Forum menu
EU now confirming that joint Brexshit report is not legally blinding
[i]Mr Paisley said that at the start of the week Mr Varadkar “had a ball at his toe and believed he was about to pull off a major coup of having secured Northern Ireland harmonised with the Republic of Ireland.” Mr Paisley claimed: “Frankly, whatever efforts are made to characterise this week Leo Varadkar was done over by the EU, the UK and the DUP.”[/i]
https://inews.co.uk/essentials/news/politics/ian-paisley-boasts-weve-done-varadkar-brexit-deal/
Take a break. I'm going to revisit this next year here, I advise you to do the same. This thread needs some space for others to contribute.
do we think having unionists and republicans at each other's throats is somehow a good thing then?
Strange times.....
As I recall the opening of the agreement last week said something like notwithstanding that nothing is agreed until everything is agreed, so yes it’s not legally binding and everyone knows that.
So why is Davis trying to wind the Irish up? And why does he suddenly want to backtrack? And what do you think will happen if the UK tries to keep the other bits of a deal and not that one? (Not saying they will of course)
Davis just needs to learn to shut up. Idiot.
Anything is fair game to be sacrificed at the altar of Brexit, including peace in Northern Ireland, apparently.
Do people like David Davis think the rest of the world isn't watching this chicanery? And all of them will obviously be queuing up to sign trade deals with people who conduct themselves like this, obviously?
So why is Davis trying to wind the Irish up?
If you watched the interview it seemed like a perfectly calm, rational answer to the questions posed.
Of course, the alarmist and anti-Brexit commentariat amongst the press chose to jump up and down on one comment flapping their arms around over something that, in reality, was neither news to anyone or remarkable.
If you cant see how manufactured most of the recent ‘big stories’ have been then you must be daft.
If you cant see how manufactured most of the recent ‘big stories’ have been then you must be daft.
aahh so its all #fakenews ?
thats a familiar tactic
But...
...ROTHERHAM!!!
aahh so its all #fakenews ?
I’d use the phrases alarmist and sensationalised clickbait
But...
...ROTHERHAM!!!
You’re aware that Keighley (Anne Cryer) is nowhere near Rotherham?
igm - Member
As I recall the opening of the agreement last week said something like notwithstanding that nothing is agreed until everything is agreed, so yes it’s not legally binding and everyone knows that.
So why is Davis trying to wind the Irish up? And why does he suddenly want to backtrack? And what do you think will happen if the UK tries to keep the other bits of a deal and not that one? (Not saying they will of course)Davis just needs to learn to shut up. Idiot.
He's "clarified" hsi statement by saying that the agree ment is legally binding.
He's a special sort of inept - publically suggesting he'll renege on an international agreeemnt made just a day earlier. Hell of an image to present for a country that's expecting to be nedotiating trade agreements. Although he'll be long gone by the tiem that actually happens, if ever.
I don't know how he's still in a job after being caught lying to Parliament last week.
I'm in an industry that normally feels it first when things start to get tight. I think things are slowing down markedly. This time of year is usually mad busy, but not this year. The contrast to last year is huge. Its dead on its arse, to be honest. And that's the general consensus from a lot of people I'm talking too.
I’m in the crayons business too, London based and mostly working within property marketing and the last year and especially the last 6 months has been the worst I’ve known in 12 years freelancing. I’ve not had a sniff of anything substantial since August. Initially I was glad of the break as I’m normally turning work away but it’s got to the stage where it’s starting to look a bit bleak.
Im not sure if the befuddled old man thing is an act or it's all just taking its toll on him !
It's not an act.
[i]"What's a requirement of my job? I don't have to be very clever, I don't have to know that much, I do just have to be calm."[/i]
You’re aware that Keighley (Anne Cryer) is nowhere near Rotherham?
Fair pint.
But...
...KEIGHLEY.
Anyway, Ian Paisley JR? Really? Well done on finding an impartial commentator. 😆
Ninfan - you young innocent you, I’m always at my calmest when winding folk up and there’s a peculiar sort of serenity that comes when you’re playing for high stakes.
Read the words from his mouth. I suspect he was trying to calm the JRM / PB Brextemist wing down and hadn’t realised what he was saying to the Irish.
But then to contradict the true point that didn’t need pointing out with one that was probably less true... the man’s a fool.
The gao between the interview and the headlines is as wide as ever. And the guardian requests contributions to quality journalism???
DD and the EU saying the same thing. Other nations can either welcome the truth or not. Their choice
DD and the EU saying the same thing. Other nations can either welcome the truth or not. Their choice
but DD has since 'clarified' saying it is legally enforceable...
the mans a genius or a fool
The vote will not be to go back to where we were. That decision has been made.
That will change. Democracy and all that.
EU now confirming that joint Brexshit report is not legally binding
In the same manner that referendum result was not legally binding.
But A not legally binding document must be a refreshing change for David Davis, as opposed to last week's not actually existing documents.
Doesn't this now mean there are 3 confusing statements relating to the agreement, which isn't actually an agreement until everything is agreed, and isn't legally binding anyway?
1. The agreement is not legally binding
2. Nothing in this document is agreed until everything is agreed.
3. If nothing is agreed the UK will maintain full alignment with those rules of the Internal Market and the Customs Union.
So does that mean that if the EU27 just walk away and ignore us, we're now committed to remaining a member?
EU briefed €100bn to FT. Around €75bn was their base case. Remember the EU wanted this money upfront and in return FOR NOTHING.
May has made it clear its £35-39bn in return f for an extensive free trade deal and a 2 year transition period. All paid as/when & if due. No deal, no money.
Also way to go EU on the deal with Japan. The EU sells Pork (and other agricultural products) tariff free and Japan sells cars. Explains the EU’s value system totally
Also way to go EU on the deal with Japan. The EU sells Pork (and other agricultural products) tariff free and Japan sells cars. Explains the EU’s value system totally
Those are the biggest exports from the respective countries before the free trade agreement was even agreed. How can this have anything to do with the "EU's value system"?
EDIT: seems I am not alone as the FT reported a few days ago the deal is known as “cheese for cars”
How about EU car exports ? Cars for Cars and Food for Food. Going EU Food for Japanese Cars seems daft to me.
UK / Japan deal will be interesting, services for cars and components ? I think we’ll go for cars vs Japanese tech investment (inc electric / hybrid vehicles) and gty manufacturing will be expanded generally
It is "cars for cars" - i.e. tariff free in both direction for cars?
How about EU car exports ? Cars for Cars and Food for Food. Going EU Food for Japanese Cars seems daft to me.
Unless you are European farmer of course ad Japan has limited agri resources and the EU does food quite well. But that is not the whole agreement of course but Jambalaya you keep spouting your nonsense.
Japan dont need free tarifs on cars, they already make them in the UK and Europe.
Jamby, seeing as you're here again (I'm going to give this one more crack) what is it about EU legislation that you think we need 'freeing' from and how do you intend to use that 'freedom'?
Is it for a cowboy capitalism free for all? Or perhaps erosion of workers rights making overheads lower and margins higher for the existing firms/individuals? Will this freedom increase or decrease wealth disparity?
Or would it be along the lines of better protection for employees?
It's the last time I'm going to ask this perfectly reasonable question.
@dannyh. Perhaps its none of your narrow questions. I reckon its to help Yorkshire gain its freedom those that can only frame their questions to support their own views.
@mt.. Freedom from what though, quality standards? Working rights?
UK voted with a lot of the European proposals, so technically got what it wanted as a member in the vast majority of cases.
The only people bitching are MEPs, the likes of farage who barely did thier jobs or turn up to any meetings but were quite happy to take the paycheck and swan around on expenses.
Danny according to Jezza it’s going to be a jobs first Brexshit with workers rights and the environment protected. So nothing to fear whatever Jambas/others might say. Sounds pretty reasonable don’t you think?
Remember the EU wanted this money upfront and in return FOR NOTHING.May has made it clear its £35-39bn in return f for an extensive free trade deal and a 2 year transition period. All paid as/when & if due. No deal, no money.
You really do need to either do more reading or invest in some non-flammable trousers.
The money isn't "in return for" anything like a prospective new trade deal, it's paying what we already owe for things like pensions. Whether we stay in the EU, broker a "good" deal or crash out with nothing, we still owe that money. It's what we committed to - what we agreed to committing to. Now, the EU may let us off some of that commitment if we're lucky (ho ho), but what you've just written here is simply fiction. Sorry.
according to Jezza
That'll be the same Jezza who the Tories have repeatedly tried to ensure doesn't have any say in anything, yes?
What's the world look like according to your glorious leader? That'd be more pertinent than what the "opposition" thinks, I'd have thought.
I don’t have a “leader”. Politicians react to events they don’t lead. Business leads. Politics follows.
I might be wrong but I think he and his party have been taking part and voting - supporting the result in the process - and Sir Keir or a very good impersonation of him was on Marr explaining why there would be no second referendum etc and how it was all going to all right. Brexit for the many not the few apparently.
I think Jezza has chosen to be quiet of his own accord (1) because he is a closet leaver (2) because he is enjoying watching the Tories implode and (3) he has no idea what is going on. Well beyond his pay grade.
But the promise is a good ‘un nonetheless. Not sure when he will be called to implement it though.
Politicians react to events they don’t lead. Business leads. Politics follows.
Sadly true these days. Not always, but certainly recently.
Except on Brexit of course, where if business was leading it wouldn’t be happening. There my suspicion is no one is leading - given I don’t see much political leadership either.
Jezzer is quite happy in the comfortable sidelines, his lack of opposition demonstrates that.
Imagine if he were to mysteriously become pm tomorrow.. He'd be eaten alive, he's exactly where he wants to be. Firing idealistic shots without consequences.
I think Jezza has chosen to be quiet of his own accord (1) because he is a closet leaver (2) because he is enjoying watching the Tories implode and (3) he has no idea what is going on.
Well, 1) is false. as far as I'm aware he's broadly in favour of the EU but has issues with certain aspects. Like many do.
2) is surely true.
3) I find unlikely, but I've no idea. With reference to 2), I suspect that there's an element of not interrupting an enemy when they're doing something really stupid.
Politicians should be leaders. Was Bevin a follower? Was Thatcher?
Its a clear example of how impoverished adn fear ridden our politics have become that politicians are so afraid of the right wing press that they refuse to lead public opinion
Hi @danny hadn’t forgotten.
My issue is with the incompetence of the EU, for example it has failed at security and most importantly economics/money add on top of all of this is the creeping (or overt in Schutz’s case) Superstate project. All of that has been enacted by deeply flawed legislation added to widespread “ruke breaking”, eg Dublin and migration crises. I dug up an old report by Open Europe (now touted as the pro-Europe research body) listing the cost of EU regulations in terms of excessive burdens on business. The report is entitled “Still OUT OF CONTROL”
Cougar the money is in retrun for a deal and transition period (plus political goodwill - waste of time that). We don’t legally owe anything for the pensions as they are an obligation of the EU. The EU deliberately underfunds its pension every year (would be illegal in UK for a company to do that). The other “obligations” are for projects committed to but not funded, again an EU member’s obligation which legally falls away when we leave. Then we have the other stuff which EU expects to commit toall of this is explained in the House of Lords report. If we had clear legal obligations they’d be written down somewhere and we wouldn’t be arguing about them. The EU wrote A50 (only then in Lisbon Treaty) and it reads that benefits lapse, I assume they thought only a net recipient would ever leave. Another example of EU incompetance. EDIT: also see May’s Q&A in Parliament today. No deal, no money. She jas already said we will settle our legal obligations. This £35bn is NOT a legal obligation.
Horatio - actually you could be right, it might be cars in both directions. I read so ething today that suggested its more than agriculture. It is a big worry for me that food is the major EU export.
Chris - Japanese make relatively few cars here vs their model ranges and production levels.
No they shouldn’t. They should be kept out of harms way where they belong.
what make you think they would sell more ?
BMW and Audi buyers are not going to swap for Mazda or Nissan cars .
Jambas the superstate idea is perfectly sensible. You can’t operate a single current regime without it. He is one of the few talking sense. Leaving aside the fact that the € is flawed by design of course. But at least his proposal will give it a second chance to fail
@Edukator indeed A’Dieu Johnny. Wife has just finished watching “Stars 80”, had On va s’aimer at our wedding and quite a bit of Claude Francois too as you’d imagine. Didn’t realise Born to be Alive was a French song. Every day is a school day 🙂
😯 Find a tory who disagrees with this oh neutral one.I don’t have a “leader”. Politicians react to events they don’t lead. Business leads. Politics follows.
How odd you have such a faith in those whose only purpose is to make money.
Still we all have our own moral compass to guide us greed or good so to speak and you have made your choice.
BMW and Audi buyers are not going to swap for Mazda or Nissan cars .
Audi and BMW comparison is Lexus not Mazda/Nissan they are comparable to say Renault or Peugot.
I’ve had VW, Audi, Porsche, BMW plus Honda, Toyota and Mitsubishi. The wife chose a Nissan over BMW and is pushing us to get a Nissan not a VW for example (French car out of the question) When they launched Lexus (1990? Toyota’s premium brand) I openly said people wouldn’t swap their Mercs but they did exactly that. Now understand I much prefer say VW and Audi for styling especially interior but I know the Toyotas are much much more reliable and cheaper even with tariffs. Take those sway and you sell more Japanese cars. Every trade deal the UK signs will mean less trade for the EU and it’s advantage is eroded.
Didn't Toyta get a government incentive to stay in the UK recently, a tax payer funded bribe that can't be made public for fear of a massive backlash? that's not just one industry, but one particular company in one particular industry is getting preference?
That's not free trade, that's bribery and corruption. The bribe got paid out of the the public purse too.
That's not free trade, that's bribery and corruption.
Given the fact that the EU didn’t take action against the UK for doing so, I’d suggest that the action we took was within the rules
Leaving aside the fact that the € is flawed by design of course
Well, I’m sure you could argue that the Euro is only flawed without complete and total political and fiscal union... the very thing that many of us felt the EU (as opposed to the EEC) was really about from the start
good to know how much you trust the EU
So the ECJ then still the same level of trust in the EU?
Given the fact that the EU didn’t take action against the UK for doing so, I’d suggest that the action we took was within the rules
So you can do crime, but as long as no one calls it, it magically becomes not a crime?
Nissan not a VW for example (French car out of the question)
Fairly French when you check the admittedly convoluted ownership etc. The Nissan guys I meet with regularly turn up with Renault branded kit.
Toyota less European, but do seem to be lurching from mishap to mishap. Also they’ve decided they backed the wrong horse with hybrids and are changing to full electric - there may be a mix of models for a bit.
Incidentally Audis etc - my wife had four and they were very unimpressive compared to the Mondeos I had at the time. Her current BMW is a lot better. My S-Max? Well it’s a posh van really. Not as good as the Mondeos sadly.
total political and fiscal union
I think I’m ok with that.
I think I’m ok with that
So was Pétain
So you can do crime, but as long as no one calls it, it magically becomes not a crime?
It’s only a crime if it’s against the rules... you know, bribe bad, party donation good.
Nissan Jukes supposedly have the chassis either built by Renault or stamped with the Renault brand. I was told this during an alcohol fuelled stag do by a Nissan worker so I could have misheard.
let's see the proof of a crime then....
Plenty can be done within the rules for industry sectors as we don't know the deal we don't know the facts - tough one there.
and yes avoiding French cars on principle is a laugh now given how many others are shared development or manufacturing.
Let's not dress it up, in the case of Toyota it's a publicly funded bung by the current government to keep a couple of factories open, lest there be bad press.
That's hardly the act of a powerful negotiating team.
Care to elaborate on the sauce, my duck? seeing as the FT is behind a pay wall?
Net neutrality and all that, or are you against that too?
Well it's from 2010 and talks about subsidy to move companies from West to east
Please use the sharing tools found via the email icon at the top of articles. Copying articles to share with others is a breach of FT.com T&Cs and Copyright Policy. Email licensing@ft.com to buy additional rights. Subscribers may share up to 10 or 20 articles per month using the gift article service. More information can be found at https://www.ft.com/tour.
> https://www.ft.com/content/74ab02a6-fd85-11df-a049-00144feab49a
/p>Millions of euros in EU subsidies have been allocated to companies relocating factories from western to eastern Europe despite specific rules designed to prevent taxpayer subsidies from going to corporations moving plants in search of cheaper labour.
The relocation of factories from wealthier members of the 27-nation European Union to poorer members, mostly in eastern Europe, has long been a sore point for labour unions. But it has become an even greater one amid the economic downturn and the rising unemployment rates that have come with it.
EU rules specifically forbid grants from its structural funds from going to subsidise the relocation of businesses. But a joint investigation by the Financial Times and the non-profit Bureau for Investigative Journalism found companies ranging from British tea maker Twinings to automotive company Valeo were at the very least receiving EU subsidies to help with the establishment of new factories, the extension of existing ones and the training of workers in their new homes.
While a direct link between the relocation of companies and the use of structural funds in destination countries is not always clear-cut, it does raise questions about whether the EU’s oversight of the use of grants is strong enough.
subsidy to move companies from West to east
isn't that improving the lot of those in the east?
Bumpity bump - sorry CFH
Davis getting a right kicking from the EU officials much as I said he would
Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief negotiator, warned that the UK’s divorce deal with the EU depended on the British government sticking to an interim deal made last week on Ireland, citizens’ rights and the financial settlement.
Verhofstadt, a former Belgian prime minister, claimed that the Brexit secretary’s comments were “unacceptable” and would provoke a wider hardening of the EU’s positions, including in the member states’ guidelines for the future relationship to be signed off by leaders on Friday.
Etc etc
Also contrary to what Jamba asserted this is not pay up for a trade deal. This is pay your debts, meet our minimum requirements and then we will talk to you about trade
the deal still has to get tyhe approval of each of the 27 and Davies comments make this much less likely
May and Co also accused of saying one thing in Brussels and another in London
Bunch of duplicitous numpties the lot of them
Nope. Just noise for the baying mob. The EU even agreed with DD. Nothing is legally binding at this stage. If Verhofstadt finds this unacceptable then he needs to learn to read,
Rather than being numpties they - both sides - have pulled off an excellent compromise. Completely the opposite of what the doomsday merchants have lied about.
And we have also learnt another thing - the EU are (rightly) scared of a hard Brexshit too.
So contrary to much of the ^, we have made a major step forward, trade will be discussed soon, compromises have been reached and progress made
Bravo a tous and commiserations to the moaners for whom progress will be such a bitter pill. For the rest of us, very good news.
[img] 
[/img]
The N.I. Problem hasn't been resolved at all though and that's a massive issue for the future.
In fact it's so important and hard to solve that "everyone" has just agreed to leave it till later basically.
They can do that but the problem is still there and it WILL come back to bite the UK...
Bunch of duplicitous numpties the lot of them
It's a well established tack, there's even an expression....
Perfidious Albion is an anglophobic pejorative phrase used within the context of international relations and diplomacy to refer to alleged acts of diplomatic sleights, duplicity, treachery and hence infidelity (with respect to perceived promises made to or alliances formed with other nation states) by monarchs or governments of Britain (or England) in their pursuit of self-interest.
Hang on poops, it's only a few pages since we were [b]told categorically that everything was settled [/b] and that this was the only reason we had moved on, Are you suggesting that someone had been telling porkies again?
@Poopscoop agreed totally NI/Ire border has not been resolved AT ALL. (edit: as TMH implies “sufficient progress” is superbly vague. EU have used Ireland as a pawn then ignored them)
Davis getting a right kicking from the EU officials much as I said he would
TJ as TMH said Barnier agreed with Davies, it’s not legally binding it’s a “Gentleman's Agreement” a “handshake” and on tremendously vague wording too. All that plus it’s “nothing is agreed until everything is agreed”
In other news the BBC is getting a good kicking for running a piece “from the US” which turns out to have been from an EU funded “research centre” and to boot the BBC only picked out the negative bits
Having done absolutely nothing except encourage US companies to swerve taxes now the EU Finance Ministers (idiot Hammond included) are now complaining about Trumps tax reforms to strongly incentivise (ie ensure) profits are booked in the US.
Must have passed you by when they sued Ireland over apple "state aid" as normally your statements are so accurate in respect of facts.Having done absolutely nothing except encourage US companies to swerve taxes
TJ as TMH said Barnier agreed with Davies, it’s not legally binding it’s a “Gentleman's Agreement” a “handshake” and on tremendously vague wording too.
Bullshine. Read the comments / tweets from the EU side. Dvies may have been technically correct but its clear what he mant and the EU side have also made it clear that this agreement does not have anything to do with the trade deal
Simply read what the EU negotiators have been saying and you can see their anger and they have said that Davies comments will harden the EUs position
Spin all you like. the truth is out there and its obvious
Barnier
“We will have a final agreement only if the final commitments taken by Theresa May and the British government on Friday are respected,” he told journalists. “And we will be vigilant; we will not accept any backtracking from the UK.”
“The first phase of #Brexit negotiations was meant to build trust,” tweeted Manfred Weber, the head of the centre-right bloc in the European parliament. “By downgrading this agreement to a statement of intent, the UK government is putting our trust at risk. The EU27 & UK must make it clear on Thursday that the agreement is binding for both sides.”
In an unusual move, the European parliament’s main parties announced on Tuesday morning that they had drawn up an amendment to their Brexit resolution, on which MEPs will vote on Wednesday, condemning the Brexit secretary personally for damaging trust.
Verhofstadt, a former Belgian prime minister, claimed that the Brexit secretary’s comments were “unacceptable” and would provoke a wider hardening of the EU’s positions, including in the member states’ guidelines for the future relationship to be signed off by leaders on Friday.
Michael Roth, Germany’s minister for Europe, told German media he was “taken aback” that the language May had used in Brussels “differed somewhat” to what the prime minister had said in London since her return, referring in particular to the suggestion that Britain would only pay the final bill to the EU once a trade agreement had been reached. “She needs to be taking the same line in Brussels as in London,” he said.
Verhofstadt told reporters the government had made “an own goal. It is clear that the European council will be more strict now … I have seen a hardening of the position of the council and there will be a hardening of the position of the parliament”.
Joe McHugh, the Irish government’s chief whip, told the country’s RTÉ broadcaster on Sunday that Davis’s suggestion sounded bizarre. “This, as far as we’re concerned, is a binding agreement, an agreement in principle.”
In other news the BBC is getting a good kicking for running a piece “from the US” which turns out to have been from an EU funded “research centre” and to boot the BBC only picked out the neg
My quick google search showed no good kicking just Guidoo web site moaning and normal people don't really read that 😉
From an EU point of view, however, this does not correspond to the deal that May received at the end of last week in Brussels. It stipulates that the [b]agreements on the final invoice[/b] will result in a [b]legally binding[/b] withdrawal agreement which is [b]independent of the trade agreement desired by the United Kingdom.[/b]
“This, as far as we’re concerned, is a binding agreement, an agreement in principle.”
Brilliant use of language!! Sums it up rather well.
This, as far as we’re concerned, is a binding agreement, an agreement in principle.”
Yup the Irish have made a mistaken interpretation having been sold a pup by the EU. Nothing is agreed until everything is agreed. If the transition and future trade deal falls away there is no money and no agreement. The only issue referred to as “done” is EU/UK cirizens rights and that has very specific working unlike the rest.
Let's see if the Irish veto it then ? My money is on no they don’t. Ditto Verhofstadt a serial troll of the worst type
That quote is so brilliant you couldn't make it up.
Still for those more interested in some sober analysi Gideon Rachmann's piece in the FT is well worth a read. More plain filter than double shot soya latte but much the better for it!
Jamba - sorry old chap. The EU havbe made it perfectly clear that a trade deal will only be discussed once the exit deal is ratified by the 27 and the money to be paid is legally binding. 100% wrong.
May and co ae trying to say what you are saying ( so they can keep the rabids on side)but have been furiously slapped down by the EU
I'll bite..
Brilliant use of language!! Sums it up rather well.
It doesn't sum up anything, it's a contradiction.
“This, as far as we’re concerned, is a binding agreement, an agreement in principle.”
This is from the mouth of the fool who was also quoted as saying in the last day or two, and I paraphrase "I don't need to be clever, I just need to be calm".
Said the turkey before Christmas.
It's never good when someone questions an agreement 24 hours after it was done
Well not quite that publicly when you want to keep everyone on side anyway.
In other news the BBC is getting a good kicking for running a piece “from the US” which turns out to have been from an EU funded “research centre” and to boot the BBC only picked out the negative bits
More Jambalaya nonsense and BS. You mean the Rand corporation. Here's a list of their Non US gov't / agency funders - NHS in their.
https://www.rand.org/about/clients_grantors.html#international-organizations-
Non-U.S. Governments, Agencies, and Ministries
Commonwealth of Australia
European Commission Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion
Directorate-General for Health and Food Safety
Directorate-General for Justice and Consumers
Directorate-General for Migration and Home Affairs
Directorate-General for Research and InnovationEuropean Defence Agency
European Parliament
European Union Research Executive AgencyIraq Kurdistan Regional Government
Government of Japan
The Netherlands Research and Documentation CentrePeople's Republic of China Department of Housing and Urban-Rural Development of Guangdong Province
Jinan Water Resources BureauRepublic of Korea Korea Institute for Health and Social Affairs
United Arab Emirates Embassy of the United Arab Emirates
United Kingdom Defence Science and Technology Laboratory
Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy
Department for Education
Department of Health
Department for International Development
Department for Transport
Foreign & Commonwealth Office
Medical Research Council
Ministry of Defence
Ministry of Justice
National Health Service
National Institute for Health Research Evaluation, Trials and Studies Coordinating CentreTransport for London
The Welsh GovernmentNon-U.S. Governments, Agencies, and Ministries
Commonwealth of Australia
European Commission Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion
Directorate-General for Health and Food Safety
Directorate-General for Justice and Consumers
Directorate-General for Migration and Home Affairs
Directorate-General for Research and InnovationEuropean Defence Agency
European Parliament
European Union Research Executive AgencyIraq Kurdistan Regional Government
Government of Japan
The Netherlands Research and Documentation CentrePeople's Republic of China Department of Housing and Urban-Rural Development of Guangdong Province
Jinan Water Resources BureauRepublic of Korea Korea Institute for Health and Social Affairs
United Arab Emirates Embassy of the United Arab Emirates
United Kingdom Defence Science and Technology Laboratory
Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy
Department for Education
Department of Health
Department for International Development
Department for Transport
Foreign & Commonwealth Office
Medical Research Council
Ministry of Defence
Ministry of Justice
National Health Service
National Institute for Health Research Evaluation, Trials and Studies Coordinating CentreTransport for London
The Welsh Government
So befuddled Davis trying to placate the swivel-eyed Tory Brexiters had pissed off the EU who are going to delay trade talks.
Free market fanboys the Rand corp reckon that Brexit will hurt UK economy, WTO, especially
And Brexit inflation exceeded expectations to make everyone's Xmas a bit shitter
Standard
Matty, I could be wrong but my reading of sky news is that quote is from Joe not DD
Verhofstadt is even saying now that it needs to be made binding ASAP. Bit of a give away.
Perhaps the EU are just upset that when push comes to shove they do not place the interests of the periphery members at the heart of matters. Either that or they can't or didn't read
teamhurtmore - Member
Hang on poops, it's only a few pages since we were told categorically that everything was settled and that this was the only reason we had moved on, Are you suggesting that someone had been telling porkies again?
Not so much porkies as communal burying of heads in the sand as it's a paradox, N.I. I mean.
THM you are wrong. So very very wrong.