Planet Rugby Forum

Extreme Brexit: England joins Africa in Commonwealth Games guide

Brexit appears to have come early for England at the Commonwealth Games as it was listed as an African country with a population of two million in the official programme. Australian organisers sought to make light of the embarrassing gaffe after England were somehow confused with Gambia, a West African nation which rejoined the Commonwealth in February after leaving in 2013.

"There was an overprint," said Mark Peters, chief executive of the Gold Coast Games.

"We found out about it maybe 10 days ago.

"We went and spoke to England and said, 'Congratulations, the Commonwealth's changing and it has since Brexit, and you are now a part of Africa'.

https://www.news24.com/Africa/News/extr ... e-20180404

SamShark wrote:Coincidentally Gambia is one of the trade deals we’ll “bang out” before the end of the transition period

Apparently they bloody love Stilton over there which will create 25 new jobs

Gospel wrote: Samshark's comment was deliberately facile because he doesn't agree with the position that Leave meant leaving the customs union. I disagree of course.

Further to this I am also of the opinion that remaining in the customs union without being full members of the EU would result in the UK being in a hugely disadvantageous position - whereby the EU would be free to sell access to our market to whomever they choose without the UK having any say in the matter or any right to a reciprocal arrangement - or to be able to sign independent trade deals. Norway aren't in the Customs Union for this very reason.

The UK / EU are currently negotiating a wide ranging FTA so your post does nothing more than demonstrate once again than you haven't got a fucking clue as to what's being discussed. Perhaps we should just avoid each other's posts in future because we're clearly not able to communicate.

Petej wrote:

SamShark wrote:Coincidentally Gambia is one of the trade deals we’ll “bang out” before the end of the transition period

Apparently they bloody love Stilton over there which will create 25 new jobs

Awesome. Do they like pork pies and fighter jets? I'm looking forward to us not carrying the burden of Irish goods traffic which should help the m4 particularly around Newport. Also with collapse of UK farming we should be able to rewild areas which is a great opportunity to introduce more beavers and reintroduce the lynx and wolves (we could test out introducing bears in Northern Ireland first before the mainland).

camroc1 wrote:Laugh all you want.

The truth is that three years before required, route change is already happening, and despite Bimbos sarcasm, that alone is significant. If it looks like the UK is going to act the bollox, and try and use the UK landbridge as a lever in negotiation, watch the capacity put on those routes increase rapidly.

DragsterDriver wrote:How long does the big boat take from Dublin to Rotterdam?

SamShark wrote:Liam Fox has already struck trade deals with Atlantis and the Bermuda Triangle

EverReady wrote:

DragsterDriver wrote:Google says 43hrs- sound correct?

By the time you Brexit there will be these things called Flying Boats

Petej wrote:

SamShark wrote:Coincidentally Gambia is one of the trade deals we’ll “bang out” before the end of the transition period

Apparently they bloody love Stilton over there which will create 25 new jobs

Awesome. Do they like pork pies and fighter jets? I'm looking forward to us not carrying the burden of Irish goods traffic which should help the m4 particularly around Newport. Also with collapse of UK farming we should be able to rewild areas which is a great opportunity to introduce more beavers and reintroduce the lynx and wolves (we could test out introducing bears in Northern Ireland first before the mainland).

camroc1 wrote:Laugh all you want.

The truth is that three years before required, route change is already happening, and despite Bimbos sarcasm, that alone is significant. If it looks like the UK is going to act the bollox, and try and use the UK landbridge as a lever in negotiation, watch the capacity put on those routes increase rapidly.

bimboman wrote:

camroc1 wrote:Laugh all you want.

The truth is that three years before required, route change is already happening, and despite Bimbos sarcasm, that alone is significant. If it looks like the UK is going to act the bollox, and try and use the UK landbridge as a lever in negotiation, watch the capacity put on those routes increase rapidly.

It can take 600 TEU weekly. That will dent the 500,000 crossing the land bridge.



You genuinly don't understand either logistics or scale.

camroc1 wrote:

bimboman wrote:

camroc1 wrote:Laugh all you want.

The truth is that three years before required, route change is already happening, and despite Bimbos sarcasm, that alone is significant. If it looks like the UK is going to act the bollox, and try and use the UK landbridge as a lever in negotiation, watch the capacity put on those routes increase rapidly.

It can take 600 TEU weekly. That will dent the 500,000 crossing the land bridge.



You genuinly don't understand either logistics or scale.

Or how many of those are destined for the UK only ?

You just don't get it, do you ?

The day it is clear that there will be delays at either Holyhead, or Dover is the day that all the shipping companies will change route for continental destined goods.

Why the hell do you think the shipping companies are sticking their toes in the market now ?

Hellraiser wrote:The English brexiteers on here don't really seem to understand the concept of death by a thousand cuts.

camroc1 wrote:

Hellraiser wrote:The English brexiteers on here don't really seem to understand the concept of death by a thousand cuts.

Rumour is that the EU will announced changes to their priority road network in 2019 after Brexit which in Ireland will include opening up motorways from Limerick to Cork, a north Cork bypass and completion and upgrading of the Dublin Rosslare motorway for explicit EU funding. The EU will continue and just change its plans to account for the UK being a third country.

piquant wrote:

Gospel wrote: Samshark's comment was deliberately facile because he doesn't agree with the position that Leave meant leaving the customs union. I disagree of course.

Further to this I am also of the opinion that remaining in the customs union without being full members of the EU would result in the UK being in a hugely disadvantageous position - whereby the EU would be free to sell access to our market to whomever they choose without the UK having any say in the matter or any right to a reciprocal arrangement - or to be able to sign independent trade deals. Norway aren't in the Customs Union for this very reason.

The UK / EU are currently negotiating a wide ranging FTA so your post does nothing more than demonstrate once again than you haven't got a fucking clue as to what's being discussed. Perhaps we should just avoid each other's posts in future because we're clearly not able to communicate.

You'd get a lot of consensus around that point, and on the single market too (why the single market aspect is so overlooked by comparison I really don't know), it's just the solution for many is to point out it's simply disadvantageous to leave the EU, and that's in large part why we'd so strongly advocate against it. I can accept people wanting to leave anyway in the name of soverignty, I don't know I quite agree but whatever, it's just those who think leaving will be advantageous who come across as raving lunatics.

bimboman wrote:

camroc1 wrote:

Hellraiser wrote:The English brexiteers on here don't really seem to understand the concept of death by a thousand cuts.

Rumour is that the EU will announced changes to their priority road network in 2019 after Brexit which in Ireland will include opening up motorways from Limerick to Cork, a north Cork bypass and completion and upgrading of the Dublin Rosslare motorway for explicit EU funding. The EU will continue and just change its plans to account for the UK being a third country.

You'll be a net contributor in 2019, that's your own money you idiot.

camroc1 wrote:

bimboman wrote:

camroc1 wrote:

Hellraiser wrote:The English brexiteers on here don't really seem to understand the concept of death by a thousand cuts.

Rumour is that the EU will announced changes to their priority road network in 2019 after Brexit which in Ireland will include opening up motorways from Limerick to Cork, a north Cork bypass and completion and upgrading of the Dublin Rosslare motorway for explicit EU funding. The EU will continue and just change its plans to account for the UK being a third country.

You'll be a net contributor in 2019, that's your own money you idiot.

And there is the Little Englander/Brexiteer understanding of thr EU on one sentence.

It's not a zero sum game,

Gospel wrote:

Rinkals wrote:Samshark suggested that Brexiteers want to stay in the customs union, and I would say it's obvious that that would be fundamental to the success of Brexit. Losing the EU as a market in which you could preferentially trade will probably impact your economy. Bimbo will disagree, I know, but I would imagine that most sensible people would regard that as quite likely.

However, it's quite clear (to me, if not to Bimbo) that the UK cannot be allowed to continue having "frictionless" trade when it is outside of the European Union if the EU is to survive. Hence the notion of benefiting from membership of the EU (eating the cake) without having to pay subscriptions or abide by the rules (having the cake) is unlikely to be agreed to by the EU negotiators.

It has been mentioned numerous times on here that EU needs the UK as a market (for BMW amongst others) and cannot afford to lose that market. Hence the notion that the UK holds the cards in this negotiation. As I said in the post above, I'm not sure that I believe that the latter is strong enough to overcome the former and allow trade which, if not entirely frictionless, is fairly free.

I must say it's disappointing that my simple statement needed this much explanation.

Samshark's comment was deliberately facile because he doesn't agree with the position that Leave meant leaving the customs union. I disagree of course.
Whether he was being facile or not, my point was that continued access to markets would be beneficial. I would have thought that would be obvious.
Further to this I am also of the opinion that remaining in the customs union without being full members of the EU would result in the UK being in a hugely disadvantageous position - whereby the EU would be free to sell access to our market to whomever they choose without the UK having any say in the matter or any right to a reciprocal arrangement - or to be able to sign independent trade deals. Norway aren't in the Customs Union for this very reason.
Well, yes. But that sort of one-sided deal is not what what you have now, so I'm not sure why you are introducing it.
The UK / EU are currently negotiating a wide ranging FTA so your post does nothing more than demonstrate once again than you haven't got a fucking clue as to what's being discussed. Perhaps we should just avoid each other's posts in future because we're clearly not able to communicate.

Rinkals wrote:Whether he was being facile or not, my point was that continued access to markets would be beneficial. I would have thought that would be obvious.

Rinkals wrote:Well, yes. But that sort of one-sided deal is not what what you have now, so I'm not sure why you are introducing it.

Rinkals wrote:Look, I commented on Samshark's post; it was you who leaped in with an abusive response.

You think it's a good idea to let the EU sell access to the UK market to a third party without the UK having any reciprocal access? Figures.

The moment the debate enters ground that is in the least bit detailed or nuanced you lose your way and just start posting about BMWs and cake. It's massively disingenuous

bimboman wrote:
What ? it takes 15 years for the EU, other countries bang em out.

RWC2015 wrote:UK strategy will be to leave the withdrawal agreement as vague as possible, so that objectors will have little to get their teeth stuck into. Just Brexit to fudge, and deal with it after!

EU is obviously looking for quite a few more commitments, and will be ruling out cakism to whatever extent possible, but unclear how much they will be willing to push the Brits for clarity.

La soule wrote:

The moment the debate enters ground that is in the least bit detailed or nuanced you lose your way and just start posting about BMWs and cake. It's massively disingenuous

That's very unfair.

It is like you have missed those hundreds of posts from the Brexiters on this thread mentioning that the EU would almost collapse because the German car industry would lobby the German government to death in order to ensure Britain can get their cake.

Disingenuous indeed.

Gospel wrote:

La soule wrote:

The moment the debate enters ground that is in the least bit detailed or nuanced you lose your way and just start posting about BMWs and cake. It's massively disingenuous

That's very unfair.

It is like you have missed those hundreds of posts from the Brexiters on this thread mentioning that the EU would almost collapse because the German car industry would lobby the German government to death in order to ensure Britain can get their cake.

Disingenuous indeed.

Where's the alleged cake in the custom union debate?

Gospel wrote:

Rinkals wrote:Whether he was being facile or not, my point was that continued access to markets would be beneficial. I would have thought that would be obvious.

Opting out of the EU's Customs Union does not prevent the UK from trading with the European Union. I even gave you Norway as an example.

Rinkals wrote:Well, yes. But that sort of one-sided deal is not what what you have now, so I'm not sure why you are introducing it.

Are you still fighting the 2016 referendum here? We had a vote on our future with the EU and opted out. As a result our deal is changing and the EU/UK are now pursuing a far reaching FTA with various opt-ins for security, defence etc. Continuing membership of the single market and customs union were taken off the table back in May's Lancaster House speech and where we are today is a direct result of that.

Rinkals wrote:Look, I commented on Samshark's post; it was you who leaped in with an abusive response.

There was nothing abusive about the response. Here it is:

You think it's a good idea to let the EU sell access to the UK market to a third party without the UK having any reciprocal access? Figures.

The moment the debate enters ground that is in the least bit detailed or nuanced you lose your way and just start posting about BMWs and cake. It's massively disingenuous.

camroc1 wrote:

RWC2015 wrote:UK strategy will be to leave the withdrawal agreement as vague as possible, so that objectors will have little to get their teeth stuck into. Just Brexit to fudge, and deal with it after!

EU is obviously looking for quite a few more commitments, and will be ruling out cakism to whatever extent possible, but unclear how much they will be willing to push the Brits for clarity.

The EU will translate each agreement into a legal document as the talks progress, and present it to the UK at the end of the process for signing, No signature, no deal.

Mullet 2 wrote:

bimboman wrote:

sewa wrote:As usual Bimbo is shooting himself in both feet. If it takes 15 years for one trade deal how will the UK with no expert negotiators do all the trade deals it needs in the short time they have left

What ? it takes 15 years for the EU, other countries bang em out.

Should I point out you were telling us how easy the trade deal option with the EU was going to be?

Nah...I shouldn't mock the stupid.

camroc1 wrote:

RWC2015 wrote:UK strategy will be to leave the withdrawal agreement as vague as possible, so that objectors will have little to get their teeth stuck into. Just Brexit to fudge, and deal with it after!

EU is obviously looking for quite a few more commitments, and will be ruling out cakism to whatever extent possible, but unclear how much they will be willing to push the Brits for clarity.

The EU will translate each agreement into a legal document as the talks progress, and present it to the UK at the end of the process for signing, No signature, no deal.

bimboman wrote:

camroc1 wrote:

RWC2015 wrote:UK strategy will be to leave the withdrawal agreement as vague as possible, so that objectors will have little to get their teeth stuck into. Just Brexit to fudge, and deal with it after!

EU is obviously looking for quite a few more commitments, and will be ruling out cakism to whatever extent possible, but unclear how much they will be willing to push the Brits for clarity.

The EU will translate each agreement into a legal document as the talks progress, and present it to the UK at the end of the process for signing, No signature, no deal.

No deal , no money

camroc1 wrote:

bimboman wrote:

camroc1 wrote:

RWC2015 wrote:UK strategy will be to leave the withdrawal agreement as vague as possible, so that objectors will have little to get their teeth stuck into. Just Brexit to fudge, and deal with it after!

EU is obviously looking for quite a few more commitments, and will be ruling out cakism to whatever extent possible, but unclear how much they will be willing to push the Brits for clarity.

The EU will translate each agreement into a legal document as the talks progress, and present it to the UK at the end of the process for signing, No signature, no deal.

No deal , no money

Indeed, the UK will be a much poorer place.

bimboman wrote:

camroc1 wrote:

bimboman wrote:

camroc1 wrote:

RWC2015 wrote:UK strategy will be to leave the withdrawal agreement as vague as possible, so that objectors will have little to get their teeth stuck into. Just Brexit to fudge, and deal with it after!

EU is obviously looking for quite a few more commitments, and will be ruling out cakism to whatever extent possible, but unclear how much they will be willing to push the Brits for clarity.

The EU will translate each agreement into a legal document as the talks progress, and present it to the UK at the end of the process for signing, No signature, no deal.

No deal , no money

Indeed, the UK will be a much poorer place.

wel actually it'll depend on how we spend the 40 billion.