sabenapilot wrote:

1- UK accepts the final offer of the EU to return 25% of their catch.
the UK initally asked for 80%, went into the negotiations with a demand for 60% and slashed it to 30% last week.
.

I would not say they slashed it to 30% as even Barnier recognized the offer was conditional at that it amounted to a reduction of EU quota by 60% as it was the UK offer is a 35% reduction of pelagics quota and demarsal quota excluded from the agreement,

But if what you are saying is correct and pending the outcome of the FTA, the Tories have just lost my vote if they capitulate to the EU.

More leaks, always from the EU side so far which is clearly taking Downing Steet in speed as Nr 10 is said to be preparing the grounds for the climb down with key bachbenchers still...

The LPF is solidified in future too through a so-called 'evolution clause' designed to avoid either side gaining a competitive advantage by failing to upgrade its environmental, social and labour standards over time.

If either party felt bilateral trade was being distorted, they could take corrective measures but only after consultation: an expert panel would meet and adjudicate within 30 days. If their remedies would later be seen to have been erroneous or excessive, the aggrieved party would be able to take compensatory measures unilaterally.

I'm starting to wonder what BoJo will sell as a win in all of this... and beginning to understand just what it takes so long for him to step out; Barnier meanwhile is giving a briefing right now to those who'll have to put this deal into temporary effect as from Jan 1st as there's no time for a formal vote in the EP before the end of the year.

Mr Barnier right now: "this trade agreement with the UK will serve as the template of all future EU trade agreements, with a so-called “level-playing field” provision to be widely adopted in other future negotiations by the EU too so others would also follow our model."
That will go down well with Brexiteers, I'm sure.

The Express seems to have made up its mind already, just listening to the EU explaining the pending deal:
https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics ... el-Barnier.

scbriml wrote:

A101 wrote:

Might be irrelevant to you, but it’s a fact of life to many here in the UK that they prefer to buy British first.

This is the very definition of anecdotal.

It's a "fact of life"? How many is "many"? Can you provide a link to a survey that shows that "many here" (whatever that is) prefer to buy British first?

It appears to be a general attitude of the population - more so outside of London and the southeast.

A101 wrote:

But if what you are saying is correct and pending the outcome of the FTA, the Tories have just lost my vote if they capitulate to the EU.

What's the old saying about being careful what you wish (or even vote) for?

Hopefully Farage will be in an absolute rage about it.

sabenapilot wrote:

olle wrote:

MEP seems to get veto over the deal. Will MPs get veto as well
?

Not as far as I understood it;
Contrary to the WA and the arrangements over NI with the EU when the UK was still a member, a FTA with the EU is now an international treaty and can thus be signed by the government alone.
So much for taking back control and parliament being sovereign: in reality the British public gave the right to sign their economy away to a bunch of millionaires in the Tory government who are known to only care about themselves and their friends who are often even richer and have actually put them there in the first place.
What could possibly go wrong with this?

Parliament in the UK is sovereign and could take that power, but they did the opposite. IIRC an opposition MP tabled an amendment or a bill allowing Parliament to have a binding vote on the deal, and the Tories rejected it thoroughly. MPs had taken that power for the withdrawal agreement, and that's why all the mess ensued (perfectly democratic mess, of course).

I remembered correctly, it happened last summer : https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/20 ... ade-deals/

scbriml wrote:

A101 wrote:

But if what you are saying is correct and pending the outcome of the FTA, the Tories have just lost my vote if they capitulate to the EU.

What's the old saying about being careful what you wish (or even vote) for?

Hopefully Farage will be in an absolute rage about it.

We were always at the hands of Government if we agreed with it or not.

I honestly don’t think any other party would have done better than each other, I think all would have capitulate one way or another.

They then just have to face voter backlash at the next GE

Croatia is in the EU and has blue passports.

A101 wrote:

..., the Tories have just lost my vote if they capitulate to the EU.

Capitulate? It’s time to get a reality check and accept that you have been fooled by “they need us more than we need the EU”.

We'll soon find out how BoJo is going to sell this deal as it is said a press conference is planned for this morning by Nr 10.

It was first planned for last night, but called off again because the PM had to first secure the backing of key backbenchers and wanted to talk to his full cabinet first, as he's said to be in need of their full support to sell this... The EU then played along pretending to be negotiating still, although Barnier gave it away as he was already briefing EU officials since this deal will have to be put to work temporarily as from January 1st, pending ratification by the European Parliament.

A101 wrote:

But if what you are saying is correct and pending the outcome of the FTA, the Tories have just lost my vote if they capitulate to the EU.

But look on the bright side. Brexit has given the UK control of its own laws, control of immigration, the freedom to strike trade deals on its own terms, and a free trade deal with the EU without having to pay into the EU budget.

If I were Norway I would wonder what the point of paying into the EU budget is if the UK can get the same deal without paying into it.

marcelh wrote:

A101 wrote:

..., the Tories have just lost my vote if they capitulate to the EU.

Capitulate? It’s time to get a reality check and accept that you have been fooled by “they need us more than we need the EU”.

Size matters: the EU is 7 times as big as the UK and on top the UK put itself in the rather weak position to first agree to leave on WTO terms and then come back to beg for a better deal (pretening it wasn't begging for one didnt work in those last days, did it?). Over summer it even made things worse by not extending the transition period, which was another demonstration of overestimation right in the middle of the covid-pandemic, so as from them it was clear that the only 2 options were self-destruction or a humbling climbdown.

It seems to have come to the second option now: the painful climbdown, which was then carefully timed on Christmas Eve so as to quickly see it disappear from the public attention.

All that remains now is one difficult moment in which BoJo faces the press to announce this underhelming deal and where he'll have to pretend it is a great victory for Britain.
My guess is he'll highlight the political aspect of how he promissed to get Brexit done, how he refused to extend the deadline despite many calls for the contrary, how the deal proves Britain can conclude these big deals and that its sovereignty lays in the ability to diverge in future (not mentioning that in that case, there will be a return of the no deal horror scenario with tariffs etc).
As as end note, I'd expect a sidestep to the sea and to fish, with some very kind reading of that part of the argeement with some quota numbers and exemples as well as a general remark about how zero tariffs, zero quota on British goods will suddenly make the British economy flourish.
And that will be it.

I wonder if for once the PM will have had the time to dress up for the occasion in a suit of his own, or whether he'll show up dressed in that of somebody else again, because seriously, if you see him standing next to Barnier for instance... come on: are there no tailors in the UK left?

AeroVega wrote:

A101 wrote:

But if what you are saying is correct and pending the outcome of the FTA, the Tories have just lost my vote if they capitulate to the EU.

But look on the bright side. Brexit has given the UK control of its own laws, control of immigration, the freedom to strike trade deals on its own terms, and a free trade deal with the EU without having to pay into the EU budget.

If I were Norway I would wonder what the point of paying into the EU budget is if the UK can get the same deal without paying into it.

Let's briefly pick that last illusion apart shall we?

1- control of laws:
Domestic laws have always been under control of the EU member states
Laws affecting the working of the SM are indeed now under control, but given the evolution clause secured, it means that if the UK touches them in a meaningful way, the 'zero tariff, zero quota' are gone within 30 days....That's sovereignty on a leash, if you excuse me saying so.

2- freedrom to strike trade deals on its own terms:
Rules of origin will make it clear very soon that any British FTA will always have to be written with the pre-existing EU deal in mind, because hardly any manufactured item (except agricultural goods) from britain will be British enough to be covered only by a UK FTA.
As M. Heseltine put it: British FTA are shaddow deals of any EU deal with any third country and will evolve in synch with them.

3- no budget contributions?
But the UK pays into the budget: not in cash, but in fish catch!
London gives the right to the EU to have their fishing fleet come and fish in sovereign British waters for zero euro compensation.

If you genuinely think the UK to have the same kind of a deal than Norway has, think again.
Norway has the EU Agencies all working for them, hence it doesn't have to set them up at home at a huge cost.
The UK is scrambling to replicate everything at home, from a British medicine agency to an aviation certification agency, and at a cost many times higher than the net contribution it paid.
Benefit of scale is not just something applicable to multinationals, of course. Brexit is pretending a company is better of if it splits itself up in 2: the only time this happens if when it is forced to do so by the regulator (because of market distortion), or because it wants to sell off part of its business.

sabenapilot wrote:

Norway has the EU Agencies all working for them, hence it doesn't have to set them up at home at a huge cost.
The UK is scrambling to replicate everything at home, from a British medicine agency to an aviation certification agency, and at a cost many times higher than the net contribution it paid.

“Sovereignty” doesn’t come cheap.....

A101 wrote:

We were always at the hands of Government if we agreed with it or not.

I honestly don’t think any other party would have done better than each other, I think all would have capitulate one way or another.

So you voted for something that was undefined, knowing that whoever was in charge would capitulate on that lack of definition one way or another? Great strategy! Thanks for confirming it's not just the politicians who are clueless. Well, I guess now the whole country will be unhappy about Brexit, not just those that voted to remain.

Well played, sir. Well played.

sabenapilot wrote:

I wonder if for once the PM will have had the time to dress up for the occasion in a suit of his own, or whether he'll show up dressed in that of somebody else again, because seriously, if you see him standing next to Barnier for instance... come on: are there no tailors in the UK left?

Boris the clown's image is very carefully managed. The unkempt hair and "12 year old boy at the end of the school day" disheveled appearance is a deliberate ploy to make the Eton-educated toff appear more like a man of the people, when nothing could be further from the truth. Rees-Mogg on the other hand, makes no effort to disguise his roots, quite the opposite. They're both detestable in their own way. How they ended up as PM and Leader of The House is beyond comprehension.

A101 wrote:

I honestly don’t think any other party would have done better than each other, I think all would have capitulate one way or another.

Oh wow, you honestly think that? So in other words, this is the Brexit you actually voted for. A kind of Brino. Excellent. Never thought you voted for Brino, but there you go, you are able to surprise me.

sabenapilot wrote:

Mr Barnier right now: "this trade agreement with the UK will serve as the template of all future EU trade agreements, with a so-called “level-playing field” provision to be widely adopted in other future negotiations by the EU too so others would also follow our model."
That will go down well with Brexiteers, I'm sure.

The Express seems to have made up its mind already, just listening to the EU explaining the pending deal:
https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics ... el-Barnier.

Let's wait what they will say if the details emerge. But for now, the tabloids seem to be more positive than. I would have guessed.

Dutchy wrote:

A101 wrote:

I honestly don’t think any other party would have done better than each other, I think all would have capitulate one way or another.

Oh wow, you honestly think that? So in other words, this is the Brexit you actually voted for. A kind of Brino. Excellent. Never thought you voted for Brino, but there you go, you are able to surprise me.

I voted to leave the EU, what has transpired over the last 4 years has been a catastrophe by a hostile remain parliament which in the intial stages who could not accept that the electorate voted to leave, and then did everything in its power to put hurdles in the government’s way to get the best deal for the UK

There were red lines that should never have been surrendered to the EU starting with the horrendous WA which should have been put in the garbage bin. The hostile former Parliament gave the EU tactical consent in the way it negotiated ever since

No deal is always better than a bad deal and that is my position, May/Johnson dealt with a hostile parliament now they will deal with some very hostile electorate if the go with a bad deal with the EU

Here is what appears to be the UK government's own analysis of the deal:

https://www.scribd.com/document/4890482 ... l-Document

Dutchy wrote:

Let's wait what they will say if the details emerge. But for now, the tabloids seem to be more positive than. I would have guessed.

Well that would be a very welcome attitude as it would help to sell this deal to the UK public which had been promissed the moon.

On the other had, didn't it go the same way initially with the WA, only to start moaning after a couple of weeks?

Wouldn't be surprised to see the same happening now: if not, the tabloids will be 5 pages thinner come next year, when there's nothing to report about 'Eurocrats', or are they going to revert to Westminstercrats reporting? Problably more nonsense about celebs and their latest romantic escapades in bikini in Malaga, Nice or Dubai?

AeroVega wrote:

Here is what appears to be the UK government's own analysis of the deal:

https://www.scribd.com/document/4890482 ... l-Document

Oh, but this document is clearly designed to counter objections to the deal anticipated from the more hardline Tory Brexiters.

It’s an interesting exercise, but hugely subjective.
A lot depends on how you “weight” particular issues; some matter more than others, or to one side more than the other. And, in assessing who has backed down, a lot depends on what timeframe you apply. On some issues the UK “ask” two weeks ago was not the same as it was in January, and even that might have been different from what Boris Johnson was promising last year, or in 2016. Take that as baseline and the 'wins' become very thin.

Interestingly, the first version of the document did include such a table, but it quickly got pulled according to Sam Lowe, a trade specialist at the Centre for European Reform thinktank.

Now the interesting part: how will this 'sovereignty on a leash' be sold to to the UK?

A101 wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

A101 wrote:

I honestly don’t think any other party would have done better than each other, I think all would have capitulate one way or another.

Oh wow, you honestly think that? So in other words, this is the Brexit you actually voted for. A kind of Brino. Excellent. Never thought you voted for Brino, but there you go, you are able to surprise me.

I voted to leave the EU

UK left almost 11 months ago. So no problems there.

A101 wrote:

, what has transpired over the last 4 years has been a catastrophe by a hostile remain parliament

So in your mind, there should be no sovereign parliament. Check.

A101 wrote:

which in the intial stages who could not accept that the electorate voted to leave

That is not supported by the facts. No vote ever made it to remain. Your extreme position was indeed not adopted, but nevertheless, they accepted the vote to leave.

A101 wrote:

, and then did everything in its power to put hurdles in the government’s way to get the best deal for the UK

Really, making a fictional history. The deal you have had in mind was never on the table. The EU would never have willing to give your deal, never. Simply because it would undermine the EU as a trading block.

A101 wrote:

There were red lines that should never have been surrendered to the EU

Surrendered? It isn't a war you know. Why is it that conservatives tend to speak in war-like terms. What is the point of that?

A101 wrote:

starting with the horrendous WA which should have been put in the garbage bin.

Your opinion to which you are entitled. Fact is WA was reasonable for both the UK and EU, how do we know that? Simple: they both agreed to it.

A101 wrote:

The hostile former Parliament gave the EU tactical consent in the way it negotiated ever since

The UK was always the weaker party. Please don't say the meaningless phrase: "they need us more than we need them". Even the hardest of hard Brexitremist now kind of acknowledge it to be a complete and utter bull. Even they say now it is equal (which it isn't).

A101 wrote:

No deal is always better than a bad deal and that is my position

My position is that a table is a table and that the sky is the sky. It is a truism, it is no position to take. Nobody will be against it.

A101 wrote:

May/Johnson dealt with a hostile parliament[/quote[]

Oh wow, if a try to put me in your way of thinking, I kind of see that you see May have had to deal with a hostile parliament, she didn't have a majority so she had to govern with an extreme nationalistic party. But Johnson? Com'on, he has had a majority of 80 and all candidates on a conservative ticket had to pledge to Brexit and the WA. How on earth can you label it as a hostile parliament? Or do you mean that Parliament wasn't in favor of your extreme position of Brexit and thus any Parliament would be labeled hostile by you?

A101 wrote:

now they will deal with some very hostile electorate

We'll see. As I said in my analysis, the EU isn't and was never the core problem in the UK. So yeah, there is still massive dissent under the electorate, waiting for the next scape coat. What it will be, will be anyone's guess. If history teaches us anything, immigrants are high on the list of candidates, unfortunately.

A101 wrote:

if the go with a bad deal with the EU

Any deal which would be acceptable for the EU would be labeled a 'bad deal' by you, wouldn't it? Or am I wrong in that assessment? What kind of deal would you approve to, which is actually acceptable for the sovereign 27 countries which work together in the EU. Remember, it takes two to tango, and 'they need us more than we need them' has been proven wrong a very long time ago.

sabenapilot wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Let's wait what they will say if the details emerge. But for now, the tabloids seem to be more positive than. I would have guessed.

Well that would be a very welcome attitude as it would help to sell this deal to the UK public which had been promissed the moon.

On the other had, didn't it go the same way initially with the WA, only to start moaning after a couple of weeks?

Wouldn't be surprised to see the same happening now: if not, the tabloids will be 5 pages thinner come next year, when there's nothing to report about 'Eurocrats', or are they going to revert to Westminstercrats reporting? Problably more nonsense about celebs and their latest romantic escapades in bikini in Malaga, Nice or Dubai?

I am truly afraid that the tabloids will point to some other scape coat. It took 20 or 30 years to undermine the EU and distract the readers of the tabloids. Distracting from the true underlying cause. The lower classes of UK society have been forgotten by Westminster, so indeed there is a lot of dissatisfaction with current UK society. But that has nothing to do with the EU, that has everything to do with Westminster and the policies of the UK government, Labor or Conservatives alike.
Now that the EU is out of the picture and can't be blamed anymore, they need something else, so with what kind of crap those pages will be filled is anyone's guess, but it will not be pretty, so no bikini's in Malaga alais.

A101 wrote:

I voted to leave the EU, what has transpired over the last 4 years has been a catastrophe by a hostile remain parliament which in the intial stages who could not accept that the electorate voted to leave,

Blame the remainers! Blame the sabeteurs! Blame the EU!

Rubbish.

Half the Tory party voted against the proposals and caused most of the problems themselves because they would not accept any Brexit that wasn't no deal. If you acknowledge for the purpose of arguement (well most sensible people accept that in reality as well) that no deal was not an option then you'll see that those pesky remainers were trying to remove that outcome from the equation. Jeeze, half those pesky remainers voted to invoke art 50, and acknowledge "the will of the people". Maybe Brexit should have been better defined from the outset, then maybe there would have been a different outcome. But it wouldn't have been no deal because nobody would have voted for it on a ballot paper.

A101 wrote:

and then did everything in its power to put hurdles in the government’s way to get the best deal for the UK

Your ideal of a "best deal" was actually phantasy and was never achieveable. The deal that comes back right now will be the only deal that can be accepted by other parties in the HOC and the UK as a whole. No deal is no option, so this has to do. Until we get to study the detail we can't say how bad it is, but I suspect it won't please anyone. All it will do is avoid no deal. Hopefully it will however allow the vast majority of the UK's economy to function, which a no deal would not have done.


Lots of the UK press are piling on this morning hailing Boris as the all conquering hero, with Barnier having blinked and given in first. It's pathetic.

We will wait and see what the ERG folk say..I suspect they will say it's a betrayal of the vote and BRINO. Labour will support it over no deal even if all MPs are being given the grand total of ONE day via zoom to study and discuss all the detail. That's parliamentary sovereignty for you.

Now the UK truly is a vassal of the EU.

Meanwhile, the international press is already picking holes in the Government's assessment of the victorious outcome of this deal, pointing out a simple tally of the negotiating issues doesn’t account for their overall importance.

In the services industry, which makes up 80% of Britain’s economy, professional qualifications will not be recognized in the EU.
That means professions such as architecture, accountancy and consulting will be harder to sell in to the bloc.
80% of the British economy is thus negatively affected by the outcome of this deal!

Another area where the U.K. has given painful ground is on product standards, meaning British firms will have to pay the regulatory cost of certification twice if they wish to sell their products in both the U.K. and the bloc. if the UK diverges in future, British companies will even have to run 2 separate production lines to comply with separate standards

On rules of origin -- which determine what inputs a good must contain to qualify for tariff-free trade -- the U.K. said it has achieved a win by securing so-called bilateral cumulation. That means inputs from both the U.K. and EU count toward the tariff-free threshold. But the U.K.’s opening ask was more ambitious: It wanted inputs from third countries with which it has a free trade agreement, such as Japan or Canada, to be included, that is NOT the case, the EU only accepts EU content back into the EU tariff free. This is going to prove a big issue for the UK in the coming years ahead, as it means much of what is sources outside of the EU cannot be sold tariff free to the EU, even if processed in the U.K. first!

These very significant 'losses' are equaled out in the government tally by 'wins' in domains where the EU didn't even have an opening bid, or on issues where the stakes were much less.

More analysis on: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... ium-europe

Dutchy wrote:

A101 wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Oh wow, you honestly think that? So in other words, this is the Brexit you actually voted for. A kind of Brino. Excellent. Never thought you voted for Brino, but there you go, you are able to surprise me.

I voted to leave the EU

UK left almost 11 months ago. So no problems there.

The context was your point on voting for a BRINO (Brexit In Name Only)

Dutchy wrote:

A101 wrote:

what has transpired over the last 4 years has been a catastrophe by a hostile remain parliament

So in your mind, there should be no sovereign parliament. Check.

I believe in sovereign UKGov/Parliament and judiciary, but when that same UKGov/Parliament vote for a referenda that gives the electorate a say then they should respect the outcome and not go against the interests of UK in important negotiations that affectively bind the hands of UKGov.

Dutchy wrote:

A101 wrote:

which in the intial stages who could not accept that the electorate voted to leave

That is not supported by the facts. No vote ever made it to remain. Your extreme position was indeed not adopted, but nevertheless, they accepted the vote to leave.

The hostile Parliament may have voted to leave with full knowledge of the process under A50 which included leaving without a WA, but made an attempt to undermine the negotiations to circumnavigate the will of the electorate. The Benn Act affectively bound the hands of government from exercising its full negotiations capacity under the TEU A50

Dutchy wrote:

A101 wrote:

and then did everything in its power to put hurdles in the government’s way to get the best deal for the UK

Really, making a fictional history. The deal you have had in mind was never on the table. The EU would never have willing to give your deal, never. Simply because it would undermine the EU as a trading block.

And what deal did I have in mind?

Dutchy wrote:

A101 wrote:

There were red lines that should never have been surrendered to the EU

Surrendered? It isn't a war you know. Why is it that conservatives tend to speak in war-like terms. What is the point of that?

Surrender; give up or hand over (a person, right, or possession)
Surrender synonyms: give up, relinquish, sacrifice, waive, abandon……

Dutchy wrote:

A101 wrote:

starting with the horrendous WA which should have been put in the garbage bin.

Your opinion to which you are entitled. Fact is WA was reasonable for both the UK and EU, how do we know that? Simple: they both agreed to it.

With 95% of it being rejected three times in the UK Parliament and then forced to renegotiate under duress due to the Benn Act with the possibility of the hostile Parliament and Speaker of the house revoking A50.
I guess we will never know how the EU would have reacted if they knew there was a possibility of leaving the EU with no WA

Dutchy wrote:

A101 wrote:

The hostile former Parliament gave the EU tactical consent in the way it negotiated ever since

The UK was always the weaker party. Please don't say the meaningless phrase: "they need us more than we need them". Even the hardest of hard Brexitremist now kind of acknowledge it to be a complete and utter bull. Even they say now it is equal (which it isn't).

And Parliament went against the UK interests and voted to give the UKGov an even weaker hand than necessary at the negotiations
All water under the bridge now

Dutchy wrote:

A101 wrote:

No deal is always better than a bad deal and that is my position

My position is that a table is a table and that the sky is the sky. It is a truism, it is no position to take. Nobody will be against it.

Good for you

Dutchy wrote:

Any deal which would be acceptable for the EU would be labeled a 'bad deal' by you, wouldn't it? Or am I wrong in that assessment?

Not necessarily

Dutchy wrote:

What kind of deal would you approve to, which is actually acceptable for the sovereign 27 countries which work together in the EU. Remember, it takes two to tango, and 'they need us more than we need them' has been proven wrong a very long time ago.

You haven’t proved anything, I guess we will never know I’m not part of the negotiations team.

A101 wrote:

May/Johnson dealt with a hostile parliament now they will deal with some very hostile electorate if the go with a bad deal with the EU

A101 wrote:

They then just have to face voter backlash at the next GE

Not from all - remember nearly half that voted are likely to be happier that SOME deal has been reached rather than no deal disaster

sbworcs wrote:

A101 wrote:

May/Johnson dealt with a hostile parliament now they will deal with some very hostile electorate if the go with a bad deal with the EU

A101 wrote:

They then just have to face voter backlash at the next GE

Not from all - remember nearly half that voted are likely to be happier that SOME deal has been reached rather than no deal disaster

Indeed, but I can't wait to see what jingoistic spin The Mail and Express put on their front pages tomorrow.

I also expect all those easy trade deals to be implemented on 1st of January as well.

As I understand the agreement presented so far is in line with the famous stairway.

Even it seems that UK got a worse deal the Canada with no services included and origin content in product must be 60% from UK or EU.

My question is how the abcense of services will effect UK exports?

Will UK fishing still be able to access EU waters? If not is UK fishing better or worse off?

Deal done

Brexit deal done: Trade agreement finally struck between UK and EU

http://news.sky.com/story/brexit-deal-d ... u-12149904

Weird there wasn’t a deal until markets closed for the day. (At least in the UK anyway).

So, a deal done.

In events that will surprise nobody - EU organises and holds a multi-lingual, international press conference and gets their side of the deal out. Finished and everyone leaves the stage.

Meanwhile, in Downing St, we have a picture of a lectern surrounded by Union flags. That's it. Incompetence from start to finish. I'm so proud,

scbriml wrote:

So, a deal done.

In events that will surprise nobody - EU organises and holds a multi-lingual, international press conference and gets their side of the deal out. Finished and everyone leaves the stage.

Meanwhile, in Downing St, we have a picture of a lectern surrounded by Union flags. That's it. Incompetence from start to finish. I'm so proud,

While it is only a comment on form, not content and as such is less relevant to predict the economic future with, I agree with you.
The way in which team UK communicated looked awfully parochial compared to the top notch no nonsense business-like attitude from Brussels.
The same can be said of its players, from DD who showed up with no files at the first meeting to BoJo who looked like he had to borrow somebody else's suit for hit diner visit to Brussels the other week...
Global Britain needs some consulting on its image, because the 1960s are long gone...

scbriml wrote:

So, a deal done.

In events that will surprise nobody - EU organises and holds a multi-lingual, international press conference and gets their side of the deal out. Finished and everyone leaves the stage.

Meanwhile, in Downing St, we have a picture of a lectern surrounded by Union flags. That's it. Incompetence from start to finish. I'm so proud,

Who cares, the main thing is that the cliff-edge Brexit has been avoided. So the absolute worst situation isn't going to be realized, so instead of 8% loss of GDP it will be 3% or so. Instead of blowing two feet off, it has been two 9mm shot in the two feet. Given the situation a big win for the British people. Alais hardcore Brexiteers will not see it like that.

scbriml wrote:

So, a deal done.

In events that will surprise nobody - EU organises and holds a multi-lingual, international press conference and gets their side of the deal out. Finished and everyone leaves the stage.

Meanwhile, in Downing St, we have a picture of a lectern surrounded by Union flags. That's it. Incompetence from start to finish. I'm so proud,

Its pretty much irrelevant . If he had have broadcast from a flashy stage he would have been accused of triumphalism. I think a low key Q&A as we are seeing now is highly more appropriate considering the current COVID situation .

More important is that sitting here in Ireland with a land border with the UK is that there is a sigh of relief all round .

Time to move on and stop the bickering on all sides. Far more important situations to deal with now.

scbriml wrote:

So, a deal done.

In events that will surprise nobody - EU organises and holds a multi-lingual, international press conference and gets their side of the deal out. Finished and everyone leaves the stage.

Meanwhile, in Downing St, we have a picture of a lectern surrounded by Union flags. That's it. Incompetence from start to finish. I'm so proud,

Let Boris Johnson do his "good news show". He needs it and let's be honest, he's pretty good in making it look like he won even if he lost. However, most commentators on the website of the Express have some other view (though there area few who buy Boris Johnson story).

LJ wrote:

scbriml wrote:

So, a deal done.

In events that will surprise nobody - EU organises and holds a multi-lingual, international press conference and gets their side of the deal out. Finished and everyone leaves the stage.

Meanwhile, in Downing St, we have a picture of a lectern surrounded by Union flags. That's it. Incompetence from start to finish. I'm so proud,

Let Boris Johnson do his "good news show". He needs it and let's be honest, he's pretty good in making it look like he won even if he lost. However, most commentators on the website of the Express have some other view (though there area few who buy Boris Johnson story).

Link to picture

Boris Johnson as the winner he is.

Happy to see a deal struck with our European friends

So in short:

• None of the unicorms promised before the referendum have been delivered (hint: unicorns don't exist, never have and this has been pointed out ad nauseam).

• The deal is pretty exactly what everyone with any contact with reality had predicted all along simply because it is the only possible deal.

• The UK doesn't actually win anything. It's degradation, added cost, added red tape, added impediments and inferior international deals and relations all around, with nothing positive to show for it.

• The EU will have to cope with the self-imposed decline of an important third country but in the grand scheme of things there are much bigger fish to fry.

• As predicted, none of the brexiters' fantasies of damaging, destroying and undermining the EU has come to pass, simply because the EU has no interest in that kind of deal and trust in the UK is at an all-time low.

• Inescapably in real life, the UK has to stick with the standards and rules set by the European Union, now due to Brexit with zero say about them but with an utterly pointless and very expensive added Brexit layer of domestic british red tape all over it.

• Boris Johnson and his posse of unemployable incompetents have at least made their own career goals. That is the only actual win in this and that was the main purpose of the exercise, so they don't care about the scorched earth all across their country.

None of this is any kind of surprise and you can trawl the depths of all tose Brexit threads to find exactly this being predicted from way before the referendum, actually, but the brexiters kept chasing fantasies and delusions which have now crashed into reality like a toy paper boat into a rock.

This is not a failure of Brexit, it is Brexit itself which has always been an inherent failure all along.

Okay, now britons (and scots) will need to come to terms with this catastrophic self-inflicted failure but for us in the European Union life just goes on.

I put my bet on that there is too much invested in the 'conservative EU UK war'
. Within 12 month uk government will request tobrenogiatevthis deal.

This is armistace 1918 not end of wars.

AeroVega wrote:

A101 wrote:

But if what you are saying is correct and pending the outcome of the FTA, the Tories have just lost my vote if they capitulate to the EU.

But look on the bright side. Brexit has given the UK control of its own laws, control of immigration, the freedom to strike trade deals on its own terms, and a free trade deal with the EU without having to pay into the EU budget.

If I were Norway I would wonder what the point of paying into the EU budget is if the UK can get the same deal without paying into it.

All of what Norway is paying for is lost to the UK, with substantial added cost incurred for duplicated UK administration, loss of shared resources, loss of infrastructure support and so on.

Norway continues to profit from many EU benefits which the UK is now losing.

Brexit deal done: Irish and UK business groups react

This Christmas Eve, businesses and representative bodies have been reacting to the news that agreement has been reached between negotiators on a Brexit trade agreement between the EU and UK.

John McGrane, Director General of the British Irish Chamber of Commerce said that businesses in Ireland and across the UK can breathe "a collective sigh of relief" today.

Mr McGrane said the new trade agreement will help to protect nearly €90bn in trade across the Irish Sea and sustain 400,000 jobs on these islands.

"The limited deal between the EU and UK is to be welcomed as it removes the threat of new tariffs and ensures a strong trading partnership is maintained from January 1st.

"This agreement also provides businesses with the certainty they need," he said.

https://amp.rte.ie/amp/1186345/

olle wrote:

I put my bet on that there is too much invested in the 'conservative EU UK war'
. Within 12 month uk government will request tobrenogiatevthis deal.

I doubt that the fundamentals will change beyond some tweaks on the fringes.

This is armistace 1918 not end of wars.

It's not a war at all. If it were, it would be a war of a bunch of UK elitist incompetents against their own country.

It's going to be interesting to see how the UK is going to exploit its new found freedoms in the next few years.

Merry Christmas to all who participated in this thread.

scbriml wrote:

vrbarreto wrote:

Plaice in our time...

Good cod man, you need to get out of the halibut of using one (fishing) liners. Get your skates on, otherwise you're just a prawn in this game of chess.

Cry haddock! And let's slip loose the cods of war...

OA260

Did anyone proof read this document.

The sections are all over the place.

bennett123 wrote:

OA260

Did anyone proof read this document.

The sections are all over the place.

It's not part of the treaty text; it's another one of those government assessments ment to win over the sceptics.
Seems the UK government thinks such is needed...

bennett123 wrote:

OA260

Did anyone proof read this document.

The sections are all over the place.

5 pieces they are all taken from different sections thats why .

AeroVega wrote:

Merry Christmas to all who participated in this thread.

As they're saying in Westminster this year - Merry Crisis and a Happy New Fear.