-
Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara
Politics, politics, politics
- Thread starter markysimmo
- Start date
nayimfromthehalfwayline
Andy Thompson
Are these two qualified to comment? Would it be any more believable coming from our own senior politicians?
Neither explicitly say "on the same terms", rather, "the door is open".
Also, this just seems quite ominous to me:
“What we will never allow as a parliament is that at the end you can have a better position, a better status outside the European Union, than inside the European Union.
“Inside the European Union will always be the best solution for every European country and European state.”
Once again, what is "better" for one, is not better for all = you would think an organisation comprising 28 countries would be more than aware of this.
Everybody doing well should be what they understand.
nayimfromthehalfwayline
Andy Thompson
That stretch of road is a nightmare at the best of times, clearly there is going to be issues at least in the short term if a deal cannot be found.
And that effects more than just the UK.
ShipOfTheseus
Clint Dempsey
Kent County Council said:
Kent: 970,000 votes cast in the 2016 referendum, 59% leave and 41% remain. Should be quite a few reconsidering, come the glorious people's vote.
nayimfromthehalfwayline
Andy Thompson
Immediately things like this bother me:
1. Planes. The EC has put out a notice saying the EASA certificates pilots and planes require to fly into the EU will no longer be valid if issued by the UK. Every single piece of documentation a plane/pilot requires will need to be re-issued by an EASA Member. That's a lot.
People wonder why I say the EU is petty. These licenses will have been issued by the UK as part of the EU and so perfectly compliant. Why should they be re-issued? Surely common sense would be to recognise them as absolutely fine and have them re-issued by an EASA member when they are next due/applicable?
3. 'Competent Authorities' Many EU technical regulations on goods require certification of compliance. The EC put out a notification saying that as of Brexit, certificates from the UK don't count. All covered products will need EU-27 certification. Not fun.
Same again. We are qualified to offer certification now, providing we adhere to the already established standard, whats the problem?
5. Trucks To operate professionally in the EU as a road transport operator or transport manager, you need a certificate of professional competence from an EU Member authority. As of Brexit, those issued by the UK cease to count.
And once again.
These licences have been given under an EU member authority. They shouldnt become invalid over night, clearly the right standards/compliance is already stated. As of renewal etc, absolutely fine.
I cant open the tweet at work but I imagine he is talking about a no deal scenario - any gradfathering will have to pass legislation, they cant just unilaterally say we will accept them. I imagine all these more simple things individual agreements can be met (assuming we have not tinkled them off too much), It will likely be a small period of time or renewal and the UK still have to adhere to EU regulations during this period the UK would however have to commit to being overseen by the ECJ on these issues (this was the terms when they were issued).
IMO
Gutter Boy
Tim Sherwood
Maybe they are just tinkled off at being reduced to an HGV thoroughfare.
A positive about returning to global trade again is that it will help reinvigorate the great west coast ports of Liverpool, Barrow, Glasgow, Milford Haven/Cardiff and Bristol. All part of rebalancing the economy again back away from the SE.
Last edited:
We have always had global trade - you see that "made in China" stamp...
Have you seen the second series of the Wire?
SpurMeUp
Les Howe
I think maybe you are reading too much into that comment. Quite simply a club can't offer ex memebers better terms than members get. If they did it would undermine membership. That is logical isn't it?
SpurMeUp
Les Howe
Hold on, didn't we want to be out of the EU? Brexit means exit. You can't both want to leave, and ask to stay part of everything you wish to. Life is not like that. Why do people think they can cheery pick? Part of the Brexit delusion.
If a Hard Brexit occured the EU would probably give the UK longer to address these things, but they are our things to address. Its funny how people want to leave but also want the EU to look after us. Make up your mind.
nayimfromthehalfwayline
Andy Thompson
The permits/licenses were perfectly valid when they were given, and presumably so for a set duration.
Those standards will be correct as of the point of the licence being given, nothing changes in regard to them, so why would they need to be immediately re-applied for? Why not a simple recognition/amnesty to say ok - these were given by an EU member, and when they need reinstating will need to be done so under EU member?
Basically what Im saying. The tweets are talking about a WTO exit, and the terrible things that will happen after - half of which seem like petty and silly things to me.
If a licence is given by an EU member state, and is valid for a period, then why would it need to be re-applied for immediately upon our leaving?
I dont see how the UK no longer being in the EU invalidates a perfectly fine Licence. Of course, subsequent renewals is another thing, and I wouldnt expect the UK to issue them.
Those standards will be correct as of the point of the licence being given, nothing changes in regard to them, so why would they need to be immediately re-applied for? Why not a simple recognition/amnesty to say ok - these were given by an EU member, and when they need reinstating will need to be done so under EU member?
Basically what Im saying. The tweets are talking about a WTO exit, and the terrible things that will happen after - half of which seem like petty and silly things to me.
If a licence is given by an EU member state, and is valid for a period, then why would it need to be re-applied for immediately upon our leaving?
I dont see how the UK no longer being in the EU invalidates a perfectly fine Licence. Of course, subsequent renewals is another thing, and I wouldnt expect the UK to issue them.
I think what you're saying is pretty fair, though I would add that the EU playing ball in a no-deal (WTO) Brexit would mean us paying what we owe (£40billion or whatever it is, the so-called 'divorce bill'). I'm not sure I've heard any of the Rees-Mogg types say that they want to pay that bill with a no-deal Brexit.
One of our red lines were no ECJ jurisdiction, the terms of the licenses include disputes being overseen by the ECJ. Are we proposing to change the terms or would we accept ECJ jurisdiction? If we want to change the terms I imagine this is one of the things stopping a simple continuation of the status quo.
This is one thing I came up with, I am sure that there are lots of others those that are really familiar will be able to raise. Probably not as easy as all that.
nayimfromthehalfwayline
Andy Thompson
I dont see why things like that need to be linked, it just seems like simple common sense to me. The licence was provided under entirely valid EU rules, it shouldnt be written off just because the UK leaves. I dont understand why that would invalidate it.
But, would it be a surprise to me for the EU to use something like that against us? No, not at all.
And yet there will still be plenty defending them for it as well, baffles me.
Could well be the case, I dont claim to be an expert. Just seems to me, very simply, there is no good reason for those licenses/permits etc to be suddenly invalid and in need to be re-applied.
IMO, these things would be linked because our government has made everything linked i.e. "nothing is agreed until everything is agreed." If we leave with no deal and tell them to "go whistle" for the money that covers our legal obligations, why on earth would they accommodate us in any way, shape or form? If we are hostile in that way to them, then we will get it right back imo.
at present the status quo goes against our red lines,we won't accept the status quo and once you are moving away from this position both have to agree to the change, in this case its more likely the UK who will lead the current licenses to no longer be valid under EU rules.
Regarding the divorce bill, they believe that we owe it to them we appear to have agreed or at least have never put a credible argument that we don't.
If it's not linked we have the power to refuse to pay it at any time, we have threatened to do this. The EUs power is refusing a trade deal. Its a pure power play on both sides, both sides have tried to use it in the negotiation it appears that the EU has been more effective.
You are right that there is no reason for them to be linked other than its the only way that they get paid what they believe they are owed and I would insist in their shoes as many of the senior players they are negotiating with have said they can go whistle or only pay if we get something back.
To reiterate they believe that they are owed this for past services not future trade. If we don't think its the case we should have argued this position rather than fail when trying to use it as a bargaining tool in the trade talks.
nayimfromthehalfwayline
Andy Thompson
Thats fair. In which case fudge 'em, lets keep the 40 billion!
Baleforce
Arthur Rowe
This is the kind of stuff we should have been negotiating from the start.
Not sure what went wrong seeing as both sides had clearly prepared detailed notes for the first meeting...
Keep the £40b and have food and medicine shortages. Not be able to fly etc etc?
How much do you think that would cost our economy?