I have a growing feeling that Britain will NOT leave the EU

Conrad

Loving the SNP this morning demanding we lay out our plan but make no such demands of Brussels that just give out a very broad brush opening position.


Remoaners are on the side of Brussels, the worst deal the better as far as remoaners are concerned.


And yes I say remaoners, not remainers. Remainers have accepted the will of the people, remoaners want a re-run. Latest YOUGOV poll shows overwhelming support for cracking on with Brexit.

hildosaver

Conrad wrote: »

Loving the SNP this morning demanding we lay out our plan but make no such demands of Brussels that just give out a very broad brush opening position.


Remoaners are on the side of Brussels, the worst deal the better as far as remoaners are concerned.


And yes I say remaoners, not remainers. Remainers have accepted the will of the people, remoaners want a re-run. Latest YOUGOV poll shows overwhelming support for cracking on with Brexit.

To be fair to the SNP surely it is the responsibility of the British Government to have a plan with which to negotiate with? The EU don't need to do anything other than respond to that plan once they see it.

Conrad

hildosaver wrote: »

To be fair to the SNP surely it is the responsibility of the British Government to have a plan with which to negotiate with? The EU don't need to do anything other than respond to that plan once they see it.

Brussels stated plan is to demand the 4 freedoms with no cherry picking.


Our stated plan is to negotiate the best possible trade deal whilst retaining full sovereignty. We have stated we might pay into certain structures just as does Israel for example.


Summary: Brussels has a rather broad brush opening position. The UK has the same.


What more do you want, precisely PRIOR to the negotiation - lay it out for me?

Herzlos

So Brussels have a clear plan, which has been spelled out for a long time and never changed. what more do you want from them?

Since we know Mays current plan is impossible, and Brussels & May know her plan is impossible, why are we wasting precious negotiating time on it?

Why do people feel the best approach is a hostile one where they go in asking for the impossible and then having to concede, instead of a friendly one where they go in with a proposal that might actually be accepted?

TrickyTree83

Herzlos wrote: »

So Brussels have a clear plan, what more do you want from them?

Since we know Mays current plan is impossible, and Brussels & May know her plan is impossible, why are we wasting precious negotiating time on it?

Why do people feel the best approach is a hostile one where they go in asking for the impossible and then having to concede, instead of a friendly one where they go in with a proposal that might actually be accepted?

Why is it in your view only the UK's proposal that is impossible?

I think Conrad has rightly pointed out multiple examples where free trade with the single market exists without the caveats of the 4 freedoms. Demonstrably the EU's position is incorrect since they already allow free trade without the 4 freedoms.

If you are just talking about single market membership, then yes what you say would be true. But regarding free trade with the EU single market, it is not true.

Conrad

The remainers stance appears to be we go in as a weak petitioner, a subservient conquered people that will take what we're given.


No, go for the sky. We are equals at the negotiation, it is for both sides to sculpt the deal and as much in their interest as ours - they require access to the city which pretty much fuels the entire EU economy, and the last thing nations like France need is hampered trade and lost jobs.

hildosaver

Conrad wrote: »

The remainers stance appears to be we go in as a weak petitioner, a subservient conquered people that will take what we're given.


No, we ask for the sky.

I dont think that is what anybody is saying and in this case I agree with the basic point you make - the UK may as well try and demand everything they possibly can. Only time will tell to see if the UK is able to achieve their demands.

Herzlos

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

Why is it in your view only the UK's proposal that is impossible?

Because the EU's proposal is currently in effect with all of the other 27 EU countries and the 140 non-EU countries. It's the status quo, and it currently works.

I think Conrad has rightly pointed out multiple examples where free trade with the single market exists without the caveats of the 4 freedoms. Demonstrably the EU's position is incorrect since they already allow free trade without the 4 freedoms.

He brings it up every other page, but it's never been in dispute.

If you are just talking about single market membership, then yes what you say would be true. But regarding free trade with the EU single market, it is not true.

But we are talking about single market. We're not going to get single market without taking on all 4 of the freedoms. We currently want the single market, no payments, and 3 of the 4 freedoms. It's not going to happen. We know it isn't going to happen and they know it isn't going to happen. So why not skip the first month or arguing and start with something which might actually be accepted?


Going in with a ridiculous offer is fine if you're trying to sell a used car to a bloke in a pub, but we're talking about a massively significant economic deal here.


We also don't need to go in as "weak petitioner, a subservient conquered people", but we need to set some expectations, and we've not got the upper hand in any regard, beyond how many German cars we buy on finance deals.

We sell more to the EU as a percentage, we buy more from the EU as a percentage, we need passporting, we need single market access, we're asking for an impossible outcome as a break from the status quo, and we've got an impossibly short deadline to come to a conclusion before dropping to a WTO term.

Can you name a single upper hand we have, that might cause the EU to cave to some of our less... extravagent... demands?

hildosaver

Herzlos wrote: »

Because the EU's proposal is currently in effect with all of the other 27 EU countries and the 140 non-EU countries. It's the status quo, and it currently works.



He brings it up every other page, but it's never been in dispute.



But we are talking about single market. We're not going to get single market without taking on all 4 of the freedoms. We currently want the single market, no payments, and 3 of the 4 freedoms. It's not going to happen. We know it isn't going to happen and they know it isn't going to happen. So why not skip the first month or arguing and start with something which might actually be accepted?


Going in with a ridiculous offer is fine if you're trying to sell a used car to a bloke in a pub, but we're talking about a massively significant economic deal here.


We also don't need to go in as "weak petitioner, a subservient conquered people", but we need to set some expectations, and we've not got the upper hand in any regard, beyond how many German cars we buy on finance deals.

We sell more to the EU as a percentage, we buy more from the EU as a percentage, we need passporting, we need single market access, we're asking for an impossible outcome as a break from the status quo, and we've got an impossibly short deadline to come to a conclusion before dropping to a WTO term.

Can you name a single upper hand we have, that might cause the EU to cave to some of our less... extravagent... demands?

Politically that would be impossible. They have to appear strong and sell the idea we can get everything we want until the very last minute when we can invent some reason (not our fault of course) as to why it couldn't be agreed. It's as much about retaining and growing votes as it is about anything else.

TrickyTree83

Herzlos wrote: »

Because the EU's proposal is currently in effect with all of the other 27 EU countries and the 140 non-EU countries. It's the status quo, and it currently works.



He brings it up every other page, but it's never been in dispute.



But we are talking about single market. We're not going to get single market without taking on all 4 of the freedoms. We currently want the single market, no payments, and 3 of the 4 freedoms. It's not going to happen. We know it isn't going to happen and they know it isn't going to happen. So why not skip the first month or arguing and start with something which might actually be accepted?


Going in with a ridiculous offer is fine if you're trying to sell a used car to a bloke in a pub, but we're talking about a massively significant economic deal here.


We also don't need to go in as "weak petitioner, a subservient conquered people", but we need to set some expectations, and we've not got the upper hand in any regard, beyond how many German cars we buy on finance deals.

We sell more to the EU as a percentage, we buy more from the EU as a percentage, we need passporting, we need single market access, we're asking for an impossible outcome as a break from the status quo, and we've got an impossibly short deadline to come to a conclusion before dropping to a WTO term.

Can you name a single upper hand we have, that might cause the EU to cave to some of our less... extravagent... demands?

You've missed the point.

There are two distinctly different free trade arrangements with the EU single market.

One is a bi-lateral agreement between the EU and the 3rd party, the other is membership of the single market. Everything above that you've posted appears to assume that membership of the single market is the stated aim.