Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by L00b

  1. Both of course. The recent annoucement in big bold letters that the UK was going to spend on Defence like it hasn't in decades, and 'Make the Navy Great Again' had a tiny, blink-and-you'll-miss-it factoid attached to it in font size 1: the Army is being downsized (80k to 72k), with battalions getting merged and tanks getting mothballed. Like just about every spending commitment announced by Johnson government over the past year, it's not new spending, either.
  2. None so blind, as those who refuse to see. She's beyond adjectives, and redemption, with an overdue Karmic tab the size of Mount Everest.
  3. That's a feature, not a bug. That is also why the question over a u-turn by 2030 is redundant. By 2030, fewer still are expected to be buying new (EV) cars for personal use, more still are expected to have converted to transport-anywhere-as-a-service. Of course, most everyone will still be dedicating at least as much disposable income on transport as now (in proportion). They just won't be owning any share of the transporting asset, anymore.
  4. Are you learning about Customs & Excise procedures and forms, then? Because those, and the required skillset to practice them, are direct consequences of your vote 4 years ago, and they are absolutely required to make Brexit a success for the UK... ...yet right now, UK businesses are hiring foreigners to do that overseas for them, because there aren't enough Brits with the right skills. <sigh> 40-odd days to go, lads. At this stage, perhaps a bit less of the ideological chest-beating, and a bit more of the practicals? I mean, you know...if you like to eat. Sometimes.
  5. Remain supporters voted for the status quo in 2016. Leave supporters voted against the status quo in 2016. Therefore Leave voters (including you) were the party arguing for changes to the Ireland / Northern Ireland border (in and amongst all the other changes brought about by Brexit). Not Remainers, who were the party arguing to keep that border as it was (in and amongst everything else they wanted to keep as it was). Man up and own your success: you knew what you were voting for. After 31st December, I don't expect many Leave voters to openly admit that they voted Leave.
  6. For things to 'stay the same' between Ireland and Northern Ireland under a trade deal, that trade deal would have to maintain the UK within the Single Market. Yes, with the ECJ, etc. Whatever FTA deal gets agreed between the EU27 and the UK will not replicate SM membership. Not by an intergalactic mile. This is at the request of the UK, which wants to become "free to diverge", and which the EU is respecting. That is why the WA Protocol was required: to ensure that whatever deal gets agreed (or not, indeed) between the UK and the EU27, 'things stay the same' between Ireland and Northern Ireland. And lest we forget, the WA Protocol was required because the UK hasn't delivered the technical system/measures which it proposed 3 years ago, that would have made this Protocol redundant: it's vapourware that still doesn't exist, anywhere in the world, even in experimental form, today any more than 3 years ago. The UK government will be breaching that Protocol with its Internal Market Bill, should Parliament reinsert the WA Protocol-cancelling clauses that the Lords removed (-twice now, I think? that is what those recent massive government vote losses were about). Glad to provide the usual fact-checking help Edit: based on precedent (£2.4bn EU fine, as I recall), the UK cannot be trusted on 'honesty'-based systems for VAT / excise management. So that's a non-flier for the EU27. Edit 2: and as I see these throwaway arguments still flying around...with about 40 days to go now, considering the sheer scale on which things are going to change regardless of whether there is a deal or not (but especially if there isn't) and, assuming that there is a deal, regardless of any phase-in period (which the EU will gladly grant I'm sure), it really is high time Leaver types (well, everyone, really) took off the rosy "things will stay the same" goggles. They really are not going to. Fail to prepare, prepare to fail and all that.
  7. The CTA governs the movement of British and Irish people. Not goods. The Irish border 'problem' is in relation to goods crossing between the UK and the Single Market after Brexit. Not people. It was good of you to quote my post: you just proved my point with your reply to it.
  8. Are you so sure that they understand the issue enough, to be avoiding it so studiously? I'm not convinced.
  9. Ah, so nothing to do with the fact that Brexit is making that particular border the only land border between the UK and the EU27, then? Nor the fact that, with the still-recent history of the place, restoring standard border checks with uniforms on the ground, would have the place flashpoint afresh in zero second flat? 80% of the UK catch is exported to the EU27. But exiting the Single Market will create huge opportunities for the UK fishing industry. Ladies and gentlemen: 'Brexit'
  10. There is no borderless area between third party countries anywhere in the world. It is simply not possible, without international treaties (bilateral at a minimum). So if the UK makes good on its threats to breach international law, there will have to be a border, and Ireland will have to put it up in the end. In that unfortunate eventuality, don't kid yourself (i) that the world and its neighbours won't rightly and clearly see that outcome as the UK's fault and (ii) that there will not be (further) consequences for the UK.
  11. In case you were not aware: Simon Coveney expressly put the kibosh on a deal until and unless the IMB is binned, last week. That's why I haven't engaged any IMB arguments by Leavers since: they're pretty much redundant. Doubly so, now that Biden has got the keys to the White House and turbocharges Irish soft power.
  12. Why could EU boats not fish in international waters? If you meant 'no fishing by EU boats in UK territorial waters', that makes sense...but then, besides remembering who owns the bulk of UK fishing rights (EU owners -Dutch & Spanish IIRC- plus the five 'Rich List' families): fishing really is an inconsequential side-show. It's a 0.1% drop in the 99.9% ocean of UK economy (0.1% is actual ratio quoted in articles)...and relies on fast and frictionless access to the EU for selling the vast majority of the catch! (80%, as I recall). [/non-partisan answer] If the UK really wants a deal, it needs to do it this week. So look for movement by the end of the week...or if no (or still insufficient) movement and no-deal looking still more of a certainty, then confirmation that Johnson & Co. have been playing the no-deal clock all along (as I've been suspecting since 2017, and still suspect now).
  13. That it? Cat got your tongue? Then you must also remember that the WA supported by Theresa May was less advantageous to the EU, than Johnson's "oven ready" version? I sure hope your memory is not too selective
  14. 4 years on, after all the threads and links (never mind MSM news, documentaries, articles, etc) and you still have no understanding of how the EU works? Really?
  15. Of course it did. Both economic and non-economic benefits, surely? What was the point of voting for "regaining control" and "sovereignty", if it was not to eventually improve your daily lot? What were these "sunlit uplands" to be made from, and paid with, if not economic success? Or are you now telling me that a majority of the British voting public deliberately voted to make themselves poorer, just so there'd be less immigration from the EU? When there was already more immigration from non-EU countries? Surely you will agree, that this would be nonsensical.
  16. So, by your own admission, neither you nor 'most Leave voters' knew what econonic benefits they would enjoy from Brexit... ...but you consider that trading under WTO terms provides benefits and you are not worried about doing that. If only you could understand how much irony these two paragraphs contain.
  17. As I recall, you voted Leave, so it's good of you to admit that, clearly, you did not know what economic benefits you were voting for. Can I take that 'nobody will know for many years' as your balanced view, at face value? Asking for the avoidance of doubt, here, because logically, it means no Leave voter knew what economic benefits they were voting for, either.
  18. You've got some cheek to post that at me, when that quote was my comment about your own post #64, which is nothing but comments about her heritage/race! Lest we forget: PC nonsense is far less insulting than bad faith. Maybe cop on sometime.
  19. The commentariat (recent Grauniad article about 'the 5') would have it, that Corbyn's main aim was to get May out and provoke a GE, and that he allied with the ultras to secure that outcome. I don't believe that he ever had a policy about Brexit, as in for or against, but just what was politically useful and expedient towards that main aim. But in that respect, I don't think that he understood its toxicity either, at any time. Starmer may be more clear-cut about it ideologically, but he's making the exact same mistake as Corbyn politically: whatever mess Brexit turns into in a couple of month's time, the Tories won't wear it or own it, and he won't get them to wear or own it either, short-term or in 4 years's time.
  20. I didn't argue that you were wrong, so I'm not sure where that came from, nor what am I supposed to prove here. But if you wish to see evidence of the point you quoted, just Google 'UK Japan deal state aid' then tab the 'news' results and an FT article should be at the top, with all the gritty details. It's not new at all, to anyone who's been following Truss' efforts.
  21. Many posting in here and elsewhere certainly don't. Or pretend they don't, because truly, they're too embarrassed at the outcome. So what is new. It is long known, expressly acknowledged by Liz Truss and her team themselves, and heavily commented, that the UK-Japan trade deal commits the UK to stricter state aid curbs than in EU talks, besides pulling the trading blanket all the way to Tokyo relative to the EU-Japan trade deal. Nothing surprising about it, the Japanese are nothing if not pragmatic, capitalising on the UK's weak negotiating position as they did. But well, it was a sovereign choice by the UK, so that is that, and the UK is where it is. As for "progress" in trading with partners, here is a brief (Twitter) insight into what awaits British artists wanting to gig in the EU27, in a little over a month's time. Some progress, for musos. I could be wrong, but I think tinfoilhat gravitates around that field? Anyway, and irrespective, a very long-announced consequence, so just consider it yet another reminder, of a practical example within a relatively niche area of trade (all other goods and services traded between the UK and the EU27 considered). Multiply by <checks notes> £80bn's worth, or thereabouts? But well, fish. ...Speaking of which, yes, some (many? most?) British fishermen are still asking for an exemption from the new, referendum-inspired, 'get Brexit done'-delivered, immigration rules. Perhaps unsurprisingly, there is no dot-connecting mention of the fact that, much more problematically for him, under the current trajectory of UK-EU talks, Mr Norquoy stands to lose the tariff-free access that he has enjoyed with his main markets in the EU27 for those past 15 years. So what is new. Yawn. Have at the windmills, go get those unicorns, and more power to ye, Leave voters
  22. I'm glad you're finding it funny too... ...though you doth protest a tad too much, at times.
  23. And as it should happen... ...the UK government suddenly kicked the next IM Bill Parliamentary session further into the long November grass, according to the Telegraph. Surely just a coincidence Ouch. 'bit harsh.
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.