You claimed Boris Johnson wasn't lying about the £350 million figure. You've both claimed Britain is being deliberately vague about its position and that it's been clear about its position, which are mutually exclusive positions, so yeah false statements.
- Status
You claimed Boris Johnson wasn't lying about the £350 million figure. You've both claimed Britain is being deliberately vague about its position and that it's been clear about its position, which are mutually exclusive positions, so yeah false statements.
ddt
Mafia Penguin
ddt
Mafia Penguin
Why don't you first back your claims up with actual quotes?
Until then, my handy guide for this thread is "anything ceptimus claims is probably untrue". Witness your latest string of posts.
The consistent position of the EU has been that access to the Single Market entails free movement of people. So, if the UK wants to remain in the Single Market, it also has to accept dirty Poles and Romanians coming in to do jobs. Just like Norway and Iceland also agreed to.
Oh, and also what Darat said. First the divorce settlement, at least significant progress on that, before we discuss the future. Seems eminently sensible.
Quickly switching the topic again? We were discussing access to the single market, not the size of the divorce bill.
Oy vey. it's the Fourth Reich!
There are many more reasons why access to the EU is more valuable to the UK than vice versa, but a simple one is that the UK has a trade deficit with the rest of the EU (link).
It's also simple maths.
UK (with Scotland?) 67 million people. EU 500-million people
Obviously the EU is going to be hurt by losing just the UK but the UK is going to lose access to a bigger market.
What do you mean, "That's not true." ? You just restated the same point I made using different words. The EU will not discuss trade till we agree to pay them their demanded "divorce bill" - that's exactly what I said.
While we maintain that the divorce bill isn't a legally required payment, and that they've not specified the actual amount they're demanding, then they won't begin trade discussions.
I know that, and the consistent position of the UK has been that trading access to the Single Market should not entail the free movement of people.
Most posters in this thread just accept the EU's position as if it were some obvious natural law - no one has yet explained why the EU's position on this subject is more correct than the UK's one.
Anyway, the purpose of negotiations is to negotiate. As long as the EU maintains its "All these points are non-negotiable" stance, then the "negotiations" are a farce.
And I repeat again - as you still don't appear to have accepted it - that the EU won't even begin to talk about trade unless and until we agree to pay their ludicrous "divorce bill". The EU have only ever wanted the UK as members in order to milk them for money, and they appear to still want to be paid for long after we've left.
Last edited:
Obviously it should, and obviously it will. Norway has different access terms to Switzerland, and both of those have different access than Iceland.
Each country has negotiated its own terms of access. The UK should get better terms than any other country because:
A) It's bigger, and
B) Because it's an existing member of the EU and therefore 100% compliant with all EU laws, regulations and rules, it follows that on the day of leaving, it will already be in full 100% compliance with all the necessary regulations.
Consistent? Rubbish. The free movement of labour is integral to the Single market and the UK has taken advantage of that for years and successive governments have accepted it as condition of membership. Only Cameron's weakness put xenophobes like yourself in a position to undermine it.
You really have no sense of irony do you? One of the big themes of Leave was to be free of EU regulations, but here you are admitting we will have to maintain compliance with those regulations to get free trade, just without any input to modifying those regulations.
Last edited:
ddt
Mafia Penguin
You know, it's very simple: it's our club and we make up the rules. You've decided you don't want to be a member of the club anymore, so you don't get to have a say on the rules.
You sound like a non-member of the local soccer club who whines about the colour of their shirts.
Apart from that, various posters have tried to explain the logic behind it. You choose to ignore those arguments, I'm not going to repeat them.
Future access of the UK to the Common Market is not a topic of discussion (yet). It's now about the divorce bill, and when you're saying that the EU says their points are negotiable, you're again lying.
There's nothing ludicrous about that. That's another lie of yours. But the UK doesn't even have yet a position on how to split the nuclear stuff (how did you guys ever develop a bomb when you don't know how to do that?)
Really?
ddt
Mafia Penguin
That's ordinary math. Brexit math works... differently.
The EU won't talk about future trading till we agree to pay, and we would be stupid to agree to pay before we negotiate future trading. So it's an impasse.
If we agree to pay their demand we've given up the only negotiating card we hold - as far as the EU is concerned, everything except the amount of money we give them is non-negotiable.
If we agree to pay their demand we've given up the only negotiating card we hold - as far as the EU is concerned, everything except the amount of money we give them is non-negotiable.
Belgian thought
Master Poster
- Joined
- May 3, 2004
- Messages
- 2,345
The only card? If that is truly the only card - Game Over!
ddt
Mafia Penguin
So why don't you back up your claims with actual quotes to show you're not lying?More accusations of lying.
For instance, this one:
I've asked you to back that one up, but you don't seem to care to actually give a single reference that supports that claim.
When you keep repeating the same falsehoods when they've been already been debunked numerous times, yes, then the only reasonable explanation is that it's a willful lie.
ddt
Mafia Penguin
Lie.
The UK govt seems to be terminally stupid anyways.
It's an impasse because the UK govt hasn't really begun negotiating.
Lie. What was that then about how happy the EU should be to be allowed to trade with the UK. That's now suddenly not a negotiating card?
Consistency doesn't seem to be your strong suit.Lie.
Amazer
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2008
- Messages
- 1,711
tbh we don't know whether we want to play Rugby (Union) Football, Rugby (League) Football, Association Football or Beach Football.
We have told the Northern Irish members of the team that they can play Gaelic Football but it's been explained several times by the EU that that's incompatible with the other games we are considering
Rees-Mogg intends on playing polo, I think.
- Status