Negotiating new trade deals and closing the rift.

weaviemx5

Distinguished Member
I'm referring to the Irish border.
So am I, as has everyone else for at least the last 3-4 years when it’s been highlighted as a major issue. May was destroyed by the DUP for even raising the idea of a border in the Irish Sea, then Johnson came along and agreed to it (and was applauded by people for “Getting Brexit Done”).

None of this is rewriting history, or new issues caused entirely by the EU negotiators, or the fault of anyone else Johnson can push out via his pocket media this week.
 

weaviemx5

Distinguished Member
The withdrawal agreement was passed based on an agreement that a trade deal would be agreed and implemented this year.
Correct, the trade deal including SM access, which comes with specific (well publicised) requirements for third nations to adhere to if they want that access, including checks on goods.
 

weaviemx5

Distinguished Member
Sorry, yes that has been highlighted by a few members here, and in some sections of the media, for quite some time so, yes was aware of it. Not up in arms though. Johnson attempting to pull fast one on the EU?
To be honest, it looks more like he’s trying to pull a fast one on the people who actually put him where he is today, by attempting to rewrite facts to suit.
 

LX200GPS

Member
Edit, quoted wrong post. Bigfingers - - > small buttons 🤭
Yes. And the UK are stating the EU are not negotiating in good faith. Maybe the EU expect Johnson to cave like his predecessor? Maybe now they're beginning to get the picture. What will they do if Johnson goes ahead with the Bill? Send in the EU army?:laugh:
 

Bigfingers

Distinguished Member
Correct, the trade deal including SM access, which comes with specific (well publicised) requirements for third nations to adhere to if they want that access, including checks on goods.
Consequently the EU are not interested in a deal, they are using NI as leverage for fishing rights for example.
That equates to not acting in good faith.
 

weaviemx5

Distinguished Member
Yes. And the UK are stating the EU are not negotiating in good faith. Maybe the EU expect Johnson to cave like his predecessor? Maybe now they're begging to get the picture. What will they do if Johnson goes ahead with the Bill? Send in the EU army?:laugh:
I’m quite sure their negotiators are doing what our own negotiators are also doing, standing by their own requirements too.

Johnson is lying to his own electorate. He signed the treaty, knowing full well that there need to be border checks to retain access to the SM, he even acknowledged that before the General Election. You’re being duped and are going along with his spin that it’s someone else’s fault.
 

weaviemx5

Distinguished Member
Consequently the EU are not interested in a deal, they are using NI as leverage for fishing rights for example.
That equates to not acting in good faith.
Yes, I’m pretty sure they are using fishing rights as part of the negotiation. I’m also realistic that it’s a trade negotiation so am not surprised.
 

kav

Distinguished Member
And b won't happen if Johnson has his way. It also breaks the GFA as it cuts the Unionist's off from GB without their consent. I do get a feeling though this is less important to the Government in the ROI?

So, the only way out is an agreement over a trade deal. Let's hope that happens. Of course in the event of a "no deal" the arrangements for setting up, or not, a hard border in the ROI will have to be agreed between ROI and their friends in Brussels. As you say, a border in ROI contravenes the GFA but no border upsets the EU's precious single market.

In the event of a "no deal" what do you think will happen between EU and Dublin?

If there is "no deal" then Varadkar's anti-British stance (putting all his eggs in one basket) during the last few years will have backfired spectacularly and he deserves to be sh*t on from a great height for that.
I don't claim to have a solution, it's clearly a thorny problem - but it's a problem that was pointed out before Johnson signed the WA, and should have been considered and addressed, rather than retrospectively deciding to break the law.

I also don't understand why Varadkar would have to share an ounce of accountability for Johnson deciding to breach international law. He, Varadkar, wanted to protect Ireland and did that, that's where his interest begins and ends. The fact that the UK government chose to sign a document into law that millions of poeple were pointing out would come back to bite them is solely on the UK government.
 

Bigfingers

Distinguished Member
Yes, I’m pretty sure they are using fishing rights as part of the negotiation. I’m also realistic that it’s a trade negotiation so am not surprised.
You can negotiate, that's not in contention. But simply saying 'give us what we want or else', is not acting in good faith. I'm not sure why you don't understand this?
 

LX200GPS

Member
I’m quite sure their negotiators are doing what our own negotiators are also doing, standing by their own requirements too.

Johnson is lying to his own electorate. He signed the treaty, knowing full well that there need to be border checks to retain access to the SM, he even acknowledged that before the General Election. You’re being duped and are going along with his spin that it’s someone else’s fault.
Are you anti-Johnson or anti- leaving the EU, or both?

I voted for Johnson because he was the only political leader who was prepared to deliver on the 2016 ref. I had previously voted May for the same reason. That was a mistake. Never voted Tory before that. I would imagine most people who voted Brexit/Johnson have no reservations about the way he is conducting himself during these negotiations.

On the other hand if you hate Johnson and hate us leaving the EU then I would suggest you are "up in arms" and not the Johnson/Brexit supporters?
 

weaviemx5

Distinguished Member
Are you anti-Johnson or anti- leaving the EU, or both?

I voted for Johnson because he was the only political leader who was prepared to deliver on the 2016 ref. I had previously voted May for the same reason. That was a mistake. Never voted Tory before that. I would imagine most people who voted Brexit/Johnson have no reservations about the way he is conducting himself during these negotiations.

On the other hand if you hate Johnson and hate us leaving the EU then I would suggest you are "up in arms" and not the Johnson/Brexit supporters?
We’ve already left the EU, and we had a democratic vote to both leave it, and to put Johnson into number 10. I accepted all of those things a long time ago, but that doesn’t mean I have to agree with them, or ignore blatant lies.
 

weaviemx5

Distinguished Member
You can negotiate, that's not in contention. But simply saying 'give us what we want or else', is not acting in good faith. I'm not sure why you don't understand this?
A bit like passing a bill that states we will go back on an international treaty that we signed 9 months’ ago, “if we don’t get our own way”. Even worse, our own PM duped those people who voted for him, and is doing it again. It just surprises me that those most frustrated by his actions don’t seem to be those very people who believed him 9 months ago.
 

Bigfingers

Distinguished Member
A bit like passing a bill that states we will go back on an international treaty that we signed 9 months’ ago, “if we don’t get our own way”. Even worse, our own PM duped those people who voted for him, and is doing it again. It just surprises me that those most frustrated by his actions don’t seem to be those very people who believed him 9 months ago.
No its not like that. One side is giving the other an ultimatum. If the EU is not going to act in good faith, why should we?
I just don't get this desire to put this country down all the time.
 

ashenfie

Well-known Member
Consequently the EU are not interested in a deal, they are using NI as leverage for fishing rights for example.
That equates to not acting in good faith.
On the subject of boats, Why not have a Tingy import tax of £1000 per passenger.
 

weaviemx5

Distinguished Member
No its not like that. One side is giving the other an ultimatum. If the EU is not going to act in good faith, why should we?
I just don't get this desire to put this country down all the time.
I’m not putting the country down? I’m pointing out the quite obvious facts surrounding the need for a customs border if we want access to the SM, as pointed out numerous times (by numerous people) over the last 4 years.

Again though, it’s like a toddler claiming that “they did it first”. Sometimes, adults have to take responsibility for their own actions, and understand the repercussions. Johnson promised to “Get Brexit Done”, which also included the small matter of accepting a border in the Irish Sea, which many of the people who voted for him appear to have forgotten.
 

Bigfingers

Distinguished Member
I’m not putting the country down? I’m pointing out the quite obvious facts surrounding the need for a customs border if we want access to the SM, as pointed out numerous times (by numerous people) over the last 4 years.

Again though, it’s like a toddler claiming that “they did it first”. Sometimes, adults have to take responsibility for their own actions, and understand the repercussions. Johnson promised to “Get Brexit Done”, which also included the small matter of accepting a border in the Irish Sea, which many of the people who voted for him appear to have forgotten.
It's clear we won't agree, let's see what happens between now and the 15th Oct. 👍
 
Dear Bigfingers the only side giving ultimatums is Little England. The EU is negotiating consistently and if England and what remains of it's empire wants any place of respect in the world it has to as well. I accept that you and fellow like minded voters are emotionally tied to Johnsons lies and forgive them but the rest of us are not and do not.
As you write we will have to see what happens but I'm not expecting the EU to cowtow to English Fascist bullying.
 

Bigfingers

Distinguished Member
Dear Bigfingers the only side giving ultimatums is Little England. The EU is negotiating consistently and if England and what remains of it's empire wants any place of respect in the world it has to as well. I accept that you and fellow like minded voters are emotionally tied to Johnsons lies and forgive them but the rest of us are not and do not.
As you write we will have to see what happens but I'm not expecting the EU to cowtow to English Fascist bullying.
I'm not emotionally tied to anyone apart from family and friends.
 

kav

Distinguished Member
No its not like that. One side is giving the other an ultimatum. If the EU is not going to act in good faith, why should we?
I just don't get this desire to put this country down all the time.
What ultimatum is the EU giving? If it's "please stick to the agreement you signed into law" then that's not exactly an ultimatum.
 

Panavision

Well-known Member
I'm surprised anyone here would blame the EU or ROI for the N.I. border issues. It's the UK's fault for this mess. The warnings were clear as day in December. Brexiteers need to own it, but they keep blaming someone else.

I'm hopeful that a deal will be struck. I believe there is agreement in other areas, the media isn't reporting much of that. Financial sector access, for example, will probably be one area both sides have agreed on.
 

Bigfingers

Distinguished Member
So what would members here like to see happen now?

1. Do not put a provision to protect UK trade and continue with a deal the EU want, including giving them fishing rights and other compliance legislation, ultimately signed off by Brussels?

2. No deal?

3. Stand firm on state aid, fishing etc, vote a Bill to provisionally stop NI essentially being stripped of sovereignty?

What other choices are there?
 

psikey

Distinguished Member
So what would members here like to see happen now?

1. Do not put a provision to protect UK trade and continue with a deal the EU want, including giving them fishing rights and other compliance legislation, ultimately signed off by Brussels?

2. No deal?

3. Stand firm on state aid, fishing etc, vote a Bill to provisionally stop NI essentially being stripped of sovereignty?

What other choices are there?
My preference order 3, 2 unless option 3 is just too damaging on the world stage, then its a 2 for me.

Only a 1 if only way to get over the "full" Brexit line then sort out after we are out if deals show to be bad for UK. I'm assuming agreements can be cancelled if both parties can't agree mutual changes? Not sure what that then leads to.
 
Last edited:

psikey

Distinguished Member
Can someone more knowledgeable enlighten me.

We have a WA that includes many things including negotiation of Trade. If we have no deal does the WA still apply for citizens rights etc.

If the WA contains things that are shown to be a serious detriment to the UK with interpretation by the EU and they won't agree to change anything can we just withdraw/cancel the agreement lawfully? If we can, do things like citizen rights fall apart?
 

Similar threads

The latest video from AVForums

Podcast: Panasonic HX800 TV + Sony HT-G700 Soundbar reviews, movie and TV show news and reviews

Trending threads

Latest News

Linn upgrades Majik LP12 turntable with new tonearm
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
VPI announces new Prime 21 turntables
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Skyworth launches 8K Q71 TV
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
AVForums Podcast: 23rd September 2020
  • By Phil Hinton
  • Published
Wharfedale introduces new Diamond 12 Series speakers
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Top Bottom