British diplomats to pull out from EU institutions within days

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...gs-within-days

British diplomats to pull out from EU decision-making meetings within days

Critics say No 10 move to quit bloc’s institutional structures leaves UK blindsided

https://images.theconversation.com/f...w=926&fit=clip

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Guardian

British diplomats will pull out from the EU’s institutional structures of power in Brussels within days, under plans being drawn up by Downing Street.

In an attempt to reinforce the message that the UK is leaving the EU by 31 October, “do or die”, the UK will stop attending the day-to-day meetings that inform the bloc’s decision-making.

The move under discussion is said by UK officials to be in line with Boris Johnson’s first statement in the House of Commons, in which he said he would “unshackle” British diplomacy from EU affairs.

Critics have countered that the symbolic walkout would merely leave the UK blindsided on decisions and ultimately damage the national interest.

EU working group meetings at which British diplomats were expected to take their seats alongside the other 27 member states will deal with issues on security, the pan-European response to any future crises involving civilians, foreign affairs and the protection of consumers interests.

It is unclear how far the UK’s withdrawal from the EU structures would go before 31 October, and whether ministers or the UK’s permanent representative in the EU would ultimately fail to show up for meetings in September and October.

The Foreign and Commonwealth Secretary, Dominic Raab, said he would attend a meeting of his EU counterparts at the end of August in Helsinki.

---

Excellent news.

The date is 31st October, but there's no reason not to begin the process now.

Meanwhile, No Deal is now leading public opinion polls.

Some senior Tory MPs resolutely opposed to no-deal are already privately admitting defeat:

'Inside myself I'm saying I have lost, I have to admit it. It's over. I don't want to be part of it all [the rebel alliance]'

— Steven Swinford (@Steven_Swinford) August 12, 2019

For some reason the poll tweet didn't embed properly. Here it is.

"If Johnson unable to make changes to Withdrawal Agreement that enable it to pass Commons before Oct 31 which shd he do?"

Go ahead w/ Brexit even if no deal 46% (+1)

Cancel #Brexit & Remain 29% (+1)

Delay until negotiate deal 12% (-1)

Don't know 14% (-)

Opinium Aug 8 pic.twitter.com/jwCII7XctM

— Matt Goodwin (@GoodwinMJ) August 12, 2019

Meanwhile, the Americans are making it clear they back No Deal.

SIgnificant.
US would 'enthusiastically' support a no-deal Brexit, says top Trump official John Bolton' | via @telegraph https://t.co/qUhnY25wQe

— Christopher Hope📝 (@christopherhope) August 13, 2019

UK 'first in line' for US trade deal, says John Bolton https://t.co/yqdPvlquG4

— BBC News (UK) (@BBCNews) August 12, 2019

there have also been many americans saying it wont pass congress without the GFA being upheld
also what hes suggesting is also illegal under wto rules afaik

Already coming together.

I favour sectorial agreements like this as opposed to comprehensive FTAs.

Also in Times tomorrow:

Donald Trump prepared to lift tariffs on steel, aluminium and automotive imports to US if UK reciprocates by lifting tariffs whisky, Harley Davidson etc

Trump and Boris Johnson will sign declaration setting out ‘road map’ to trade deal at G7 summit

— Steven Swinford (@Steven_Swinford) August 13, 2019

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dbgtz

there have also been many americans saying it wont pass congress without the GFA being upheld
also what hes suggesting is also illegal under wto rules afaik

---

Nowhere in the GFA does it state that Britain must be governed by EU law/abide by their customs regime forever. A myth.

Anyway, the Republicans only need to win 19 seats in 2020 to win back the House of Representatives.

President Trump would love a fight with the Democrats in 2020 over them blocking a FTA with Britain.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

Nowhere in the GFA does it state that Britain must be governed by EU law/abide by their customs regime forever. A myth.

---

never said it did, stop making arguments up

I'm not at all savvy with the GFA. Could someone provide a comprehensive explanation? @-:Undertaker:-; @dbgtz;

The way I see it - with no knowledge on the subject whatsoever:

• We crash out of the EU without a deal
• To protect its markets the EU erect a hard border between N Ireland and Ireland (never understood why they insist Britain do it, as they don't want one)
• This breaks the GFA?

Then we're indirectly breaking the agreement because of a third party.. a little out of our control? Surely this means the EU doesn't give a hoot about preserving the integrity of the GFA

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zak

I'm not at all savvy with the GFA. Could someone provide a comprehensive explanation? @-:Undertaker:-; @dbgtz;

---

i'm not going to pretend to be an expert so i shall link this https://www.wesleyjohnston.com/users.../synopsis.html which sums it up reasonable well i believe
the main points from this i believe are relevant:

• All members must agree to the principles of non-violence and democracy [in northern ireland]
• Northern Ireland will be governed based on mutual respect and recognition of the European Convention on Human Rights,
• Removal of security installations which are deemed unnecessary, plus a reduction in the British Army presence in the province.

Quote:

---

The way I see it - with no knowledge on the subject whatsoever:

• We crash out of the EU without a deal
• To protect its markets the EU erect a hard border between N Ireland and Ireland (never understood why they insist Britain do it, as they don't want one)
• This breaks the GFA?

Then we're indirectly breaking the agreement because of a third party.. a little out of our control? Surely this means the EU doesn't give a hoot about preserving the integrity of the GFA

---

the eu protects the interest of all member states, which includes protecting the customs union/single market
you cannot enforce the rules of a market if you have a backdoor to said market, which the uk would be i.e. this would allow poor quality imports of goods into the eu which do not meet their standards
saying its the fault of the eu is just passing the blame

Exclusive:

Boris Johnson poised to trigger repeal of European Communities Act as he cements his do or die pledge to leave EU on Oct 31

Stephen Barclay to sign 'commencement order' within days enabling EU withdrawal act to come into force

Eurosceptics say it is 'totemic' moment

— Steven Swinford (@Steven_Swinford) August 15, 2019

Steve Baker, leading eurosceptic, on significance of signing order triggering EU withdrawal act on October 31:

'It’s the do or die pledge in black and white. It is not merely symbolic

‘Once it’s signed that’s it, the UK is leaving'

— Steven Swinford (@Steven_Swinford) August 15, 2019

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dbgtz

the eu protects the interest of all member states, which includes protecting the customs union/single market
you cannot enforce the rules of a market if you have a backdoor to said market, which the uk would be i.e. this would allow poor quality imports of goods into the eu which do not meet their standards
saying its the fault of the eu is just passing the blame

---

The poor quality imports is partly true, but this is what any country does anyway. Britain, being a developed country, is obviously unlikely to produce poor quality imports. So what is the EU protecting in that scenario? Itself with protectionist trade policy. The European Union isn't the only country guilty of this, every country does so, but lets not skate over the fact that the EU's worst nightmare is for a more competitive and dynamic economic on its border which would undercut protected EU industries such as French agriculture from cheaper and better imports.

In any case to answer @Zak; as you can see, none of this relates to the GFA in terms of undermining it and it is the problem of the EU/Republic of Ireland given they want to protect their own protectionist market. An obvious solution to this is either a customs border is erected (again, not against the GFA) or the Republic of Ireland is given special status where it remains in the EU Single Market and has open flow with the new British Single Market, but it itself would then have to have customs checks with the rest of the EU. Either way, this is an issue for the Republic and the EU to sort between themselves given this problem is due to their own trade policy - not us.

The irony of all this is that in the end, it won't be Britain imposing border checks as we're more free market orientated and understand that European goods are perfectly fine, it is the EU which will force the Republic to impose checks - or will effectively expel it from the SM + CU if it refuses.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dbgtz

i'm not going to pretend to be an expert so i shall link this https://www.wesleyjohnston.com/users.../synopsis.html which sums it up reasonable well i believe
the main points from this i believe are relevant:

• All members must agree to the principles of non-violence and democracy [in northern ireland]
• Northern Ireland will be governed based on mutual respect and recognition of the European Convention on Human Rights,
• Removal of security installations which are deemed unnecessary, plus a reduction in the British Army presence in the province.

the eu protects the interest of all member states, which includes protecting the customs union/single market
you cannot enforce the rules of a market if you have a backdoor to said market, which the uk would be i.e. this would allow poor quality imports of goods into the eu which do not meet their standards
saying its the fault of the eu is just passing the blame

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

Exclusive:

Boris Johnson poised to trigger repeal of European Communities Act as he cements his do or die pledge to leave EU on Oct 31

Stephen Barclay to sign 'commencement order' within days enabling EU withdrawal act to come into force

Eurosceptics say it is 'totemic' moment

— Steven Swinford (@Steven_Swinford) August 15, 2019

Steve Baker, leading eurosceptic, on significance of signing order triggering EU withdrawal act on October 31:

'It’s the do or die pledge in black and white. It is not merely symbolic

‘Once it’s signed that’s it, the UK is leaving'

— Steven Swinford (@Steven_Swinford) August 15, 2019

The poor quality imports is partly true, but this is what any country does anyway. Britain, being a developed country, is obviously unlikely to produce poor quality imports. So what is the EU protecting in that scenario? Itself with protectionist trade policy. The European Union isn't the only country guilty of this, every country does so, but lets not skate over the fact that the EU's worst nightmare is for a more competitive and dynamic economic on its border which would undercut protected EU industries such as French agriculture from cheaper and better imports.

In any case to answer @Zak; as you can see, none of this relates to the GFA in terms of undermining it and it is the problem of the EU/Republic of Ireland given they want to protect their own protectionist market. An obvious solution to this is either a customs border is erected (again, not against the GFA) or the Republic of Ireland is given special status where it remains in the EU Single Market and has open flow with the new British Single Market, but it itself would then have to have customs checks with the rest of the EU. Either way, this is an issue for the Republic and the EU to sort between themselves given this problem is due to their own trade policy - not us.

The irony of all this is that in the end, it won't be Britain imposing border checks as we're more free market orientated and understand that European goods are perfectly fine, it is the EU which will force the Republic to impose checks - or will effectively expel it from the SM + CU if it refuses.

---

Thank you for the clarification both of you

So - The EU needs to protect its markets, completely understandable. A border must be erected if an agreement cannot be reached but this in no way Britain's fault. You could argue that by leaving the EU they've caused the issue and they have.. but if it was left up to us there would be no border. So aren't Ireland a little annoyed that the EU will demand a border and undermine the GFA?

All I've heard is that we've got to resolve the Irish border issue.. Shouldn't the EU be coming to us with a solution if it cares about protecting the interests of Ireland? We don't have an issue, in the event of no deal we'd not do anything....?

I'm rambling but I hope that makes sense?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

Exclusive:

Boris Johnson poised to trigger repeal of European Communities Act as he cements his do or die pledge to leave EU on Oct 31

Stephen Barclay to sign 'commencement order' within days enabling EU withdrawal act to come into force

Eurosceptics say it is 'totemic' moment

— Steven Swinford (@Steven_Swinford) August 15, 2019

Steve Baker, leading eurosceptic, on significance of signing order triggering EU withdrawal act on October 31:

'It’s the do or die pledge in black and white. It is not merely symbolic

‘Once it’s signed that’s it, the UK is leaving'

— Steven Swinford (@Steven_Swinford) August 15, 2019

The poor quality imports is partly true, but this is what any country does anyway. Britain, being a developed country, is obviously unlikely to produce poor quality imports. So what is the EU protecting in that scenario? Itself with protectionist trade policy. The European Union isn't the only country guilty of this, every country does so, but lets not skate over the fact that the EU's worst nightmare is for a more competitive and dynamic economic on its border which would undercut protected EU industries such as French agriculture from cheaper and better imports.

---

this is obviously a hypothetical, but most people are expecting the us to force their food standards on us and the big one here is chlorinated chicken
there are a few reasons why eu countries do not do this, partly down to animal welfare and partly down to the fact that, at least to the eus belief, chlorinating the chicken is just covering up poor quality and leads to greater cases of illness akin to poorly patching a pot hole vs properly retarmarcing the road
theres also the excessive use of growth hormones and other chemicals banned in the EU
in the eu as well, certain foods and drinks have a "protected status" in how it can be named, e.g. you cant make any old cheese in greece and call it "Dorset Blue cheese". the country of origin is also very much labelled on eu products, something which i believe the us has said we would have to drop

those are obviously just some examples from one country, but a country most people seem to be pushing us to have a deal with
and the fact is, whether you agree with the rules or not, it would be ridiculous for them to just trust we dont allow things which dont follow these rules in to the eu.

also the european union isnt a country

i also dont know why you keep pointing to french agriculture when brexit is more likely to do great harm to our own agriculture sector than the french

Quote:

---

In any case to answer @Zak; as you can see, none of this relates to the GFA in terms of undermining it and it is the problem of the EU/Republic of Ireland given they want to protect their own protectionist market. An obvious solution to this is either a customs border is erected (again, not against the GFA) or the Republic of Ireland is given special status where it remains in the EU Single Market and has open flow with the new British Single Market, but it itself would then have to have customs checks with the rest of the EU. Either way, this is an issue for the Republic and the EU to sort between themselves given this problem is due to their own trade policy - not us.

The irony of all this is that in the end, it won't be Britain imposing border checks as we're more free market orientated and understand that European goods are perfectly fine, it is the EU which will force the Republic to impose checks - or will effectively expel it from the SM + CU if it refuses.

---

nothing you said actually explains how "none of this relates to the gfa", you just said a statement as if it were fact. id argue that "Removal of security installations" is very much relevant
your entire suggestion is to shove the burden onto ireland who very much did not vote to have customs checks with rEU

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zak

Thank you for the clarification both of you

So - The EU needs to protect its markets, completely understandable. A border must be erected if an agreement cannot be reached but this in no way Britain's fault. You could argue that by leaving the EU they've caused the issue and they have.. but if it was left up to us there would be no border. So aren't Ireland a little annoyed that the EU will demand a border and undermine the GFA?

All I've heard is that we've got to resolve the Irish border issue.. Shouldn't the EU be coming to us with a solution if it cares about protecting the interests of Ireland? We don't have an issue, in the event of no deal we'd not do anything....?

I'm rambling but I hope that makes sense?

---

the problem with your logic here is the disconnect between the eu and ireland. ireland is part of the eu and allowing any "disallowed" goods through is going to hurt them just as much (if not more) than any other eu country.
your logic is somewhat flawed in suggesting the EU is undermining it - we started this process so the burden is on us to come up with a workable agreement. if the reverse happened and the EU kicked the UK out (not sure if that would even happen), then the burden would be on them.
the eu did also come to us with a solution btw, but we rejected it without suggesting an actual alternative workable for all parties

i also think its wrong to think that we wouldnt put a border up on the ni/eire border at some point. part of the narrative of brexit is to take control of our borders (which we had complete control over except the ni), so to leave a massive hole unchecked would completely go against this idea of taking back control
i suspect the only reason people in positions of power are saying there will be no hard border is that they literally do not have the time or money to have it up by brexit day, or they are expecting to kick the can down the road a bit more

Pretty big step taken yesterday.

BREAKING: The Brexit Secretary has now signed the formal order repealing the 1972 European Communities Act on October 31, Sunday Telegraph reveals.

Downing Street throwing down gauntlet to Remainer MPs No.10 sources tonight accuse of "appalling dishonesty". pic.twitter.com/9C9uRi1Ptn

— Edward Malnick (@malnick) August 17, 2019

I have signed the legislation setting in stone the repeal of the European Communities Act 1972. This is a landmark moment in taking back control of our law. It underlines that we are leaving the EU on October 31. pic.twitter.com/r52UY60aG2

— Steve Barclay (@SteveBarclay) August 18, 2019

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dbgtz

this is obviously a hypothetical, but most people are expecting the us to force their food standards on us and the big one here is chlorinated chicken
there are a few reasons why eu countries do not do this, partly down to animal welfare and partly down to the fact that, at least to the eus belief, chlorinating the chicken is just covering up poor quality and leads to greater cases of illness akin to poorly patching a pot hole vs properly retarmarcing the road

---

Most people are expecting... you mean most Remainers keep asserting?

The chicken argument is such a silly argument. Firstly, your water is chlorinated. Secondly, consumer choice. I ate chicken in America and I am still here breathing, tasted the same as any other chicken I have had whether it was British, Indian or Spanish. It's basically washing chicken.

That's not to say I am all for it being included in a trade deal. What we accept is entirely down to us post-Brexit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dbgtz

theres also the excessive use of growth hormones and other chemicals banned in the EU
in the eu as well, certain foods and drinks have a "protected status" in how it can be named, e.g. you cant make any old cheese in greece and call it "Dorset Blue cheese". the country of origin is also very much labelled on eu products, something which i believe the us has said we would have to drop

---

None of this is unique to the EU. Nor can America make us change our food standards if we do not want to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dbgtz

those are obviously just some examples from one country, but a country most people seem to be pushing us to have a deal with
and the fact is, whether you agree with the rules or not, it would be ridiculous for them to just trust we dont allow things which dont follow these rules in to the eu.

---

Up to the EU what they import just as it is our choice post-Brexit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dbgtz

also the european union isnt a country

---

In terms of trade, the EU acts as a sovereign state. Individual nations cannot sign FTAs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dbgtz

i also dont know why you keep pointing to french agriculture when brexit is more likely to do great harm to our own agriculture sector than the french

---

How so? The existing subsidy regime could/will initially be maintained by Whitehall.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dbgtz

nothing you said actually explains how "none of this relates to the gfa", you just said a statement as if it were fact. id argue that "Removal of security installations" is very much relevant
your entire suggestion is to shove the burden onto ireland who very much did not vote to have customs checks with rEU

---

Customs posts are not security installations. That is obviously referring to military checkpoints in the GFA.

As for the Republic, if they wish to remain in the EU Single Market and Customs Union then that has its obligations that they will have to follow. Alternatively they could make the calculation that it is better to be outside and have closer relations with its biggest trading partner (Britain). But that is their call. It isn't our fault, it is the choice Ireland has made as another country. Remember, Britain has said it won't install border checks - if anyone installs them, it will likely be the Irish having to install them as a result of EU trade protectionism. Let them sort out that dilemma between themselves.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dbgtz

the problem with your logic here is the disconnect between the eu and ireland. ireland is part of the eu and allowing any "disallowed" goods through is going to hurt them just as much (if not more) than any other eu country.

---

You're making big assumptions here that EU trade policy is completely beneficial and not guided by special interests such as French farmers/unions wanting to protect their expensive produce from outside competition. Cheaper goods and food is a good thing for society/consumers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dbgtz

your logic is somewhat flawed in suggesting the EU is undermining it - we started this process so the burden is on us to come up with a workable agreement. if the reverse happened and the EU kicked the UK out (not sure if that would even happen), then the burden would be on them.

---

No the burden is not on us once we've left to help EU trade policy.

The EU is responsible for policing its SM/CU - once we're out we have no more responsibility to it than Russia or Belarus do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dbgtz

the eu did also come to us with a solution btw, but we rejected it without suggesting an actual alternative workable for all parties

---

By annexing part of our country and forcing us into "regulatory alignment" aka following their laws with no say?

Imagine suggesting to America that, as part of an FTA, we want them to have Texas be in our Single Market/Customs Union, with the rest of America having to "regulatory align" aka copy our regulations and laws, without any say. No country has *ever* voluntarily accepted such an arrangement.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dbgtz

i also think its wrong to think that we wouldnt put a border up on the ni/eire border at some point. part of the narrative of brexit is to take control of our borders (which we had complete control over except the ni), so to leave a massive hole unchecked would completely go against this idea of taking back control
i suspect the only reason people in positions of power are saying there will be no hard border is that they literally do not have the time or money to have it up by brexit day, or they are expecting to kick the can down the road a bit more

---

I personally have no issue with a border, after all it already exists in terms of currency, law, infrastructure, government etc.

In the event of No Deal, the massive spat that's coming between the Republic and the EU is going to be something to behold.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

Most people are expecting... you mean most Remainers keep asserting?

The chicken argument is such a silly argument. Firstly, your water is chlorinated. Secondly, consumer choice. I ate chicken in America and I am still here breathing, tasted the same as any other chicken I have had whether it was British, Indian or Spanish. It's basically washing chicken.

That's not to say I am all for it being included in a trade deal. What we accept is entirely down to us post-Brexit.



None of this is unique to the EU. Nor can America make us change our food standards if we do not want to.



Up to the EU what they import just as it is our choice post-Brexit.

---

it doesnt matter what you think is safe/fine etc. or not, the fact is in this hypothetical (which i did assert was hypothetical), these do not meet eu standards. nothing you replied actually addressed that

just to be clear though, our current government are pushing for a US trade deal so dont say this is anything to do with "remainers"

Quote:

---

In terms of trade, the EU acts as a sovereign state. Individual nations cannot sign FTAs.

---

that doesnt make it a state

Quote:

---

How so? The existing subsidy regime could/will initially be maintained by Whitehall.

---

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a9058621.html
https://metro.co.uk/2019/08/15/no-de...bust-10577054/
https://www.fwi.co.uk/news/eu-refere...no-deal-brexit

etc

Quote:

---

Customs posts are not security installations. That is obviously referring to military checkpoints in the GFA.

As for the Republic, if they wish to remain in the EU Single Market and Customs Union then that has its obligations that they will have to follow. Alternatively they could make the calculation that it is better to be outside and have closer relations with its biggest trading partner (Britain). But that is their call. It isn't our fault, it is the choice Ireland has made as another country. Remember, Britain has said it won't install border checks - if anyone installs them, it will likely be the Irish having to install them as a result of EU trade protectionism. Let them sort out that dilemma between themselves.

---

do you not see the irony in what you just said

Quote:

---

You're making big assumptions here that EU trade policy is completely beneficial and not guided by special interests such as French farmers/unions wanting to protect their expensive produce from outside competition. Cheaper goods and food is a good thing for society/consumers.

---

not if it doesnt adhere to reasonable standards it doesnt
and as far as ireland are concerned, eu standards are reasonable standards whether you agree with them or not

Quote:

---

No the burden is not on us once we've left to help EU trade policy.

The EU is responsible for policing its SM/CU - once we're out we have no more responsibility to it than Russia or Belarus do.

---

what you replied to has nothing to do with eu trade policy

Quote:

---

By annexing part of our country and forcing us into "regulatory alignment" aka following their laws with no say?

Imagine suggesting to America that, as part of an FTA, we want them to have Texas be in our Single Market/Customs Union, with the rest of America having to "regulatory align" aka copy our regulations and laws, without any say. No country has *ever* voluntarily accepted such an arrangement.

---

the idea of "norway plus" or whatever was floated for years prior to the referendum which would have meant exactly what you just said. pretty sure its something you advocated as well.

Quote:

---

I personally have no issue with a border, after all it already exists in terms of currency, law, infrastructure, government etc.

In the event of No Deal, the massive spat that's coming between the Republic and the EU is going to be something to behold.

---

its irrelevant what you think in what you just replied to

"ultimately ireland will leave the eu too"
ok
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UlKX70oRLws

Looks like it is beginning to sink in that we're off.

Senior French and German officials now briefing off the record that they are jointly agreed a no deal Brexit now most likely outcome. French official adds that no-deal exit would still mean U.K. paying billions of euros in financial obligations arising from its departure.

— Andrew Neil (@afneil) August 21, 2019

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dbgtz

it doesnt matter what you think is safe/fine etc. or not, the fact is in this hypothetical (which i did assert was hypothetical), these do not meet eu standards. nothing you replied actually addressed that

just to be clear though, our current government are pushing for a US trade deal so dont say this is anything to do with "remainers"

---

Yes, and my point is that just because something does not meet EU standards does not mean it is bad. EU standards, like many couuntries, are done in a way as to make imports more expensive so as not to allow them to undercut internal producers.

It'll be up to us what standards we have - surely that is a good thing in a democracy?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dbgtz

that doesnt make it a state

---

It's an attribute of a sovereign state though.

Nobody can sign FTAs with Germany/France/Poland/Greece - they have to with the EU.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dbgtz

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a9058621.html
https://metro.co.uk/2019/08/15/no-de...bust-10577054/
https://www.fwi.co.uk/news/eu-refere...no-deal-brexit

etc

---

Rural areas overwhelmingly voted Leave even in the face of absurd scare stories like these.

Do Australia, Canada and New Zealand have agricultural industries? Or is it only possible inside the EU?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dbgtz

do you not see the irony in what you just said

---

No. Britain decided it wants to make its own laws and sign its own FTAs. The Republic on the other hand seems keen on somebody else continuing to write these rules for them - as well as keeping an open border with Britain. So logically, the Republic should enter into a customs union and join our single market to achieve both these objectives. That would solve their dilemma that is coming straight at them down the tracks.

But their call. Post-October, it is going to be Mr Varadkar who is being summoned to Brussels to take his orders from ze EU.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dbgtz

not if it doesnt adhere to reasonable standards it doesnt
and as far as ireland are concerned, eu standards are reasonable standards whether you agree with them or not

---

Then Ireland are going to have to put up a border, aren't they?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dbgtz

what you replied to has nothing to do with eu trade policy

---

We have no obligation outside of the EU to protect the EU's SM+CU - am I correct?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dbgtz

the idea of "norway plus" or whatever was floated for years prior to the referendum which would have meant exactly what you just said. pretty sure its something you advocated as well.

---

Yes years before the referendum.

But then we had the campaign, and the referendum and the argument changed. After all, it was Remainers who strongly made the case that Norway received laws by fax and had no say or voice around the table. About the only thing they've been right about.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dbgtz

its irrelevant what you think in what you just replied to

"ultimately ireland will leave the eu too"
ok

---

Of course, because in 69 days it is going to be the Republic's problem - not ours.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

Yes, and my point is that just because something does not meet EU standards does not mean it is bad. EU standards, like many couuntries, are done in a way as to make imports more expensive so as not to allow them to undercut internal producers.

It'll be up to us what standards we have - surely that is a good thing in a democracy?

---

no, your original point was: "Britain, being a developed country, is obviously unlikely to produce poor quality imports. So what is the EU protecting in that scenario?"
your point of making imports more expensive so as not to allow them to undercut internal producers is true, but it ignores reasons why they would do this
you then said "Up to the EU what they import just as it is our choice post-Brexit." which is true if your suggestion wasnt allowing a massive back door into the market

i dont really understand what standards of goods or your original point at all has to do with being a democracy

Quote:

---

It's an attribute of a sovereign state though.

Nobody can sign FTAs with Germany/France/Poland/Greece - they have to with the EU.

---

it also has a flag, which is an attribute of a state
so does the un
so does gay pride
so does earth day

diamond is made of carbon
humans are also made of carbon
humans = diamond

stop stretching so hard, you might hurt yourself

Quote:

---

Rural areas overwhelmingly voted Leave even in the face of absurd scare stories like these.

Do Australia, Canada and New Zealand have agricultural industries? Or is it only possible inside the EU?

---

australia, canada and NZ do not have significant trade links with the EU which are about to snap in one hit

Quote:

---

No. Britain decided it wants to make its own laws and sign its own FTAs. The Republic on the other hand seems keen on somebody else continuing to write these rules for them - as well as keeping an open border with Britain. So logically, the Republic should enter into a customs union and join our single market to achieve both these objectives. That would solve their dilemma that is coming straight at them down the tracks.

But their call. Post-October, it is going to be Mr Varadkar who is being summoned to Brussels to take his orders from ze EU.

---

maybe they enjoy being in the eu because it means the uk cant steam roll them into doing what they want

Quote:

---

Then Ireland are going to have to put up a border, aren't they?

---

ive never suggested otherwise in the event of no deal, but that has nothing to do with the point you were making

Quote:

---

We have no obligation outside of the EU to protect the EU's SM+CU - am I correct?

---

the border issue isnt about protecting the eu market

Quote:

---

Yes years before the referendum.

But then we had the campaign, and the referendum and the argument changed. After all, it was Remainers who strongly made the case that Norway received laws by fax and had no say or voice around the table. About the only thing they've been right about.

---

so what youre saying is you changed your mind
convenient

Quote:

---

Of course, because in 69 days it is going to be the Republic's problem - not ours.

---

if you want to throw NI under a bus, sure

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dbgtz

no, your original point was: "Britain, being a developed country, is obviously unlikely to produce poor quality imports. So what is the EU protecting in that scenario?"
your point of making imports more expensive so as not to allow them to undercut internal producers is true, but it ignores reasons why they would do this
you then said "Up to the EU what they import just as it is our choice post-Brexit." which is true if your suggestion wasnt allowing a massive back door into the market

---

I don't view it as being a backdoor. I do not care one jot whether the European Union wants its own standards, will accept our standards or wants to protect its market from being undercut - how they decide to police their market is down to them and the Republic of Ireland, but my point is that it is not Britain's job to come up with solutions as to how they do they or even to do it for them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dbgtz

i dont really understand what standards of goods or your original point at all has to do with being a democracy

---

Most modern democracies decide their own product standards/trade remits and don't have the EU do it for them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dbgtz

it also has a flag, which is an attribute of a state
so does the un
so does gay pride
so does earth day

diamond is made of carbon
humans are also made of carbon
humans = diamond

stop stretching so hard, you might hurt yourself

---

I talk about the EU acting as a legal personality at the WTO and signing FTAs like most sovereign states do themselves, and you call that stretching... and then go on to talk about the rainbow flag and humans being made of carbon. Stretch Armstrong here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dbgtz

australia, canada and NZ do not have significant trade links with the EU which are about to snap in one hit

---

They have significant trade links with America and China, yet we do not see the American flag next to the Canadian flag at press conferences, they do not accept laws coming from the Chinese Politburo and they do not allow China to set NZ customs duties.

When will EU supporters like yourself actually admit this fundamental difference between alliances and state-building?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dbgtz

maybe they enjoy being in the eu because it means the uk cant steam roll them into doing what they want

---

Ah yes, those nasty British who protected them in World War II and still provide them with free Naval and Air cover. As compared with those nice Germans and French who made them vote again, and who imposed massive cuts on them over the Euro crisis.

The sad thing is though, this warped logic is how the southern Irish think. So let them get on with it I say.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dbgtz

ive never suggested otherwise in the event of no deal, but that has nothing to do with the point you were making

---

So you admit that Britain has no requirement to impose a border?

Therefore the problem is the EU in regards to the Good Friday Agreement you seem to claim is under threat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dbgtz

the border issue isnt about protecting the eu market

---

It 100% is - currently its being dressed up, but that is what it is all about.

You'll see after Brexit just how quickly Mr Varadkar takes his marching orders from Brussels.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dbgtz

so what youre saying is you changed your mind
convenient

---

I always said long before the referendum that EFTA and EEA were preferable to current terms, but an FTA was most preferable.

As it happens I underestimated how nasty the EU could be, so much so that No Deal is now extremely attractive. Fuck them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dbgtz

if you want to throw NI under a bus, sure

---

Isn't that what the EU wanted to do by trying to annex Ulster from the country to whom it belongs to?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

I don't view it as being a backdoor. I do not care one jot whether the European Union wants its own standards, will accept our standards or wants to protect its market from being undercut - how they decide to police their market is down to them and the Republic of Ireland, but my point is that it is not Britain's job to come up with solutions as to how they do they or even to do it for them.

---

if you dont view it as a backdoor then youre completely deluded

Quote:

---

Most modern democracies decide their own product standards/trade remits and don't have the EU do it for them.

---

we are invovled in every step of the negotiating process of any deal, what is it you dont understand about that?

Quote:

---

I talk about the EU acting as a legal personality at the WTO and signing FTAs like most sovereign states do themselves, and you call that stretching... and then go on to talk about the rainbow flag and humans being made of carbon. Stretch Armstrong here.

---

my entire point is something being an attribute of something doesnt make it a defining factor

Quote:

---

They have significant trade links with America and China, yet we do not see the American flag next to the Canadian flag at press conferences, they do not accept laws coming from the Chinese Politburo and they do not allow China to set NZ customs duties.

When will EU supporters like yourself actually admit this fundamental difference between alliances and state-building?

---

america and canada arent in a customs union

Quote:

---

Ah yes, those nasty British who protected them in World War II and still provide them with free Naval and Air cover. As compared with those nice Germans and French who made them vote again, and who imposed massive cuts on them over the Euro crisis.

The sad thing is though, this warped logic is how the southern Irish think. So let them get on with it I say.

---

Quote:

---

So you admit that Britain has no requirement to impose a border?

Therefore the problem is the EU in regards to the Good Friday Agreement you seem to claim is under threat.



It 100% is - currently its being dressed up, but that is what it is all about.

You'll see after Brexit just how quickly Mr Varadkar takes his marching orders from Brussels.



I always said long before the referendum that EFTA and EEA were preferable to current terms, but an FTA was most preferable.

As it happens I underestimated how nasty the EU could be, so much so that No Deal is now extremely attractive. Fuck them.



Isn't that what the EU wanted to do by trying to annex Ulster from the country to whom it belongs to?

---

ive just realised this is a waste of my time

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dbgtz

if you dont view it as a backdoor then youre completely deluded

---

Again, it is the EU's problem.

Tell me why Britain should be concerned with protecting EU markets?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dbgtz

we are invovled in every step of the negotiating process of any deal, what is it you dont understand about that?

---

1 of 28 when our economy is equivalent to 19 EU economies put together.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dbgtz

my entire point is something being an attribute of something doesnt make it a defining factor

---

When it comes to trade/customs, the EU acts as a sovereign state. Hence it has a WTO seat and EU countries cannot sign their own FTAs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dbgtz

america and canada arent in a customs union

---

They're in their own customs unions. Like we should be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dbgtz

ive just realised this is a waste of my time

---

Well yes, because public opinion continues to shift my way.

Poll out tonight by @OpiniumResearch finds that when it comes to the impact of a No Deal Brexit on Britain:

✅37% believe it’d be positive

❌35% believe it’d be negative

...Britain just as split as ever then.

— Paul Brand (@PaulBrandITV) August 24, 2019

The argument of "Britain is useless and can't do anything itself" coupled with "Brexit=Doomsday" isn't really working for you.

no undertaker its because you peddle the same bollocks over and over and im just bored
then you also come out with statements like this

Quote:

---

Ah yes, those nasty British who protected them in World War II and still provide them with free Naval and Air cover. As compared with those nice Germans and French who made them vote again, and who imposed massive cuts on them over the Euro crisis.

The sad thing is though, this warped logic is how the southern Irish think. So let them get on with it I say.

---

which is just awful
like a complete disregard for those in ireland, complete disregard for what ww2 actually happened, a complete disregard for the fact the germans and french didnt make ireland do anything, a complete disregard for the fact ireland actually likes being in the eu and just frankly lunacy
quite frankly why the hell should irish people give a shit about what the uk did in ww2 anyway, that waas so fucking long ago that most of the people from then are dead its been like 70 years let it go

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dbgtz

no undertaker its because you peddle the same bollocks over and over and im just bored
then you also come out with statements like this

which is just awful
like a complete disregard for those in ireland, complete disregard for what ww2 actually happened, a complete disregard for the fact the germans and french didnt make ireland do anything, a complete disregard for the fact ireland actually likes being in the eu and just frankly lunacy
quite frankly why the hell should irish people give a shit about what the uk did in ww2 anyway, that waas so fucking long ago that most of the people from then are dead its been like 70 years let it go

---

Isn't it interesting that you say I have a disregard for the Republic of Ireland, then in the next breath drone on and on about how Britain should bend over backwards to accommodate politically absurd Irish demands (which is why no government or Parliament will ever accept the backstop) and basically hand them, and the EU, a quarter of your own country on a plate?

How about having some regards for your own country FOR ONCE and its interests? When will you *ever* put Britain first.

literally proving my point there undertaker

nothing i said was anywhere along the lines of anything to do with "irish demands" please either stop making arguments up or improve your comprehension skills

Nice to have a government with some balls at last.

Boris Johnson tells Sky News that whether Britain leaves with or without a deal ‘depends entirely’ on the EU

He tells ITV that ‘strictly speaking’ the UK will no longer owe the EU the £39bn Brexit divorce bill it it leaves without a deal

— Steven Swinford (@Steven_Swinford) August 25, 2019

Boris Johnson tells BBC News the chances of the UK leaving the EU without a deal are now "touch and go" https://t.co/S9Wtrms7tl

— BBC Breaking News (@BBCBreaking) August 25, 2019

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dbgtz

literally proving my point there undertaker

nothing i said was anywhere along the lines of anything to do with "irish demands" please either stop making arguments up or improve your comprehension skills

---

Time and time again you cannot say why Britain should have any obligation towards the protection of the EU's SM+CU.

All you've offered me is the GFA (again, we won't impose borders we have said) and that I somehow disregard the Irish.