Brexit, the economy and house prices (Part 3)

gfplux

cogito wrote: »

If money isn't a problem for the EU, why are they banging on so much about the divorce bill and insist on this being resolved before other matters are addressed?

Because David Davis agreed to getting the Financial settlement, the Irish border and citizens rights making enough progress before moving on.
While Britain wastes time and throws insults like "go whistle" it appears that the EU are the only ones worried about the ticking clock.

Cogito, you know this, your post does not contribute anything unless others don't know it and so your statement has to be corrected. It is probably like the withdrawal/apology in the tabloids. The initial lie gets all the attention and the correction is passed over.

Each side on this thread have their fixed positions but there are facts out there that your post attempts to subvert.

gfplux

always_sunny wrote: »

There is no disagreement, perhaps Express readers may disagree but otherwise it's agreed that the UK will need to pay for agreed commitments which you acknowledge it is not a divorce bill.

The UK believes that the items are interlinked, the EU does not.
The EU is looking to resolve issues (i.e. Ireland border, EU nationals, etc) prior to entering trade talks as stated before in the negotiation plans.
We agree that the UK doesn't like this dance but that is the dance the EU wants to do.

David Davis agreed to this on the very first day of the negotiations.

gfplux

cogito wrote: »

If the EU is looking to resolve issues, why does it reject every UK suggestion as unrealistic or fantasy? The answer is that Barmier has no brief to depart from the EU's position papers. Why else would they insist that the ECJ continus to have jurisdiction over the UK. The EU is behaving with obduracy whereas the UK is showing flexibility.

You really need to take off your rose tinted specs.

The UK has issued a lot of position papers all for phase two of the talks.
Britain should get on with the first phase. Talks resume today.

Again your post is clearly wrong and you are trying to represent false news as facts.

Got to go, off to the beach.

Thrugelmir

gfplux wrote: »

David Davis agreed to this on the very first day of the negotiations.

Since when the EU appear not not to moved their position one inch. That's not negotiation.

vivatifosi

gfplux wrote: »

Cogito, thanks for the new thread.

Have you forgotten that the EU did offer a detailed summary (way back in June) of what should be paid. Item by item for Britain to dispute and/or argue about.
You will find it here
https://ec.europa.eu/commission/publications/position-paper-essential-principles-financial-settlement_en

As I understand Britain have not attempted to engage the EU on this paper apart from "Go Whistle"

I think part of the issue is that has no numbers against it. Also, it wants a one off payment from the UK, but does not want to give the money back that the EU owes Britain in a single lump sum at the same time.

Logic dictates that there should be middle ground on this that both sides can agree to.

Thrugelmir

gfplux wrote: »

Have you forgotten that the EU did offer a detailed summary (way back in June) of what should be paid. Item by item for Britain to dispute and/or argue about.
You will find it here
https://ec.europa.eu/commission/publications/position-paper-essential-principles-financial-settlement_en

Where are the hard numbers though.......

Easy enough to write a list of demands. Quantifying them is far harder. As the UK was a net contributor to the EU. Then the UK should receive it's fair share of assets. Such as the EC buildings, numerous infrastructure projects across Europe , etc etc.

cogito

gfplux wrote: »

The UK has issued a lot of position papers all for phase two of the talks.
Britain should get on with the first phase. Talks resume today.

Again your post is clearly wrong and you are trying to represent false news as facts.

Got to go, off to the beach.

In what way is it wrong?

cogito

gfplux wrote: »

Even if a nasty row is brewing how does that help Britain? If Britain will not engage about the financial settlement then sufficient progress will not be made to move on to trade.

Maybe it doesn't help the UK but it doesn't help the EU either.

cogito

gfplux wrote: »

Cogito, thanks for the new thread.

Have you forgotten that the EU did offer a detailed summary (way back in June) of what should be paid. Item by item for Britain to dispute and/or argue about.
You will find it here
https://ec.europa.eu/commission/publications/position-paper-essential-principles-financial-settlement_en

As I understand Britain have not attempted to engage the EU on this paper apart from "Go Whistle"

They did not set out a detailed summary. The document itself is called 'essential principles' but has no numbers attached. Until the EU provides numbers, the only negotiations that can take place are about the principles.

phillw

cogito wrote: »

the entire electorate could see that Cameron had asked for little and got less despite his bluster.

Er no, the leavers thought that. Those who voted remain could see that Cameron had asked for as much as he could and the EU won't ever get into more unreasonable demands.

Brexit was about some rich people taking control of the rest of the country. They dressed it up in a package that seemed like a good idea.

cogito wrote: »

Maybe it doesn't help the UK but it doesn't help the EU either.

Sure, but that doesn't mean that the EU will be prepared to stand down from their principles just because the UK is acting out.

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Then the UK should receive it's fair share of assets. Such as the EC buildings, numerous infrastructure projects across Europe , etc etc.

I am not entirely sure the EU owns any of the buildings. Like we don't own a lot of the hospitals and schools that Labour built. Shaking that tree is likely a waste of time. Even if there is any money there, it's small change compared to what we have already signed contracts to pay.

In terms of infrastructure projects funded by the EU that were given to the countries, it was a gift. You can't ask for it back.

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Since when the EU appear not not to moved their position one inch. That's not negotiation.

You don't seem to understand negotiation. People only move from their position if they are offered something better. We're demanding something better and offering something worse.

The EU has been very clear since before the referendum what their terms and red lines are. The government are wasting the negotiating time because of a mass delusion that we can bully them into submission. Magical thinking got us into this mess, it won't get better until we can get rid of it.