PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Jet Blast (https://www.pprune.org/jet-blast-16/)
-   -   BREXIT (https://www.pprune.org/jet-blast/619673-brexit.html)

4468 8th Mar 2021 16:14


Eurocrats are angry and scared that the Brits have taken their toys and gone home.
I think they’re much more worried that the second largest net contributor has left the club! Once the so-called divorce settlement has been spent, (which is unlikely to take long!) the future budget negotiations could take a very nasty turn!

Sallyann1234 8th Mar 2021 16:16


Originally Posted by ThorMos (Post 11004641)
You don't want an answer, do you? Once you stop sputtering we can go on, let me know...
Again asking myself why i bother...

There is certainly a lot of frustration showing, that Brexit is not going the way they wanted and that the EU is managing to survive without the UK's participation.

BizJetJock 8th Mar 2021 16:16

Oil Can
Certainly. There are many posts on here declaring that lower income workers who voted leave in areas where the main employer was at least perceived to be at risk of upping sticks and moving in the event of brexit, leaving higher unemployment, must be stupid.
Yet there are many round the country including some on here who are comfortable middle class socialists who would suffer a loss of net income if Labour came back into power following the inevitable tax rises. But that is considered to be an intelligent and principled stance, at least by themselves.

Yes I know there will be tax rises anyway to pay for covid, but these are strange times!

Alsacienne 8th Mar 2021 17:46

Erklärungen
1. Gemeinsame Erklärung über die Zusammenarbeit mit den Mitgliedstaaten der internationalen Organisationen
DIE REGIERUNGEN DES KÖNIGSREICHS BELGIEN, DER BUNDESREPUBLIK DEUTSCHLAND, DER FRANZÖSISCHEN REPUBLIK, DER ITALIENISCHEN REPUBLIK, DES GROSSHERZOGTUMS LUXEMBURG UND DES KÖNIGREICHS DER NIEDERLANDE —
IM AUGENBLICK der Unterzeichnung der Verträge, durch die sie untereinander die Europäische Wirtschaftsgemeinschaft und die Europäische Atomgemeinschaft gründen,
IN DEM BEWUSSTSEIN der Verantwortung, die sie für die Zukunft Europas übernehmen, indem sie ihre Markte vereinigen, ihre Volkswirtschaften einander annähern und auf diesem Gebiet die Grundsätze und Einzelheiten einer gemeinsamen Politik festlegen,
IN DER ERKENNTNIS, daß die Schaffung einer Zollunion und eine enge Zusammenarbeit bei der friedlichen Entwicklung der Kernenergie wirksam zum wirtschaftlichen und sozialen Fortschritt und Wohlstand ihrer eigenen sowie der anderen Länder beitragen sollen,
IN DEM BEMÜHEN, diese Länder an den hierdurch eröffneten Ausweitungsmöglichkeiten teilhaben zu lassen —
ERKLÄREN SICH BEREIT, alsbald nach Inkrafttreten dieser Verträge mit den anderen Ländern, insbesondere im Rahmen der internationalen Organisationen, denen sie angehören, Abkommen zu schließen, um diese im gemeinsamen Interesse liegenden Ziele zu erreichen und die harmonische Entwicklung des gesamten Handelsverkehrs zu gewährleisten.

which I believe translates to :

Explanations
1. Joint declaration on cooperation with the member states of international organizations
THE GOVERNMENTS OF THE KINGDOM OF BELGIUM, THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY, THE FRENCH REPUBLIC, THE ITALIAN REPUBLIC, THE GRAND DUCHY OF LUXEMBOURG AND THE KINGDOM OF THE NETHERLANDS,
AT THE MOMENT of the signing of the treaties by which they establish the European Economic Community and the European Atomic Energy Community,
AWARE of the responsibility they assume for the future of Europe by uniting their markets, bringing their economies closer together and laying down the principles and details of a common policy in this area,
RECOGNIZING that the creation of a customs union and close cooperation in the peaceful development of nuclear energy should be effective in contributing to the economic and social progress and prosperity of their own and other countries,
IN EFFORT to allow these countries to participate in the opportunities for expansion that this opens up -
DECLARE THEIR READY to conclude agreements with the other countries, especially within the framework of the international organizations to which they belong, as soon as these agreements come into force, in order to achieve these common interest objectives and to ensure the harmonious development of all trade.


........... as I believe the lingua franca of this forum is English .... however ...


Epexigíseis
1. Koiní dílosi gia ti synergasía me ta kráti méli diethnón organismón
TIS KYVERNISEIS TOU VASILEIOU TOU VELGIOU, TIS OMOSPONDIAKIS DIMOKRATIAS TIS GERMANIAS, I GALLIKI DIMOKRATIA, I ITALIKI DIMOKRATIA, I MEGALI DOUKALIA TOU LOUXEMVOURGOU KAI TO VASILEIO TON KATO CHORON,
STIN YPOGRAFI tis ypografís ton Synthikón me tis opoíes idrýoun tin Evropaïkí Oikonomikí Koinótita kai tin Evropaïkí Koinótita Atomikís Enérgeias,
GNORIZETE tin efthýni pou analamvánoun gia to méllon tis Evrópis, enónontas tis agorés tous, férnontas tis oikonomíes tous pio kontá kai kathierónontas tis archés kai tis leptoméreies mias koinís politikís ston toméa aftó,
ANAGNORIZONTAS óti i dimiourgía teloneiakís énosis kai stenís synergasías gia tin eirinikí anáptyxi tis pyrinikís enérgeias tha prépei na eínai apotelesmatikí sti symvolí stin oikonomikí kai koinonikí próodo kai tin evimería ton dikón tous kai állon chorón,
PROSFORA na epitrépsoun se aftés tis chóres na symmetáschoun stis efkairíes epéktasis pou anoígei -
DILOSI TOUS ETOIMOU na synápsoun symfoníes me tis álles chóres, idíos sto plaísio ton diethnón organismón stous opoíous aníkoun, mólis tethoún se ischý oi symfoníes aftés, prokeiménou na epitefchthoún aftá ta koiná symféronta kai na diasfalisteí i armonikí anáptyxi ólon ton synallagón.

............ it's all Greek to me.

OilCan 9th Mar 2021 10:36


Originally Posted by BizJetJock (Post 11004652)
Oil Can
Certainly. There are many posts on here declaring that lower income workers who voted leave in areas where the main employer was at least perceived to be at risk of upping sticks and moving in the event of brexit, leaving higher unemployment, must be stupid.
Yet there are many round the country including some on here who are comfortable middle class socialists who would suffer a loss of net income if Labour came back into power following the inevitable tax rises. But that is considered to be an intelligent and principled stance, at least by themselves.

Yes I know there will be tax rises anyway to pay for covid, but these are strange times!

So you’re trying to highlight an apparent contradiction between what constitutes stupidity, intelligence and principles with the ‘net loss of income’ as the common denominator.

If I’ve got that bit right, I think you’re conflating two entirely different issues.

If a low income Labour voting socialist voted ‘leave’ and lost all of his income as a result, then that is a consequence he had not considered and will probably want somebody else to take responsibility for what he voted for.
OTOH, if a comfortable middle class socialist votes Labour in an election, he accepts the consequent tax rises and takes responsibility for the partial loss of income.

I don’t see the contradiction. :confused:

It’s interesting you compare ‘socialists’ (in your original post), I wonder what your view of the capitalists would be?

BizJetJock 9th Mar 2021 13:15

I don't see that there is a difference between two people who think in terms of the benefit to society rather than to themselves, so it is not two different ideas. It may well be two different levels of outcome.
But it's intersting you bring up capitalists, since there is a wide variety of them. I run my own business, so i guess that makes me a capitalist. There is a vast gulf, though, between the likes of myself and "capitalists" like Philip Green and Mike Ashley. I would be banned if I wrote my views on them!

highflyer40 9th Mar 2021 14:37


Originally Posted by antheads (Post 11004623)
I'm not sure anyone thought at the time that 'an ever closer union' meant fifty thousand Dom Perignon swilling technocrats that are taxed at a far lower rate than the populace and have obscene pensions. I'm not sure that at the time they thought that 'an ever closer union' meant that Greece would be turned into a German vassal state. That the Euro would predominantly benefit Germany ,whilst making southern Europe uncompetitive. Also did they wonder that this 'ever closer union would mean nation-states would be ordered and sanctioned by the European Commission (just a civil service!) to take unwanted migrants to solve Mama Merkel's problems?

Southern Europe (well more southeastern Europe) was always going to be uncompetitive, and end up as a so called vassal state of somebody. They are incapable of taking care of themselves due to the chronic corruption.

Ancient Observer 9th Mar 2021 14:40

Comrade, don't forget the problems with False Consciousness, and, comrade, we can only address the proper proletariat in our committee, not the lumpenproletariat.

OilCan 9th Mar 2021 20:31


Originally Posted by BizJetJock (Post 11005166)
I don't see that there is a difference between two people who think in terms of the benefit to society rather than to themselves, so it is not two different ideas. It may well be two different levels of outcome.
But it's intersting you bring up capitalists, since there is a wide variety of them. I run my own business, so i guess that makes me a capitalist. There is a vast gulf, though, between the likes of myself and "capitalists" like Philip Green and Mike Ashley. I would be banned if I wrote my views on them!

So you think there is a very narrow range of 'socialists' but a wide variety of 'capitalists', of which you are one, but you're not at the Green/Ashley end of the spectrum.

Where on that spectrum would you put BoJo, Gove, Rees-Mogg, Farage, Mark Francois, Andrew Bridgen, Desmond Swayne and any others you might care to mention?

Effluent Man 10th Mar 2021 09:52

I also ran my own business for forty years. Yet I don't regard myself as a capitalist. I was a second hand car dealer.

Krystal n chips 10th Mar 2021 11:53

Well that's just typical of these foreign types in the EU !....good grief, surely by now they've got the message we've told them to "f "orff !, that the UK is jolly well British , we've "taken back control ! " plus, the British Gov't are paragons of law abiding citizens !

Brexit: EU poised to take legal action against UK over Northern Ireland | Brexit | The Guardian

Denti 10th Mar 2021 12:24

Well, that legal action can take a lot of time, therefore it is just to save face in the EU. The real pressure will come from the european parliament, which, at this point in time, can be judge, jury and executioner on the TCA. As long as in the view of the European Parliament the UK is in breach of the withdrawal agreement, it will not ratify the TCA and rather end up in a no deal scenario. That would be quite bad for both sides, but the risk to the EU is perceived to be a lot less than for the UK.

ATNotts 10th Mar 2021 13:01


Originally Posted by Denti (Post 11005786)
Well, that legal action can take a lot of time, therefore it is just to save face in the EU. The real pressure will come from the european parliament, which, at this point in time, can be judge, jury and executioner on the TCA. As long as in the view of the European Parliament the UK is in breach of the withdrawal agreement, it will not ratify the TCA and rather end up in a no deal scenario. That would be quite bad for both sides, but the risk to the EU is perceived to be a lot less than for the UK.

And a few postings back a read that the EU isn't democratic as the European Parliament has no teeth; perhaps it has been fitted with a set of false ones!!

That will be another Brexiteer falsehood debunked.

Krystal n chips 10th Mar 2021 13:01


Originally Posted by Denti (Post 11005786)
Well, that legal action can take a lot of time, therefore it is just to save face in the EU. The real pressure will come from the european parliament, which, at this point in time, can be judge, jury and executioner on the TCA. As long as in the view of the European Parliament the UK is in breach of the withdrawal agreement, it will not ratify the TCA and rather end up in a no deal scenario. That would be quite bad for both sides, but the risk to the EU is perceived to be a lot less than for the UK.

No doubt the legal process could take time, they usually do irrespective of the context, but it's the principal which is more significant here with this action.

The EU are only too well aware of the arrogance / petulance of the UK Gov't, one which is quite blase about acting unlawfully on purely domestic policies and, whilst offering a token "teething troubles " apology will abrogate responsibility whilst transferring blame, as much as they can / dare, to the end users of an agreement which was flawed from the onset as they were repeatedly warned....and duly ignored to "get Brexit done ! " .

It's a neat move by the EU really.

KelvinD 10th Mar 2021 14:24

The bottom line with this EU/UK/NI fandango is the fact that the overpaid representatives on the UK negotiating team were simply unable to negotiate a decent deal that would not be fraught with all the bitterness and acrimony of the current situation. Same goes for fishing. A "deal" that falls somewhere between coming second in the negotiating stakes and just plain bare faced lying on behalf of our government.

ORAC 10th Mar 2021 14:29

I think there are some unrealistic expectations being discussed here.

First let us look at Article 16 of the NI Protocol and the grounds under which it can be invoked. I think the UK can make a good claim in any court that, in light of the actions and letter from the Protestant paramilitary groups that economic and societal difficulties exist, and diversion of trade, justify their invocation of suitable safeguard measures - particularly since their invocation is only temporary, until October, pending the installation of suitable IT systems.


https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....e72cf7d430.png

Secondly note that the article allows for the other side to take “proportionate rebalancing measures as are strictly necessary to remedy the imbalance”

Note the article is titled “safeguards” and refers to rebalancing and not sanctions or retaliatory measures as a response. The value of amount of traffic affected will be minuscule compared to the cross channel traffic between the UK and the EU and will be difficult to implement. Any major retaliatory measure would, itself, be in breach of the Protocol.

Lastly it refers to the procedures set out in Annex 7 to the Protocol - these are also set out below.

One of the main EU complaints has been that the UK didn’t give them advance notice of their intentions to extend the current waivers, announcing their extension on 3rd March, when they were due to expire on 1st April. But note point 3 of the Annex which required the UK give one months notice of the implementation of any safeguard measures - so it would seem the UK missed the deadline by 3 days. But the UK has said it did provide notice at an official level - just not directly in a telephone call between Lord Frost and his counterpart Maros Sefcovic - so it may well have been done legally on the due date to meet the legal requirement.

In which case the main complaint would seem to echo back to that concerning the UK refusing the EU emissary ambassadorial status - that they don’t see themselves being given the respect they deserve.


Regardless the Annex calls for the matter to be resolved in the Joint Committee, not in the Courts, and Article 5 of the Annex lays down that they should be tabled for discussion every 3 months after implementation - making the first discussion no earlier than 1st July. with the measures due to expire in October, long before any case could reach the Courts and any proportional rebalancing measures be designed and implemented.
https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....e3fcbb6435.png

In summary, the U.K. can make a good case for their having invoked Article 16. The forum for discussing the measures is the Joint Committee with the first discussion being in July, three months after their implementation. At which point any rebalancing measures will have to be proportionate.

Whilst there is a lot of steam and high dudgeon of the matter I cannot see it having much practical effect.

The EU Parliament can, of course, refuse to pass the Trade Agreement - with the catastrophic effect it would incur ( and the cessation of any of the payments from the UK to the EU) but it would not affect the NI Protocol which is an independent international treaty and their actions would not, therefore resolve the issues involved one way or the other - but would cause even greater problems concerning Irish cross-border commerce.

ATNotts 10th Mar 2021 14:34


Originally Posted by KelvinD (Post 11005857)
The bottom line with this EU/UK/NI fandango is the fact that the overpaid representatives on the UK negotiating team were simply unable to negotiate a decent deal that would not be fraught with all the bitterness and acrimony of the current situation. Same goes for fishing. A "deal" that falls somewhere between coming second in the negotiating stakes and just plain bare faced lying on behalf of our government.

The causes are two fold. First, there was no way in which Brexit was compatible with keeping an open border with the Irish Republic, so whatever solution was found was always going to be unsatisfactory. The least worst solution was the "back stop" negotiated with Theresa May's team, and which was roundly rejected by the ERG extremists. Second, the Johnson government was so fixated on "getting Brexit done" and ideologically set against any suggestion the transition period be extended that the final "deal" was cobbled together a few hours before Santa set off for his rounds and all the negotiators disappeared for their socially distanced Christmas and New Year holiday. That was a recipe for the issues that have come out of the woodpile in the last couple of months regarding fishing, trade border down the Irish Sea, problems for people purchasing goods from EU suppliers etc etc.

Denti 10th Mar 2021 14:45


Originally Posted by ORAC (Post 11005863)
The EU Parliament can, of course, refuse to pass the Trade Agreement - with the catastrophic effect it would incur ( and the cessation of any of the payments from the UK to the EU) but it would not affect the NI Protocol which is an independent international treaty and there actions would not, therefore resolve the issues involved one way or the other - but would cause even greater problems concerning Irish cross-border commerce.

The payments of the UK to the EU are part of the Withdrawal Agreement, which, as you rightly say, does contain the NI Protocol and is very much independent of the TCA, in fact, the WA including its NI Protocol has been ratified by both parties and is binding international law, including the payments. The TCA has no direct financial component, it is a trade deal with some bolted on bits like security and judicial cooperation.

Effluent Man 10th Mar 2021 21:55

Solids about to strike the air con over NI. EU taking the UK to court and it looks awfully like the USA isn't going to side with the UK.

SaulGoodman 11th Mar 2021 01:15


Originally Posted by Effluent Man (Post 11006168)
Solids about to strike the air con over NI. EU taking the UK to court and it looks awfully like the USA isn't going to side with the UK.

Why would they side with anyone at all?


All times are GMT. The time now is 13:25.


Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.