Page 1681 of 2119

Re: OFFICIAL EU/UK referendum thread

Posted: Wed May 23, 2018 4:03 pm
by Petej
Looks like hmrc as well as Mark Carney are both lacking patriotism and "crying Wolf" according to the Daily Express. If we can get Boris his own plane he will be able sort it out as he did with the lady in iran, the garden bridge, the channel bridge and the floating airport.

Re: OFFICIAL EU/UK referendum thread

Posted: Wed May 23, 2018 4:11 pm
by bimboman
Have you bothered to consider that the EU couldn’t give a fudge? The only harm caused is self inflicted harm by the UK on the UK.
Yeah you're right destroying the UK market is why the EU is so keen on keeping us in the customs union.

Re: OFFICIAL EU/UK referendum thread

Posted: Wed May 23, 2018 4:13 pm
by Hellraiser
Petej wrote:Looks like hmrc as well as Mark Carney are both lacking patriotism and "crying Wolf" according to the Daily Express. If we can get Boris his own plane he will be able sort it out as he did with the lady in iran, the garden bridge, the channel bridge and the floating airport.

Carney said something unpatriotic about Canada?

Re: OFFICIAL EU/UK referendum thread

Posted: Wed May 23, 2018 4:25 pm
by SamShark
Imagine how proud Boris would be, walking down the steps of his red, white and blue plane waving his Blue passport.

Brexit is likely to be a bit of a disaster in most areas, but at least he'd be happy and it might make up for not being PM which seemed to be his original objective?

Re: OFFICIAL EU/UK referendum thread

Posted: Wed May 23, 2018 4:26 pm
by Petej
Hellraiser wrote:
Petej wrote:Looks like hmrc as well as Mark Carney are both lacking patriotism and "crying Wolf" according to the Daily Express. If we can get Boris his own plane he will be able sort it out as he did with the lady in iran, the garden bridge, the channel bridge and the floating airport.

Carney said something unpatriotic about Canada?
He is being unpatriotic to the commonwealth and empire 2.0

Re: OFFICIAL EU/UK referendum thread

Posted: Wed May 23, 2018 4:30 pm
by sewa
rfurlong wrote:been away from this thread for a few weeks - whats the latest news in this perpetually exploding clowns car, aka Brexit?

has the NI border guards farce been discussed here yet? Apparently adverts were placed for Northern Ireland border guards, with the condition that applicants must have a British passport ..... which ruled out about half a million nationalists in NI who (under the GFA) have legally chosen to have Irish passports instead.

Adverts promptly pulled as they were discriminatory under the Belfast Agreement ..... you couldn't make this shit up if you tried :lol:
Thats Brexit gold right there, these clowns are hiring people for a border that apparently won´t exist and they can´t even do that without breaking the law :lol:

Re: OFFICIAL EU/UK referendum thread

Posted: Wed May 23, 2018 4:39 pm
by SamShark
'max fac' would cost business up to £20bn per year

This is what Jon Thompson, chief executive and permanent secretary at HMRC, told the Treasury committee about the costs of “max fac” for business.
Brexit means Brexit, but that seems a bit pricey.

Possibly lies of course. Is Jon Thompson a remoaner?

Re: OFFICIAL EU/UK referendum thread

Posted: Wed May 23, 2018 5:03 pm
by Anonymous 1
DragsterDriver wrote:
eldanielfire wrote:
c69 wrote:Former Cabinet Ministers Greening, Rudd and Green have broken with JRM and told him to fudge off and have the Chief Whip's ear.

The Tories are really fecked long term.


Pity the Metrocentic trendy lefty Labour sellouts are so shit
The irony of commentators having a go at Labour and the Tories being screwed is neither have enjoyed the consistently high poll ratings they both have had for the past year since the pro-Iraq Blair days. Both can win a majority with only a small swing. It's been all the other parties who are fecked. Everything else is just media narratives and the bonkers expectation management.
The pity is that everybody was so quick to put the boot into nick clegg imo.
TBF they had to wait five years before they got the chance

Re: OFFICIAL EU/UK referendum thread

Posted: Wed May 23, 2018 5:17 pm
by bimboman
SamShark wrote:
'max fac' would cost business up to £20bn per year

This is what Jon Thompson, chief executive and permanent secretary at HMRC, told the Treasury committee about the costs of “max fac” for business.
Brexit means Brexit, but that seems a bit pricey.

Possibly lies of course. Is Jon Thompson a remoaner?

"Could" not "would" , also I'm struggling to divide £32.5 into either figure to make sense.



Well he didn't say that he's in charge of that amount as he has decided that's what it would cost:
Working on the basis of 200m trade consignments each year, at £32.50 per customs declaration, the “max fac” system could cost business between £17bn and £20bn
https://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploa ... ummary.pdf



It also appears that they were having to replace systems anyway:

Re: OFFICIAL EU/UK referendum thread

Posted: Thu May 24, 2018 12:37 am
by Leinster in London
bimboman wrote:
SamShark wrote:
'max fac' would cost business up to £20bn per year

This is what Jon Thompson, chief executive and permanent secretary at HMRC, told the Treasury committee about the costs of “max fac” for business.
Brexit means Brexit, but that seems a bit pricey.

Possibly lies of course. Is Jon Thompson a remoaner?

"Could" not "would" , also I'm struggling to divide £32.5 into either figure to make sense.



Well he didn't say that he's in charge of that amount as he has decided that's what it would cost:
Working on the basis of 200m trade consignments each year, at £32.50 per customs declaration, the “max fac” system could cost business between £17bn and £20bn
https://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploa ... ummary.pdf



It also appears that they were having to replace systems anyway:
You missed the point about 200m in, and 200m out.
That then comes to £13bn.

From what I can see that is going to be a standard cost per consignment imposed by HMRC for processing completed forms. The hint is that this is the level that is required to recoup the capital costs of the system, and the annual costs (staff) to run it.

This means for individual companies there will be additional costs. As mentioned HMRC only process completed forms. There will be costs of employing staff to do this. Alternatively the agents will take care of it for about £20-£50 a form.If I remember correctly, the import forms were more detailed, so more expensive.

I don't think companies the UK can competitively remain a link in supply chains with these additional costs.

Re: OFFICIAL EU/UK referendum thread

Posted: Thu May 24, 2018 10:00 am
by Blackrock Bullet
bimboman wrote:
Blackrock Bullet wrote:
eldanielfire wrote:
DragsterDriver wrote:
eldanielfire wrote:
The irony of commentators having a go at Labour and the Tories being screwed is neither have enjoyed the consistently high poll ratings they both have had for the past year since the pro-Iraq Blair days. Both can win a majority with only a small swing. It's been all the other parties who are fecked. Everything else is just media narratives and the bonkers expectation management.
The pity is that everybody was so quick to put the boot into nick clegg imo.
The Lib Dems spent decades putting the boot into the other parties form unrealistic vantage points knowing they would almost never be in government and thus not needing realistic positions. He's also gone against Lid Dem philosophy in opposing the referendum. Lib Dems are supposed to be about more public power, not telling the public "You are all morons, we'll ignore what you say". He's a massive two faced hypocrite.
He can’t have his own views and vision as leader of a Party?

What you mean is that the Lib Dems had their first proper opportunity in decades at power. They were the opposition before that. Opposition is opposition.

A proper opportunity which was rejected absolutely by the electorate last year ? That sort of opportunity ?
I am talking about 2010.

It is very easy to say that the Liberals/Lib Dems just moaned for years when they didn’t have a sniff of power. They got into power as a Coalition, something which Lib Dem voters and the wider British electorate don’t seem to appreciate given their first past the post democracy. To be fair it is true to say this happens in other countries too, where smaller coalition parties get a kicking for “selling out”, but it is more pronounced in the UK.

Re: OFFICIAL EU/UK referendum thread

Posted: Thu May 24, 2018 11:01 am
by bimboman
You missed the point about 200m in, and 200m out.
That then comes to £13bn.
Except my links are very specific on 200 million total.

As for the rest regarding cost then 32.50 is an
Oddly accurate number using your superstitions....

Let’s just be honest it’s a
Nonsense. Figure, designed for headlines not reality.

Re: OFFICIAL EU/UK referendum thread

Posted: Thu May 24, 2018 12:27 pm
by mikerob
A long read but interesting insight from Sir Ivan Rogers.

https://policyscotland.gla.ac.uk/blog-s ... t-in-full/

(the speech went up yesterday but the website has been up and down all morning...)

Re: OFFICIAL EU/UK referendum thread

Posted: Thu May 24, 2018 12:42 pm
by camroc1
mikerob wrote:A long read but interesting insight from Sir Ivan Rogers.

https://policyscotland.gla.ac.uk/blog-s ... t-in-full/

(the speech went up yesterday but the website has been up and down all morning...)
Link not working, but I think this Guardian article quotes most of the interesting bits.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... van-rogers

Re: OFFICIAL EU/UK referendum thread

Posted: Thu May 24, 2018 12:43 pm
by Leinster in London
bimboman wrote:
You missed the point about 200m in, and 200m out.
That then comes to £13bn.
Except my links are very specific on 200 million total.

As for the rest regarding cost then 32.50 is an
Oddly accurate number using your superstitions....

Let’s just be honest it’s a
Nonsense. Figure, designed for headlines not reality.
It is a very precise number presented by the person in charge of the budget to implement the new system given to his superiors.

The only changes to this figure should be a scaling ratio to implement the required new system for handling the non-EU traffic. As this new system is not required on the accelerated timescale that a Brexit system is required, and as there is a large volume reduction required for this new system, it would be significantly cheaper than a system that could handle a hard Brexit in Mar 2019.

Politicking whatever, but that is over. Decision time based on the reality in front of you is what is required.
The price per cionsignment in a hard brexit scenario is £32.50, and it is too late to implement an investigation or new analysis to change it.

Re: OFFICIAL EU/UK referendum thread

Posted: Thu May 24, 2018 12:53 pm
by bimboman
Leinster in London wrote:
bimboman wrote:
You missed the point about 200m in, and 200m out.
That then comes to £13bn.
Except my links are very specific on 200 million total.

As for the rest regarding cost then 32.50 is an
Oddly accurate number using your superstitions....

Let’s just be honest it’s a
Nonsense. Figure, designed for headlines not reality.
It is a very precise number presented by the person in charge of the budget to implement the new system given to his superiors.

The only changes to this figure should be a scaling ratio to implement the required new system for handling the non-EU traffic. As this new system is not required on the accelerated timescale that a Brexit system is required, and as there is a large volume reduction required for this new system, it would be significantly cheaper than a system that could handle a hard Brexit in Mar 2019.

Politicking whatever, but that is over. Decision time based on the reality in front of you is what is required.
The price per cionsignment in a hard brexit scenario is £32.50, and it is too late to implement an investigation or new analysis to change it.

You've not addressed the error on guessing what the £32.50 is made of and how it's 17 to 20 billion at all. "Scaling ratio" 55 million to 200 million even at 255 x 32.50 leaves us a long way short of 17 billion.


The price per consignment at 32.50 (in itself total guess work) makes the cost 6.5 billion cost not 20 .... Go away

Re: OFFICIAL EU/UK referendum thread

Posted: Thu May 24, 2018 1:09 pm
by Gospel
camroc1 wrote:
mikerob wrote:A long read but interesting insight from Sir Ivan Rogers.

https://policyscotland.gla.ac.uk/blog-s ... t-in-full/

(the speech went up yesterday but the website has been up and down all morning...)
Link not working, but I think this Guardian article quotes most of the interesting bits.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... van-rogers
Imagine my surprise that he still refuses to accept the referendum result and wants to mitigate it no matter what.

Re: OFFICIAL EU/UK referendum thread

Posted: Thu May 24, 2018 1:22 pm
by mikerob
Gospel wrote:
camroc1 wrote:
mikerob wrote:A long read but interesting insight from Sir Ivan Rogers.

https://policyscotland.gla.ac.uk/blog-s ... t-in-full/

(the speech went up yesterday but the website has been up and down all morning...)
Link not working, but I think this Guardian article quotes most of the interesting bits.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... van-rogers
Imagine my surprise that he still refuses to accept the referendum result and wants to mitigate it no matter what.
Where does it say that he doesn't accept the referendum result?

Are you saying that there shouldn't be attempts to mitigate the negative consequences of Brexit?

From the speech itself:
At the moment, it sometimes feels, from the noise levels, that there are only three schools:

- Those Remainers, who are in fact Reversers, who, whether genuinely or not, see no viable version of Brexit and want to put the issue back to the people as and when there is a final version of the Framework Agreement this year, presumably with the intended choice between that and the status quo ante the referendum, but minus the Cameron renegotiation package;
- Those Leavers who view anything except the clearest complete rupture with the EU as an unacceptable betrayal of the “will of the people” and an act of sabotage of the “true path” Brexit – a path which will later have to be resumed if any of this perfidy were to succeed short term;
- A third way school, which attempts to satisfy both the extremes by asserting that, from outside the EU, we can resume total control of our laws, borders and money and exercise full sovereignty, without intrusion by a foreign Court, but still retain virtually all the benefits of current trading arrangements with our former partners, whilst diverging from them to taste, wherever we derive advantage domestically or with other partners, from so doing. Plus of course still have a major role in setting the key policies of the bloc we have left.

I speak solely as one unaccountable individual, not elected to anything by anyone and with no aspiration ever to be. So my views are merely those of someone with, I hope, a bit of expertise, and a passionate interest in the future of my country.

But my view on each of these schools of thought is that all are wrong and are basically fantasist propositions.

Re: OFFICIAL EU/UK referendum thread

Posted: Thu May 24, 2018 1:30 pm
by SamShark
Vote leave guy - Brexit is a shambles but it's not my fault.

Blames:

PM
Civil servants
Some pro-Brexit MPs

https://dominiccummings.com/

Re: OFFICIAL EU/UK referendum thread

Posted: Thu May 24, 2018 1:34 pm
by SamShark
Pro-Brexit Tory MPs concede staying in EU customs union into next decade is 'only viable option'
Verdict backed by Jacob Rees-Mogg and other leading Brexiteers - because of cabinet’s failure to agree 'what kind of trading and customs arrangements' it wants
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/p ... 67001.html

At any point are we allowed to say this looks a bit shit, without betraying the will of the people as expressed in June 2016?

Or do we just have to do it because.....

Re: OFFICIAL EU/UK referendum thread

Posted: Thu May 24, 2018 1:52 pm
by Leinster in London
bimboman wrote:
Leinster in London wrote:
bimboman wrote:
You missed the point about 200m in, and 200m out.
That then comes to £13bn.
Except my links are very specific on 200 million total.

As for the rest regarding cost then 32.50 is an
Oddly accurate number using your superstitions....

Let’s just be honest it’s a
Nonsense. Figure, designed for headlines not reality.
It is a very precise number presented by the person in charge of the budget to implement the new system given to his superiors.

The only changes to this figure should be a scaling ratio to implement the required new system for handling the non-EU traffic. As this new system is not required on the accelerated timescale that a Brexit system is required, and as there is a large volume reduction required for this new system, it would be significantly cheaper than a system that could handle a hard Brexit in Mar 2019.

Politicking whatever, but that is over. Decision time based on the reality in front of you is what is required.
The price per cionsignment in a hard brexit scenario is £32.50, and it is too late to implement an investigation or new analysis to change it.

You've not addressed the error on guessing what the £32.50 is made of and how it's 17 to 20 billion at all. "Scaling ratio" 55 million to 200 million even at 255 x 32.50 leaves us a long way short of 17 billion.


The price per consignment at 32.50 (in itself total guess work) makes the cost 6.5 billion cost not 20 .... Go away
Not a clue what I was looking at last night, so you may well be right.
Maybe they are counting the additional VAT and duty that will be collected by the CDS system in a hard brexit situation.

Re: OFFICIAL EU/UK referendum thread

Posted: Thu May 24, 2018 1:52 pm
by mikerob
SamShark wrote:
Pro-Brexit Tory MPs concede staying in EU customs union into next decade is 'only viable option'
Verdict backed by Jacob Rees-Mogg and other leading Brexiteers - because of cabinet’s failure to agree 'what kind of trading and customs arrangements' it wants
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/p ... 67001.html

At any point are we allowed to say this looks a bit shit, without betraying the will of the people as expressed in June 2016?

Or do we just have to do it because.....
Surely the "will of the people" will be enacted on 29 March 2019 - we will have left the EU (barring some other highly improbable events).

Re: OFFICIAL EU/UK referendum thread

Posted: Thu May 24, 2018 1:58 pm
by La soule
SamShark wrote:
Pro-Brexit Tory MPs concede staying in EU customs union into next decade is 'only viable option'
Verdict backed by Jacob Rees-Mogg and other leading Brexiteers - because of cabinet’s failure to agree 'what kind of trading and customs arrangements' it wants
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/p ... 67001.html

At any point are we allowed to say this looks a bit shit, without betraying the will of the people as expressed in June 2016?

Or do we just have to do it because.....

Put it in Spoilers. Gospel is going to get pissed off.

Re: OFFICIAL EU/UK referendum thread

Posted: Thu May 24, 2018 2:16 pm
by shereblue
No one ever claimed this was going to be the easiest deal in the world

Re: OFFICIAL EU/UK referendum thread

Posted: Thu May 24, 2018 2:17 pm
by sewa
shereblue wrote:No one ever claimed this was going to be the easiest deal in the world
Bollocks

Re: OFFICIAL EU/UK referendum thread

Posted: Thu May 24, 2018 2:25 pm
by Gospel
La soule wrote:Put it in Spoilers. Gospel is going to get pissed off.
Raging, even.

Re: OFFICIAL EU/UK referendum thread

Posted: Thu May 24, 2018 2:28 pm
by La soule
Gospel wrote:
La soule wrote:Put it in Spoilers. Gospel is going to get pissed off.
Raging, even.
Calm down.

Please.

Re: OFFICIAL EU/UK referendum thread

Posted: Thu May 24, 2018 2:35 pm
by Gospel
SamShark wrote:
Pro-Brexit Tory MPs concede staying in EU customs union into next decade is 'only viable option'
Verdict backed by Jacob Rees-Mogg and other leading Brexiteers - because of cabinet’s failure to agree 'what kind of trading and customs arrangements' it wants
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/p ... 67001.html

At any point are we allowed to say this looks a bit shit, without betraying the will of the people as expressed in June 2016?

Or do we just have to do it because.....
It's all part of the democratic process to debate these options and I'd agree that it all looks a but shit but IMO I think the "we" was decided at the referendum. Even if you were to argue that the question has now changed I don't think there's the time.

Re: OFFICIAL EU/UK referendum thread

Posted: Thu May 24, 2018 4:51 pm
by SamShark
If remainers think (obviously) we're heading in the wrong direction, and Brexiters (increasingly) think we're heading in the wrong direction it seems insane just just do it anyway and screw us all over.

A lot of the fantasies and hopes, or project fear if you really like, are more out in the open.

Nobody can say what Brexit is, but there are definitely at least 3 options, not the now silly looking "in" or "out".

1) There's out - really out - but we wont have the same levels of access for business and there will be a hard border in NI. We won't have "the easiest trade deals in the world". We will likely be poorer and we won't have more money for the NHS. But we will have complete control of immigration and won't have anything much to do with the EU.

2) There's out - a little bit - where some people think we're heading which is of no use to hard Brexiters, no real use to remainers - but many people think it's not as damaging as option 1 so could tolerate it. Sort of.

3) Or there's the status quo.

I'd vote for 3, obviously. If a majority voted for 1, this time clearly set out without the fantasy bits, then fine.

Re: OFFICIAL EU/UK referendum thread

Posted: Thu May 24, 2018 5:58 pm
by fishfoodie
Gospel wrote:
SamShark wrote:
Pro-Brexit Tory MPs concede staying in EU customs union into next decade is 'only viable option'
Verdict backed by Jacob Rees-Mogg and other leading Brexiteers - because of cabinet’s failure to agree 'what kind of trading and customs arrangements' it wants
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/p ... 67001.html

At any point are we allowed to say this looks a bit shit, without betraying the will of the people as expressed in June 2016?

Or do we just have to do it because.....
It's all part of the democratic process to debate these options and I'd agree that it all looks a but shit but IMO I think the "we" was decided at the referendum. Even if you were to argue that the question has now changed I don't think there's the time.
If you buy a brand new car off a forecourt, & as you're driving off, the front wheel detaches & rolls into the road, & one of the cylinder motars its way thru the bonnet; do you just continue driving off home; or do you reverse back, storm your way into the office & demand your money back; because the steaming pile of shite you've been given isn't what was in the contract you signed ?

Re: OFFICIAL EU/UK referendum thread

Posted: Thu May 24, 2018 6:03 pm
by Santa
If you arrive at the car yard and buy the Dodge Challenger with the twin cam double overhead fluffy racing dice that you always wanted, but the whole time your three year-old is wailing that they want a Reliant Robin, do you relent or so you ignore the screaming brat?

Re: OFFICIAL EU/UK referendum thread

Posted: Thu May 24, 2018 6:55 pm
by Petej
Gospel wrote:
SamShark wrote:
Pro-Brexit Tory MPs concede staying in EU customs union into next decade is 'only viable option'
Verdict backed by Jacob Rees-Mogg and other leading Brexiteers - because of cabinet’s failure to agree 'what kind of trading and customs arrangements' it wants
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/p ... 67001.html

At any point are we allowed to say this looks a bit shit, without betraying the will of the people as expressed in June 2016?

Or do we just have to do it because.....
It's all part of the democratic process to debate these options and I'd agree that it all looks a but shit but IMO I think the "we" was decided at the referendum. Even if you were to argue that the question has now changed I don't think there's the time.
I really don't think the we was decided at the referendum and I rather agree with David Davis on 26th November 2002
There is a proper role for referendums in constitutional change, but only if done properly. If it is not done properly, it can be a dangerous tool. The Chairman of the Public Administration Committee, who is no longer in the Chamber, said that Clement Attlee—who is, I think, one of the Deputy Prime Minister's heroes—famously described the referendum as the device of demagogues and dictators. We may not always go as far as he did, but what is certain is that pre-legislative referendums of the type the Deputy Prime Minister is proposing are the worst type of all.
Referendums should be held when the electorate are in the best possible position to make a judgment. They should be held when people can view all the arguments for and against and when those arguments have been rigorously tested. In short, referendums should be held when people know exactly what they are getting. So legislation should be debated by Members of Parliament on the Floor of the House, and then put to the electorate for the voters to judge.

We should not ask people to vote on a blank sheet of paper and tell them to trust us to fill in the details afterwards. For referendums to be fair and compatible with our parliamentary process, we need the electors to be as well informed as possible and to know exactly what they are voting for. Referendums need to be treated as an addition to the parliamentary process, not as a substitute for it.
The Brexit vote was on a blank piece of paper and they are currently filling in the frequently underwhelming details.

Re: OFFICIAL EU/UK referendum thread

Posted: Thu May 24, 2018 7:04 pm
by The Man Without Fear
Santa wrote:If you arrive at the car yard and buy the Dodge Challenger with the twin cam double overhead fluffy racing dice that you always wanted, but the whole time your three year-old is wailing that they want a Reliant Robin, do you relent or so you ignore the screaming brat?
Most of us ignore you.

Re: OFFICIAL EU/UK referendum thread

Posted: Thu May 24, 2018 8:20 pm
by Gospel
Petej wrote:The Brexit vote was on a blank piece of paper and they are currently filling in the frequently underwhelming details.
Everyone knew that leave meant leave. The government even spent £9m explaining this in great detail to every household in the country. What we have now are those that disagree with the result trying every trick in the book to change the outcome by ensuring we get a deal that is so bad that the public will eventually decide it's no longer worth pursuing. But what I actually think will happen is that we will get a half-arsed Brexit which will result in a stalemate - whereby there won't be any mechanism to actually pull us all the way out or all the way back in.

Re: OFFICIAL EU/UK referendum thread

Posted: Thu May 24, 2018 9:16 pm
by camroc1
So it appears push is coming to shove, and the UK will be told to shove off.
UK 'chasing a fantasy' in Brexit talks, top EU official warns
Senior official involved in talks says EU will not negotiate under threat, after a fraught week in Brussels

Daniel Boffey and Jennifer Rankin in Brussels, Pippa Crerar in London and Lisa O'Carroll in Dublin

Thu 24 May 2018 19.34 BST Last modified on Thu 24 May 2018 20.18 BST

The EU has accused the British government of “chasing a fantasy” and warned that it will not negotiate under threat, after a fraught week of Brexit talks in Brussels that have raised serious concerns about the future of the negotiations.

The whole approach of the UK government to the discussions was castigated by a senior EU official involved, who further warned that the bloc would not be forced into positions that were against its interests.

The UK’s suggestion that it would seek to recover more than €1bn of contributions to the Galileo satellite project unless the European commission lifted a block on British firms being involved received a particularly strident response, with an implicit threat that such posturing could unravel the discussions.

“The EU doesn’t negotiate under threat,” the senior EU official said. “Such a request for reimbursement would be backsliding and unacceptable.”

After a bad-tempered week in Brussels, frustration is mounting as EU negotiators come to think that almost two years after the referendum the British government has not come to terms with Brexit.



The senior EU official said: “I have to say on the basis of this week’s discussions, I am a bit concerned because the pre-condition for fruitful discussions has to be that the UK accepts the consequences of its own choices.

“I am concerned that if the current debate continues, in three months’ time it will be the EU that will be made responsible for the Brexit decision. We need the UK to accept the consequences of its own decisions.



“To paraphrase The Leopard by Tommaso di Lampedusa, I have the impression that the UK thinks everything has to change on the EU’s side so that everything can stay the same for the UK.”

A whole host of withdrawal issues, from the role of the European court of justice in the governance of the withdrawal agreement to the UK’s role in Euratom, are yet to be dealt with despite the looming autumn deadline for an agreement.

However, it remains the issue of the Irish border that could derail the talks before the European council summit in June, by which time Dublin and Brussels are demanding progress.

The EU wants the UK to agree to a backstop position for Northern Ireland that would come into force should a future trade deal or bespoke technological solutions fail to arise that could avoid the need for a hard border.

In a blow to Theresa May, the EU has formally rejected suggestions that the entire UK could remain half-inside the EU’s single market, while benefiting from a special customs deal to avoid a hard border.

The EU also poured cold water on suggestions from some influential Conservatives that the backstop could be time limited to allow the UK to find another answer. “We were not keen to have a discussion on the backstop to the backstop,” the official said.

The EU official warned that progress on the Irish border – “let alone substantive progress” – was proving “elusive”.

“We need to have the recognition that the backstop has to be Northern Ireland specific,” the official said. “We have to do away with the fantasy that there is an all-UK solution to that.”

Senior sources at the Brexit department rejected the suggestion that Brussels had dismissed the UK’s new backstop plan for the Irish border, suggesting that it was “simply a negotiating position” and that they believed the EU was open to the idea. “It’s a public stance for them to take during the negotiation,” one said.

A No 10 source said: “This is what they do every time. As usual we’ve heard it all before. There’s nothing they’ve said which concerns us.”

A government source added: “We presented seven papers this week … so the claim we aren’t providing enough detail is laughable.

Advertisement

“The risk is that if they follow down this track, putting conditions on our unconditional offers and trying to insult us, the EU will end up with a relationship with its third biggest economy and largest security partner that lets down millions of citizens in the EU and UK.”

However, in a forthright point-by-point deconstruction of the UK’s negotiating positions, the EU official:

Warned that it would not allow the UK the access it wants post-Brexit to the Galileo satellite programme as it would give Downing Street the ability to “switch off the signal for the EU”.
Ruled out the UK retaining use of the European arrest warrant, as it could put in jeopardy “the lives and liberty of citizens”.
Responded to UK complaints that the EU’s proposed free-trade deal was insufficient by pointing out that the UK was asking for a more trusted position than that enjoyed by the member states, which are held accountable by the ECJ and the EU institutions, which the official described as “a big ask” and “not where the European council is at”.
Noted that the UK had suggested it could try to change the EU’s rules from inside before it leaves to gain access to its programmes post-Brexit, ominously warning that the commission’s negotiators would report back to the member states on the development.
In Dublin, Ireland’s taoiseach, Leo Varadkar, confirmed that he had not seen any firm proposals on the Irish border backstop since his meeting with May 10 days ago in Sofia.

“We are still waiting for them,” he said. “We’re not that far away from the deadline for the withdrawal agreement, we’re very much in the space where we need legal text,” he said.

Asked if he would consider, in principle, an extension of the transition period to 2023, he said: “There’s been no request from the UK to extend that and no offer to do so.”
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... cial-warns

Re: OFFICIAL EU/UK referendum thread

Posted: Thu May 24, 2018 9:21 pm
by DragsterDriver
Who is the Eu official? I can’t see his name.

Re: OFFICIAL EU/UK referendum thread

Posted: Thu May 24, 2018 9:22 pm
by camroc1
DragsterDriver wrote:Who is the Eu official? I can’t see his name.
Try the Guardian.

Re: OFFICIAL EU/UK referendum thread

Posted: Thu May 24, 2018 9:32 pm
by DragsterDriver
camroc1 wrote:
DragsterDriver wrote:Who is the Eu official? I can’t see his name.
Try the Guardian.
Still can’t see it?

Re: OFFICIAL EU/UK referendum thread

Posted: Thu May 24, 2018 9:36 pm
by bimboman
Warned that it would not allow the UK the access it wants post-Brexit to the Galileo satellite programme as it would give Downing Street the ability to “switch off the signal for the EU”.
But they’re happy for that power to rest in Bern.

A genuine classic of the example of a nonsense argument that is made to sound reasonable. This includes of course the 3bln in trade across the Irish/NI border.

Re: OFFICIAL EU/UK referendum thread

Posted: Thu May 24, 2018 9:41 pm
by Leinster in London
bimboman wrote:
Warned that it would not allow the UK the access it wants post-Brexit to the Galileo satellite programme as it would give Downing Street the ability to “switch off the signal for the EU”.
But they’re happy for that power to rest in Bern.
Probably because Bern has allowed the ECJ to maintain the jurisdiction of the legal framework of the project, and UK demand equal legal jurisdiction.