Progress on Brexit talks

[Judy in the sky]

Doesn't matter if there are no actual figures to go on, Bernier has stated that there is a "bill" to pay to leave the EU.. I just wonder if May has offered him £50 and he's said "I was really looking for £75.. Sounds like bartering is alive and kicking in the EU. We should go for a hard Brexit and walk away with no money exchanging hands. Bernier will be apoplexic (just before losing his job for not getting a bloody penny from the UK)

 

[IWalkLikeHimaMartian]

Actually, the largest minority of electors, elected suffcient politicians to form a govenment.

Do you not think your comment should have been in response to BraFriend? He was the one suffering from a misunderstanding:

Thus providing a safety valve against explosions of a disgruntled majority. Do you know what a majority is John?

Now if this was Wannabe replying, it would have gone along the lines of "You really don't know anything about politics do you, you're obviously useless and worthless, and being so stupid, I'm amazed they even let you vote. Minorities don't elect politicians, people vote for their party, and the party with the greatest number of politicians then forms a government."

Nearly as good as mine but more verbose:

You do not know what a majority is.
We operate a first past the post system. Invariably, a minority elect politicians.

Invariably it is a minority that elect the politicians. Yes, a majority of those that voted, but invariably a minority of those eligible to vote.

 

[IWalkLikeHimaMartian]

Has the EU produced a bill for our inspection? If so can this tax payer see?

Ask David Davis, he appears to have seen it:

But Brexit Secretary David Davis said the UK had a "duty to our taxpayers" to "rigorously" examine the EU's demands.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-41106507
There must be a bill if DD wants to rigorously examine it.

 

[IWalkLikeHimaMartian]

yep that is what he would have said probably accuse some one of being a porkie pier

Obviously you are still reading my posts, gasbanni.
Do you want me to show how to use the 'ignore' function?

 

[IWalkLikeHimaMartian]

On his attitude to date, I wouldn't be at all surprised.....

.....I expect they've spent the rest.
But that doesn't make sense,..... And who in their right mind
So he's effectively trying to say ....
. Can anyone tell me, is this guy for real.
.........but it almost looks that they want the talks to fail yt choosing such a unbending negotiator.

Talk about a loaded comment.........
Whatever is said doggit has his own perception before anything is said.

 

[tony1851]

Davies should just delay, delay and delay more. Barnier has to go back to the EU in October to update them on the talks. If there is no agreement on any of the three points which they insisted on dealing with first ('exit bill', NI, citizens' rights) then Barnier will be seen to have failed at the first hurdle.
It will then occur to many in the EU heirarchy that the UK may not be the pushover that they first thought (as opposed to when Cameron came back with a few crumbs). Those in the EU who depend on trade with the UK will then start to put pressure on their governments to reach a deal. Among many others, this will include Spanish citrus growers, Dutch flower sellers, car manufacturers and so on. This is where the interests of companies and individual countries in the EU differ from the EUs' own empire-building objectives.
Those who read the Guardian are led to believe that the UK is weak/has nothing to offer/finished/can't survive without the comfort blanket of the EU etc. Hopefully our negotiators will do their job and disown them of that belief.

 

[IWalkLikeHimaMartian]

It seems that when the guy wrote article 50, he didn't envisage it being used, so didn't bother to make it water tight, hence why they're arguing over the terms. As the EU refuse to allow an independant negotiator to settle the dispute, and are insisting that no exit deal can be negotiated until the divorce bill is agreed (on their terms only I suspect) then this is going to drag on, and get very acrimonious.

Why should a third party be introduced to negotiate any dispute. Article 50 did not state any third party negotiators.
Surely UK understood Article 50 before invoking it. Why should it be altered now to suit UK?
Is the acrimony not of the UK's making?
EU laid out their negotiating position long ago. UK is still fuddling about, producing papers on the 'wishful thinking' of future trade arrangements.

 

[IWalkLikeHimaMartian]

Davies should just delay, delay and delay more. Barnier has to go back to the EU in October to update them on the talks. If there is no agreement on any of the three points which they insisted on dealing with first ('exit bill', NI, citizens' rights) then Barnier will be seen to have failed at the first hurdle.
It will then occur to many in the EU heirarchy that the UK may not be the pushover that they first thought (as opposed to when Cameron came back with a few crumbs). Those in the EU who depend on trade with the UK will then start to put pressure on their governments to reach a deal. Among many others, this will include Spanish citrus growers, Dutch flower sellers, car manufacturers and so on. This is where the interests of companies and individual countries in the EU differ from the EUs' own empire-building objectives.
Those who read the Guardian are led to believe that the UK is weak/has nothing to offer/finished/can't survive without the comfort blanket of the EU etc. Hopefully our negotiators will do their job and disown them of that belief.

Or more likely, UK will fall out of the EU, with no agreement for future trade, I/NI will see new borders, EU/UK citizens will be left in limbo..........

 

[JohnD]

"The purpose of the Brexit financial settlement is not to discharge the UK’s legal liabilities in a strict sense but to deal with the overall effect of its departure. Article 50 expressly states that the EU “conclude an agreement with [the departing state], setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal”. Arrangements, not liabilities.

The ultimate objective of the EU in the Brexit negotiations, which its team has been open about since last summer, is that Brexit must be “orderly” and not “disorderly”. And any departure that has an adverse financial impact on the remaining EU27 and the bloc’s institutions will be disorderly, whether or not there happen to be legally recognised and enforceable liabilities."

"This is why the UK’s stress on legalities is misconceived. The EU is less interested in debts and more interested in responsibilities. So a responsible departing member state should make sure that its exit is as smooth as possible — and not slam the door on the way out yelling that it will see those remaining in court"

https://www.ft.com/content/7d26e4e9-2eb0-3afb-94ec-5874e178c311

The UK's stress on this imaginary bill is whipped up by the quitters and their Euro-phobia. When the Daily Mail tail is wagging the government dog, there is naturally a lot of hostile nonsense muddying the waters.

If Dog registers with the FT (no payment) he will get a monthly ration of free reads of articles.

 

[IWalkLikeHimaMartian]

Here is some explanation of some of the amount owing:

In off-camera remarks to the Ambrosetti forum, he said the UK must accept some key principles about money and honour the commitment it made in 2014 to pay 14% of the EU budget until 2020

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-41140564

It is strange that Mr Barnier could tell us that, but our own politicians could not.

 

[motorbiking]

I actually think DD needs to draw up Britain's no deal position. Effectively publishing details of the tax breaks and incentives that will be rolled out to protect British trade and smooth transacting with the EU. £100bn goes a long way.

 

[noseall]

I think we should give the quitters what they want. Waste time then leave without paying a penny. Sod Europe, we can go into a deep recession on our own. Put Judith in charge of talks and bring back all of our expensive negotiators. At least we will lose nothing that way.

 

[noseall]

I actually think DD needs to draw up Britain's no deal position. Effectively publishing details of the tax breaks and incentives that will be rolled out to protect British trade and smooth transacting with the EU. £100bn goes a long way.

Er....your post is self contradictory. No deal means no EU trade, unless I've got the gist wrong.

 

[motorbiking]

no deal doesn't mean no EU trade. plenty of countries trade with the EU without a trade deal.

 

[Brigadier]

And you can flush the Canaries, Greek islands, Balearics, and Costas down the toilet as well, without easy access to UK tourism.

Money will talk in the end, and self-serving bureaucratic r soles like Barnier will be sacrificed at its altar.