Britain is leaving the EU

[really]

The UK agreed future spending plans and commitments with the other members. The plans and costs are going ahead, the UK would be acting in bad faith by walking away from their commitments.

The rather uninspiring election campaign so far suggests to me that May has accepted her weak negotiating position and wants a bigger mandate not dependent on the more ardent Brexiters in parliament.

 

[AdrienIer]

So pro-brexit English Edward thinks May is doing the election to be able to do a hard brexit more freely while anti-brexit really thinks she's doing it to be able to do a soft brexit. Which one of you is doing wishful thinking ? I think it's both.

 

[really]

Time will tell I guess.

Brexit will make my work slightly more awkward - I just want an easy life.

 

[EnglishEdward]

But the UK still wants access to said EU wife's, home, bed and car

That is not so, as you would know if you had actually read the letter that Theresa May sent to the EU.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...to_European_Council_President_Donald_Tusk.pdf

To save you time, I quote the appropriate sentence in that letter.

That is why the United Kingdom does not seek membership of the
single market: we understand and respect your position that the four freedoms
of the single market are indivisible and there can be no "cherry picking".

At the same time UK dosnt want to live under the Wifes rules

Yes, I rather think that is the main point of voting Leave.

Also wife is Rich,

Which is why we get annoyed by the incessant demands for money,
whether in the form of net payments or termination penalties.

and has a history of violence

Here we get to the crux of it, the UK seems to be not truly viewed as a sovereign nation,
but by many e.g. from the other side of the world too, as a subject state to be abused.

 

[EnglishEdward]

So pro-brexit English Edward thinks May is doing the election to be able to do a hard brexit more freely while anti-brexit really thinks she's doing it to be able to do a soft brexit. Which one of you is doing wishful thinking ? I think it's both.

Neither Theresa May nor I believe in the terms hard brexit or soft brexit so it is rather difficult for me to respond to your question.

 

[AdrienIer]

Hard brexit : no deal, or only on very minor matters.
Soft brexit : major deal so as to have continued cooperation with the EU.

You may not think soft brexit is feasible, but saying you "don't believe in the term" is nonsensical.

 

[Arakhor]

Here we get to the crux of it, the UK seems to be not truly viewed as a sovereign nation, but by many e.g. from the other side of the world too, as a subject state to be abused.

If you mean the US, Brexit won't change that, and if you mean parts of the Commonwealth, I think that they'd laugh you out of the room instead.

 

[EnglishEdward]

If you mean the US, Brexit won't change that, and if you mean parts of the Commonwealth, I think that they'd laugh you out of the room instead.

I was replying to FriendlyFire's post as follows:

But the UK still wants access to said EU wife's, home, bed and car
At the same time UK dosnt want to live under the Wifes rules
Also wife is Rich, and has a history of violence

for which the "EU wife" is neither the USA nor Australia.

 

[EnglishEdward]

Hard brexit : no deal, or only on very minor matters.
Soft brexit : major deal so as to have continued cooperation with the EU.

You may not think soft brexit is feasible, but saying you "don't believe in the term" is nonsensical.

I don't have a problem with your particular definitions, but the problem is that people in the UK use the
terms, and particularly the "soft exit" term very elastically i.e. to mean totallly different things.

For instant the BINOs (Brexit In Name Only) seem to interpret "soft brexit" as being where very nearly
everything remains the same but the UK does not send representatives to EU decision meetings.
Others interpret it as being a Brexit where the UK is out of the customs union, ECJ and single market,
but reaches comprehensive agreement with the remnant EU across almost the entire range of matters.

 

[Arakhor]

I was replying to FriendlyFire's post as follows: ... for which the "EU wife" is neither the USA nor Australia.

So why use the phrase "from the other side of the world", which can't possibly apply either to Europe or the EU?

 

[EnglishEdward]

So why use the phrase "from the other side of the world", which can't possibly apply either to Europe or the EU?

Because FriendlyFire who made the comment about "EU wife" has as his Location "Sydney" which is in "Australia".

 

[Arakhor]

Well, that wasn't obvious at all.

 

[EnglishEdward]

The UK agreed future spending plans and commitments with the other members.

That was under the presumption that the UK remains in the EU and with the UK leaving the EU such commitments fall away.

The plans and costs are going ahead,

There is two years for the EU to adjust its plans, but if the rest of the EU wants to play peacock putting its head in the sand, we shall see.

the UK would be acting in bad faith by walking away from their commitments.

What is the point of paying for a project or program that you are no longer part of and cannot benefit from it?

 

[EnglishEdward]

It seems that it is the EU that enters contracts without a cancellation clause and yet we are expected to trust them as commercial negotiators.

EU demands medicine agency leaves Britain - but could owe HUNDREDS of MILLIONS in rent

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world...ency-Canary-Wharf-London-millions-rent-Brexit

 

[Arakhor]

You're expecting any sort of sensible reporting on Europe from the Express?

Even when it's not about Europe, this is still the Express we're talking about. Just this morning, they were trumpeting that May has vowed to protect pensions, yet literally right next to them in the paper stand was the i's headline that the Tories have refused to honour the triple-lock and next to that was a different paper (which one, I forget) saying that the Tories were 'reviewing' the far cheaper 'double-lock'.

 

[Takhisis]

No, sorry, divorce metaphors are still metaphors. Family law is one thing, international law is another one entirely.

 

[FriendlyFire]

Which is why we get annoyed by the incessant demands for money,
whether in the form of net payments or termination penalties.

Here we get to the crux of it, the UK seems to be not truly viewed as a sovereign nation,
but by many e.g. from the other side of the world too, as a subject state to be abused.

Is the UK now learning that EU contribution euromonies are being spent to rebuild up Europe poorer countries because growing strong economy benefits everyone in the long term ?
Because you know thats been like that for a long, long time with money flowing from wealthy, powerful EU countries to the poor EU countries.

The UK is the third most powerful EU member, the UK has numerous "special" rebates, opting out of treaties and having the third most influence
While I would say EU handling of both the economic crisis and refugee crisis has been poor to very poor.
Many of the complaints of the UK were self inflicted, eg Polish immigration, Selling off Fishing qouta etc Stop assigning blame to the EU for this

 

[Silurian]

It seems that it is the EU that enters contracts without a cancellation clause and yet we are expected to trust them as commercial negotiators.

EU demands medicine agency leaves Britain - but could owe HUNDREDS of MILLIONS in rent

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world...ency-Canary-Wharf-London-millions-rent-Brexit

It is not unreasonable that EU institutions are based in the EU.

Since we have voted to leave the EU we have voted for EU institutions to leave the UK.

This will have a cost but we voted for that cost.

This cost will be part part of the estimated Euro 60bn.

If the UK does not want to pay the cost then the EU will have to tell the landlord that the UK does not want to pay its bill.

 

[Traitorfish]

Is the UK now learning that EU contribution euromonies are being spent to rebuild up Europe poorer countries because growing strong economy benefits everyone in the long term ?

The UK doesn't understand that spending money in its own poorer regions will benefit everyone. You can't imagine that adding international borders into the mix will tear away the fog of confusion.

 

[EnglishEdward]

You're expecting any sort of sensible reporting on Europe from the Express?

There are other sources.

http://www.politico.eu/article/report-ema-faces-e400m-decades-long-london-rent-bill/

Even when it's not about Europe, this is still the Express we're talking about. Just this morning, they were trumpeting that May has vowed
to protect pensions, yet literally right next to them in the paper stand was the i's headline that the Tories have refused to honour the triple-lock.

These two statements are entirely consistent with each other.

Protecting pensions means maintaining their value, the triple-lock means increasing their value.

It is not unreasonable that EU institutions are based in the EU.

Yes

Since we have voted to leave the EU we have voted for EU institutions to leave the UK.

We have no more voted to expel the EU institutions than to expel the 4 million other EU member state nationals here.

This will have a cost but we voted for that cost.

Nugatory cost for an empty building only arises if EU chooses to relocate the EMA. The EU's EMA could stay or sublet.

This cost will be part part of the estimated Euro 60bn.

Yes, I have worked that out.

If the UK does not want to pay the cost then the EU will have to tell the landlord that the UK does not want to pay its bill.

OK with me.

But Think. Rental contract until 2037 with no break clause! I smell a rat. Might be
an unbelievable stupid negotiator from the EU, but more likely someone on the take.

The UK doesn't understand that spending money in its own poorer regions will benefit everyone.

Some of us do, but the money men are mainly in London.