Forum menu
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