Brexit negotiations

I like this XM. It shows a fair and sensible view of the shenanigans we keep hearing about.

xmiles wrote:Just in case anyone is interested here is a neutral analysis of the bill for leaving the EU. Funnily enough not something anyone on the brexit campaign ever mentioned.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-42025865

Tusk gives May two weeks to come up with the money and sort out the Irish border issue.

I guess that means that May will have to make the figure public?

The figure of 40 is being bandied about now

gloswhite wrote:The figure of 40 is being bandied about now

That'll be about right if the UK also gives up any claim on project assets in Europe that have previously been partially funded by the UK but because of the different perspectives on how the figure is to be calculated I reckon that once May comes up with a figure Tusk and Barnier may have a difficult job in getting agreement from all 27 members.
Interesting that the initial estimates were around the £18 billion mark but we've been gradually lulled into accepting that it's going to be a helluva lot more over the last 18 months, yet still they persist with the idea of ploughing ahead regardless. Begs the question that if we are going to embody EU law into our own as is proposed, are unlikely to get any of the immigration outcomes Leavers expected and end up paying over the odds for the privilege when the "it's what people voted for" argument will be dropped. Because nobody did vote for that.

gloswhite wrote:I like this XM. It shows a fair and sensible view of the shenanigans we keep hearing about.

I do try to only quote reasonably objective sources.

wanderlust wrote:

gloswhite wrote:The figure of 40 is being bandied about now

That'll be about right if the UK also gives up any claim on project assets in Europe that have previously been partially funded by the UK but because of the different perspectives on how the figure is to be calculated I reckon that once May comes up with a figure Tusk and Barnier may have a difficult job in getting agreement from all 27 members.
Interesting that the initial estimates were around the £18 billion mark but we've been gradually lulled into accepting that it's going to be a helluva lot more over the last 18 months, yet still they persist with the idea of ploughing ahead regardless. Begs the question that if we are going to embody EU law into our own as is proposed, are unlikely to get any of the immigration outcomes Leavers expected and end up paying over the odds for the privilege when the "it's what people voted for" argument will be dropped. Because nobody did vote for that.

Heard a comment yesterday that many pro-brexit, (must admit, myself included), think the 40 or 50 billion isn't too bad, because we'll get it back through trade anyway, (don't know over what period), but as we've seen its more about politics , on both sides, than common sense. at the moment. 
It seems the French and Germans are now being looked on as too demanding, by the few countries that are putting most cash into the EU, as they will lose, by percentage, far more than the big two, and they aren't prepared to put up with much more.

xmiles wrote:

gloswhite wrote:I like this XM. It shows a fair and sensible view of the shenanigans we keep hearing about.

I do try to only quote reasonably objective sources.

I know, I know, and you're doing a sterling job. 

Both you and Wander are excellent posters, just for the wrong side, (oh bugger, that'll set you both off   )

gloswhite wrote:
Heard a comment yesterday that many pro-brexit, (must admit, myself included), think the 40 or 50 billion isn't too bad, because we'll get it back through trade anyway, (don't know over what period), but as we've seen its more about politics , on both sides, than common sense. at the moment. 
It seems the French and Germans are now being looked on as too demanding, by the few countries that are putting most cash into the EU, as they will lose, by percentage, far more than the big two, and they aren't prepared to put up with much more.

I don't see how we are going to make a 40 to 50 billion pound surplus on trade after leaving the EU. What are we going to be exporting and to whom to generate this level of profit?

xmiles wrote:

gloswhite wrote:
Heard a comment yesterday that many pro-brexit, (must admit, myself included), think the 40 or 50 billion isn't too bad, because we'll get it back through trade anyway, (don't know over what period), but as we've seen its more about politics , on both sides, than common sense. at the moment. 
It seems the French and Germans are now being looked on as too demanding, by the few countries that are putting most cash into the EU, as they will lose, by percentage, far more than the big two, and they aren't prepared to put up with much more.

I don't see how we are going to make a 40 to 50 billion pound surplus on trade after leaving the EU. What are we going to be exporting and to whom to generate this level of profit?

Haven't a clue, but that is what I heard. I should have said that the way it was stated was that overall 40-50 billion is very small in the greater scheme of things..

gloswhite wrote:

xmiles wrote:

gloswhite wrote:
Heard a comment yesterday that many pro-brexit, (must admit, myself included), think the 40 or 50 billion isn't too bad, because we'll get it back through trade anyway, (don't know over what period), but as we've seen its more about politics , on both sides, than common sense. at the moment. 
It seems the French and Germans are now being looked on as too demanding, by the few countries that are putting most cash into the EU, as they will lose, by percentage, far more than the big two, and they aren't prepared to put up with much more.

I don't see how we are going to make a 40 to 50 billion pound surplus on trade after leaving the EU. What are we going to be exporting and to whom to generate this level of profit?

Haven't a clue, but that is what I heard. I should have said that the way it was stated was that overall 40-50 billion is very small in the greater scheme of things..

Was it written on the side of a red bus?

gloswhite wrote:Haven't a clue, but that is what I heard. I should have said that the way it was stated was that overall 40-50 billion is very small in the greater scheme of things..

That's about 10% of our total exports, according to the ONS.

xmiles wrote:

gloswhite wrote:

xmiles wrote:

gloswhite wrote:
Heard a comment yesterday that many pro-brexit, (must admit, myself included), think the 40 or 50 billion isn't too bad, because we'll get it back through trade anyway, (don't know over what period), but as we've seen its more about politics , on both sides, than common sense. at the moment. 
It seems the French and Germans are now being looked on as too demanding, by the few countries that are putting most cash into the EU, as they will lose, by percentage, far more than the big two, and they aren't prepared to put up with much more.

I don't see how we are going to make a 40 to 50 billion pound surplus on trade after leaving the EU. What are we going to be exporting and to whom to generate this level of profit?

Haven't a clue, but that is what I heard. I should have said that the way it was stated was that overall 40-50 billion is very small in the greater scheme of things..

Was it written on the side of a red bus?

  Like it

T.R.O.Y wrote:

gloswhite wrote:Haven't a clue, but that is what I heard. I should have said that the way it was stated was that overall 40-50 billion is very small in the greater scheme of things..

That's about 10% of our total exports, according to the ONS.

Rightly or wrongly, I would take that as vindication of the statement, especially if spread over a period of time.

Summary of Barnier speech here.

...in which he contradicts May/Davis by saying that UK banks will lose their EU passport rights when Brexit happens - a disaster for the UK economy. Also says that if the UK "diverges too much from the EU regulatory model" they will block any trade deal. What a fiasco!
How can May/Davis make such claims when the people they are negotiating with aren't going to go for it?

Brexit minister apologises to peers for saying article 50 cannot be revoked

Lord Callanan, who was appointed a Brexit minister last month to replace Lady Anelay, who stood down for health reasons, has just apologised in the House of Lords for telling peers last week that article 50 could not be revoked.
Asked a week ago today to confirm that the supreme court, in the Gina Miller case, said article 50 was irrevocable, he said: 

I can confirm that. It is also stated by the European commission that article 50, once invoked, is irrevocable unless there is political agreement on it.

The Labour peer Andrew Adonis said he would be reporting Callanan to the privileges committee over this because it was a false statement that Callanan was refusing to correct.
And today Callanan did apologise. In a statement to peers, he said that his statement last Monday was incorrect. That was a result of “a misunderstanding of the question”, he said. 

To reiterate, for the avoidance of any doubt, the supreme court proceeded in the Miller case on the basis that article 50 would not be be revoked, but did not rule on the legal position regarding its irrevocability. It was, and remains, the government’s policy that our notification of article 50 will not be withdrawn ...
I recognise that my comments have caused confusion and I apologise to the House.

Her character really is boring, and she's stretching it beyond belief here. Staying in the customs union or even the single market is a perfectly reasonable position to hold.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/nov/20/electoral-commission-launches-inquiry-into-leave-campaign-funding?

One of a few funding enquiries at the moment, would there be fair ground and for a second referendum should they go through?

Oh fuck me here we go...

https://news.sky.com/story/medicine-regulator-begins-the-great-brexit-experiment-11136019

Oh dear.