advertisement


Brexit: give me a positive effect... V

Status
Not open for further replies.
king brilliant said:
??? I was challenging ET's incorrect assertion that, because he had no majority (back to the wall etc.), Johnson had no choice but to sign the WA. The text was indeed drafted in Oct 2019. It was eventually passed by the UK parliament in January 2020, with Johnson's full support - and with the aid of the Tories' huge majority. It was actually 'signed' on 24th January 2020.
Click to expand...

Sorry, he had no choice but to agree the WA. He should still have torn it up as soon as he was returned with a majority. It was, and remains, a multifarious, manifold, myriad, multiple miscellany of man traps, nation traps, money traps, and not honey traps.
 
Colin L said:
Show me where/when Barnier offered a Canada-style FTA and then withdrew the offer. My recollection is that Barnier agreed the desirability of a comprehensive FTA, and the UK said righto, we'll have the Canada one, which was never going to the agreed to by the EU

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-51549662
Click to expand...

Barnier floated around Europe for months or years waving a piece of paper which he held in his hand. It was thus referred to as 'the Barnier staircase', multiply reproduced on these pages, always 'midst much smugness. Canada was at the bottom of it.
 
eternumviti said:
Barnier floated around Europe for months or years waving a piece of paper which he held in his hand. It was thus referred to as 'the Barnier staircase', multiply reproduced on these pages, always 'midst much smugness. Canada was at the bottom of it.
Click to expand...

You are being disingenuous. Every FTA is unique as you well know.
Every one is tailored to the respective geographies, combination of goods and services and respective parties strengths.
 
eternumviti said:
Barnier floated around Europe for months or years waving a piece of paper which he held in his hand. It was thus referred to as 'the Barnier staircase', multiply reproduced on these pages, always 'midst much smugness. Canada was at the bottom of it.
Click to expand...
Can you provide at least one reference of that paper-waving?
 
eternumviti said:
Barnier floated around Europe for months or years waving a piece of paper which he held in his hand. It was thus referred to as 'the Barnier staircase', multiply reproduced on these pages, always 'midst much smugness. Canada was at the bottom of it.
Click to expand...

The paper listed the types of deal already written and the differences between them.

Now where is the link to where the UK were offered the Canada deal? Love the squirming in Boris’s defence btw. He did not have to sign the WA, he chose to. I just knew that sort of thing would be ok with you, if it suited your agenda.

Parliamentary sovereignty until it’s not convenient. Agreements signed with no intention of keeping them. Pure UKIP.
 
eternumviti said:
Sorry, he had no choice but to agree the WA. He should still have torn it up as soon as he was returned with a majority. It was, and remains, a multifarious, manifold, myriad, multiple miscellany of man traps, nation traps, money traps, and not honey traps.
Click to expand...

 
eternumviti said:
Sorry, he had no choice but to agree the WA. He should still have torn it up as soon as he was returned with a majority. It was, and remains, a multifarious, manifold, myriad, multiple miscellany of man traps, nation traps, money traps, and not honey traps.
Click to expand...

Do try to get it right first time! Even if it was, and remains, that handful of 'M' words, he could have declined to put it before parliament. But he didn't do that. He claimed it to be a 'fantastic' deal. He either believed that, or he lied, or both. So he's either an idiot - or he lied. Or both.
 
Colin L said:
You are being disingenuous. Every FTA is unique as you well know.
Every one is tailored to the respective geographies, combination of goods and services and respective parties strengths.
Click to expand...

Of course they are. This was referred to all-round as a Canada-style deal, on Barnier's staircase marked with a nice maple leaf flag.

SteveS1 said:
The paper listed the types of deal already written and the differences between them.

Now where is the link to where the UK were offered the Canada deal? Love the squirming in Boris’s defence btw. He did not have to sign the WA, he chose to. I just knew that sort of thing would be ok with you, if it suited your agenda.

Parliamentary sovereignty until it’s not convenient. Agreements signed with no intention of keeping them. Pure UKIP.
Click to expand...

I'm not defending BJ at all. The silly bugger should never have put it to Parliament. Given that he did, and I don't think he should have done, how does that constitute 'defending' him?

Vaguely amusing that the Barnier staircase was much and regularly touted on these pages, the 'only offer available' etc. As soon as Barnier withdrew it, everyone went into a form of denial, as though it had never existed.

What staircase? What Canada-type deal?

king brilliant said:
Do try to get it right first time! Even if it was, and remains, that handful of 'M' words, he could have declined to put it before parliament. But he didn't do that. He claimed it to be a 'fantastic' deal. He either believed that, or he lied, or both. So he's either an idiot - or he lied. Or both.
Click to expand...

Indeed.
 
UK expects EU to offer Canada-style trade deal
https://www.rte.ie/news/brexit/2020/0202/1112549-brexit-uk
Britain expects the EU to "live up to" its undertakings to offer the UK a Canada-style free-tradedeal, foreign minister Dominic Raab said...

Brexit U-turn: How ‘flip-flopping’ EU offered UK Canada style deal
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1247019/brexit-news-eu-latest-free-trade-talks
THE EU's chief Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier has ruled out granting Boris Johnson a Canada-style trade deal...
 
eternumviti said:
I'm not defending BJ at all. The silly bugger should never have put it to Parliament. Given that he did, and I don't think he should have done, how does that constitute 'defending' him?
Click to expand...

You did (wrongly) state that his back was to the wall and (also wrongly) that he had no choice but to sign the WA. That comes across as if you're defending him. Or, at very least, his actions.
 
Johnson 'signed' the rehashed WA when his back was against the wall. Why he poked it through Parliament, I have no idea, or can't recall. I think he should have torn it up as soon as he was returned with his majority.

You think I'm I'm defending Johnson? I don't think I am in this instance, and, with respect, I don't actually give a ff what you think. What I can see is a bunny hole, and someone is trying to drag me down it.
 
eternumviti said:
You think I'm I'm defending Johnson? I don't think I am in this instance, and, with respect, I don't actually give a ff what you think. What I can see is a bunny hole, and someone is trying to drag me down it.
Click to expand...

You should by now, you've dug enough of them and this is another example.

Johnson cynically signed it with no intention of honouring it (which certainly explains the DUP's muted anger). Early in the PFM discourse on these matters, you gave the impression that you were not the sort of voter inclined to support such actions but that mask slipped a while back and you find yourself fully on board with these shysters. I have no idea whether you would have been enthusiastic for such chicanery on any other topic, I can only assume this is the norm.
 
eternumviti said:
Johnson 'signed' the rehashed WA when his back was against the wall. Why he poked it through Parliament, I have no idea, or can't recall. I think he should have torn it up as soon as he was returned with his majority.

You think I'm I'm defending Johnson? I don't think I am in this instance, and, with respect, I don't actually give a ff what you think. What I can see is a bunny hole, and someone is trying to drag me down it.
Click to expand...

The WA was NOT signed when his back was against the wall. It was signed when he had more power at his disposal than any PM in recent history! Why do you persist in denying this? You don't give a ff for truth either.

And you've burrowed this particular bunny hole yourself, no help required from anyone else on here - and no need to keep digging.
 
SteveS1 said:
You should by now, you've dug enough of them and this is another example.

Johnson cynically signed it with no intention of honouring it (which certainly explains the DUP's muted anger). Early in the PFM discourse on these matters, you gave the impression that you were not the sort of voter inclined to support such actions but that mask slipped a while back and you find yourself fully on board with these shysters. I have no idea whether you would have been enthusiastic for such chicanery on any other topic, I can only assume this is the norm.
Click to expand...

I refer you to the reply that I gave to PsB a day or two ago. This is the pertinent bit;

Why should our people trust an organisation with a long record of subterfuge, deceit and double standards, of selectively turning a blind-eye to breaches of its own (international) treaty law, of open contempt for the most basic principles of democracy and the results of popular referenda, of power-creep and of progressive technocratic and legal imperialism? An organisation that imposed crippling austerity on Greece, Italy, Spain, Portugal and Ireland purely in order to save the deeply flawed single currency, and thus its own flawed and unpopular project, ERM and the consequent USE. An organisation that is staffed by people so arrogantly lacking in self-awareness that they permit their open, mocking contempt for the UK specifically and for democracy generally to be filmed and recorded for televised broadcast? What was it that Verhofstadt's appalling brown-noser of an official (who also happened to be Irish) said? The answer is at the foot of this post.

“We got rid of them. We kicked them out. We finally turned them into a colony, and that was our plan from the first moment.”
 
It is obvious Johnson didn’t even bother to read the WA. He’s too lazy, entitled, and down to simply extraordinary family wealth hasn’t had to do anything properly in his entire life except cash large cheques and dance like a barrel-organist’s monkey. The problem with Brexit, as anyone with a functional brain have observed since the very outset, is those who argued so forcefully and deceptively for it had zero plan, zero strategy and zero capability to deliver anything but a few short-term cash wins for billionaire speculators and long-term decline for the UK. That we still, after thousands of pages of often heated discussion, have yet to document even a single positive effect speaks volumes. It is what it is.
 
eternumviti said:
I refer you to the reply that I gave to PsB a day or two ago. This is the pertinent bit;

Why should our people trust an organisation with a long record of subterfuge, deceit and double standards, of selectively turning a blind-eye to breaches of its own (international) treaty law, of open contempt for the most basic principles of democracy and the results of popular referenda, of power-creep and of progressive technocratic and legal imperialism? An organisation that imposed crippling austerity on Greece, Italy, Spain, Portugal and Ireland purely in order to save the deeply flawed single currency, and thus its own flawed and unpopular project, ERM and the consequent USE. An organisation that is staffed by people so arrogantly lacking in self-awareness that they permit their open, mocking contempt for the UK specifically and for democracy generally to be filmed and recorded for televised broadcast? What was it that Verhofstadt's appalling brown-noser of an official (who also happened to be Irish) said? The answer is at the foot of this post.

“We got rid of them. We kicked them out. We finally turned them into a colony, and that was our plan from the first moment.”
Click to expand...

Haven't you poted that brilliant piece of Brexit propaganda before?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


advertisement


Back
Top