That is amusing. We are all going to need a good sense of humour in the new year.
Brexited | the worst threads live the longest
- Thread starter Silva
- Start date
That is amusing. We are all going to need a good sense of humour in the new year.
That wouldn't be different, you described an unilateral decision which is inherent to all deals, unilateral means that the decision is taken by one side without the other side input. And it doesn't address the issue, the issue isn't about how to end a deal but how to make a deal work when one side wants to diverge while being in the same trade area where there is no custom or border checks.
If one side diverged, ie the EU believed the UK was behaving unfairly, then the EU would end the deal, that is the point. I would just see a formal period of notice being put in the agreement.
I don't think anyone is saying there is any problem 'making the deal work' unless that divergence occurs, so I'm not with you there, sorry.
The point is to not have to end the deal, to have agreements in place that prevent the situation where either side feels that it has to put an end to the deal. You are not addressing the problem and simply managing the termination of the deal which isn't the point and not a problem.
An analogy would be that we are trying to find ways to avoid a fire to start and you suggest that the solution is that if the fire start we put water on it.
I'm with you now hopefully, you want a perfect long-term deal, which would be great if it happened, but I don't think it will. I'm describing a deal that might be signed now, one that might be merely kicking the can down the road rather than addressing the problem, but it would hardly be the first time politicians did that of course.
No, I don't want a perfect long term deal, that's the point that I'm making. The problem is the long term viability of the deal which is why I told you that you are not addressing the problem and even worse your proposition is comestic because you always have the right to unilaterally put an end to an international deal.
I get that you want a deal that is sure to be viable long-term, my point is that it might be possible to agree one that isn't, only might of course. Politicians do cosmetic I think.
No you don't get it, you seem to think that it's what I personally want when I'm telling you that it's what an FTA is supposed to create, you don't negotiate during 4 or 5 years for a deal that will only survive 1 year. You are purposely ignoring the problem and providing an answer that doesn't address it.
Edit: Here are some of the problems.
What are the basic rules that we both agree on?
If someone wants to diverge significantly, how both sides find a common ground?
If someone diverges without notifying the other, how do we fix the potential issues and who is the arbitrator?
If a national commits an offense that affects someone from an other country, which juridiction is in charge, where the complaint is received and how?
Last edited:
There may be divergence that would lead to the end of the agreement yes, or there may not, but we differ on whether that is a reason not to sign one now of course.
Your point on arbitration and jurisdiction is vital though. I may be mis-remembering, I often do, but did this same problem not delay the signing of the transition agreement for some time? How was it resolved then?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cod_Wars
There is precedent.....we take fishing very seriously in Europe.
Not a good sign for the UK, from the first paragraph in that link: " Each of the disputes ended with an Icelandic victory. "
Or a good sign, as the principle that a nation could control fishing access to it's own waters was maintained.
I don't think anyone expects fishing to be a reason not make an agreement, unless either or both sides don't want to make an agreement in the first place.
How to win friends and influence people...
What a bureaucratic barstard! He can elk right off!
We are the European equivalent of Kim Jong in North Korea. Waving our weapon around like a bunch of nationalistic idiots, alienating any potential allies.
Fair enough, I just read the first paragraph to make sure "the cod wars" were actually something that happened.
This thread in an interesting read. I'm sure many would like to see the UK roll over and give the EU whatever it likes. There's idiots on both side of the discussions it seems. Neither the UK or EU has come out of matters looking well. That said both are trying to look after their own interests so it's to be expected.
Very much agree. Such reductions threats have a habit of rebounding through unintended consequences.
For me, it has nothing at all to do with rolling over.
It has everything to do with being a high integrity partner which other countries want to do business with for mutual benefit.
But we are acting like completely the opposite.
BravoPrecisely, whatever happened to British dignity?
Sadly (and not even wrongly) , what brexiteers will take from that is a much smaller country was able to 'defend' its rights, its territorial waters and dignity against a much larger and more powerful enemy and ultimately ended up being on the right side of history as it were.
It's actually an interesting read, at one point Iceland were threatening to withdraw from NATO.
When you play poker do you try to bluff on every hand? That's pretty much what we're trying to do against an opponent with more chips and better cards. Unless they fold, which they show no sign of doing, then it's just going to result in a loss for us - in this case a loss of trade, power and influence.
If you have a significant amount of money, you can do better by using a currency broker. We used one when we bought our house here, as we were cash buyers and Italy requires a bank cheque from an Italian bank when you buy property.
The broker held our funds for a while and then exchanged them to euros when the rate was decent - the euro was worth about 78p at the time.
Both sides have said no deal is a bad solution. The UK unilaterally chose to leave because they were sure they could get a good deal. The EU's interests have been clear from before the UK even left, long before the claims of an oven-ready deal were made. Saying neither side comes out of this looking well is like looking at a scene of one person shooting themselves in the foot while another person spills some coffee in response and saying "well, neither side came out of this looking well". The EU did what any large trading bloc would do in a mess someone else created. The UK acted like amateurs.
The exchange rate depends on what happens to the markets next of course, but it's currently looking likely that the worth of your pounds savings in euros will go down, yeah. But maybe things will recover quickly in the spring after an initial dip. Plus there's the uncertainty due to the pandemic; who knows what that will do.
Apart from that though, it also depends on where you're living now and where you're moving. Here in Canada, my Ottawa house is worth little in the Vancouver housing market but would buy me an estate on Cape Breton Island, all in the same Canadian dollars. So it's hard to say really.
If it did come to that I presume the British fishermen would expect a warm welcome at the European ports where they would need to dock in order to sell their catch from british waters.
On a conspiratorial note maybe Boris's rich friends didn't want him to announce a no deal whilst the markets were closed.
Last edited:
So, it seems, they've finally admitted that the only 'benefit' of Brexit is UK sovereignty.
fecking hell
fecking hell
So, it seems, they've finally admitted that the only 'benefit' of Brexit is UK sovereignty.
fecking hell
Ingerlund
Before, the delays weren't as much of a big deal, as they are now.
Every day that passes without a decision leads to a huge amount of uncertainty....I'll be honest, I'm going to stock up a little on key things.
The third and final lockdown (I predict a 3 week lockdown mid Jan) will provide a small amount of breathing room for the Govt to sort some shit out, but after that, it won't be good. Unless of course we get a deal, and we end up looking like a bunch of fecking idiots because we get a worse deal than what we were in.
Every day that passes without a decision leads to a huge amount of uncertainty....I'll be honest, I'm going to stock up a little on key things.
The third and final lockdown (I predict a 3 week lockdown mid Jan) will provide a small amount of breathing room for the Govt to sort some shit out, but after that, it won't be good. Unless of course we get a deal, and we end up looking like a bunch of fecking idiots because we get a worse deal than what we were in.
What will you stock up on?
So what happened today anyway? They just agreed to keep negotiating?
It is 100% guaranteed that the deal won't be anywhere near close to what the UK had already. Even with a deal the customs checks will still be there.
Not decided yet....basics really, just enough to have for 2-3 weeks extra in case things go bad
100%.
It will be chilled foods imported from the EU that may fall short imo.
Just what is this loss of power and influence? Some loss of trade I would accept, although it goes both ways, certain states within the EU will lose out, as with Ireland, quite heavily.
Its the power and influence bit... we only have any real power and influence when we are giving money or resources away, and we usually get little in return. The only real power and influence the UK exercises these days is via our seat/vote on the UN Security Council and if we stay in the EU that is likely to get swallowed up (along with France's seat) in favour of the USE; resulting from the march to 'every closer' Union The UK's supposed 'soft power' that people sometimes spout, is an illusion made up by others to 'big us up' when they want something from us.
Loss of trade with Brexit, yes there has always been a big risk and in the short term highly likely to be losses, but this business of loss of power and influence is an illusion. Just as some Brexiteers spout about 'sovereignty', some remainers spout about loss of 'power and influence' in both cases the majority is illusionary.
I heard today on the BBC that the only thing that has not been agreed is the fishing situation.
If that is correct, there must be progress being made.
If that is correct, there must be progress being made.
Actually there's vast amounts of EU regulations that are written almost exactly as proposed by UK regulatory bodies/ government. Something like 98% of regulations proposed by the UK have been adopted more or less unamended since we joined the EEA or whatever it was called. Now we will get 100% of nothing, yay. Or we'll make up our own rules and the trade deal goes out the window, double yay.
We also used to benefit disproportionately from EU science funding before Brexit too, not any more, we've been awarded much less than we put in since 2016 because nobody knows if the project would even have got finished since nobody knew when we were "leaving" or what "leaving" means.
Other examples would be e.g. the European Medicines Agency which used to be headquartered in London and has now I think moved to Amsterdam.
There are many more, these are just what spring to mind.