Re: Deal before Year End?

Your phrase MUTUALY BENEFICIAL is the fly in your ointment l
think Aerolor??
Ergo, 80 to 90 billion trade deficit and the priviledge to pay another
15 billion for the right to get access to it???
To say nothing about fishing either ??

Donkeyman! 👎🤔

Re: Deal before Year End?

Then dont contribute???

Donkeyman! 👍👍😁😁👍👍

Re: Deal before Year End?

Not so Barry, l entirely agree with you as long as your statement
that we "regain total sovreignty" is compied with??lf not,
Then l favour a so called "no deal" which by the way is a default
position which we have no control over ??
What would you prefer to be our course of action in the present
circumstances given your earlier statement about "sovreignty" ??

Donkeyman! 🤔🤔

Re: Deal before Year End?

That's all as maybe DM, but you have continually stated your desire for a no deal outcome in dozens of posts and threads, for example post 3 in this thread and I quote " For myself l await the reality of no deal with relish !". You say this and then say to me than your desire for a no deal outcome is in the event that we fail to regain sovereignty. So have you now changed your stance?

I noted that the poll question reads "What do you want to happen by end of year?" to which ten people, presumably you included, have answered "No deal" without any qualification. That is why I voted for a deal, with my qualification written in my post, so if that is your stance now also then why the reticence to actually say so?

Re: Deal before Year End?

I think the problem is that the three choices are:
Deal
No deal
Extension of transition.

'Deal' could indicate several situations: a deal involving our handing over our sea areas and various elements of our sovereignty, very similar to our present situation; or a deal ensuring our retention of complete sovereignty.

To clarify my own preference, I should prefer a trade deal similar to what the EU have agreed with other countries, such as Canada and Japan, in which they have absolutely no control of sovereignty, political or judicial.

If any other sort of 'deal' which would compromise the above, then I believe a 'no deal' would be the only acceptable choice.

As for an extension to the transition period, no way! Four years has been far too long already and this year's transition period has achieved absolutely nothing. Nothing whatsoever.
Who in their right mind could imagine an extension of this nonsensical situation would possible change anything, AND we'd have to continue to pay the EU for the same thing we have gained so far - NOTHING!

Re: Deal before Year End?

Who on earth seriously wants another extension?
Three folk here, it seems.


The ill-feeling generated on both sides because of the extensions we've had so far are surely patently obvious?
Both sides have had plenty long enough and if common ground for a basic trade deal can't be reached now it is almost certain that - for whatever reason - more time alone will not solve that dilemma.

I've said what I think will happen; we will leave with no deal & when the EU see that we were serious AND their importers & exporters start to complain, which they certainly will, we will see the EU asking to talk seriously about a deal.
This suggests that possibility has merit:
"“If that deal is not in place on January 1, then we have a no-deal situation. That does not exclude that negotiations can continue, from our side, and it does not exclude that we can continue on the basis of the mandate that’s given to us,” a Commission spokesman said."
https://uk.reuters.com/article/brita...KBN28I1H5?il=0

Re: Deal before Year End?

There is only one option at the moment and thats the Australia type arrangement.

The deal on offer is worse than no deal so that is not on the table

Extension is not going to happen and it has been written into UK law that we will not do this beyond Dec 31 2020.

That leaves walking away - then negotiate the trade agreement in 2021 once all the crap is out of the way.

Re: Deal before Year End?

“UK agrees to drop law breaking legislation in E U agreement” - there you go!

Re: Deal before Year End?

Other way around - its the EU that have backed down so we don't need the controversial clauses in the internal markets bill.

Re: Deal before Year End?

That is good news!
Good because it means that the EU have (or will) formally relinquish what were seen by the UK as unreasonable demands contained within the WA that could have affected our internal market.

Or don't you understand what an "agreement in principal" is?

It is a stepping stone towards a full agreement in that area only.
It does look promising, but let's see the actual wording first.

Quite so.