BS: brexit matters

Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 07 Sep 17 - 07:21 PM

When I was 13 I'd stay up late for BBC2's European movies... 😜

that's probably when I first became an internationalist...

Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Sep 17 - 07:24 PM

I caught the end and will watch the whole thing on catch-up.

Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Sep 17 - 03:33 AM

"that's probably when I first became an internationalist..."
When I first moved to Manchester one of the cinemas had just started an Ingmar Bergman season - I saw every one of them (sometimes two a day) - have been a manic depressive ever since!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 08 Sep 17 - 05:34 AM

From: Steve Shaw - PM
Date: 07 Sep 17 - 05:30 PM

The EU wants the money they think we should be paying.
No, they appear to have picked a nice round figure out of thin air.
If you have good reason to dispute the amount they're asking for, let's be having it, preferably without the little Englander hubris.
If they won't tell the UK how this figure has been arrived at, how can we dispute it, either in total or line by line?

And it's perfectly right that they want a financial settlement resolved before discussing trade arrangements. Why would any rational negotiator want those two issues enmeshed?
Maybe we should agree the payment in order to get things moving, and then re-negotiate it later. But better yet, let's get on with things.
The EU may not want the two items enmeshed, but they need to take account of their own instructions.
According to European Council (Art. 50) guidelines for Brexit negotiations "2. Negotiations under Article 50 TEU will be conducted in transparency and as a single package. In accordance with the principle that nothing is agreed until everything is agreed, individual items cannot be settled separately."

So, by their own rules, set out at the start of the process, we are not able to agree (and be bound by)their claim for an 'exit payment' at this point in the negotiations.

I do like your line Why would any rational negotiator want those two issues enmeshed? as I have made clear above that it is the EU that has enmeshed the two, and so, are being described by you as irrational!

Cheers
Nigel

Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters
From: Iains
Date: 08 Sep 17 - 05:40 AM

Mr Parsons. Well Done Sir!

Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 08 Sep 17 - 05:43 AM

"Steve Shaw wrote: It is not about tit-for-tat
But it does seem to be about tit for tat, doesn't it?

You're leaving so you get nothing."

What I meant is that being in the EU is not necessarily about getting a return pound for pound monetarily or in material goods. It's more about being in a bloc of nations that share similar ideals in terms of human rights, democracy and the rule of law and with whom we can freely trade and enjoy freedom of movement. Not saying that a lot hasn't gone pear-shaped, but that's the idea. And during our membership we have embraced almost all EU laws with very little dispute. In the amended words of Joni, many of us won't realise what we had 'til it's gone.

Had a letter from Calor Gas yesterday containing my renewed contract. If I want to leave, I have to agree to pay them £300-plus to remove the bulk tank. I don't like it, but If I ever do leave (unlikely as it happens) I have to stump up, don't I? After all, I did agree to it. No unseemly squabbling, as we're seeing Davis and his sorry ilk engaging in.

Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters
From: akenaton
Date: 08 Sep 17 - 06:07 AM

"Freedom of movement" was a parasitic economic policy.

What do you not understand about that? "To make us more competitive in the global economy!"......Mr A Blair (Labour)

Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters
From: akenaton
Date: 08 Sep 17 - 06:11 AM

The social consequences were never even contemplated.

Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 08 Sep 17 - 06:38 AM

We are now a global village. The worlds resources are limited and should be used to their best advantage globally. This includes labour. Borders and boundaries were created by men in a time when we needed to defend our own resources. We should have grown up enough to realise that we now need to pool them. Sadly, judging from attitudes on here and elsewhere, that does not seem to have happened. I doubt it will in my lifetime and as long as people maintain their selfish parochial attitudes I have fears it ever will. :-(

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Sep 17 - 07:10 AM

If I want to leave, I have to agree to pay them £300-plus to remove the bulk tank.

Perfectly reasonable.
What equivalent expense will the EU incur when we leave?

If we were a net beneficiary, would they be demanding to pay us money before negotiating trade?

Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters
From: Stu
Date: 08 Sep 17 - 07:10 AM

""Freedom of movement" was a parasitic economic policy."

No it wasn't. One example: It enabled a seamless exchange of skills and expertise at the highest levels of scientific research and development and gave the UK a competitive edge when developing new technologies.

That's one huge advantage being pissed away.

Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters
From: Iains
Date: 08 Sep 17 - 07:28 AM

"We are now a global village" All well and good until your village has something that my village wants.
Resource wars are only just beginning while opposing sides joust for position.
The only thing "grown up" about it is that the biggest bully aims to take all!

Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 08 Sep 17 - 08:05 AM

All well and good until your village has something that my village wants.

My village IS your village. You seem to have missed the point of the phrase "We are now a global village". Of course when the Phenglions from Betelgeuse turn up we may have a different set of problems...

Not sure what your point is about "the only grown up thing" is. I did say we should have grown up enough . Not that we have.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters
From: Iains
Date: 08 Sep 17 - 08:16 AM

My point is the global village only exists as a utopian dream. You can see the reality each time you update the news.

Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 08 Sep 17 - 08:42 AM

I can only repeat what I said on 07 Sep 17 at 09:31 AM

You may say I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you'll join us
And the world will live as one

And before anyone says anything about dreams vs reality remember that none of us are doing anything whatsoever to improve the situation by posting on here. Even as armchair warriors, posting on an obscure forum of interest only to a small minority, we are way down the food chain. We are neither informing anyone of anything new nor improving anyone's lot. At least we can be honest and say what we would like to see.

Pretty much like folk singers perfoming protest songs...

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters
From: Stu
Date: 08 Sep 17 - 09:14 AM

"Even as armchair warriors"

Speak for yourself. I am active in my local community socially, culturally and economically and attend public meetings, hustings, planning committee meetings and talk to local councillors, engage with the town council and frequently write to my MP.

So there.

Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 08 Sep 17 - 09:27 AM

Speak for yourself.

Sorry, Stu, but on here you are an armchair warrior. I never intimated that doing that precludes anyone from being a real warrior in real life. Socially or otherwise.

I am also active in a number of organisations for the betterment of my fellow man.

So there to you too :-P

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters
From: Stu
Date: 08 Sep 17 - 09:53 AM

Community level is the only way to make a difference. National politics is too partisan and led by corporate and establishment interests and local politics also suffers from tribalism and local authorities are pretty much corrupt to the core.

Nope, the only way things happen is when folk get out and make them happen.

Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 08 Sep 17 - 10:12 AM

Lovely stuff in the Independent :-)

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters
From: Iains
Date: 08 Sep 17 - 10:26 AM

"I am also active in a number of organisations for the betterment of my fellow man."
unlike some here that like to belittle their fellow man!

Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 08 Sep 17 - 10:42 AM

From: Steve Shaw - PM
Date: 08 Sep 17 - 05:43 AM

Had a letter from Calor Gas yesterday containing my renewed contract. If I want to leave, I have to agree to pay them £300-plus to remove the bulk tank. I don't like it, but If I ever do leave (unlikely as it happens) I have to stump up, don't I? After all, I did agree to it. No unseemly squabbling, as we're seeing Davis and his sorry ilk engaging in.

Fair enough, if, as you state, you agreed to severance terms in your contract you have to live by that.
When UK joined the common market, no severance terms were mentioned. So there is no correlation between the two situations, except possibly the attempt by the larger partner to prevent the smaller partner from leaving by applying a severance charge.

Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters
From: Stu
Date: 08 Sep 17 - 10:54 AM

"When UK joined the common market, no severance terms were mentioned."

The terms and conditions were updated.

Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters
From: MikeL2
Date: 08 Sep 17 - 11:01 AM

Hi Steve

<" If you wear a very large pink carnation and wave a copy of The Guardian over your head every time a camera gets anywhere near you, I'll know it's you! ">

I will probably waving an empty pint pot to my mate to get them in.

Cheers

Mike

Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 08 Sep 17 - 01:51 PM

I will probably waving an empty pint pot to my mate to get them in.

Not in the stands at City :-( They were pretty strict on that whan I went.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters
From: MikeL2
Date: 08 Sep 17 - 02:49 PM

Hi Dave


makes sense really. Do you think they will allow to take cup (Cardboard) of coffee?

Gone are the days when you used to take booze on the terraces. Sales of Daily Mirror rocketed !!! lol

Regards mike

Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters
From: Teribus
Date: 08 Sep 17 - 05:49 PM

I think that Nigel Parson's post:

Nigel Parsons - 08 Sep 17 - 05:34 AM

Is possibly the best post I have ever read on Mudcat. Beautifully succinct, it struck down a lamentably poor argument with the efficiency of a QC.

I particularly loved this bit of it:

"Maybe we should agree the payment in order to get things moving, and then re-negotiate it later. But better yet, let's get on with things.

The EU may not want the two items enmeshed, but they need to take account of their own instructions.

According to European Council (Art. 50) guidelines for Brexit negotiations "2. Negotiations under Article 50 TEU will be conducted in transparency and as a single package. In accordance with the principle that nothing is agreed until everything is agreed, individual items cannot be settled separately.

So, by their own rules, set out at the start of the process, we are not able to agree (and be bound by)their claim for an 'exit payment' at this point in the negotiations.

I do like your line Why would any rational negotiator want those two issues enmeshed? as I have made clear above that it is the EU that has enmeshed the two, and so, are being described by you as irrational!

Cheers
Nigel

Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 08 Sep 17 - 07:30 PM

Clear as mud, Bill. Try again in the morning after a couple of Anadins.

Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters
From: Teribus
Date: 09 Sep 17 - 02:14 AM

Clear as crystal to everybody else Shaw:

The EU Commission cannot even follow their own rules and guidelines, apart of course for on the rare occasions where it suits them. THAT has always been the major failing of the EU Project, but what would anyone expect from a lash-up as corrupt as the EU, a cosy club whose sole purpose from the outset was to keep France and Germany sweet. After the end of March 2019 with the UK out, I don't think German industry and the German people will be all that happy as it will be them that have to take up the slack and pay in even more to keep the gravy train on the rails.

Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters
From: Iains
Date: 09 Sep 17 - 04:00 AM

"Clear as mud, Bill. Try again in the morning after a couple of Anadins."

I see no counter argument can be given so the normal response of insult occurs.
Strange the moderators do not appear to delete these sort of responses from certain people.

Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 09 Sep 17 - 04:29 AM

There is no counter argument because there is no argument in the first place. Tezzer just sychophantically repeated Nigel's post. Carry on arguing about the argument itself though by all means but don't complain when the thread gets closed.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Sep 17 - 04:43 AM

Do any of you think UK should pay more than is reasonable?
Would you be happy for our negotiators to accept the first figure produced by EU?

Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Sep 17 - 05:01 AM

I should like the evidence that the EU Commission rarely follows its own rules and guidelines. Only a close observer over a number of years could have come up with such a claim. So let's be having a dozen or two examples of how the rules and guidelines are flouted. Easy to say...

Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Sep 17 - 05:10 AM

Anyway, it's raining which means I can't cut the grass which means I can watch Man City v Liverpool at 12.30. I predict Blues 1 Reds 3. The way politics should always be! My cousin has a City season ticket but, luckily, he doesn't read Mudcat.

Ok, Iains, let's be having one of your sneery insults as a nice follow-up to your last post. I may even give you a recipe if you oblige. Hypocrite.

Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Sep 17 - 05:13 AM

Steve, the example has already been given twice.

Here it is again, "2. Negotiations under Article 50 TEU will be conducted in transparency and as a single package. In accordance with the principle that nothing is agreed until everything is agreed, individual items cannot be settled separately."

Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Sep 17 - 05:22 AM

"Do any of you think UK should pay more than is reasonable?
Would you be happy for our negotiators to accept the first figure produced by EU?"

So what's a reasonable figure, Keith, and who's going to arrive at it?

Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Sep 17 - 05:27 AM

One example, which is dubious in any case, is not evidence that the EU rarely follows it's own rules and guidelines. "Rarely" means that it follows them on very few out of many occasions. I'm afraid that Teribus's remark was throwaway.

Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Sep 17 - 05:28 AM

The apostrophe goblin strike's again...

Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Sep 17 - 05:35 AM

So what's a reasonable figure, Keith, and who's going to arrive at it?

It will have to be arrived at by negotiation, with EU justifying every item.
You seem to be objecting to UK questioning the figure demanded.
Are you?
Do you advocate we accept the first amount they demand without itemisation?

Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Sep 17 - 05:40 AM

Steve,
One example, which is dubious in any case,

It is not dubious and is easily verified, e.g.
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/eu-agreed-brexit-negotiating-stance-133719883.html

Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Sep 17 - 06:19 AM

I have neither indicated that I think we shouldn't negotiate nor have I said that we should accept the first figure. Stop being a complete trolling arse. And one more time. I don't give a fig for your ONE example. "Rarely follows its own rules and guidelines" means that "ON THE MANY OCCASIONS THAT THE EU SHOULD HAVE FOLLOWED ITS OWN RULES AND GUIDELINES, IT FAILED TO DO SO IN THE VAST MAJORITY OF CASES." Now I am asking for a sufficient number of examples of those occasions, which must be set against the occasions when it DID follow the rules and guidelines, in order to substantiate what was an easy europhobic remark to make but which is very difficult to back up. If you can't debate honestly, just clear off.

Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Sep 17 - 06:28 AM

I am debating honestly.

You said,
"The EU wants the money they think we should be paying. If you have good reason to dispute the amount they're asking for, let's be having it, preferably without the little Englander hubris.

And it's perfectly right that they want a financial settlement resolved before discussing trade arrangements."

It reads like we should pay what "The EU wants" and that you support them breaking their own rule by demanding the bill is agreed separately and first.

Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters
From: Stu
Date: 09 Sep 17 - 07:10 AM

"It will have to be arrived at by negotiation, with EU justifying every item."

There are two sides in this negotiation, and it's incumbent on both of them to reach agreement, so BOTH sides have to reach compromise. By going into the negotiation with one or other saying their opposite has to justify everything, this could take forever and comes across as belligerence.

We are leaving them, not the other way around so the onus is on us to make sure we reach a compromise, not least for the good of the people of these islands. The alternative, a hard "fuck 'em all" brexit would be the worst possible outcome, as it is there will be no winners in this lunacy, but at least our idiot Tory Brexit team should be acting like statesmen and not petulant children. For all our sakes.

Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 09 Sep 17 - 08:24 AM

"The ability to do exactly as we like whenever we like will be severely curtailed."

So you want to take away from those beneath you the right to chose their career, and be told the type of work to prioritise the 'states' needs. This has the stench of Stalinism/Naziism doesn't it.

So is this going to start with redeploying those in cushy, well-paid jobs into the agricultural, personal care and sweat-shop sectors - there are plenty of skilled people from overseas who are qualified to employ into skilled, professional and management work.

Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Sep 17 - 08:45 AM

Stu,
By going into the negotiation with one or other saying their opposite has to justify everything, this could take forever and comes across as belligerence.

Of course they have to justify the sum they are demanding.
Of course we should only pay what we consider we rightfully owe.

We are leaving them, not the other way around so the onus is on us to make sure we reach a compromise,

When you check out of an hotel, if you consider the bill excessive, you go through the itemised bill and check that you agree with what you are being charged for.

An itemised bill is expected.

Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 09 Sep 17 - 09:01 AM

Of course we must pay into the EU indefinitely to compensate half-billion people for the effect our pathetic little hissy fit will have on the structural development of EU member states that are economically lagging behind. If we do not continue to live up to our responsibilities, either remaining or leaving (= paying but not wanting any of the benefits). Of course there will be people here with a f*** everyone else attitude, but I do not want to be labeled as a nasty, isolationist piece of excrement.

Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters
From: Stu
Date: 09 Sep 17 - 09:17 AM

"An itemised bill is expected."

Then brexit will take forever. Fine by me.

Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Sep 17 - 09:40 AM

I am debating honestly.

You said,
"The EU wants the money they think we should be paying. If you have good reason to dispute the amount they're asking for, let's be having it, preferably without the little Englander hubris.

And it's perfectly right that they want a financial settlement resolved before discussing trade arrangements."

It reads like we should pay what "The EU wants" and that you support them breaking their own rule by demanding the bill is agreed separately and first.

It reads like no such thing. Once again you indulge in your slimy, disreputable trick of deliberately misinterpreting your opponents' posts in order to make a vacuous case against them. My words are clear. Take them or leave them but don't come on this forum with your silly, disreputable mischief.

Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Sep 17 - 09:52 AM

And just get a load of this piece of little-Englander drivel:

"Of course they have to justify the sum they are demanding.
Of course we should only pay what we consider we rightfully owe."

So WE don't have to justify anything. THEY have to do the justifying. WE should tell them what's fair for us to pay. WE know what we "rightfully owe" and THEY don't get a penny more. End of.

Tell you what, Keith. Why don't you add on to your little analysis "And who won the bloody war anyway?"

Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 09 Sep 17 - 09:54 AM

There's a live feed on FB at the moment from the anti-BrexShit demo in London. A great many of the 'comments' rolling up on it are from Pro-BrexShitters, and a considerable number of those proclaim that they 'voted for democracy', and that anyone who disagrees with them is a 'traitor' who should be forced to leave the UK,

Oh, the delicious irony! Sadly, those thick dipshits don't even get it.

Subject: RE: BS: brexit matters
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Sep 17 - 10:02 AM

By the way, the EU is NOT breaching its stated negotiating guidelines in the way you allege. From the Guardian:

[stated EU policy:] "Negotiations under article 50 will be conducted as a single package. In accordance with the principle that nothing is agreed until everything is agreed, individual items cannot be settled separately."

Superficially, this sounds promising. Downing Street wants everything on the table at once, so it can use trade and security as leverage. But the EU is actually only making the point that this principle applies to article 50 talks, ie the terms of exit, not what follows after.

Try again. And do try to apply a dose of honesty this time.