SkyBlueDom26
Well-Known Member
We're not in a strong negotiating position because we had a pathetic remainer in charge
The EU: In, out, shake it all about.... (104 Viewers)
- Thread starter jimmyhillsfanclub
- Start date
SkyBlueDom26
Well-Known Member
Not if the remoaners have a say
Sick Boy
Super Moderator
Yep, that's it, keep burying your head in the sand and blaming everyone else. Perhaps the UK could get someone like Boris Johnson or David Davis in charge, i'm sure they'd have done much better - haha!
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
We're not in a strong negotiating position because we're not. We have massively misunderstood what is and isn't possible for the EU to agree with in line with the treaty obligations.
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
What is the potential? It's a massive market yes but for what? Come on Dom...
What sort of reciprocal access would the US want and would that protect the interests of UK companies?
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
David Davis and Dominic Rabb were both leavers. If you’re referring to May then you have to ask the question why all the leavers stood to one side so she could take the job unopposed. I would think that the magnitude of the referendum hit the leavers like a bad case of an STD so they offered May up as a pallet cleanser. The promised utopia of brexit was a unicorn promise but let’s let May take charge and then we can blame it on a remainer. Same with the general public, the reason brexit is a failure is because remainers, sorry remoaners, are all negative.
Sorry but project fear has quickly become reality and leavers disowning their votes and blaming remainers for something they didn’t vote for tells you all you need to know about the mentality of leavers. Always someone else’s fault, the EU, immigration, remainers etc etc.
Are you claiming that the Brexiteers negotiated to remain, or have you misread the post?
The leave campaign misled voters and now we have the mess to prove it.
Hopefully not.
Explain the strengths of our negotiating position against the strongest economy and the most nationalistic President in the Western world. ( who is desperate for a win ). We will be classed as a distressed trading partner.
Off you go...
Waiting in suspense .
clint van damme
Well-Known Member
yep, the brexiteers had an opportunity to get rid of the 'remoaner' and bottled it. They knew we are heading up a blind alley and the PM s position is a poisoned chalice.
Shitebags everyone of them.
Maybe this: https://www.kfw.de/kfw.de.html
Grants credit for projects that maybe commercial banks wouldn’t. Things like investment in green technology or helping start ups.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
The whole negotiating process is done by civil servants
The process was entirely geared to a remain or soft exit strategy which made negotiations impossible - no normal business would ever approach it like that.
This misled nonsense is also bollocks. The real misleading occurred in the 74 referendum when there was cover ups regarding the intent of an eu superstate. When foot and Benn stated this they were mocked and ridiculed as was Powell on the right.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Here’s a question for you. There is constant dross about different people voting for different brexits.
Would you be happy with a remain question that stated remain means no more integration treaties, no power of veto ever to be removed and never to be part of the Euro?
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
But it isn't a business negotiation Grendel, that's the key point. Approaching it that way sees everything as a bargain that can be traded, it is just not the case.
tisza
Well-Known Member
Already have under funded banks for Green initiatives and start-ups etc.
Key issue was to make sure it wasn't competing in any areas directly covered by commercial banks due to competition regulations.
Primarily lends money to commercial banks to lend to people/projects.
As much about getting commercial banks into the habit of lending again despite what they claim by limiting risk.
Also can Govt hold onto to RBS whilst starting a National bank? Competition rules again
You can’t bind future EU parliaments . No power of veto can be removed without agreement of all 28 states. We have an exemption from the Euro, despite some leavers saying that is going to be changed without our agreement. If we don’t sign integration treaties which have a veto, there won’t be any. Maybe future UK Parliaments will want more integration.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
That’s not what I asked. Many people who vote remain do so on the basis the status quo remains and there is no further integration. If there was a referendum should this option be made available as a question to show the remainers who want to stay but want integration to stop at the point we are at?
I am not a fan of Foot, Benn or Powell and what has happened so far has not resulted in a superstate. So, up until now, 46 years later, their predictions have not come true. They may or may not come true in the future. They will only do so if we agree to it. We could always leave if they were to deny us vetos on things we already have vetos on, without our agreement. But, that is up to future governments to decide. First we have to stop this madness which is based on madness and frightening people about things that have not happened.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
It has become true - people were lied to about increased integration were they not in 1974?
Of course not. Remain is the political status quo, membership of the EU, but people say the EU needs reform. It cannot stand still if it wants to survive.
It is not a superstate. Increased integration in trade and workers rights is a great positive.
clint van damme
Well-Known Member
that's an interesting point.
SkyBlueDom26
Well-Known Member
Calm ya attitude
clint van damme
Well-Known Member
translated - I haven't a fucking clue!
tisza
Well-Known Member
This is where it finds itself in conflict. Few states want (or indeed could sell to their electorates) much further integration (certainly beyond tinance & trade) or surrendering of powers but this is what Brussels has increasingly been asking for.
The push for an EU army, for example, already an issue raising eyebrows when most are already part of Nato. Who wants to finance an armed force, continue NATO spending requirements whilst knowing any major conflict in mainland Europe (ostensibly against the Russians) is going to be heavily reliant on American help.
Centralized Eurozone budgets another cause for concern amongst many smaller states that use the Euro or aspire to adopt it.
One of the reasons there were originally 2 sites for European Parliament was to prevent the idea of a centralization of power.
Biggest growth in Brussels is the number of enforcement agencies for EU law and the powers they wield without actually being voted for. Most European leaders want a shift in power at least back towards the European council.
Even Junckers admitted , after the Cameron talks and again after the referendum, the balance had swung too far towards Brussels and needed to be addressed quickly.
May's elections will be an interesting one for 2 reasons in particular - the respective turnouts and how the many populist parties perform.
Sky Blue Pete
Well-Known Member
It’s a really good question and the reason why major changes were supposed to be agreed by each country
Sick Boy
Super Moderator
Using your own logic, since then the country voted in governments who were committed to the EU and no party over the decades looking to undo it ever got close to actually getting in power, so that means the electorate were condoning it.
Your own logic, not mine
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Using your own logic, since then the country voted in governments who were committed to the EU and no party over the decades looking to undo it ever got close to actually getting in power, so that means the electorate were condoning it.
Your own logic, not mine
Nope one government reneged on its commitments
FactCheck: Did Blair promise Euro referendum? - Channel 4 News
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
That says he didn't renege on a commitment, that says he promised a referendum if one was necessary.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Lol of course the blood stained Blair creature did - of course
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Well that's what your link says.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
“We will put the constitution to the people in a referendum and wholeheartedly campaign for a yes vote”
Ok
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
It's almost like you haven't read your own link.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Yep I’ve read it.