Article 50 Discussion

[steveod]

And if our infamous liars 

Boris and Cummins do this then they can spend a few years in jail under misconduct in public office laws. 

Edited October 6, 2019 by steveod

[tobyjugg2]

Trade department would lobby for government to accept Trump's demands for weaker food hygiene standards after Brexit, Whitehall memo says

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-trump-food-hygiene-standards-trade-department-memo-a9145971.html

 

" If the UK agreed to lower standards to match US regulations, it would allow food products to be sold even if they were contaminated by maggots, animal hair and rat droppings.  "

"The US Food and Drug Administration decides the extent to which food products sold to consumers can contain contaminants including rodent hair, animal faeces, insect fragments and maggots.

For example, cocoa beans are allowed to contain up to 10mg of mammal faeces per pound, while ground paprika can contain up to 75 insect fragments and 11 rodent hairs per pound.

 

The UK does not currently allow any such contamination."

 

 

"Weakening our SPS regime to accommodate one trade partner could irreparably damage our ability to maintain UK animal, plant and public health, and reduce trust in our exports," it says.

 

" Despite these risks, the Defra memo suggested that the Department for International Trade, led by Liz Truss, is likely to lobby for the UK to "accommodate" US demands. "

 

 

[Maharg1]

I wouldn't agree to sod all from him or even talk to him if he don't send that woman back.

[honeybee13]

That's just scary. I read something yesterday, not sure where exactly, that said the US has 10 times as many food poisoning cases as the UK. Hardly surprising given what you've posted, TJ.

Just now, Maharg1 said:

I wouldn't agree to sod all from him or even talk to him if he don't send that woman back.

 

Sorry? Who and what woman please.

[Maharg1]

Surely you've watched the news

[Jase1982]

It kind of puts into perspective why the US only have 20 trade agreements with other countries.  Although, in terms of whether or not a free trade agreement with the US would jeopardise any future agreement with the EU; I'd be interested to know how it worked for Canada and Australia.

[honeybee13]

Local government Brexit planning officers are saying the government still aren't telling them what they're planning for. One quote in this article suggests the government haven't grasped the problems with weeks to go before a more and more likely no deal. Another person says government are worried about revealing what the worst case scenario is.

 

They've spent billions on Brexit planning, what's it been for?

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/oct/07/leaked-brexit-planning-memo-offers-no-new-guidance-for-departing-eu

[tobyjugg2]

Isn't it all expained in the multi million tax payer pound advert on TV which tell you 'get ready for Brexit ' without saying how or what

 

.. other than the undefined Brexit they say everyone voted for

 

Edited October 8, 2019 by tobyjugg2

[tobyjugg2]

15 hours ago, Jase1982 said:

Although, in terms of whether or not a free trade agreement with the US would jeopardise any future agreement with the EU; I'd be interested to know how it worked for Canada and Australia.

 

I suppose we could export quality food to other countries, while importing rat tail and faeces food for the UK population ....

 

 

I'm sure Johnson and the ERG would be fine with that approach.

 

They have 'studies to imply that those sort of 'additives won't reduce life span any more than the resurgent fracking and air pollution associated with the reduction in rights and regs.

Edited October 8, 2019 by tobyjugg2

[honeybee13]

Have you seen this article in the Spectator about No10's thinking at the moment?

 

If it's true, we've gone backwards and no deal looks a lot more likely. Worrying that they talk about putting countries who oppose a Brexit delay at the back of the queue. Are they sure countries are going to be queuing up to do business with us when we're so much smaller than Europe?

 

We will make clear privately and publicly that countries which oppose delay will go the front of the queue for future cooperation — cooperation on things both within and outside EU competences. Those who support  delay will go to the bottom of the queue.

 

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/10/how-number-10-view-the-state-of-the-negotiations/

[tobyjugg2]

Just now, honeybee13 said:

We will make clear privately and publicly that countries which oppose delay will go the front of the queue for future cooperation

 

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/10/how-number-10-view-the-state-of-the-negotiations/

 

That leaves/justifies just the USA rat bits food deal doesn't it?

.. as a potentially better trade deal with Russia (as the other pro Brexit country) might upset the yanks.

 

 

[honeybee13]

Real trading freedom then?

[tobyjugg2]

oops - forgot Iran. Might as well get cheap oil if no-one else will trade with us.

 

... Oh dear .. Iran says as no one else will trade with us - theres a premium to the oil price

[tobyjugg2]

Mind you. Russia says they will sell us Iranian oil with a small premium

... but that will upset the US and mean we con't eat rat bits today.

[tobyjugg2]

and the ERG wont like that as they need the cheap rats bits to feed us on so we can grow the good stuff to sell to others so the ERG can make profit from it ..

[tobyjugg2]

So we buy USA rat bits food.

We sell them quality food.

The ERG and American big business profits

The UK population eats rat poo and breaths pollution.

 

and the USA controls our food and trade with NO say from us

 

Now THATS Vassalage.

 

 

 

[Maharg1]

16 hours ago, Jase1982 said:

It kind of puts into perspective why the US only have 20 trade agreements with other countries.  Although, in terms of whether or not a free trade agreement with the US would jeopardise any future agreement with the EU; I'd be interested to know how it worked for Canada and Australia.

 

That's very misleading, they have 20 FREE trade agreements, they also have trade agreements with around another 100 countries

[tobyjugg2]

not as misleading as yours

 

lets look at one of the later deals

" Significant concessions were granted to the United States on trade in automobiles: tariff reductions for Korean automobiles were delayed for five years, and U.S. autos were granted broader access to the Korean market. At the same time, the negotiators agreed to set aside disagreements over U.S. beef exports for the time being. "

 

 

 

.. The USA also maintains 'opt outs' on it deals

... We would perhaps call them reneging.

... although of course if its included in the 'deal' that the USA can do it - its only reneging if the other side does it

 

.. Then take a look at the EU/US deal proposals where there are none of those American opt outs

Edited October 8, 2019 by tobyjugg2

[Maharg1]

How is mine misleading, it was claimed that the US only has 20 trade deals but it has hundreds, 20 of them are Free trade deals.

 

Those are government figures so come on then smartarse backup your crap

[tobyjugg2]

Didn't say it was false - just misleading

They are free trade only in name - not in detail as outlined

 

.. The USA also maintains 'opt outs' on its deals

... We would perhaps call them reneging.

... although of course if its included in the 'deal' that the USA can do it - its only reneging if the other side does it

 

.. so perhaps Vassalage is a more apt description

Edited October 8, 2019 by tobyjugg2

[tobyjugg2]

Putting aside that trade issue while we await some sense from @Maharg1 including the overdue statement on whether @Maharg1 was mislead or simply misleading in the false quote used elsewhere here...

 

The unofficial announcements re Johnson/Merkel conversation, which only a fool would believe

 

No10 apparently leaked yesterday that the talks would end this week ...

 

:

 

 

Unofficial No 10 briefing on Brexit - Summary and analysis

You can read James Forsyth’s Spectator blog, in which he publishes, apparently more or less in full, a message he got yesterday from a “contact in No 10” setting out Downing Street’s thinking on the state of the Brexit process here. And here are the main points.

• Brexit talks with the EU will “probably end this week”, the source says.

The negotiations will probably end this week.

This is entirely plausible, and consistent with the underlying tone of the No 10 lobby briefing yesterday.

• Boris Johnson would not revive the deal currently on offer to the EU after the election, the source says. The source writes:

If this deal dies in the next few days, then it won’t be revived ...

We will also make clear that [if the talks break down] this government will not negotiate further so any delay would be totally pointless. They think now that if there is another delay we will keep coming back with new proposals. This won’t happen. We’ll either leave with no deal on 31 October or there will be an election and then we will leave with no deal.

• And the Tories would fight a general election on a no-deal platform, the source says. The source writes:

To marginalise the Brexit party, we will have to fight the election on the basis of ‘no more delays, get Brexit done immediately’ ...

We will focus on winning the election on a manifesto of immediately revoking the entire EU legal order without further talks, and then we will leave.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2019/oct/08/brexit-lates-news-boris-johnons-dominic-cummings-accused-of-being-source-of-unofficial-no-10-threat-to-retaliate-against-eu-countries-that-back-extension-live-news

Edited October 8, 2019 by tobyjugg2

[tobyjugg2]

What does it mean?

God knows with a serial liar in the PM's seat,

 

but possibly:

 

Johnson is lining up for the Benn extension and an election - as defined by Parliament

... but trying to line himself up as choosing that course of action, rather than as imposed on him due to his failings - as it is.

 

He will rely on the Brexit vote to get him in, alongside the extreme unpopularity and mistrust of Corbyn.

 

He will of course go for an election, which he could win given Corbyn, rather than a confirmatory Brexit referendum - which he almost certainly would lose.

 

 

[Jase1982]

3 hours ago, Maharg1 said:

 

That's very misleading, they have 20 FREE trade agreements, they also have trade agreements with around another 100 countries

 

How is this misleading?  I've merely stated a fact that they only have 20 free trade agreement, and the point I was making was more to do with their reduced standards and the potential incompatibility of the single market, or anything that could work with the single market.

 

Actually saying they have trade agreements with another 100 countries is misleading in itself because these agreements will be a mix of different deals and won't involve free trade.  Free trade deals are what we should be focusing on in my opinion as they represent a willingness for one market to completely open itself to another, and include an alignment of regulations/standards etc

[tobyjugg2]

and those US FTA's aren't FTA's as the name would indicate.

 

Continuing with the example I used

 

After the agreement was 'agreed':

 

"On April 27, 2017, President Trump announced his intention to renegotiate or terminate the treaty, "

 

"On March 16, 2018, The third round of Korea-U.S. FTA talks has begun.^[38] The talks concluded later on March 27, when an agreement in principle was reached between the Trump administration and the South Korean government.

The terms included an increase of annual U.S. auto exports from 25,000 vehicles to 50,000 that are only required to meet U.S. safety regulations instead of South Korean regulations.

A cap will also be placed on steel exports from South Korea to the United States "

 

So what the US do is reel you in, then renege,

then renegotiate a worse deal for 'their partner' once the deal with the US has split the other from other trade partners.

 

Classic Divide and conquer

 

Edited October 8, 2019 by tobyjugg2

[tobyjugg2]

Now this is interesting from the NYT

 

We know that Johnson was a remainer until Leave seemed his best chance for power.

We know that his latest 'stance' is drawing back support from Farage's Brexit party

We know that he wants an election, not a binding referendum

We know that Johnson lies and twists and decieves anyone - even his mates if they are in his way.

We are sure that all he's looking to get (like Corbyn) is 4 years in power to try and do whatever he wants - NOT to do what he says

 

 

 

"

Across Europe, embattled traditional parties are grappling with how to deal with the disruptive force of the far right: isolate and contain it, or work with it in hopes of winning back voters?

Creeping cooperation has become strikingly common at the local level, with potentially cascading consequences for European democracy. The most recent example: After joining forces with the far-right Freedom Party, Austria’s conservative party leader, Sebastian Kurz, above, took more than 250,000 votes from his erstwhile partners. "