Keeping up with the latest Brexit News

Which option would you prefer?

  • Leave with no deal

    Votes: 122 74.4%
  • Leave with the WA without the backstop

    Votes: 42 25.6%

  • Total voters
    164
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
Where did he say it was take it or leave it?

He said it was "a broad landing area for a deal" and invited the EU to negotiate on it.

Dominic Cummings briefed MPs with a statement to that effect. That’s it would be no deal if the EU didn’t accept Johnson’s deal.

And as with everything Cummings, it turned out to be BS.
 
I don't honestly know, beyond my knowledge & pay grade.

What I do know is that if Boris does get a deal he is highly likely to be the one involved in the next 2 years after the GE and will not let the EU have it all their own way and no one-sided backstop to act as EU's leverage.

I'm fine with Freedom of Movement for those that have jobs that UK needs to fill externally so long as Job ends they can Move back unless legally gained the approval to stay. No automatic right to stay.

That's not freedom of movement then is it - its just an immigration policy.

I'd live to see Boris negioate with the Sky Cancellation team

I'd like you to remove the dish, the box and I want to cancel my subscription charge. Oh - but I still want to watch Sky Sports please.
 
That's not freedom of movement then is it - its just an immigration policy.

I'd live to see Boris negioate with the Sky Cancellation team

I'd like you to remove the dish, the box and I want to cancel my subscription charge. Oh - but I still want to watch Sky Sports please.
Then you can get a Now TV subscription 😂
 
That's not freedom of movement then is it - its just an immigration policy.

I know ;)

Why do you want people to come here if they can't work & contribute?

Surely you don't really want a mass of unskilled/un-needed people to just arrive, sign on and live off UK tax payer benefits?

I can't imagine the Polish or Lithuanian's would be happy with a couple million British turning up demanding homes & benefits without ability to work or support themselves. Luckily for them not many want to, if any.

I know, a new policy on freedom of movement. Every time a Brit wants to move to an EU country we allow one from that EU country. No mass population shifts.

Or

Each country of origin covers any social costs of their citizens during the next 50 years of the EU until standardised benefits, tax, min wage etc across all EU nations eliminates the "pull" factors.
 
Last edited:
I know ;)

Why do you want people to come here if they can't work & contribute?

Surely you don't really want a mass of unskilled/un-needed people to just arrive, sign on and live off UK tax payer benefits?

I can't imagine the Polish or Lithuanian's would be happy with a couple million British turning up demanding homes & benefits without ability to work or support themselves. Luckily for them not many want to, if any.

Wait - you know how freedom of movement works, right?
 
Wait - you know how freedom of movement works, right?

I know how freedom of movement DOESN'T work and shouldn't have been enabled until:

Each country of origin covers any social costs of their citizens during the next 50 years of the EU until standardised benefits, tax, min wage etc across all EU nations eliminates the "pull" factors.
 
We all do don't we? It's been gone over enough times on here.

Clearly not in much detail

I know how freedom of movement DOESN'T work and shouldn't have been enabled until:

Each country of origin covers any social costs of their citizens during the next 50 years of the EU until standardised benefits, tax, min wage etc across all EU nations eliminates the "pull" factors.

You can’t just rock up to the UK and start claiming benefits 😂
 
Remainers did not exist before the referendum, it’s a made up word with no meaning to me. A leaver exists, a remaine doesn’t. Cause we never asked for this.
It's a word now:

Remaine is too


So does Cause. Although you used it incorrectly.

Please don't do Grammar police.
 
Has the EU ever completed a trade deal in 2 years?
Let's hope all trade with the EU doesn't stop on the 1st November while we wait for a deal.
 
Let's hope all trade with the EU doesn't stop on the 1st November while we wait for a deal.

It won’t stop in the event of a no deal - it’ll just be exposed to tariffs and customs checks at the border.

It’ll be painful - but according to Rees Mog we’ll get over it.

Not that he has much to worry about. He’ll be too busy counting all the money his funds will make out of the chaos.
 
Do you honestly think we will get a favourable trade deal without a customs union, or Freedom of movement or some other thing that you will call BRINO?
Yes. Why wouldn't we?

Did Japan, South Korea or Canada have to sign up to any of those things? Are they more important to EU trade than we are?
Dominic Cummings briefed MPs with a statement to that effect. That’s it would be no deal if the EU didn’t accept Johnson’s deal.

And as with everything Cummings, it turned out to be BS.
The only BS is how you continue to misrepresent things.

The UK government hopes to begin a period of intense negotiations with the aim of reaching a final agreement at an EU summit on 17 October.

Brexit Secretary Stephen Barclay told BBC Breakfast that the government's plan set out to the EU were "serious proposals" and were recognised by EU chief negotiator Michel Barnier as such.

He said both sides "recognise that it is better to have a deal" and negotiations "will have to be intensively done in the next few days".


I thought it was take it or leave it? Sounds to me like it was a set of proposals to negotiate on. Which is exactly what they are going to do.
 
Funnily enough I was thinking of the same movie but didn't want to mention it so it was taken the wrong way.
Sorry - completely not getting the Carousel reference?
 
The problem with that idea is quite simple, while the Treasury has raised billions through tax/vat on tobacco products there is no way to know how much of that (if any) has been pumped into the NHS to specifically treat smoking related diseases. If I had my way I'd ban smoking entirely, but I know that's an extreme solution that wouldn't work. I'd fine parents who smoke in front of their children in homes etc. I say that as somebody whose living with the consequences of passive smoking.

But hey ho, No Deal Brexit might make smoking unaffordable. So bright sides and all that.
There have been lots of studies about healthcare costs by disease, lifestyle (e.g. smoking) and age - so there is an understanding of how much the NHS spends on smokers. Though for most the relevant point is how much more or less smokers cost than non-smokers.

This is quite an interesting read about the net cost to health and welfare costs.

This research looked at Finland. Smokers lifetime healthcare costs were lower than non-smokers by 4,700 Euros. A more significant saving for the government finances was smokers receiving a pension for 7.3 years less than non-smokers - which saved the Finnish pension system over 100,000 Euros.

This article includes some figures on other smoking related costs that are far harder to estimate e.g. someone has estimated that smokers fag breaks cost £2.9 billion in lost productivity - although that assumes that smokers take all the same breaks as regular workers plus fag breaks - which may not be true.

I would happily ban smoking completely but I understand that would involve a long term significant cost for the NHS and Pensions.
 
Sorry - completely not getting the Carousel reference?

Logan's Run (1976)

After aborted attempts to adapt the novel, story changes were made including raising the age of "last day" from 21 to 30 and introducing the idea of "Carrousel" [sic] for eliminating 30-year-olds.
 
Last edited:
If you don't disagree that we have a parliamentary democracy then you are not wrong.
Removing the double negatives this becomes:
If you agree that we have a parliamentary democracy then you are correct.
Is that what you meant?
 
Yes. Why wouldn't we?

I could just do the classic Squiffy reply and say, Why would we?

I'm sure Geography has quite a lot to do with it. There is the small matter of no physical borders to think about.

Why not look at the deals that Norway and Switzerland have with the EU. They are probably much better indicators of what we might expect from a free trade deal with the EU.

Such a shame we won't be reaping the benefits o the Japanese deal. It could take years to create our own with Japan.
 
I could just do the classic Squiffy reply and say, Why would we?

I'm sure Geography has quite a lot to do with it. There is the small matter of no physical borders to think about.

Why not look at the deals that Norway and Switzerland have with the EU. They are probably much better indicators of what we might expect from a free trade deal with the EU.

Such a shame we won't be reaping the benefits o the Japanese deal. It could take years to create our own with Japan.
Quite right. Great thread on why today’s potential miracle deal doesn’t matter either way.

 
More project fear from Nissan;

Nissan Europe 'unsustainable' in no-deal Brexit

Speaking to the BBC, Mr de Ficchy said: "We do not know still what a no-deal means.

"There are many alternatives, and today there is a lot of uncertainty.

"The only message I can [give] is that if a no-deal will be associated with the application of 10% duties under the WTO rules, that will create an enormous problem for the overall European activities of Nissan Europe.

"If we will have to sustain 10% export duties on the vehicles that we export from UK to EU, knowing that those vehicles represent 70% of total production, the overall business model won't be sustainable.

"It's not a question of Sunderland, it's a question of the overall economic sustainability of our business [in Europe]."

He said the business was asking for tariffs not be imposed if there is a no-deal Brexit.

"We are asking not to have tariffs being applied in a no-deal scenario because otherwise the tariffs won't be sustainable for us," he said.
 
More project fear from Nissan;

Nissan Europe 'unsustainable' in no-deal Brexit

Speaking to the BBC, Mr de Ficchy said: "We do not know still what a no-deal means.

"There are many alternatives, and today there is a lot of uncertainty.

"The only message I can [give] is that if a no-deal will be associated with the application of 10% duties under the WTO rules, that will create an enormous problem for the overall European activities of Nissan Europe.

"If we will have to sustain 10% export duties on the vehicles that we export from UK to EU, knowing that those vehicles represent 70% of total production, the overall business model won't be sustainable.

"It's not a question of Sunderland, it's a question of the overall economic sustainability of our business [in Europe]."

He said the business was asking for tariffs not be imposed if there is a no-deal Brexit.

"We are asking not to have tariffs being applied in a no-deal scenario because otherwise the tariffs won't be sustainable for us," he said.

If we leave with no deal, some people here will still claim it's unrelated. The fact is, car manufacturing within the UK is as good as dead on a no deal Brexit.

I'm sure some of the Brexiteers who voted out and work in such positions will understand this and see it for the greater good I guess. I'm lucky I am not such a person although the IT contracting slowdown has directly impacted me.
 
Theo P. wants a 2nd Ref now :eek:

A successful businessman claims to know more now than he did before.

Not such a numpty after all :D
 
I read the Nissan statement as a warning to both the UK and the EU to get their shirt together. The wording seemed to be very specifically aimed at Europe as a whole.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

The latest video from AVForums

TV Buying Guide - Which TV Is Best For You?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom