- Status
quadraginta
Becoming Beth
Yes. Very enlightening.
If I understood that correctly (And I probably didn't, because the irony would be so strong as to be almost a parody.), Article 50 was written by a Brit, with the currently most objectionable clauses to the Brexiters having been written specifically to quell the objections of EU suspicious ("Euroskeptic") Brits who didn't want some other country to be able to leave the EU without being held to their financial obligations.
Also, these two statements make an interesting juxtaposition;
quadraginta
Becoming Beth
Maybe some sort of a swap could be worked out.
The U.K. could keep the E.U. regulatory agencies, and in exchange they would send Parliament to Amsterdam or Milan.
Great Britain (and again this is an outsider looking in) never struck me as being all the comfortable in the EU and from what I can gather had an awful lot of exceptions to a lot of EU rules already.
Which is, again, kind of what I'm having a hard time getting around. Any issues Great Britain had with the EU they probably had enough negotiating power to negotiate another asterisks to put next to their name.
And apparently there was already a proposal already along those lines in the works that got shelved when Brexit happened.
It's almost like the author forgot what he wrote in article 50
See the bit about taking account of the framework for its future relationship? That's the part the EU negotiators have thus far refused to engage with. Like all corrupt officials they want to first settle on the size of the bribe necessary to get them to begin their actual work.
See the bit about taking account of the framework for its future relationship? That's the part the EU negotiators have thus far refused to engage with. Like all corrupt officials they want to first settle on the size of the bribe necessary to get them to begin their actual work.
Well no it's simple negotiating. Establishing the framework for a Post-Brexit UK's relationship with the EU now gives negotiating advantage to the UK, waiting until after gives negotiating advantage to the EU.
And why exactly should an organization engage a member that is attempting to leave it?
And why exactly should an organization engage a member that is attempting to leave it?
We never joined the EU. We joined a common market (that's what we still want) but common market then gradually changed into a political union - something we never wanted. David Cameron tried to negotiate reforms that would enable us to opt out of the ever closer political union thing, but he failed to get any meaningful concessions and that's why the people then voted to leave.
Maybe because that's what's written in their own articles?
When the UK ceases to coordinate its trade and immigration arrangements with those of an alliance it has left, and the remaining members of the alliance say, that creates an economic and travel boundary which it will be necessary to guard and police; you are saying that's just Johnnie Foreigner waiting for a bribe.
Back in the days of Empire when some jumped up foreign official had the audacity to require to examine an Englishman's driving licence or passport at a ridiculous border post in the middle of nowhere; well that could be sorted out with a little baksheesh, paid in crisp white notes that were as good as gold anywhere.
Alas those fine times are in the past.
Discussions with several well-placed Irish and European sources reveal a carefully co-ordinated escalation by Ireland and the Task Force to put pressure on the UK to get to grips with the Irish border issue.
[...]
"All we have been getting from the British," says one source, "was muzak, and nothing else."
[...]
Essentially, Dublin and Brussels believed that Britain was half-heartedly focussing on technical fixes around trade and customs. The Irish question was not just about economics, it was about the abstract strengths of the Good Friday Agreement, about peace and reconciliation and societal progress.
[...]
By contrast, Theresa May suggested that all sides were close on the issue, and were even "on the same page."
A Government source suggested this was wishful thinking; without a guarantee that would be written into the conclusions of the December European Council, London would be asking Ireland to take a leap into the dark.
https://www.rte.ie/news/analysis-and-comment/2017/1117/920981-long-read-brexit/
[...]
"All we have been getting from the British," says one source, "was muzak, and nothing else."
[...]
Essentially, Dublin and Brussels believed that Britain was half-heartedly focussing on technical fixes around trade and customs. The Irish question was not just about economics, it was about the abstract strengths of the Good Friday Agreement, about peace and reconciliation and societal progress.
[...]
By contrast, Theresa May suggested that all sides were close on the issue, and were even "on the same page."
A Government source suggested this was wishful thinking; without a guarantee that would be written into the conclusions of the December European Council, London would be asking Ireland to take a leap into the dark.
https://www.rte.ie/news/analysis-and-comment/2017/1117/920981-long-read-brexit/
What do you think the EU is obliged to do because of this?
From that same article:
Instead it seems like the UK, in typical Leaver style, is expecting everyone else to do the heavy lifting.
P.J. Denyer
Penultimate Amazing
I hear Mogadishu is lovely this time of year.
In case you hadn't noticed over the past year, May has a habit of coming out with lovely sounding assurances like that, but when you scratch the surface (or even tap it gently) there is no substance whatsoever behind it.
Wudang
BOFH
Would you describe May as having a fairly solid reputation for doing what she says she will or will not do?
Strawberry
Master Poster
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2011
- Messages
- 2,151
There will have to be customs checks on both sides of the border as per WTO rules unless NI stays in a customs union with the EU.
- Status