advertisement


Brexit: give me a positive effect... XII

Status
Not open for further replies.
Progressive initiatives indeed and no longer a UK problem. Who will end up paying these additional costs?
Every four or five years the UK has an election control mechanism with the option to remove the party running the country. There is no turning back for the Federal tanker.
Quite, who pays for EU matters should no longer be a UK concern.

Meanwhile, the money tree is alive and well in Britain. Not-so-frugal Rishi has been running the credit card hot, and UK public debt is now well over £2 trillion (2.3 trillion or 108% of GDP, that's £31,000 per citizen). This is higher than the EU27 (91%) even including EV's favourite southern member states. And that's just public debt.

Total debt, i.e. including private debt and corporate debt, is another matter. UK debt is high in these areas, too. Personal debt is heading towards 2 trillion, including mortgages "secured" by a frothy property market. Non-financial corporate debt is up. Total debt is estimated close to £7 trillion, more than 300% of GDP.
 
Interesting interview with an advisor to Theresa May’s government on R4 earlier (sorry, forgot who it was) suggesting the current issues with the NI border were perfectly well understood as being unworkable both by that administration and also by Johnson, and Johnson’s behaviour since is pure recklessness and arrogance that was never going to be accepted by the EU. The point was also made that he attempted to illegally prorogue parliament in order to crash out without a deal. As ever Tories gonna Tory. Their ego and power grabs are far more important than everyone else’s jobs and security.
 
I heard that interview - problem is that everyone who cares already knew that and this type of information won`t impinge on the numpties in any way.
 
Suggestions of tariffs and quotas, dark threats that the 'EU will act, swiftly, resolutely and firmly if the UK has the effrontery to sell British sausages in British supermarkets'.

Try to actually think that one through. 'Crushing retaliation' covers it pretty well, I think. The EU is threatening to cancel the FTA over the sale of sausages. It's surreal. You couldn't make it up.

Or...Brexiteers are still not ready for the realities of the Brexit borders they campaigned for.
 
Oh god, not the “hands of us great British sausage”.

RideKbB.jpg

But who will protect the sausages now that the navy are on fish patrol?
 
Sefcovic was however very puffed up about the fact that the kind and charitable EU had seen fit to consider allowing medicines produced and/or distributed in the UK, and supplied from within the UK, to be dispensed in British pharmacies, surgeries and supermarkets, and he was very sanctimonious about the degree to which he and his 'colleagues in the EU have a strong commitment to the people of Northern Ireland', one which presumably doesn't preclude breaking the Belfast Agreement and thus the international laws about which they are otherwise so pompously self-righteous. It's about as strong a commitment as those that they have towards other once cherished ex-citizens such as those employed in the shellfish business, except there's probably rather less likelihood of an outbreak of extreme unpleasantness on the west coast of Scotland or Cornwall as there is in west Belfast, so the weasel words aren't required.

4/10 on the tabloidism scale. Can do better.
 
But who will protect the sausages now that the navy are on fish patrol?
The Paras. Rapid Sausage Brigade. Meanwhile Tory ministers are going full Carry On-

“George Eustice, the environment secretary, described the threat of an “outright ban” on chicken nuggets and sausages being sent from GB to NI as “bonkers”.

It looks like we could have a chicken nugget war on at any moment. Boris must slap down these tan food provocateurs in Brussels.
 
Oh, do try to keep up, PsB.

When I responded to you that 'he didn't', I meant that he didn't say it. I said it.

I know that you like everything to be entirely literal, and that the grey areas between the actual, written down lines of agreements don't exist, but the further 'grace periods' that the UK is threatening to extend in order to prevent the supermarkets from running out of goods include those relating to chilled meats. As I understand it, 'chilled meats' (which includes minced meat products, which in turn include sausages) cannot be sent into the EU customs area/SM either at all or without extensive, expensive and time-consuming SPS checks, which means that the logistics chains between the UK supermarkets distribution hubs and their NI branches are broken. The EU, as represented by Sefcovic, has said that any further unilateral extension of 'grace periods' by the UK will bring 'swift, firm and resolute' retaliation by the EU, and other EU sources have suggested that this retaliation 'might' include the suspension of (an unspecified 'some') tariff-free exports from the UK to the EU, and/or the imposition of quotas.

It therefore follows that if the UK continues to allow sausages to be sent into NI supermarkets, the EU will retaliate by attempting to disrupt or destroy UK exports of some or all goods (unspecified) to the EU by introducing quotas and tariffs. This could correspond to an attempt at some potentially pretty 'crushing' retaliation, in my view.

Is that just a long-winded way of saying you don't agree with EU food safety standards?
 
Yes, I'm perfectly aware of what Mandy Rice-Davies said, I just can't see by what contortions, however witty, it relates to what I said.

The photo, incidentally, is of the lovely Joanne Whalley, who played Christine Keeler.



I don't think anyone is making excuses.



Sure, very poorly conceived and negotiated, and the British side utterly failed to see that the EU would make it a matter of honour (the wrong word, because there is no honour in this) to implement it to the letter. So it isn't working, is smashing the GFA, and therefore needs changing.

I can't see how you lot are so determined not to grasp that the thing is a disaster, that the EU is insisting upon a blinkered, spiteful and completely unnecessary 'to-the-letter' legalistic implementation which is smashing head first into the GFA, and that it has therefore to be either changed or scrapped.

The intention of the Irish Sea checks is to prevent 'goods at risk' of crossing into the SM/CU without relevant SPS checks or duties from doing so. Food supplies in Sainsburys lorries for delivery to Sainsburys supermarkets do not constitute risk. The earth on seed potatoes and tractor tyres do not constitute any more of a sanitary risk than they did prior to brexit, neither does the dog belonging to Mrs Flanagan of Ballymena returning from seeing her daughter in Norfolk, the parcel sent by her daughter to her, nor the prize heffer of farmer Simpson of Coleraine returning home from the Royal Agricultural Showground at Stoneleigh.

Only a fraction of the goods entering NI are destined for the RoI, it should be very clear what consignments they are, and the checks should be confined to those consignments which are obviously 'at risk'. Anything else is simply absurd, most particularly taken against the current background of complete alignment. It really just exposes the EU for the sham that it is.


Sauve qui peut!

EV, all the issues related to NI trade were covered off with the Govster back in December.

From the interweb: "Eyes wide open...with keen or complete knowledge, awareness, or expectations. If you don't sign this contract with eyes wide open, you're going to get yourself into trouble."
 
Quite, who pays for EU matters should no longer be a UK concern.

Meanwhile, the money tree is alive and well in Britain. Not-so-frugal Rishi has been running the credit card hot, and UK public debt is now well over £2 trillion (2.3 trillion or 108% of GDP, that's £31,000 per citizen). This is higher than the EU27 (91%) even including EV's favourite southern member states. And that's just public debt.

Total debt, i.e. including private debt and corporate debt, is another matter. UK debt is high in these areas, too. Personal debt is heading towards 2 trillion, including mortgages "secured" by a frothy property market. Non-financial corporate debt is up. Total debt is estimated close to £7 trillion, more than 300% of GDP.

Indeed. If the concern and focus was genuinely for economic prospects, we wouldn't be in this mess and there wouldn't be the same desperation for alternative justifications. I love the idea that ET would sign uncomfortable agreements committing his business to actions he can't fulfill, on the basis that he can just change them further down the track.
 
Quite, who pays for EU matters should no longer be a UK concern.

Meanwhile, the money tree is alive and well in Britain. Not-so-frugal Rishi has been running the credit card hot, and UK public debt is now well over £2 trillion (2.3 trillion or 108% of GDP, that's £31,000 per citizen). This is higher than the EU27 (91%) even including EV's favourite southern member states. And that's just public debt.

Total debt, i.e. including private debt and corporate debt, is another matter. UK debt is high in these areas, too. Personal debt is heading towards 2 trillion, including mortgages "secured" by a frothy property market. Non-financial corporate debt is up. Total debt is estimated close to £7 trillion, more than 300% of GDP.
There are many who say Rishi is not spending enough, the world has gone mad. After a year cooped up people are on a spending spree, house prices are up and so are staycation items such as caravans, motorhomes and jet-skis, whether its a bubble nobody cares.
 
The EU, ISTM, has done two useful things at the same time. It has created a source of revenue to ease the post-Covid fiscal stress; and it has created a mechanism to encourage reductions in waste and emissions that we urgently need to see drastically reduced. That's the sort of joined-up, socially and environmentally responsible approach we've turned our back on.
 
Progressive initiatives indeed and no longer a UK problem. Who will end up paying these additional costs?
Every four or five years the UK has an election control mechanism with the option to remove the party running the country. There is no turning back for the Federal tanker.

No diatribe on unelected bureaucrats Mr Barren?
 
Increased costs to be paid for by our friends and nabours in the EU to fund the federal USE magic money tree.

New sources of revenue to ease the burden on Member States
To help repay the borrowing, new own resources will be introduced to complement Member States' contributions to the EU budget.

These would better align the sources of revenue to the EU budget with the EU priorities and objectives. They include tackling climate change and ensuring fair taxation in an increasingly digital economy.

The first new own resource, already as of 1 January 2021, will be a new contribution based on non-recycled plastic packaging waste. Further new sources of revenue could include a new own resource based on a carbon border adjustment mechanism, a digital levy, and the EU Emission Trading System.

The Commission also committed to propose other new own resources, based on the Financial Transaction Tax and a financial contribution linked to the corporate sector or a new common corporate tax base, by June 2024.

https://ec.europa.eu/info/strategy/eu-budget/long-term-eu-budget/2021-2027/whats-new_en
https://ec.europa.eu/info/strategy/...2027/revenue/potential-new-sources-revenue_en

The EU will become a super state. The EU is on the verge of collapse. Both touted in the referendum.

And in other news...your dear leader has re-appeared:

https://twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/1401939564114198533
 
Increased costs to be paid for by our friends and nabours in the EU to fund the federal USE magic money tree.

New sources of revenue to ease the burden on Member States
To help repay the borrowing, new own resources will be introduced to complement Member States' contributions to the EU budget.

These would better align the sources of revenue to the EU budget with the EU priorities and objectives. They include tackling climate change and ensuring fair taxation in an increasingly digital economy.

The first new own resource, already as of 1 January 2021, will be a new contribution based on non-recycled plastic packaging waste. Further new sources of revenue could include a new own resource based on a carbon border adjustment mechanism, a digital levy, and the EU Emission Trading System.

The Commission also committed to propose other new own resources, based on the Financial Transaction Tax and a financial contribution linked to the corporate sector or a new common corporate tax base, by June 2024.

https://ec.europa.eu/info/strategy/eu-budget/long-term-eu-budget/2021-2027/whats-new_en
https://ec.europa.eu/info/strategy/...2027/revenue/potential-new-sources-revenue_en

Annie's cafe in Benidorm has run out of bangers, they're punishing us!



Given that every country is going to be in recovery mode, some more additional self inflicted damage than others, what exactly is wrong with the proposals here in your opinion Col?

It looks like another scrape that you haven't really read. We are not immune from our COVID impact (one of the worst) and our self inflicted trade losses that have only just begun to show - where do you think the money is going to come from?

This is not about a temporary fund raiser for covid recovery, it is a financial power shift towards a federal Europe. It appears to be sold as something for nothing but consumers will end up paying this tax.

There is no transition to a federal USE, that's your bogey man construct, you are creating enemies to deflect from our own problems. None of which helps the very real issues caused by the nonsense you voted for.

I love the weasel words 'new own resources', EU classic. Colin is of course absolutely right on this one. For the Commission to raise its own 'resources' was, until the Covid recovery fund, explicitly against the treaties, and would have been quickly batted into very deep water by the German Federal Constitutional Court. However, now the EC has got its foot in the door, the mission creep is inevitable. This is clearly a 'Hamilton' moment, and the objective is, as always, full fiscal, monetary, and thus political union. What the Commission takes, it keeps.

Don't get me wrong on this one - I think that fiscal union is essential to the long-term survival of the Euro, but the inevitable consequential political union is going to be an impossible sell. I guess we will have to watch the Commission overplay this card over the next few months and years. Its going to be interesting, especially as the Eurozone economies become unbalanced as Germany surges ahead post covid.
 
Or...Brexiteers are still not ready for the realities of the Brexit borders they campaigned for.

I vaguely recall you as one of the few people on this thread who was open to actual debate. This kind of facile comment must irritate even you.
 
I love the idea that ET would sign uncomfortable agreements committing his business to actions he can't fulfill, on the basis that he can just change them further down the track.

Show me exactly where I said that. The only contracts I enter into are those to pay my staff, suppliers, my landlord, and HMRC. I have reneged on none of them.
 
Sauve qui peut!

EV, all the issues related to NI trade were covered off with the Govster back in December.

From the interweb: "Eyes wide open...with keen or complete knowledge, awareness, or expectations. If you don't sign this contract with eyes wide open, you're going to get yourself into trouble."

I was warning that the backstop and then the NIP were a disaster waiting to happen way back in the 'Oh, Britain' wail, and I said in Jan 2020 that BJ was wrong to sign it. My eyes were wide open, wider open to the traps in the NIP (and WA) than anyone here.

BJ clearly thought that he could blag it on order to get a deal through. It was always going to come back and bite him on the arse. I'm afraid that the alternative was a strong possibility of no deal, but maybe it was a game of brinksmanship that the EU wouldn't have savoured either. The FTA provides advantage weighted well towards EU exporters to the UK, and no deal would have lost them that comfortable advantage. They might just have blinked. As it is, we are now in a worse position than no deal.
 
Show me exactly where I said that. The only contracts I enter into are those to pay my staff, suppliers, my landlord, and HMRC. I have reneged on none of them.

I haven't suggested you would, in fact I'm contrasting what I believe and certainly hope you would do v what Johnson has done here. I would not expect you to support it.

BJ clearly thought that he could blag it on order to get a deal through. It was always going to come back and bite him on the arse. I'm afraid that the alternative was a strong possibility of no deal, but maybe it was a game of brinksmanship that the EU wouldn't have savoured either. The FTA provides advantage weighted well towards EU exporters to the UK, and no deal would have lost them that comfortable advantage. They might just have blinked. As it is, we are now in a worse position than no deal.

Right so what's the solution? Mine would be stop trying to manage the media and start negotiating in better faith, face down a few of the extremist ERG and find a way out of the ridiculous red lines over SM/CU alignment - of all the concerns with EU membership, commonality of standards and rules would have been the least controversial. The moronic insistence of symbolic divergence is damaging more than just the NIP.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


advertisement


Back
Top