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.

 reds8n wrote:


Brussels has already prepared itself for Brexit by toughening its criteria for granting equivalence to systemically important non-EU financial centres, and the commission negotiator told the meeting that intensive talks would be needed with the UK on financial stability arrangements.

The commission official also said that the ball was in the UK’s court to set out ideas for how trade in financial services might operate after Brexit.

"A UK government official said: “We are confident of negotiating a deep and special economic partnership that includes a good deal for financial services, and protects the City of London’s position as the world’s leading financial centre.

“We start from the unique position of regulatory alignment and trust in one another’s institutions. The UK’s financial services sector plays an essential role in the European economy and so it is in the interests of all parties to secure a deal.”

It appears the EU have decided that it is in the interests of the EU to ensure the deal doesn't include financial services (not a surprise really) I think that is what the spokesperson is saying?

Also I think we should just ask the government to go home. We could then replace them all with the tape players endlessly repeating "deep and special economic partnership". It would also be cheaper, the populace would only have to pay for the cost of the batteries (or buy a wind up one).

Sounds like they'll consider access on a case by case basis where they are in control, rather than allowing blanket access with the UK in control.

That's a lot better for us than I was expecting.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/feb/01/finsbury-park-accused-had-no-reason-to-deny-attack-other-than-he-didnt-do-it-court-hears

"Delivering her closing speech at Woolwich crown court on Thursday morning, the lawyer for 48-year-old Darren Osborne accepted the prosecution’s claim he had developed a “warped hatred of Muslims” in the weeks preceding the incident last June, in which one man died and others were seriously injured.

Lisa Wilding QC also accepted that Osborne had been in central London the previous day looking to carry out a similar attack against Muslims.
“The question I ask is this: why would a man so intent on killing – as he agrees he was – who appeared to want to have his say, to proclaim his case and give his views, why would he deny doing the very thing he set out to do if, in fact, he had done it?” she asked the jury."

I think I know this - to avoid 35 years in jail.

Na. He tots didn’t do it. He even said so. Why would he like to you? You calling him a liar? You did not just call him a liar! I’m telling mum what you said!

I suppose the defence QC has the duty to defend the defendant to the best of their ability, whatever the seemingly obvious facts of the case.

Yes, they absolutely do.

Jury is now out, we'll see if they bought 'A bloke called Dave did it'.

read this :

https://twitter.com/SamCoatesTimes/status/959006916579155974

out Govt. in action.

"First civil service analysis for the bill makes “no deal” look unattractive.

Britain’s 75,000 hauliers can use EU roads because of EU membership. If we crash out they rely on a permit system for “3rd countries”

Officials think we will get 1,200 permits, devastating the industry"

"So the first reason the bill is causing tension is some Brexiteers in government think this analysis too gloomy.

Some Brexiteer spads are attacking civil service pessimism (sounds familiar!)

Others think it make “no deal” look awful thereby undermining our negotiating hand"

"The other tension is that Ministers and Officials close to the negotiation also think Haulage bill should be paused because:

1. We will get a deal so why waste time and money on this bill
2. The transition negotiations are delicate so why antagonise Brussels"

meanwhile





That's my area.. no way that airport is suitable.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/02/01/david-davis-used-give-advice-businesses-perhaps-like-read/

Before entering politics, David Davis was a senior executive at Tate & Lyle. Naturally the fruits of his wisdom were sought throughout the world of management. Indeed, in 1985 no less than the Harvard Business Review commissioned him to write an article about the risks inherent in launching big projects. Here was his advice.

Big projects, warned Mr Davis, frequently proved far costlier than managers had bargained for – particularly if the projects suffered from “inadequate design”, with managers recklessly “proceeding with the project on the basis of a skimpy feasibility study with many unknowns”. All too often, he wrote, “ignorance governs decisions”, although “the people connected with their development rarely admit it”.

Ultimately, concluded Mr Davis, it was better to “abandon the project rather than throw good money after bad”. Regrettably, however, some managers simply couldn’t bring...

... quite.

Tate and Lyle was one of the biggest backers of Brexit.

They are happy because now this American owned firm can import cheap cane sugar from Belize and undercut UK beet growers.

Naturally, I fully expect people to disagree with me, but I think the EU have made another tactical blunder, on par with their whitewash when Cameron asked for more powers, in relation to insisting that the transition period allows the free movement of EU citizens into Britain.

I don't think the EU have learned anything from the referendum.

For the record, I am pro-immigration, but a lot of our countrymen and women obviously take a different view.

The referendum result was won on immigration IMO, and nothing will rally the British people more against the EU, or harden Brexit support, than free movement.

Such an easy victory for May to gain support, and even Labour will be reluctant to challanege May on it, because they know working-class Labour supporters in the Labour heartlands are sensitive about immigration.

If I were a Remain supporter, I'd be shaking my head at the folly of Brussel's latest demand...

One of the four fundamental freedoms of the EU is free movement of people.

It's May who has suddenly done a froot loop and said it won't be allowed during the transition period, not the EU.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
One of the four fundamental freedoms of the EU is free movement of people.

It's May who has suddenly done a froot loop and said it won't be allowed during the transition period, not the EU.

I am in total agreement with you, which may surprise you.

None the less, you and I both know that immigration is a red rag to a bull, as far as the British public is concerned.

I suspect the EU knows this. May certainly knows it, hence the move. It's low cunning, but effective, red meat thrown to the Tory backbenchers. Like I say, Labour will have to tread very carefully.

The immigration issue is only going to complicate talks even more, and increases the chances of a no deal situation.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:



I am in total agreement with you, which may surprise you.

None the less, you and I both know that immigration is a red rag to a bull, as far as the British public is concerned.

I suspect the EU knows this. May certainly knows it, hence the move. It's low cunning, but effective, red meat thrown to the Tory backbenchers. Like I say, Labour will have to tread very carefully.

The immigration issue is only going to complicate talks even more, and increases the chances of a no deal situation.

So rather than challenging the bigotry and racism of the minority in her own back ranks she bows down before them emboldening their view that someone how the populace of the UK is superior. What message does that send to the British public? That they are correct, that these attitudes should prevail. The way to make something unacceptable is not surrendering under a slight breeze because it might cause a bit of disruption. I'd be more impressed if she slapped them down hard and provided a message as to why such views are unacceptable in todays society. We didn't make drink driving generally unacceptable by allowing softening our stance because of a few disruptive MPs.

The EU could have sacrificed free movement but that is one of their fundamental ideals. Chipping away at these over time results in their eventual collapse.

On a practical note it is going to be almost impossible for a company that has to abide by the EU rules then have different rules for one set of EU employees compared to another. How are they going to be able to validate whether someone is suitable or not. Honestly if I was the business I'd just ignore the bigoted rules.

May's problem is that while the hard core Brexiteers in the Tory Party are in the minority, they are more kamikaze.

The gak will hit the fan if and when the more numerous softcore + Remainer members of the party decide they need to man up and kick the Brexiteers into touch.

When that happens, May will be up the proverbial creek, because she finally will be forced to adopt a real position.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

The BBC wrote:Are the Conservatives now unleadable on Brexit?

It is a good summary of the situation.

 Whirlwind wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:



I am in total agreement with you, which may surprise you.

None the less, you and I both know that immigration is a red rag to a bull, as far as the British public is concerned.

I suspect the EU knows this. May certainly knows it, hence the move. It's low cunning, but effective, red meat thrown to the Tory backbenchers. Like I say, Labour will have to tread very carefully.

The immigration issue is only going to complicate talks even more, and increases the chances of a no deal situation.

So rather than challenging the bigotry and racism of the minority in her own back ranks she bows down before them emboldening their view that someone how the populace of the UK is superior. What message does that send to the British public? That they are correct, that these attitudes should prevail. The way to make something unacceptable is not surrendering under a slight breeze because it might cause a bit of disruption. I'd be more impressed if she slapped them down hard and provided a message as to why such views are unacceptable in todays society. We didn't make drink driving generally unacceptable by allowing softening our stance because of a few disruptive MPs.

The EU could have sacrificed free movement but that is one of their fundamental ideals. Chipping away at these over time results in their eventual collapse.

On a practical note it is going to be almost impossible for a company that has to abide by the EU rules then have different rules for one set of EU employees compared to another. How are they going to be able to validate whether someone is suitable or not. Honestly if I was the business I'd just ignore the bigoted rules.

Again, I don't disagree with this, I'm just putting the facts of the matter on the table:

1. The British public is bitterly divided on immigration.

2. May is a lame duck PM, with not a lot of room to manouvere.

3. It's a minority government, so the Tory backbenchers wield power and influence.

4. The EU can't budge an inch on freedom of movement. I can't fault the logic. I'd do exactly the same if I were the EU.

This all adds up to irrisistable force meeeting immovable object.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
May's problem is that while the hard core Brexiteers in the Tory Party are in the minority, they are more kamikaze.

The gak will hit the fan if and when the more numerous softcore + Remainer members of the party decide they need to man up and kick the Brexiteers into touch.

When that happens, May will be up the proverbial creek, because she finally will be forced to adopt a real position.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

The BBC wrote:Are the Conservatives now unleadable on Brexit?

It is a good summary of the situation.

If you're counting on Remain Tory MPs to do the right thing for your side of the argument, then you've come to the wrong place.

They know where their bread is buttered.

Party before country - that's the Tory motto.

Well you see, I think that the non-HC-Brexiteer Tories understand that Brexit is going to be a huge disaster that if "owned" by the Conservative Party will destroy it for a generation.

Therefore they will try to avoid that outcome.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

Again, I don't disagree with this, I'm just putting the facts of the matter on the table:

1. The British public is bitterly divided on immigration.

2. May is a lame duck PM, with not a lot of room to manouvere.

3. It's a minority government, so the Tory backbenchers wield power and influence.

4. The EU can't budge an inch on freedom of movement. I can't fault the logic. I'd do exactly the same if I were the EU.

This all adds up to irrisistable force meeeting immovable object.

She is weak because she shows week in, week out that she tries to keep everyone happy, however unpalatable their views are. As you've pointed Tories will support their party first before country. So she could quite easily stare them down and say 'fine you do what you need to do, but I won't support a bigoted agenda'. Then they have to make a choice about whether they want to ruin the country or abide by more sensible views of the world. What she demonstrates now is that they can pull her whatever way they want and she simply has no control. But by doing so it allows a cancer to grow and fester in people's views on immigrants.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

Again, I don't disagree with this, I'm just putting the facts of the matter on the table:

1. The British public is bitterly divided on immigration.

2. May is a lame duck PM, with not a lot of room to outmaneuver.

3. It's a minority government, so the Tory backbenchers wield power and influence.

4. The EU can't budge an inch on freedom of movement. I can't fault the logic. I'd do exactly the same if I were the EU.

This all adds up to irresistible force meeting immovable object.

You left out that Ireland is waiting in the wings to complicate things further.

Finally we are getting the to the tricky parts of the deal.

EU seeks powers to stop post-Brexit bonfire of regulation
https://www.ft.com/content/9052ed50-06d5-11e8-9650-9c0ad2d7c5b5

The EU is threatening sanctions to stop Britain undercutting the continent’s economy after Brexit, including “tax blacklists” and penalties against state-subsidised companies, according to a strategy paper.

The measures, outlined in a presentation to EU27 member states last week, show the bloc wants unprecedented safeguards after the UK leaves to preserve a “level playing field” and counter the “clear risks” of Britain slashing taxes or relaxing regulation.

Brussels describes the UK economy as too big and too close to treat like a normal trade partner and wants to define new ways to enforce restrictions on taxation, state aid, environmental standards and employment rights.

The negotiators said any deal on future relations had to “cater to the specificities” of the UK-EU relations — implying the “depth and breadth” of relations justifies tighter controls than those expected of the US, Japan or Canada.

And here's my prediction for the Tory response.

Week 1. No no no. None of that. None at all. We're going to pull out with no deal. And retain our veto. And get exactly the trade deal we want because reasons.

Weeks 2-26 - various flip flopping

Weeks 27 - Those in charge of Brexit found grabbing their ankles, acquiescing to every EU demand, whilst whispering 'please sir, may I have another'.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Naturally, I fully expect people to disagree with me, but I think the EU have made another tactical blunder, on par with their whitewash when Cameron asked for more powers, in relation to insisting that the transition period allows the free movement of EU citizens into Britain.

As I understand it, May hasn't even mentioned movement in Brexit discussions with Brussels, or in cabinet meetings.
Why would freedom of movement be changed in the transition period? the whole point is to give time to prepare for the changes before they come into effect thus everything remains the same until the transition period ends and we may be in a position to handle the ensuing clusterfeth.

EU has always been firm that citizens rights are to be upheld whether they moved before or after the transition started.

We know this will be the case, May is making noise to appease the frothers, we all know she'll fold like wet paper.

Is there a level of shambles above "omnishambles"?

This government qualifies.

If wrexit wouldn't hurt getting 30k models this would be great entertaiment.

tneva82 wrote:
If wrexit wouldn't hurt getting 30k models this would be great entertaiment.

It won't. There's a not improbable chance that you'll be able to fly to WHW, buy a good supply of models in pounds and fly back for the same price they're not charging in euros.

Hard Brexit would shrink the Welsh economy by 8 to 10%

Welsh first minister trails potential constitutional clash with Westminster.

You know, I've just realised something.

The whole Brexit debacle and the Tory incompetence paints into stark light the true problem with the UK being part of Europe.

It's not that Europe is, or ever has been, some kind of fascist bully-boy. It's been our own government's utter, utter incompetence.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Is there a level of shambles above "omnishambles"?

This government qualifies.

Meta-shambles? When even the shambles are in shambles.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Is there a level of shambles above "omnishambles"?

This government qualifies.

clusterfeth?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Hard Brexit would shrink the Welsh economy by 8 to 10%

Welsh first minister trails potential constitutional clash with Westminster.

Yet another turkey that is now upset when it realised that all the pictures of Christmas dinner tables weren’t a lie and the farmers weren’t being honest about the lorry taking them to a big party in their honour.

Hum, well, it started the day after the referendum.

Cornwall fears loss of funding after backing Brexit

Region was on course to benefit from £2.5bn of funding between 2000 and 2020 but voted 56% in favour of leaving EU

(26 June 2016)

Normally, I would reply to other people's comments,

but I've just realised that the best hope for Brexit relies on May staying as PM...

To have your hopes in the hands of one of the weakest and most feeblest PM's in British history...

We all disagree on Brexit, but we can all agree that this lack of a strategy, something, anything for us to hang our hats on, is shambolic.

Hard Brexit? Soft Brexit? Canada? Norway? Switzerland? Singapore? North Korea? Vulcan? Klingon? A trade deal with B5's league of non-aligned worlds??

Give us something!!!!!!

Lack of strategy plays into Hard Brexit, because that is the default result if the negotiations fail for whatever reason.

It all depends on the Brexit you want. I'm happy for May to do it as she'll get us Brexit in name only whilst simultaneously killing off the Tories.

If you actually want a hunger games Brexit then you want someone like Mogg.