Not more lies from Dr. Fox! Still insiders from the DIT are expecting the department to be downgraded to a purely promotional role as Fox is basically not doing anything apart from collecting airmiles.
Off Topic UK / EU Future
- Thread starter Leo
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
- Status
Not more lies from Dr. Fox! Still insiders from the DIT are expecting the department to be downgraded to a purely promotional role as Fox is basically not doing anything apart from collecting airmiles.
Civil servants and industry analysts say that the International Trade Secretary Liam Fox and his department could to be downgraded to a "promotional" role.
One source in Fox's department said that Fox could resign if his role is stripped by May.
Unlike you I do not only seek articles bashing the UK. You seem to have a need to justify living in France.
Once again you have made comments that you could not justify, then when it is shown that you are wrong, you attack the person.
There again you are incorrect. The Common Market was always destined to evolve into the EU. While studying Economics at Uni my tutor was opposed to the EEC as it was then for the very reason that a common market has to have freedom of movement of goods, services, finance and people.
You can call a ransom a ransom by all means but cannot call money due in membership fees a ransom. I am sure that courts will eventually decide how much the UK is obliged to pay - but that will be at an international level not the potentially biased opinion of one party or the other.
I am sure in the future the UK and EU will secure a trade deal - all sides will want one.
It is a shame you do not understand that leaving a club means leaving behind all membership rights. The EU does. We do and as I have said before that if this was frexit you would be amongst those championing the idea that if you leave a club you lose its benefits.
Am I the only one that thinks our Govt. has behaved with extraordinary arrogance towards the EU, and additionally, have made no effort to actually understand how the EU negotiates.First, we decided to leave and potentially destabilise the EU. Then we specify 'red lines' which is hardly a good way to get the EU 'on our side'. Those 'red lines' are a direct challenge to the fundamental principle (note to SH. That's how to spell 'principle') of the EU's 4 freedoms. Then we complain that the EU isn't being reasonable because they are sticking to their principles - something that I must admit we don't understand in the UK as we have no written constitution, and can change anything at any time. (Except for red lines of course) Quote " Well, those are my principles. If you don't like them I have others". Copyright Groucho (I think)Marx.. The only thing missing from the UK's performance in this whole sorry tale is sending a gunboat. Unfortunately that's tricky as most of them are laid up.
At least we can take comfort in the fact that we will know whether leaving is a good thing in 50 years. Curious, that was missing from the big red bus. But it's probably true we'll know in 50 years, and the big red bus only peddled lies.
And of course, forgotten all along is the fact that, uniquely in the EU, the UK has a problem that No OTHER COUNTRY HAS. We have a special agreement (Good Friday) between part of the UK and a member of the EU. I have still seen NO PROPOSAL WHATSOEVER from anyone suggesting we should leave the EU single market & tariff arrangements, that keeps the Good Friday Agreement in place.
And don't let's start on immigration - the biggest myth in the whole departure palaver.
At least we can take comfort in the fact that we will know whether leaving is a good thing in 50 years. Curious, that was missing from the big red bus. But it's probably true we'll know in 50 years, and the big red bus only peddled lies.
And of course, forgotten all along is the fact that, uniquely in the EU, the UK has a problem that No OTHER COUNTRY HAS. We have a special agreement (Good Friday) between part of the UK and a member of the EU. I have still seen NO PROPOSAL WHATSOEVER from anyone suggesting we should leave the EU single market & tariff arrangements, that keeps the Good Friday Agreement in place.
And don't let's start on immigration - the biggest myth in the whole departure palaver.
Not at all. I was just trying to analyse why you feel the need to constantly knock the UK. It is a bit weird.
The Lords Committee was an all party mix so no political bias there. They clearly concluded that the UK was not legally obliged to pay anything. The UK is simply asking for a free trade deal to benefit both parties not stay in without paying. If we leave without a deal I'm sure The Hague will come up with an answer in about five years time. The EU morphing from one thing to another rightly fuelled the fear of moving to a superstate which only the eurocrats with their fingers in the till really want. The proletariat will certainly not be asked in case in case the answer is no.
You are probably right about the UK's arrogance - but when were we not arrogant? However to me it is more the UK having a total lack of understanding. To operate a free market you need to have resources able to move to where they are needed. Restriction on their movement distorts the market. The EU do not just have the four pillars as a matter of principle but of economic sense. In fact the UK is a great example of how a successful growing country draws in the resources it needs to continue to thrive - but don't tell SH or any leaver that. The UK benefitted MOST from the 4 pillars - but we have stupidly thrown that away.
Unlike others on here though I do not blame either side solely. The EU have been incredibly arrogant and stupid too. They could and should have worked out what future relationship would have suited them best while not allowing the UK to simply cherry pick. Had they done so and offered the UK the best deal they could live with it would have put them in a superb position to both dissuade other countries from exiting while getting the deal they will eventually go for as a future trade deal.
most people side with what they believe is in their own self-interest, without thinking of the long-term effects the decision could have.
Who said anything about political bias. I referred to country bias. The UK decide the UK owe nothing - how amazing is that. Don't tell me the EU decides the UK owes 1,000 billion. Who would have guessed? It will take a court independent of both the UK and EU to rule between the two parties if it comes to that.
The UK wants a trade deal - they will get it. However it will be more along the lines of Canada or Japan and will need to be negotiated in time.
Your superstate is the leavers "project fear" (like Turkey's 80 million) and is worth no response.
It is disingenuous of you to pretend you give a fig about the proletariat - if you even understand what it is.
An array of remain politicians are now warning the consequences of a second referendum would lead to an even larger majority for leaving the EU. If there was one it should be on the basis of either accept the deal or no deal.
Why? Why not offer what people want if they no longer want brexit.? Leave promised them something they cannot deliver - so contract isnull and void.
I am happy to have another referendum - and if leave with no deal defeats remain then so be it.
By the time that a transition period comes to an end, although it looks ever more likely there will be another one after that, five years will have passed since the referendum. Under the terms of the fixed parliament act, a new election has to be held every five years, and no legislation that a government passes can be binding on the next government. The PM found a way around the act to call an early election when she thought it would help her out, and we all know how that worked out. Democracy was overturned by the PM because she ignored the act, therefore to say that there should not be another vote on the thing that could according to Rees-Mogg could have an effect on the country for the next 50 years is rather simplistic. If the leavers were so confident in the result, why do they all shout that no further test of the nations opinion should be taken?
- Status