good then....

best rush to make things more awkward as the tariffs hit.

Membership of the Board of Trade is restricted to Privy Councillors.

The only member is:

(i) Secretary of State for Department of International Trade and President of the Board of Trade (Chair)

can you actually have a board that consists of just a single person ...?

Still nice work if you can get it eh ?

.. betcha there's a nice little "expenses" top up there too.

n

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:


Which is how I view demands for a 2nd Referendum. If we were ever going to have a 2nd Referendum, then that should have been agreed upon from the very start, not demanded after the fact. Its moving the goal posts.

You can't demand that because we live in an open and free society where we get democratic choice. Therefore people are entitled to change their minds, the next generation are entitled to have a vote. Having an absolute decision that once made can never be reconsidered for a generation or more goes against these principles. That's why we vote for our MPs every 5 years. The same democratic choice should apply for referendums if that is the type of democracy we want (it's not a good idea). And herein lies the problem. Unless there is an overwhelming result one way or the other with a large turn out (and even then) there is always going to be the argument that those that didn't or didn't have a choice should be a vote. A referendum just to change a decision is just as bad as getting the result you want and then refusing to have any more referendums on the issue in case it gets overturned.

Bloodshed.

I view Brexit as potentially our last chance to secede from the EU and retain our national independence. One day, if we wait too long, we'll be too closely integrated that we will no longer be able to leave without resorting to force.

Except all indicators are that the longer things go by the less likely it is that people want to leave (youngest are pro-EU, oldest are anti-EU generally), so the reality is that it would only be a minority that would be resorting to violence. However if this is the only red line it's slightly worrying. People can suffer way before this because of lack of money, social support etc that might all be an outcome of Wrexit. If there was an increase in suicides because of greater poverty and lack of social care would that be bloodshed or not?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 reds8n wrote:


can you actually have a board that consists of just a single person ...?

Of course you can...that's because the person is a complete 'plank'.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:


My 25 billion is based on a reasonable estimate of what we pay now, up until 2019.

Barnier is banging on about deadlock, which is EU code for give us more money.

Like I keep saying, let's stop wasting time with this sham of a negotiation.

I'll take my chances with the Yanks and WTO terms.

I think there is a misconception here as to why the talks stalled. The UK agreed at the last meeting to bring figures to the EU as how much it wanted to pay and what the governments perspective of the value of these were. The UK negotiation team didn't bring any figures or financial information so they couldn't discuss this area. Ergo as the EU has made this a red line in that this has to be agreed before any trade talks start then they were never going to be able to progress beyond these talks and it was rather a waste of time thinking it was. The question you should be asking is why the UK government didn't do something they agreed to at the last meeting (answer: the current UK government is incompetent).

Having an absolute decision that once made can never be reconsidered for a generation or more goes against these principles.

Unless it's in favour of the eu right? Because I've heard from your camp that the referendum should never have occurred. So we should be bound forever by a decision made in 1975.

 reds8n wrote:


can you actually have a board that consists of just a single person ...?

Still nice work if you can get it eh ?

.. betcha there's a nice little "expenses" top up there too.

n

Historically speaking, the Board of Trade used to be reasonably important, back in the 18th and 19th century. Conducted a lot of business. With the demise of Empire and devolving of trade affairs to the EU however, its become pretty defunct over the last sixty years. Makes sense that they'd consider reviving it now, although I'd be interested to hear what sort of criteria they're planning for the members (other than being Liam Fox ).

 Future War Cultist wrote:

Having an absolute decision that once made can never be reconsidered for a generation or more goes against these principles.

Unless it's in favour of the eu right? Because I've heard from your camp that the referendum should never have occurred. So we should be bound forever by a decision made in 1975.

I would argue that even the 1975 decision should have not been put forward as a referendum. They are bad ideas because they are too easy to manipulate by demagogues (e.g. Farage) proposing easy solutions to complex problems (e.g. immigration). They are also susceptible to whether the populace want to 'stick one in the eye' to the current government (for example Leave probably wouldn't have won in the noughties when the economy was generally going well and more people were benefiting). We have a parliamentary democracy where we vote in people to make these decisions on our behalf. We vote on the issues that are important and an individuals MPs views and on that basis decisions are made. We don't live in a direct democracy which is what referendums advocate. If we wanted that then we'd need to remove parliament and have votes on key issues every X number of years so that those decisions are also democratic and that everyone gets to have their say over time not just one group of people at a very specific time which may exclude significant parts of future or current people in the country.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ketara wrote:
Makes sense that they'd consider reviving it now, although I'd be interested to hear what sort of criteria they're planning for the members (other than being Liam Fox ).

I'm sure he'll have a few of his friends lined up for positions...

 Whirlwind wrote:


I'm sure he'll have a few of his friends lined up for positions...

I can picture one gentleman turning up with a fake 'tache even now. 'How do you do there. I'm Mr Definitely-not-Werrity. Charmed, I'm sure'.

https://twitter.com/SunPolitics/status/918164329316454400

DUP politician says he thought the terrorist meeting he attended was actually a flute band event

easy mistake to make eh ?

Who hasn't done that ?

the Board of Trade used to be reasonably important, back in the 18th and 19th century.

....Brexit in a nutshell.


http://uk.businessinsider.com/philip-hammond-chancellor-uk-economy-suffering-brexit-2017-10

The British economy is already suffering due to the "cloud of uncertainty" caused by Brexit, Chancellor Philip Hammond said today.

Hammond told the Treasury Select Committee that uncertainty over Brexit negotiations must end soon to prevent any further "dampening" of the UK's economic prospects.

"While the UK economy is fundamentally strong and in good shape, we are being affected by uncertainty over the negotiation process that we are engaged in at the moment," he told MPs.

"There's plenty of anecdotal evidence that business and consumers are waiting to see what the outcome is or at least what the direction of travel is before firming up investment decisions and consumption decisions."

He added that: "The cloud of uncertainty is acting as a temporary dampener and we need to remove it as soon as possible by making progress with the negotiation process."

Closed skies
Hammond also warned against a no-deal Brexit saying that it was "possible" that planes would no longer be able to fly in and out of the UK due to air traffic control arrangements coming to an end.

He told MPs that: "It is already conceivable that in a no deal scenario there will be no air traffic moving between the UK and the European Union on the 29th March 2019."

Flights between the UK and EU are currently managed under the Open Skies agreement, which would cease to apply if Britain leaves without a deal.

While Hammond said such a scenario was possible he added that: "I don't think anyone seriously believes that is where we will get to."

The Chancellor has been urged by some Tory MPs to make detailed plans for leaving the EU without a deal. While he said the Treasury was making some plans for all possible scenarios, he was not willing to set aside funds for an extreme exit from the EU until absolutely necessary.

Prime Minister Theresa May is facing calls from Brexit-supporting MPs to sack Hammond for what they claim is his "pessimistic" view of Brexit. In a speech to MPs this week, May said that she would prove the "doomsayers" on Brexit wrong and achieve a good deal for Britain.

Whilst Redwood, Lawson et al call for him to be sacked as his forecasts aren't optimistic enough.




"Do you believe in fairies? If you believe," Peter shouted at them, "clap your hands! Don't let Brexit die!"

@whirlwind. We, Britain, have been reminded on numerous occasions that we're leaving the 'golf club' and shouldn't be expecting to use the facilities for free when we've left etc etc which is fair enough.

But that works both ways - we're leaving, so why should we be responsible for setting club membership fees?

If I go to a restaurant for a meal, I don't expect to write up my own bill. That is for the management to tell me what I owe them, based on a price they set out before I ordered.

@reds8n. It is possible to talk down an economy and lower confidence with doom and gloom. Hammond is doing it now.

Hammond has all the persona of a man who would struggle to sell water to somebody dying of thirst.

He's got to go. His heart was never in Brexit. Cut him open, he'll bleed blue and yellow.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
...Hammond has all the persona of a man who would struggle to sell water to somebody dying of thirst.

He's got to go. His heart was never in Brexit. Cut him open, he'll bleed blue and yellow.

It pains me to say it, but if we're going through with this fething farce, we probably should have someone who actually believes it's a good thing running the show.

It'll ensure that when it blows up in their face, no one can try and blame anyone else for the feth up.

Unfortunately, they will try. There seems to be an enduring desire to blame everyone else for the woes of our Govts incompetence. We've been blaming the EU for everything for so long, they've become an automatic bogey man for a certain mindset.

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:But that works both ways - we're leaving, so why should we be responsible for setting club membership fees?

Because the UK is renting golf clubs (in cooperation with some other EU countries) that it wants to keep using beyond the membership time while playing elsewhere. The UK didn't know that it would quit its membership early when it signed that contract and the contract is still valid. This makes the arrangement unexpectedly complicated. The clubs are a bit less useful for the UK as they can't be used on that golf course (so to speak).

EU countries (including the UK) have made long term projects (like academic research projects, or investments). Those will be "alive" beyond the date of Brexit and the question is: What will happen to those once Brexit is finalised and how will they be paid for? Some parts will probably be canceled (if they can't work with whatever policy arrangement UK/EU have) others will keep going. Now both sides have to find an acceptable middle ground how the UK pays for its part in projects that the UK agreed on (and what that part is, considering the circumstances).

The same goes for long term EU projects that were agreed upon and happen to take place in the UK. I don't think anybody wants those to just get cancelled because of Brexit if a solution can be found that is less destructive.

A lot of the big budget EU projects I've been to and experienced in my life have ended up being gigantic boondoggles. Not that the UK governments has never done that of course....

EG,

Somewhat flippant, not quite 100% true but realish hypothetical example: "EU Grants have enabled my <home towns> regeneration."

Result: Strange sculptures and a 15 foot long, 7 foot tall all weather jumbo vision television screen for <home town>'s population to watch while they stand in the queue waiting for the job centre to open to receive their dole money.

 Compel wrote:
A lot of the big budget EU projects I've been to and experienced in my life have ended up being gigantic boondoggles. Not that the UK governments has never done that of course....

EG,

Somewhat flippant, not quite 100% true but realish hypothetical example: "EU Grants have enabled my <home towns> regeneration."

Result: Strange sculptures and a 15 foot long, 7 foot tall all weather jumbo vision television screen for <home town>'s population to watch while they stand in the queue waiting for the job centre to open to receive their dole money.

No doubt loads of this goes on, but is it the EU's fault when they fund regeneration in a town and the council opts to spend it on the local welding artist and a monthly artisan craft fair in the expensive end of town?

At last, some good news for Brexit supporters.

EU preparing for trade talks with Britain: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-41604675

Looks like Barnier has had the rug pulled from underneath his feet.

London preparing for a no deal scenario has clearly focused some minds in the European capitals.

What I wouldn't give for a Douglas Hurd or even a Robin Cook, to tour the European capitals and exploit some of those cracks, instead of that complete buffoon we have know


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Mario wrote:

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:But that works both ways - we're leaving, so why should we be responsible for setting club membership fees?

Because the UK is renting golf clubs (in cooperation with some other EU countries) that it wants to keep using beyond the membership time while playing elsewhere. The UK didn't know that it would quit its membership early when it signed that contract and the contract is still valid. This makes the arrangement unexpectedly complicated. The clubs are a bit less useful for the UK as they can't be used on that golf course (so to speak).

EU countries (including the UK) have made long term projects (like academic research projects, or investments). Those will be "alive" beyond the date of Brexit and the question is: What will happen to those once Brexit is finalised and how will they be paid for? Some parts will probably be canceled (if they can't work with whatever policy arrangement UK/EU have) others will keep going. Now both sides have to find an acceptable middle ground how the UK pays for its part in projects that the UK agreed on (and what that part is, considering the circumstances).

The same goes for long term EU projects that were agreed upon and happen to take place in the UK. I don't think anybody wants those to just get cancelled because of Brexit if a solution can be found that is less destructive.

I have no problem with honouring our treaty obligations: this nation's honour demands we pay our bills, but not a penny more


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 r_squared wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
...Hammond has all the persona of a man who would struggle to sell water to somebody dying of thirst.

He's got to go. His heart was never in Brexit. Cut him open, he'll bleed blue and yellow.

It pains me to say it, but if we're going through with this fething farce, we probably should have someone who actually believes it's a good thing running the show.

It'll ensure that when it blows up in their face, no one can try and blame anyone else for the feth up.

Unfortunately, they will try. There seems to be an enduring desire to blame everyone else for the woes of our Govts incompetence. We've been blaming the EU for everything for so long, they've become an automatic bogey man for a certain mindset.

Agreed.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
At last, some good news for Brexit supporters.

EU preparing for trade talks with Britain: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-41604675

Looks like Barnier has had the rug pulled from underneath his feet.

London preparing for a no deal scenario has clearly focused some minds in the European capitals.

What I wouldn't give for a Douglas Hurd or even a Robin Cook, to tour the European capitals and exploit some of those cracks, instead of that complete buffoon we have know

So they are starting to come up with a position on trade, in preparation of us moving onto the next phase?
That's certainly good. I'm surprised they hadn't already done that.

It doesn't mean they'll let us talk trade any time soon though. Hopefully this carrot will be enough to get team UK to pull their finger out.

Herzlos wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
At last, some good news for Brexit supporters.

EU preparing for trade talks with Britain: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-41604675

Looks like Barnier has had the rug pulled from underneath his feet.

London preparing for a no deal scenario has clearly focused some minds in the European capitals.

What I wouldn't give for a Douglas Hurd or even a Robin Cook, to tour the European capitals and exploit some of those cracks, instead of that complete buffoon we have know

So they are starting to come up with a position on trade, in preparation of us moving onto the next phase?
That's certainly good. I'm surprised they hadn't already done that.

It doesn't mean they'll let us talk trade any time soon though. Hopefully this carrot will be enough to get team UK to pull their finger out.

The realists in the EU are starting to flex their muscles and make their feelings known, which can only be good for the UK.

Barnier is tying himself in knots with his contradictions.

I see Yougov have Scotland's unassailable ascendant Tories polling 7 points behind Labour and 17 behind the Nats.

Did anyone say they were "unassailable?"

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

The realists in the EU are starting to flex their muscles and make their feelings known, which can only be good for the UK.

Which realists?

Barnier is tying himself in knots with his contradictions.

Which contradictions?


I understand you see everything as bad for the EU and good for us, but sometimes I need a bit of help to follow that line of though.

Herzlos wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

The realists in the EU are starting to flex their muscles and make their feelings known, which can only be good for the UK.

Which realists?

Barnier is tying himself in knots with his contradictions.

Which contradictions?


I understand you see everything as bad for the EU and good for us, but sometimes I need a bit of help to follow that line of though.

For the realists, this quote came from the article.

Anders Vistisen, a Danish Eurosceptic MEP and vice-chair of the EU Parliament's foreign affairs committee, agreed, adding: "The most integral thing is the future relationship. If we are making a bad trade deal for Britain we are also hurting ourselves."

As for contradictions, Barnier talks about deadlock, and then the next day, the EU 27 are talking about a trade deal with Britain. Barnier has to know what's going on, hence my point about contradictions.

Add that to Juncker's madcap point about "28 beers" and you can see the EU are not getting it their own way

Drunker would be thinking about beer wouldn't he.

 Future War Cultist wrote:
Drunker would be thinking about beer wouldn't he.

We've been told for months, mainly by pro-EU newspapers, that the EU have the upper hand, are running rings around Britain, the EU is better prepared etc etc

We now know that's concentrated bullgak!

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

 Future War Cultist wrote:
Drunker would be thinking about beer wouldn't he.

We've been told for months, mainly by pro-EU newspapers, that the EU have the upper hand, are running rings around Britain, the EU is better prepared etc etc

We now know that's concentrated bullgak!

No, we don't.


Funny how just making unspecific statements work for both sides.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

 Future War Cultist wrote:
Drunker would be thinking about beer wouldn't he.

We've been told for months, mainly by pro-EU newspapers, that the EU have the upper hand, are running rings around Britain, the EU is better prepared etc etc

We now know that's concentrated bullgak!

You're getting your EU news from eurosceptic MPs?

Good for you, I guess.

I couldn't help to giggle when I read this though.


Richard Branson’s Brexit strategy: Wait for Leave voters to die, then rejoin EU
https://www.rt.com/uk/406462-richard-branson-brexit-die/

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

 Future War Cultist wrote:
Drunker would be thinking about beer wouldn't he.

We've been told for months, mainly by pro-EU newspapers, that the EU have the upper hand, are running rings around Britain, the EU is better prepared etc etc

We now know that's concentrated bullgak!

No, we don't.


Funny how just making unspecific statements work for both sides.

It's not unspecific. For weeks and months, all we've heard is this: no trade talks until Ireland, money, and citizens' rights are agreed on.

Now we know the EU are talking about and producing papers on a possible trade deal with the UK. That is hard facts, and hard evidence.

Again, I say to you sir, that we have been mislead by an agenda driven pro-EU media, that has been trying to convince us that the UK will be lucky to get anything from Brussels.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

jouso wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

 Future War Cultist wrote:
Drunker would be thinking about beer wouldn't he.

We've been told for months, mainly by pro-EU newspapers, that the EU have the upper hand, are running rings around Britain, the EU is better prepared etc etc

We now know that's concentrated bullgak!

You're getting your EU news from eurosceptic MPs?

Good for you, I guess.

I couldn't help to giggle when I read this though.


Richard Branson’s Brexit strategy: Wait for Leave voters to die, then rejoin EU
https://www.rt.com/uk/406462-richard-branson-brexit-die/

Eh?

It's the EU saying that it's talking about trade with Britain, not me. I linked to hard evidence. What more do you need?



Automatically Appended Next Post:
From the article I linked to:

The draft paper submitted to the 27 EU states by European Council president Donald Tusk, suggests free trade talks could open in December - should Prime Minister Theresa May improve her offer on what the UK pays when it leaves.

And I'd submit that, as evident by this very thread, you don't know what you're talking about.

jouso wrote:
Richard Branson’s Brexit strategy: Wait for Leave voters to die, then rejoin EU
https://www.rt.com/uk/406462-richard-branson-brexit-die/

I'm 26, you may be waiting a while...

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
And I'd submit that, as evident by this very thread, you don't know what you're talking about.

Really?

In public, Barnier is talking about deadlock.

In private, Tusk is circulating a draft paper to the EU 27, suggesting that free trade talks might start in December...

And yet, we're constantly told that the British negotiating position is all over the shop...