Brexit News & Discussion v6: EU Leaders Go to Battle Over Plugging Post-Brexit Budget Gap

Status
Not open for further replies.
Old Nidge is throwing a wobbly atm. LOL



It's funny how he still pretends he doesn't understand what the payment is for.
That's something I have found a lot of UK politicians doing. The once still talking about all sorts of free trade deal without free movement etc.
They still pretend they don't understand what will happen.

I mean say about the EU what you want. At least they don't pretend not to understand an issue.
They just ignore it.
 
It's funny how he still pretends he doesn't understand what the payment is for.
That's something I have found a lot of UK politicians doing. The once still talking about all sorts of free trade deal without free movement etc.
They still pretend they don't understand what will happen.

I mean say about the EU what you want. At least they don't pretend not to understand an issue.
They just ignore it.

Just watch the full show, he's still deluded.



That's the first of the issues sorted, now the UK just need to sort out citizens rights and the border in the next 6 days or no trades talks.
 
Yeah, I have read that it will be around 45-55 Billion Euros which both sides agreed on.
Seems like a good step to move forward.
Also, I think predicted a few days ago if the UK would offer 50 Billion the EU would take despite them saying they want 60+.

Yea I remember you saying as much, or at least someone did I assume you.
 


The Times reports that Britain's proposal tries to avoid "regulatory divergence" between Northern Ireland and the European Union by giving more power to the Northern Irish government so it can ensure "convergence" with the Republic of Ireland on issues like agriculture and energy.

It means Northern Ireland could end up following European Union regulations long after Brexit, even as the rest of the United Kingdom moves away from them.

http://uk.businessinsider.com/uk-de...-avoid-post-brexit-hard-border-report-2017-11
 
Last edited:
Brexit Cost Rises as Britain Retreats on Divorce Demands
By STEPHEN CASTLE | NOV. 29, 2017

30brexit-master768.jpg


LONDON — The proposition that Britain could have its cake and eat it during Brexit, as the foreign secretary Boris Johnson once said, was always dismissed as a fiction by opponents. On Wednesday, it was quietly interred by the government as it capitulated on the amount it will have to pay for a divorce settlement.

And this was not Britain’s first capitulation over Brexit, nor — almost certainly — will it be the last, analysts said.

What Mr. Johnson was saying was that Britain could secure the economic benefits of membership in the European Union without paying a penalty or being subject to its rules, particularly on the free movement of labor within the bloc.

On Wednesday, Britain reportedly agreed in principle to a divorce check of around $47 billion to $53 billion in the hope of securing the start of talks on a future trade arrangement with the 27 nations.

The unofficial offer, which covers commitments made while a member of the club, roughly doubles Britain’s initial $24 billion pledge, made in September, which fell flat with the European Union leadership.

For months, supporters of the withdrawal, known as Brexit, have rejected the idea of paying a substantial exit bill to honor commitments. Some, like the Euroskeptic lawmaker John Redwood has insisted that Britain owed nothing at all.

Yet, with time running out for Britain before it departs in March 2019, such pledges have collided, brutally, with reality.

Earlier this year, Britain’s chief Brexit negotiator, David Davis, told Parliament he could achieve a trade deal with the European Union that provided the “exact same benefits” as its current membership in the bloc’s single market and customs union. He has not repeated that promise recently, probably because European leaders have said repeatedly that Britain cannot possibly enjoy the benefits of membership if it is outside the bloc.

In the meantime, other reversals are quietly underway. Lawmakers were initially told that European Union law would cease to apply to Britain in March 2019, when it leaves. Now, the government has accepted that during the sort of “standstill” transition that Britain badly wants, European rules — including new ones — will apply to Britain, as will judgments of the European Court of Justice.

During this standstill transition — which Mrs. May suggests could be two years — Britain will also have to accept the free movement of European citizens and will not be able to control migration from the Continent — even though immigration was perhaps the argument that proved decisive in the referendum.

Britain’s new pragmatism stands in contrast to some early remarks by Prime Minister Theresa May, who insisted that no deal with the European Union was better than a bad one, implying that she was ready to walk away from the table.

But the reality, analysts and business leaders have been saying with increasing emphasis, is that Mrs. May desperately needs to show progress on a reasonable departure plan, not a “cliff edge” exit that would potentially throw the economy into chaos. Business leaders have warned repeatedly that they will be forced to begin shifting operations out of Britain in the new year if nothing further is accomplished.

In London, where the government made no official comment, the about-face was widely criticized. A Labour Party lawmaker, Chris Leslie, said that the offer would cost 1,000 pounds for every Briton, a far cry from the £350 million pounds a week that Brexit backers promised that Britain’s exit would bring in. Nigel Farage, the former leader of the pro-Brexit U.K. Independence Party, said on Twitter that “Christmas has come early for the E.U.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/29/world/europe/brexit-divorce-demands.html
 
Still wants to keep his EU pension though. Funny that.

Nigel Farage refuses to give up EU pension: 'Why should my family suffer?'

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...ep-britain-first-rise-far-right-a8089256.html

Yeah, I am starting to think the UK will not actually leave. It just appears to be too complicated to do within a two year period.
Two options the UK gets put in a very damaging position. Or they are going to make some kind of deal where they basically have to still obey 80% EU rules but have no say anymore.

I don't think I have ever witnessed such a self-inflicted political wound like Cameron calling for the Brexit vote.
I mean whatever is going to happen all outcomes are going to be bad. Leaving with or without a deal is bad.
And not leaving would be wrong as well because a considerable % of the British public would rightfully felt betrayed.
Talk about a lose/lose situation for everyone involved including the EU. It's not like they are completely innocent.
 
Yeah, I am starting to think the UK will not actually leave. It just appears to be too complicated to do within a two year period.
Two options the UK gets put in a very damaging position. Or they are going to make some kind of deal where they basically have to still obey 80% EU rules but have no say anymore.

I don't think I have ever witnessed such a self-inflicted political wound like Cameron calling for the Brexit vote.
I mean whatever is going to happen all outcomes are going to be bad. Leaving with or without a deal is bad.
And not leaving would be wrong as well because a considerable % of the British public would rightfully felt betrayed.
Talk about a lose/lose situation for everyone involved including the EU. It's not like they are completely innocent.

Cameron didnt think people were stupid enough to actually vote leave
 
Yeah, I am starting to think the UK will not actually leave. It just appears to be too complicated to do within a two year period.

If only there were a large group of people who said Brexit was a pipe dream without a good ending.
 


Effectively this means the border is moved to the Irish Sea.

giphy.gif
 


Effectively this means the border is moved to the Irish Sea.

giphy.gif


I don't really understand what "regulatory divergence" means?
Like different parts of Britain, in this case, Northern Irland will still be part of the EU single market?
But the rest of the UK arent? How is that going to work? That would put Northern Ireland outside the UK and EU to some degree?
Also, wouldnt that open the way for other regions to ask for the same?
 
I don't really understand what "regulatory divergence" means?
Like different parts of Britain, in this case, Northern Irland will still be part of the EU single market?
But the rest of the UK arent? How is that going to work? That would put Northern Ireland outside the UK and EU to some degree?
Also, wouldnt that open the way for other regions to ask for the same?

Yes.

 
I don't really understand what "regulatory divergence" means?
Like different parts of Britain, in this case, Northern Irland will still be part of the EU single market?
But the rest of the UK arent? How is that going to work? That would put Northern Ireland outside the UK and EU to some degree?
Also, wouldnt that open the way for other regions to ask for the same?

It means NI will keep the same regulations as Ireland, so its effectively staying in the EU.
Yes.
Covered under the GFA.
Yes.
 
It means NI will keep the same regulations as Ireland, so its effectively staying in the EU.
Yes.
Covered under the GFA.
Yes.

Thanks, so in other words England just sold out NI.
If you assume Brexit is a good thing.
 
Thanks, so in other words England just sold out NI.
If you assume Brexit is a good thing.

In other words the people of NI who voted for the GFA referendum (71%) get what they wanted, no border on the island of Ireland.

I've always maintained that Brexit was a self inflicted disaster in the making, once the GFA is protected I don't really care what Britain does now.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top