New Brexit Thread

[Newbie to this]

58 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

I can see BIG problems arising in France if Macron gives even a tiny bit on fishing.

Thankfully it's not up to him, it's up to our government, if we move on fishing.

Don't get me wrong I understand the point you are making, but it is becoming increasingly obvious to the EU, that they no longer have a say 

[old man]

52 minutes ago, Nuke said:

For conflicts yes, not for negotiations. In a conflict you only have one winner.

/Markus

You could argue that the meek will never inherit the earth as they only get a turn when the strong don't need it anymore?😀

 

1 hour ago, JohnfromUK said:

I cannot answer your question, but I do believe (and have believed for some time) that fishing is likely to be a major issue.  My reason is simply that the French fishermen have always been very militant, and quick to blockade ports, ferries etc.  It has happened many times in the past.  With Macron's present popularity - and their militant and disruptive 'Gillets Jaunes' movement, I can see BIG problems arising in France if Macron gives even a tiny bit on fishing.  I suspect that the Spanish will also veto any changes, so whatever Barnier may think himself, I think he will get his orders.

Agreed John but I don't see the point or need to leave the EU with less than was ours in the first place?

[JohnfromUK]

12 minutes ago, Newbie to this said:

Thankfully it's not up to him, it's up to our government, if we move on fishing.

I hear what you say, but it takes two to form an agreement, and in this case - one of the two is really 27 'member states'.

I entirely agree we should not move/give ground on having full control of our fishing.  However - for Barnier to agree to that (because it is a change from the present 'when we were in the EU' state), he needs to get agreement of his 27 member states.  I cannot see France agreeing - because they have these militant fisherman, Gillets Jaunes etc., and Macron doesn't have a majority anyway and has had declining popularity (slightly better over Covid recently).  The last thing he wants is having to get tough with his own electorate if they choose to blockade ports to defend 'their fishing jobs' by blockaded ports and riots.  Similarly - if the ports are blockaded - much of our food imports comes through those ports ......... so the French fisherman will have a strong position and a weak leader in Macron.

Edited May 19, 2020 by JohnfromUK

[discobob]

19 hours ago, Mr_Nobody said:

Yup, sold our gold but I'll give him that!

and bought Euros!!!!

[Nuke]

2 hours ago, old man said:

You could argue that the meek will never inherit the earth as they only get a turn when the strong don't need it anymore?😀

 

It's not about being meek, it's about knowing how the science of negotiations works.

As soon as either party takes a stand you are no longer negotiating for a win-win, only escalating the conflict.

If you want only one winner or two losers you go for conflict all the way.

If you want a good lasting relationship with no dominating party, you negotiate.

It's quite simple but absolutely not easy.

/Markus

Edited May 19, 2020 by Nuke

[Vince Green]

3 hours ago, Bobba said:

I am totally confused on the topic of Fishing rights and quotas after brexit and the more I read the more confused I get !!

It seems to me that on leaving the EU the UK will not be taking back control by saying Quotas were part of CAP, we're no longer part of that regime, all quotas are cancelled and we start again with new quotas and licenses. What appears to be emerging is not a clean break let's start again,  but that existing arrangements will remain in place but massaged eg more catch by foreign vessels or leased use of UK quotas must be landed in UK ports. If this is so, then how are we taking back control of UK fishing?

Can someone help clarify my thoughts please?

I did find this article interesting but it only added to my confusion !

https://unearthed.greenpeace.org/2018/10/11/fishing-quota-uk-defra-michael-gove/

I'm no good at links so if it doesn't work, sorry. Google it.

Well I can give you a taster because several drinking friends of my mate Pete are Cornish fishermen so I have had it explained to me. Basically the original deal was a reciprocal arrangement by which we could fish in their waters and they can fish in ours.

Only trouble was (if you take Spain as an example) their waters are rubbish (warmer and overfished) so they all come up and fish in our waters. Ships have a quota but the Spanish trawlers just ignore that and when they get back to their home port nobody asks them the difficult questions like where did you get all this fish?

Stop the Spanish, French and Dutch trawlers fishing in our waters and they would go bust so the stakes are high and they are not going to accept it without a fight.

[Bobba]

31 minutes ago, Vince Green said:

Well I can give you a taster because several drinking friends of my mate Pete are Cornish fishermen so I have had it explained to me. Basically the original deal was a reciprocal arrangement by which we could fish in their waters and they can fish in ours.

Only trouble was (if you take Spain as an example) their waters are rubbish (warmer and overfished) so they all come up and fish in our waters. Ships have a quota but the Spanish trawlers just ignore that and when they get back to their home port nobody asks them the difficult questions like where did you get all this fish?

Stop the Spanish, French and Dutch trawlers fishing in our waters and they would go bust so the stakes are high and they are not going to accept it without a fight.

Thanks. The difference between theory and practice..........

Many years ago I worked in a Government Agency which dealt with the CAP. We were subjected to audit and inspection by both Commision auditors and the European Court of Audit. We gained the impression then that when it came to control checks it was not a level playing field and when I visited other member states their approach to control checks was in their national interest. If the auditors didn't catch them it was a matter of pride, whereas the UK played it by the book.

Having had the opportunity to travel in Europe I have seen under sized fish in many fish markets. Yet, by comparison, some years back we were on our way to dive the Eddystone lighthouse and watched a trawler tipping fish over the side. We learned later that where part of the catch would take trawlers over their quota resulting in penalties some of them would dump the excess. Somehow I cannot envisage the French or Spanish following that practice.

Edited May 19, 2020 by Bobba

[Rewulf]

3 hours ago, Nuke said:

It's not about being meek, it's about knowing how the science of negotiations works.

As soon as either party takes a stand you are no longer negotiating for a win-win, only escalating the conflict.

If you want only one winner or two losers you go for conflict all the way.

If you want a good lasting relationship with no dominating party, you negotiate.

It's quite simple but absolutely not easy.

/Markus

Negotiating  , or diplomacy, IS conflict without violence, if one side does not want to change 'the deal' that is already in effect (as in this case) they will dig in, threaten , cajole, and make the process as difficult as possible.
The 'science' is a set of rules and etiquette , that exist when BOTH sides are looking for mutual beneficial ends, this does not exist in these negotiations, so the science is thrown out the window.
To this day , the EU would happily see the whole Brexit process stopped in its tracks and ended, this they believe would be most beneficial to themselves, as virtually no aspect of Brexit is wholly beneficial to the EU bloc.
In this we must be clear, as the bloc , has become a wholly separate entity to Europe.
They are negotiating from a stand point of what is best for them, not Europe as a whole, of which the UK is still part of.

The UK must deliver Brexit, or the people will vote in someone who will.
It would be a good idea if the EU accepted that this WILL happen, and bargains accordingly ,while it attempts damage limitation on its own internal issues.

[Nuke]

The science in question are how we all, except for some parts of Asia, are wired mentally.

/Markus

[old man]

13 hours ago, Nuke said:

The science in question are how we all, except for some parts of Asia, are wired mentally.

/Markus

/Markus, we should be mentally wired to win, especially over the fishing situation.

Where would be the sanity over that, of coming out with less than we went in with? You cant eat cars etc. but fish.....mm? 😀

We could even grow our own veg,farm our own meat, milk and eggs or go without? ? ? 😙

Oh yes make our own wine too, maybe?

Edited May 20, 2020 by old man

[Newbie to this]

1 hour ago, old man said:

Oh yes make our own wine too, maybe?

Failing that we can just get it from the many other places outside the EU.

[Rewulf]

50 minutes ago, Newbie to this said:

Failing that we can just get it from the many other places outside the EU.

We already do, S.America , Oz and Californian wines are excellent.
But heres an idea we could make it here using imported grapes/juice, the only thing we struggle with is our growing climate for certain fruits.
Thats a massive finger to possible EU tariffs on wine.

The UK has produced its draft proposals for a possible FTA with the EU today, with some poking of holes in Barniers 'hard line ' argument.
I think the EU negotiating team would do well to read them, and let it sink in that we are very serious about our position.

[Newbie to this]

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/our-approach-to-the-future-relationship-with-the-eu

 

 

Edited May 20, 2020 by Newbie to this

[Nuke]

2 hours ago, old man said:

/Markus, we should be mentally wired to win, especially over the fishing situation.

I think you miss my point.

If you know how your opponent will react you can use it to your advantage, does it really matter who won when you know you got everything you could out of it?

/Markus

[Newbie to this]

19 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

We already do, S.America , Oz and Californian wines are excellent.
But heres an idea we could make it here using imported grapes/juice, the only thing we struggle with is our growing climate for certain fruits.
Thats a massive finger to possible EU tariffs on wine.

The UK has produced its draft proposals for a possible FTA with the EU today, with some poking of holes in Barniers 'hard line ' argument.
I think the EU negotiating team would do well to read them, and let it sink in that we are very serious about our position.

And should hopefully get cheaper, when we don't have to pay the EU protection racket fees, along with many other products. 

[Rewulf]

34 minutes ago, Nuke said:

If you know how your opponent will react you can use it to your advantage,

Have you ever played poker Markus ?

The EU is playing a massive game of bluff, with the citizens of Europes money.
Remember what I said , the EU and Europe are 2 entirely different entities, and always have been.
Its just become more obvious of late.

[old man]

1 hour ago, Nuke said:

I think you miss my point.

If you know how your opponent will react you can use it to your advantage, does it really matter who won when you know you got everything you could out of it?

/Markus

Possibly so?

I think it plain how the opponent has reacted?

Very greedily IMHO.

[Raja Clavata]

45 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

Have you ever played poker Markus ?

The EU is playing a massive game of bluff, with the citizens of Europes money.
Remember what I said , the EU and Europe are 2 entirely different entities, and always have been.
Its just become more obvious of late.

We need Mr Daniel Levy on our negotiating team, his reputation throughout Europe precedes him, then they'd know we really mean business.

[Newbie to this]

2 minutes ago, Raja Clavata said:

We need Mr Daniel Levy on our negotiating team, his reputation throughout Europe precedes him, then they'd know we really mean business.

Yes, one very shrewd operator.

Loved how he played Liverpool with the Keane transfers 

[Nuke]

22 hours ago, Rewulf said:

Have you ever played poker Markus ?

Yes. But bluffing has nothing to do with my point either. 

/M

21 hours ago, old man said:

Possibly so?

I think it plain how the opponent has reacted?

Very greedily IMHO.

I think it is quite clear that both parties are more interested in winning the conflict than negotiating the best deal they can.

/Markus

[Newbie to this]

31 minutes ago, Nuke said:

Yes. But bluffing has nothing to do with my point either. 

Poker isn't always about bluffing

 

31 minutes ago, Nuke said:

think it is quite clear that both parties are more interested in winning the conflict than negotiating the best deal they can.

I think you may well be right.

[Cheshirelad]

The EU is sending a message to all the other EU countries - DO NOT TRY TO DESERT US! They are trying to put so many barriers in our way that we are supposed to just meekly accept, in order to keep us tied into their dictatorship.

Now that we have made the decision to leave the EU, that is exactly what we must do - with or without a trade agreement. If it means paying (realistic) tariffs to the EU then so be it ... we are already paying huge amounts of money to deal with the EU.

[Rewulf]

1 hour ago, Nuke said:

Yes. But bluffing has nothing to do with my point either. 

But in a letter of his own Mr Barnier said: "There is no automatic entitlement to any benefits that the EU may have offered or granted in other contexts and circumstances to other, often very different, partners."

The EU has previously said Britain needs to accept Europe has a sovereign right to impose whatever conditions it feels necessary on opening its markets to foreign countries.

So, is he bluffing or serious ?
 

1 hour ago, Nuke said:

I think it is quite clear that both parties are more interested in winning the conflict than negotiating the best deal they can.

The UK team speaks for the UK government, the one we elected.

Barmier and his team speak for who ?
Do you seriously believe he gives a fig if these talks fail and we leave on WTO terms ?

[Nuke]

1 hour ago, Rewulf said:

Do you seriously believe he gives a fig if these talks fail and we leave on WTO terms ?

I think neither he or Boris cares as long as they can spin the story to show that they won.

/M

[Vince Green]

Its impossible to negotiate with the EU because Barnier hasn't got the authority to make concessions on behalf of the member states,  he only has the authority to demand concessions from us.

Its like trying to buy a car off a salesman who hasn't got the authority to knock anything off the price on the windscreen.