Brexit, the economy and house prices part 5

Herzlos

I think this is still fallout from Tracey claiming that a vote for Brexit was a vote for leaving the single market and customs union, despite most of the prominent Brexit campaigners saying the opposite before the referendum.

Who knows what the current state of affairs is. May seems to have settled on some loose verbiage that keeps both wings of her party happen. That we already know the eu will reject it is irrelevant.

phillw

Rough_Justice wrote: »

You can't grumble about not talking after refusing to talk.
Oh hold on, you can .......... I have read your recent posts.

The EU aren't grumbling about not talking, they are grumbling that what the UK want to talk about is a waste of time. Therefore increasing the amount of time taken to talk is not logical.

gfplux

wunferall wrote: »

I see Juncker has been criticized for "catapulting" his choice Martin Selmayr to the post of secretary-general of the European Commission. Not only by a German MEP but by French media too.

https://www.politico.eu/article/transparency-watchdog-in-european-parliament-questions-martin-selmayr-appointment/
That's your fair, transparent EU Commission for you.
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/europe/juncker-s-promotion-of-his-right-hand-man-stirs-unrest-1.3406252
https://www.neweurope.eu/article/selmayr-coronation/

What is it with this obsession with the EU and it!!!8217;s future. Some people are taking more notice of the EU now than before the referendum

gfplux

Here is more on the imminent publication by the EU of the first draft of the withdrawal agreement.

https://luxtimes.lu/european-union/32962-eu-to-stoke-brexit-tensions-with-100-page-draft-exit-deal

This could be as important (first draft) agreement since the British people discovered the article 50 text.

Matt_L

Herzlos wrote: »

I think this is still fallout from Tracey claiming that a vote for Brexit was a vote for leaving the single market and customs union, despite most of the prominent Brexit campaigners saying the opposite before the referendum.

Who knows what the current state of affairs is. May seems to have settled on some loose verbiage that keeps both wings of her party happen. That we already know the eu will reject it is irrelevant.

None of them said what you and others say they said during the referendum campaign..

phillw

Matt_L wrote: »

None of them said what you and others say they said during the referendum campaign..

It is largely irrelevant who really said what before the referendum. It was repeated enough online that we could stay in the single market, that leave voters were using that argument for why it was ok to vote to leave. I tried to correct them but was shot down as project fear before the referendum.

Maybe it was fake news on facebook, I don't know. But that information whether it was real or not was around at the time.

In 2014 Owen Paterson said:

https://www.owenpaterson.org/news/optimistic-vision-post-eu-united-kingdom

"This brings us to the only realistic option, which is to stay within the EEA agreement. The EEA is tailor made for this purpose and can be adopted by joining EFTA first."

Dan Hannon mentions Sweden and Norway https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zzykce4oxII&feature=youtu.be&t=185 and said nobody was suggesting prejudicing doing a similar trade deal, when ending FOM would do that.

He even goes on to say that the EU have never said that leaving would remove access from the free market.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zzykce4oxII&feature=youtu.be&t=358

Which is not my understanding of what the EU was saying at the time.

gfplux wrote: »

This could be as important (first draft) agreement since the British people discovered the article 50 text.

They've left out Theresa Mays fudge. The Daily Mail and Express will not be impressed.

Matt_L

Moby wrote: »

Well researched and shows their is no unanimity on Brexit.

Poorly researched as most of it was taken completely out of context and none of it was said during the referendum campaign...

Rough_Justice

phillw wrote: »

The EU aren't grumbling about not talking, they are grumbling that what the UK want to talk about is a waste of time. Therefore increasing the amount of time taken to talk is not logical.

It is supposed to be a negotiation, therefore I'm sure both parties could level the same accusation that the other side are wasting their time by not reaching agreement.

If you don't agree during negotiations you either talk some more or you call it a day and quit negotiating. Since the EU have refused to talk further it strikes me that it is the EU who are pushing for walking away, not the UK as the media (and Barnier if the report is true) are trying to suggest.

Matt_L

phillw wrote: »

It is largely irrelevant who really said what before the referendum. It was repeated enough online that we could stay in the single market, that leave voters were using that argument for why it was ok to vote to leave. I tried to correct them but was shot down as project fear before the referendum.

Maybe it was fake news on facebook, I don't know. But that information whether it was real or not was around at the time.

Completely relevant, just because some bogus facebook page said we would stay in the SM or CU is irrelevant. All those leading both remain and leave camps during the referendum made it explicitly clear that a vote to leave means leaving the SM and CU...

gfplux

Rough_Justice wrote: »

Yeah right.
It takes so many man hours to say "No", "No" ,"No" doesn't it?

Sensible people seem to be of the impression that the EU is not interested in negotiaiing.

The EU and Britain NEGOTIATED a phase one agreement. The EU have spent the last few weeks turning that NEGOTIATED agreement into a legally binding leaving agreement. The first draft of this NEGOTIATED agreement will be published in the next couple of days.
What word do you not understand in the words of Davis/Barnier/May
We are delighted we have reached agreement on phase one after some hard negotiating.