Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2020 14:26:09 GMT
Number 10 seem to have realised Johnson’s statement has been greeted by a collective shrug by all involved, so have now gone even harder. Trouble with brinkmanship is sometimes you do fall off the brink... They've called his Bluff, so now he has to make good his promise to walk away or else lose face.
|
|
|
Post by sherlock on Oct 16, 2020 14:47:42 GMT
Two can play at the brinkmanship game
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2020 15:31:20 GMT
So look like Boris is going for no-deal
(I still think it could be an attempt at brinkmanship on his & Dom's part - won't believe it until it happens) Yet there seems so many trade-offs that would ensure a win-win for both sides. The Europeans consume far more fish from our waters than we can catch. Plus they like it fresh and un-processed on the counter. So for example the French fishermen should catch it fresh for their markets. For an island nation, we consume far less fish than we like to think. And having it all to ourselves will not change that, nor will customers on the continent want it packed frozen and filleted. They like to see how fresh it is by the clearness of the eyes, whilst we tend to have it topped and tailed these days so that it no longer looks like an animal. Its not a market the UK fishermen will make inroads to. We want to manufacture Cars by the likes of Nissan tariff free for import to the EU, but they want to impose tariffs on components manufactured in, for example, Japan and assembled in the UK. Otherwise production shifts to the continent. Without quantifying the value of each fiscally, there is a goodwill gain to be had by waiving duties case by case. What on earth are they endlessly stalemating over after all this time?
|
|
|
Post by mark687 on Oct 16, 2020 15:39:46 GMT
60+% of our total future trade is stalled because we almost literary cannot agree on the price of fish its Yes Prime Minster 2020.
Regards
mark687
|
|
|
Post by johnhurtdoctor on Oct 16, 2020 15:51:28 GMT
Why on earth are we so obsessed with fish? Is it because it presents an image of the lowly & hardworking fisherman making an honest living on the high seas? When the reality is not quite the same?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2020 16:16:28 GMT
60+% of our total future trade is stalled because we almost literary cannot agree on the price of fish its Yes Prime Minster 2020. Regards mark687 It seems to have become a symbolic totem to be bartered out of proportion to its value. An interesting read in its own right: www.spectator.co.uk/article/britains-strange-aversion-to-seafood
|
|
|
Post by johnhurtdoctor on Oct 16, 2020 18:21:50 GMT
|
|
|
Post by number13 on Oct 17, 2020 0:03:36 GMT
60+% of our total future trade is stalled because we almost literary cannot agree on the price of fish its Yes Prime Minster 2020. Regards mark687 Lol and so true, the fish issue ish (I mean is) about price, it's a haggle isn't it? France wants to have access under current terms, as a non-CFP nation the U.K. will (reasonably imo) want to charge more for the same level of access. It seems odd that only France are suddenly quite so interested in fish. Many Spanish and Danish ships also fish in our waters (or certainly used to) and yet it doesn't seem to be a problem for them. ('You think there's something fishy about the French position, Prime Minister?' 'Yes, thank you Bernard.' )
Although it's grabbed the headlines (command of the seas, coastal nation, etc.) I think fish is a relative sideshow as others have said. The really big problem is over state aid to business and I think it's Germany that are most concerned about this, and it is understandable. Both government and opposition now seem to be 'interventionist' by instinct (certainly compared with the Thatcher or Blair years), so I can see why many in Europe might worry about 'tilting' of the 'level playing field' and want some reassurance. But how/if it can be done without tying future British governments to E.U. laws etc. to a degree the government can't/won't accept, goodness knows.
|
|
|
Post by sherlock on Oct 17, 2020 8:11:13 GMT
60+% of our total future trade is stalled because we almost literary cannot agree on the price of fish its Yes Prime Minster 2020. Regards mark687 Lol and so true, the fish issue ish (I mean is) about price, it's a haggle isn't it? France wants to have access under current terms, as a non-CFP nation the U.K. will (reasonably imo) want to charge more for the same level of access. It seems odd that only France are suddenly quite so interested in fish. Many Spanish and Danish ships also fish in our waters (or certainly used to) and yet it doesn't seem to be a problem for them. ('You think there's something fishy about the French position, Prime Minister?' 'Yes, thank you Bernard.' )
Although it's grabbed the headlines (command of the seas, coastal nation, etc.) I think fish is a relative sideshow as others have said. The really big problem is over state aid to business and I think it's Germany that are most concerned about this, and it is understandable. Both government and opposition now seem to be 'interventionist' by instinct (certainly compared with the Thatcher or Blair years), so I can see why many in Europe might worry about 'tilting' of the 'level playing field' and want some reassurance. But how/if it can be done without tying future British governments to E.U. laws etc. to a degree the government can't/won't accept, goodness knows.
The French are just the most vocal on the issue (cos Macron has re-election in the not too distant future and has to play to the domestic audience), but other states do have interests in the fishing issue. For example the Belgian ambassador to the EU weighed in, even citing a treaty in 1666 where Charles II gave the Belgians ‘eternal rights’ to British waters. He may have been joking, though assembled diplomats didn’t seem to be sure: www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/oct/08/belgian-ambassador-throws-king-charles-ii-treaty-into-eu-fishing-debateWhereas the fishing is a more symbolic debate where states throw their weight around, the state aid is more probably considered more serious by the EU. There the EU’s need to give Britain a good deal, but not too good a deal, comes into play. The government’s made it an issue of sovereignty (who’d have thought the Tories of all parties would become the great defenders of state aid) so will probably hate any kind of compromise, even though the entire point of a negotiation is to compromise.
|
|
|
Post by number13 on Oct 17, 2020 12:28:09 GMT
Lol and so true, the fish issue ish (I mean is) about price, it's a haggle isn't it? France wants to have access under current terms, as a non-CFP nation the U.K. will (reasonably imo) want to charge more for the same level of access. It seems odd that only France are suddenly quite so interested in fish. Many Spanish and Danish ships also fish in our waters (or certainly used to) and yet it doesn't seem to be a problem for them. ('You think there's something fishy about the French position, Prime Minister?' 'Yes, thank you Bernard.' )
Although it's grabbed the headlines (command of the seas, coastal nation, etc.) I think fish is a relative sideshow as others have said. The really big problem is over state aid to business and I think it's Germany that are most concerned about this, and it is understandable. Both government and opposition now seem to be 'interventionist' by instinct (certainly compared with the Thatcher or Blair years), so I can see why many in Europe might worry about 'tilting' of the 'level playing field' and want some reassurance. But how/if it can be done without tying future British governments to E.U. laws etc. to a degree the government can't/won't accept, goodness knows.
The French are just the most vocal on the issue (cos Macron has re-election in the not too distant future and has to play to the domestic audience), but other states do have interests in the fishing issue. For example the Belgian ambassador to the EU weighed in, even citing a treaty in 1666 where Charles II gave the Belgians ‘eternal rights’ to British waters. He may have been joking, though assembled diplomats didn’t seem to be sure: www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/oct/08/belgian-ambassador-throws-king-charles-ii-treaty-into-eu-fishing-debateWhereas the fishing is a more symbolic debate where states throw their weight around, the state aid is more probably considered more serious by the EU. There the EU’s need to give Britain a good deal, but not too good a deal, comes into play. The government’s made it an issue of sovereignty (who’d have thought the Tories of all parties would become the great defenders of state aid) so will probably hate any kind of compromise, even though the entire point of a negotiation is to compromise. That's brilliant, I never realised they watched 'Yes, Prime Minister' in Belgium.
In that case we must resurrect the claim to the Dukedom of Normandy, right now! And while we're at it, the entire northern half of France and part of the south, citing the maximum extent of the Angevin posessions. And Holland, via William of Orange. And it goes without saying that Hanover is 100% a British possession by direct royal descent. Boris could play an update on 'Henry V' : 'I love Europe so much, I would not give up one inch of it.'
As someone who grew up, politically speaking, during the Thatcher years, it does seem surprising to see the right to give state aid as a Tory 'red line', but the idea of free market Conservativism as typical Conservatism is relatively recent isn't it? Pre-Thatcher, Macmillan was very interventionist of course, then Heath/Barber and even in the Thatcher government there were rows and resignations about how much (if at all) they should intervene to support British industry.
Oh the irony, if the E.U. do manage to enforce Thatcherite non-interventionist free market economics on a U.K. Conservative government. Maybe we've forgotten that many of the Single Market rules date from her time and a lot of it was British-led and seen as a great success (and I think it was), so the irony meter is likely to overload if Boris runs into not so much the hand of history, as the handbag of history...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 17, 2020 18:28:47 GMT
The French are just the most vocal on the issue (cos Macron has re-election in the not too distant future and has to play to the domestic audience), but other states do have interests in the fishing issue. For example the Belgian ambassador to the EU weighed in, even citing a treaty in 1666 where Charles II gave the Belgians ‘eternal rights’ to British waters. He may have been joking, though assembled diplomats didn’t seem to be sure: www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/oct/08/belgian-ambassador-throws-king-charles-ii-treaty-into-eu-fishing-debateWhereas the fishing is a more symbolic debate where states throw their weight around, the state aid is more probably considered more serious by the EU. There the EU’s need to give Britain a good deal, but not too good a deal, comes into play. The government’s made it an issue of sovereignty (who’d have thought the Tories of all parties would become the great defenders of state aid) so will probably hate any kind of compromise, even though the entire point of a negotiation is to compromise. That's brilliant, I never realised they watched 'Yes, Prime Minister' in Belgium.
In that case we must resurrect the claim to the Dukedom of Normandy, right now! And while we're at it, the entire northern half of France and part of the south, citing the maximum extent of the Angevin posessions. And Holland, via William of Orange. And it goes without saying that Hanover is 100% a British possession by direct royal descent. Boris could play an update on 'Henry V' : 'I love Europe so much, I would not give up one inch of it.'
As someone who grew up, politically speaking, during the Thatcher years, it does seem surprising to see the right to give state aid as a Tory 'red line', but the idea of free market Conservativism as typical Conservatism is relatively recent isn't it? Pre-Thatcher, Macmillan was very interventionist of course, then Heath/Barber and even in the Thatcher government there were rows and resignations about how much (if at all) they should intervene to support British industry.
Oh the irony, if the E.U. do manage to enforce Thatcherite non-interventionist free market economics on a U.K. Conservative government. Maybe we've forgotten that many of the Single Market rules date from her time and a lot of it was British-led and seen as a great success (and I think it was), so the irony meter is likely to overload if Boris runs into not so much the hand of history, as the handbag of history... I think you are overlooking the Battle of Hastings. Technically we are all French. Every week when I pass Raby Castle and its vast hunting park of Oak Trees and Deer, I am reminded that such things owed their tradition as a gift of old William the Conqueror to his trusty Noblemen to have their own private Deer hunting grounds and Castle. Its why we still have more Oak trees than the rest of Europe. And lots of Deer sheltering therein.
|
|
|
Post by number13 on Oct 17, 2020 23:13:39 GMT
That's brilliant, I never realised they watched 'Yes, Prime Minister' in Belgium.
In that case we must resurrect the claim to the Dukedom of Normandy, right now! And while we're at it, the entire northern half of France and part of the south, citing the maximum extent of the Angevin posessions. And Holland, via William of Orange. And it goes without saying that Hanover is 100% a British possession by direct royal descent. Boris could play an update on 'Henry V' : 'I love Europe so much, I would not give up one inch of it.'
As someone who grew up, politically speaking, during the Thatcher years, it does seem surprising to see the right to give state aid as a Tory 'red line', but the idea of free market Conservativism as typical Conservatism is relatively recent isn't it? Pre-Thatcher, Macmillan was very interventionist of course, then Heath/Barber and even in the Thatcher government there were rows and resignations about how much (if at all) they should intervene to support British industry.
Oh the irony, if the E.U. do manage to enforce Thatcherite non-interventionist free market economics on a U.K. Conservative government. Maybe we've forgotten that many of the Single Market rules date from her time and a lot of it was British-led and seen as a great success (and I think it was), so the irony meter is likely to overload if Boris runs into not so much the hand of history, as the handbag of history... I think you are overlooking the Battle of Hastings. Technically we are all French. Every week when I pass Raby Castle and its vast hunting park of Oak Trees and Deer, I am reminded that such things owed their tradition as a gift of old William the Conqueror to his trusty Noblemen to have their own private Deer hunting grounds and Castle. Its why we still have more Oak trees than the rest of Europe. And lots of Deer sheltering therein. I wouldn't go that far in applying the Belgian Historical Principle. William's probably legitimate claim to the English throne would give us first dibs on Normandy and those parts of France gained through later marriage etc. We can't just claim the whole country; that would be silly.... Although now I think about it, his northern/Norman lineage should give the U.K. a fair claim on Denmark and makes us a dead cert. to rule the Kingdom of Sicily!
(Or, M. le Ambassador, we could all reenter the 21stC and agree a full free trade deal as sensibly as longtime friends and allies should, Restoration fishing permits notwithstanding.)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 17, 2020 23:30:31 GMT
I think you are overlooking the Battle of Hastings. Technically we are all French. Every week when I pass Raby Castle and its vast hunting park of Oak Trees and Deer, I am reminded that such things owed their tradition as a gift of old William the Conqueror to his trusty Noblemen to have their own private Deer hunting grounds and Castle. Its why we still have more Oak trees than the rest of Europe. And lots of Deer sheltering therein. I wouldn't go that far in applying the Belgian Historical Principle. William's probably legitimate claim to the English throne would give us first dibs on Normandy and those parts of France gained through later marriage etc. We can't just claim the whole country; that would be silly.... Although now I think about it, his northern/Norman lineage should give the U.K. a fair claim on Denmark and makes us a dead cert. to rule the Kingdom of Sicily!
(Or, M. le Ambassador, we could all reenter the 21stC and agree a full free trade deal as sensibly as longtime friends and allies should, Restoration fishing permits notwithstanding.)
All things with a tongue firmly in the cheek of course. But then the Aristocracy has apparently slyly referred to the Royal Family as 'The Germans' so I have heard/read - whatever the origins of The Orangemen as being Dutch. According to Winston Churchill in the first volume of his 'A History of the English Speaking Peoples', even when the Romans set foot on our rain sodden soil, they found that the true 'Natives' had been pushed to the boundaries of Ireland by migrants. So we were all true Europeans a long time ago. I guess we need to call the Vatican in Rome and get the Pope to settle the ownership issue....
|
|
|
Post by number13 on Oct 18, 2020 12:50:33 GMT
I wouldn't go that far in applying the Belgian Historical Principle. William's probably legitimate claim to the English throne would give us first dibs on Normandy and those parts of France gained through later marriage etc. We can't just claim the whole country; that would be silly.... Although now I think about it, his northern/Norman lineage should give the U.K. a fair claim on Denmark and makes us a dead cert. to rule the Kingdom of Sicily!
(Or, M. le Ambassador, we could all reenter the 21stC and agree a full free trade deal as sensibly as longtime friends and allies should, Restoration fishing permits notwithstanding.)
All things with a tongue firmly in the cheek of course. But then the Aristocracy has apparently slyly referred to the Royal Family as 'The Germans' so I have heard/read - whatever the origins of The Orangemen as being Dutch. According to Winston Churchill in the first volume of his 'A History of the English Speaking Peoples', even when the Romans set foot on our rain sodden soil, they found that the true 'Natives' had been pushed to the boundaries of Ireland by migrants. So we were all true Europeans a long time ago. I guess we need to call the Vatican in Rome and get the Pope to settle the ownership issue.... Oh, you noticed I was joking? I thought I was being subtle...
WSC was right about the waves of early migration, even more completely than he knew. At that time there were many archaeologists who disagreed and said that the changeover from the builders of the huge stone circles and tombs to the metalworking 'Beaker People' culture had mostly been the transmission of new ideas to existing people. A largely cultural shift.
Then two years ago there was the amazing story (link below) of the new discovery based on DNA research, which showed the arrival of the 'Beaker People' had not been only a shift in culture or technology, but the almost total replacement of the population of Britain by newcomers. Not invasion, but a migration westwards of many small groups from a long way east, even beyond Europe as far as central Asia, who in some way outlasted the people who were here before them. So the Britons the Romans met were actually from further east than them!
EDIT: Apologies for the digression, I started pontificating....
|
|
|
Post by muckypup on Oct 18, 2020 13:01:05 GMT
Why on earth are we so obsessed with fish? Is it because it presents an image of the lowly & hardworking fisherman making an honest living on the high seas? When the reality is not quite the same?its not why is it so important too us/boris......it why is it so important to EU....
|
|
lidar2
Castellan
You know, now that you mention it, I actually do rather like Attack of the Cybermen ...
Likes: 5,813
|
Post by lidar2 on Oct 19, 2020 10:35:15 GMT
The French are just the most vocal on the issue (cos Macron has re-election in the not too distant future and has to play to the domestic audience), but other states do have interests in the fishing issue. For example the Belgian ambassador to the EU weighed in, even citing a treaty in 1666 where Charles II gave the Belgians ‘eternal rights’ to British waters. He may have been joking, though assembled diplomats didn’t seem to be sure: www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/oct/08/belgian-ambassador-throws-king-charles-ii-treaty-into-eu-fishing-debateWhereas the fishing is a more symbolic debate where states throw their weight around, the state aid is more probably considered more serious by the EU. There the EU’s need to give Britain a good deal, but not too good a deal, comes into play. The government’s made it an issue of sovereignty (who’d have thought the Tories of all parties would become the great defenders of state aid) so will probably hate any kind of compromise, even though the entire point of a negotiation is to compromise. That's brilliant, I never realised they watched 'Yes, Prime Minister' in Belgium.
In that case we must resurrect the claim to the Dukedom of Normandy, right now! And while we're at it, the entire northern half of France and part of the south, citing the maximum extent of the Angevin posessions. And Holland, via William of Orange. And it goes without saying that Hanover is 100% a British possession by direct royal descent. Boris could play an update on 'Henry V' : 'I love Europe so much, I would not give up one inch of it.'
As someone who grew up, politically speaking, during the Thatcher years, it does seem surprising to see the right to give state aid as a Tory 'red line', but the idea of free market Conservativism as typical Conservatism is relatively recent isn't it? Pre-Thatcher, Macmillan was very interventionist of course, then Heath/Barber and even in the Thatcher government there were rows and resignations about how much (if at all) they should intervene to support British industry.
Oh the irony, if the E.U. do manage to enforce Thatcherite non-interventionist free market economics on a U.K. Conservative government. Maybe we've forgotten that many of the Single Market rules date from her time and a lot of it was British-led and seen as a great success (and I think it was), so the irony meter is likely to overload if Boris runs into not so much the hand of history, as the handbag of history... Actually it's the whole of France dating back to Edward III's claim in 1340 that kicked off the first Hundred Years war - he was the closest male relative of the last Capetian king.
Even today, Elizabeth II is the rightful monarch of France
|
|
|
Post by number13 on Oct 19, 2020 11:04:06 GMT
That's brilliant, I never realised they watched 'Yes, Prime Minister' in Belgium.
In that case we must resurrect the claim to the Dukedom of Normandy, right now! And while we're at it, the entire northern half of France and part of the south, citing the maximum extent of the Angevin posessions. And Holland, via William of Orange. And it goes without saying that Hanover is 100% a British possession by direct royal descent. Boris could play an update on 'Henry V' : 'I love Europe so much, I would not give up one inch of it.'
As someone who grew up, politically speaking, during the Thatcher years, it does seem surprising to see the right to give state aid as a Tory 'red line', but the idea of free market Conservativism as typical Conservatism is relatively recent isn't it? Pre-Thatcher, Macmillan was very interventionist of course, then Heath/Barber and even in the Thatcher government there were rows and resignations about how much (if at all) they should intervene to support British industry.
Oh the irony, if the E.U. do manage to enforce Thatcherite non-interventionist free market economics on a U.K. Conservative government. Maybe we've forgotten that many of the Single Market rules date from her time and a lot of it was British-led and seen as a great success (and I think it was), so the irony meter is likely to overload if Boris runs into not so much the hand of history, as the handbag of history... Actually it's the whole of France dating back to Edward III's claim in 1340 that kicked off the first Hundred Years war - he was the closest male relative of the last Capetian king.
Even today, Elizabeth II is the rightful monarch of France
|
|
|
Post by johnhurtdoctor on Oct 19, 2020 17:51:48 GMT
UK refuses to restart Brexit talks despite EU accepting its demands. I wish the Tories would be honest for once, they never wanted a deal. But of course with their narrative they can blame all the failings on the EU. Just for once it would be great if the Tories actually took responsibility for its own failings, not just in this but in general.
|
|
|
Post by sherlock on Oct 21, 2020 16:14:03 GMT
Now it’s got the brinkmanship rhetoric out of its system, the government’s got back to work.
|
|
|
Post by number13 on Oct 23, 2020 1:16:20 GMT
A bit of light relief on the Europe front, at least for everyone who recalls how the Rt. Hon. Jim Hacker MP became leader of his party - and yes, Prime Minister...
Perhaps the EU will redesignate them as 'homogenised high-fibre veggie tubes'...
|
|