Astute
Well-Known Member
So who will be better off? I will give you a clue. It won't be us. Just like it isn't us with trade in the EU.
So who will be better off? I will give you a clue. It won't be us. Just like it isn't us with trade in the EU.We can sell things to Japan though. Are they pulling out of Europe or out of the UK?
You just don't have a clue.The irony being that Japan was one of the country’s banded around by leavers that we must leave to do a trade deal with. Shame non of the leave lot stopped to engage their brains that actually being in the EU was actually protecting jobs with Japanese manufacturers in the U.K. The minute we voted leave the EU clambered over itself to get a trade deal done with Japan as there was no longer a risk of us vetoing it to protect British jobs. India has also stated its exited by us leaving as they can now finally do a trade deal with the EU now we’re no longer able to veto it. Another country banded around by leavers as a reason to leave despite the fact that we always could have had the trade deal if we hadn’t vetoed it.
And as you well know there are idiots on both sides that know much less than many on here. But you want us to concentrate on those happy to see us leave only.The leave argument was that we want a „cut and paste“ FTA with Japan. Liam Fox is in charge of that. Japan have stated that any trade deal with the UK won’t be as good as that with the EU. If Japan makes cars in the EU or Japan, there is no difference, apart from transport costs. There will be a difference if they make them in the UK.
Yes Mart. Of course Mart.
And I suppose remain told the truth......
If only you could look at both sides the same way you would see the whole situation much better.
And as you well know there are idiots on both sides that know much less than many on here. But you want us to concentrate on those happy to see us leave only.
Leaving is changing the status quo. It is a dangerous gamble based on lies. If remain had won and it turned out all vetos could be cancelled by Frau Merkel and the fourth Reich, I would be calling them out. They didn’t and that cannot happen, so, yes, I am calling the leave lies out.
They can be cancelled within the Eu constitution rules
They can be cancelled within the Eu constitution rules
Have you accepted the result of the ref yet mart?
Show me the rule that says that. Do you have to have unanimous consent to do away with vetos?
Oh dear
You just don't have a clue.
Being part of the EU means we have a trade deal with Japan. So Japan can now close all manufacturing in the EU countries which includes us. Being a part of the EU hasn't helped here in the slightest.
Still waiting. Where is your link to prove your lie? There isn’t one. Just confirmed, yet again, my point that leavers are lying, and if anything lying at a faster rate ( as is Trump BTW ), as Brexit continues to flounder.
It’s not a lie. The Eu constantly change the way they approve legislature powers - constantly - and can put treaties through without individual consent - Lisbon and Maastricht being the classic examples where countries views were ignored and against all democratic principals were shoved through
The Lisbon treaty itself weakened the veto by reducing areas where unanimous voting is required to pass legislation. - therefore the Eu can very easily do this again with another treaty which means only 15 states are required to approve legislation to pass it thereby eliminating the veto
No it doesn’t. Constantly? You named 2 examples since we have members - in nearly 50 years. The Lisbon Treaty did away with some vetos, but not the most sensitive. The Lisbon Treaty was signed by all governments. If the British government doesn’t want Turkey, then that is it. If the British government doesn’t want to give up it’s veto, then it doesn’t. It is not complicated.
Yes I do have a clue which is why I say it is ironic as Japan is one of the country’s brexiteers claimed we have to leave the EU to get a free trade deal with. If we were remaining in the EU we could veto this trade deal to help safeguard British jobs and the deal won’t happen. This has been India’s frustration in getting a trade deal with the EU as we keep vetoing it over proposed new visa rules as part of the trade deal. India. India sees Brexit as an opportunity to do a deal with the EU not the U.K. and have stated that any U.K. India trade deal post brexit must include new visa rules making it easier for Indian nationals to travel to the U.K. Only we’re now that desperate to get a trade deal over the line so Fox and his cronies can say I told you so will now accept the new visa rules that we had the luxury of vetoing as EU members. In another twist of irony the EU Japan trade deal is being pointed to as what we need to achieve with a U.K. Japan trade deal post brexit.
So basically you’ve missed what is actually happening and Brexit is loosing us the protection of the veto meaning U.K. jobs are threatened by the EU Japan trade deal as they will be by a U.K. Japan trade deal that aims to emulate what the EU has achieved. It also means that rather than taking control of our borders we’re making them easier to access in exchange for a trade deal which has the danger of increasing illegal immigrants as despite the hysteria surrounding people crossing the channel in rubber dinghies, stowaways in lorry’s, people clinging to the side of ships etc, visa overstay is by far the biggest issue with regards to illegal immigrants in this country.
No it doesn’t. Constantly? You named 2 examples since we have members - in nearly 50 years. The Lisbon Treaty did away with some vetos, but not the most sensitive. The Lisbon Treaty was signed by all governments. If the British government doesn’t want Turkey, then that is it. If the British government doesn’t want to give up it’s veto, then it doesn’t. It is not complicated.
Accession of Turkey to the European Union - WikipediaThe myth here of course is that Turkey wants to join the EU.
Think it is Ed that was doing the blathering...but surprise surprise not leading by example - just stocking up his excuses. He could easily exchange his gas guzzler for an electric one but not quite got around to taking action yet.What are you blathering about you melon?
So why are non-electric cars being phased out? Why are towns & cities looking to stop fuel burning vehicles entering them? Emissions from carbon-fuel are a major contributor to various health issues as well as global warming, you melon!You don’t fix systemic carbon output (mostly from industry) by individual actions. That’s what national and supranational bodies are for. We didn’t fix the ozone layer by asking everyone to use the fridge less, we banned CFCs.
Thanks for the kind offer - but I will pass if that is ok?Fuck me.
And WILL change the rules on vetos...so they only apply in ever decreasing circumstances over a protracted time period. Anything important to feeding the machine will be steamrollered throughIt’s not a lie. The Eu constantly change the way they approve legislature powers - constantly - and can put treaties through without individual consent - Lisbon and Maastricht being the classic examples where countries views were ignored and against all democratic principals were shoved through
The Lisbon treaty itself weakened the veto by reducing areas where unanimous voting is required to pass legislation. - therefore the Eu can very easily do this again with another treaty which means only 15 states are required to approve legislation to pass it thereby eliminating the veto
Accession of Turkey to the European Union - Wikipedia
Turkey is negotiating its accession to the European Union (EU) as a member state, following its application accede to the European Economic Community, the predecessor of the EU, on 14 April 1987.
Turkey signed a Customs Union agreement with the EU in 1995 and was officially recognised as a candidate for full membership on 12 December 1999, at the Helsinki summit of the European Council.
Negotiations for full membership were started on 3 October 2005. Progress was slow, and out of the 35 Chapters necessary to complete the accession process only 16 had been opened and one had been closed by May 2016.
European what?Read the last sentence and not just the headline. “The proposal would need to get past the European Parliament and European Council, where it is expected to face opposition“ It is a proposal and it won’t get through without unanimous consent. The 15% minimum VAT, plus exceptions, only got through by unanimous consent. The U.K. waived it’s veto in this instance.
Liam Fox wanted to rubber stamp the EU Japan agreement. It’s what leavers want... apparently. Now the EU has it and we have no chance of getting a deal on the same or better terms than the EU, it has become a stick to beat the EU with. And you, @ Astute, have the cheek to say the leave side doesn’t lie.
I’m not talking about turkey
Answer this - is it within Eu legislative powers to propose a treaty which changed the voting structure of the legislative bodies so the veto on that issue is weakened or vanishes?
Answer yes or no please
European what?
How about where Selmayr only got 10 votes out of well over 500 on keeping the position he should have never got as it broke EU laws, rules and regulations? There was very serious opposition. Yet what happened?
Like you finally agreed Selmayr should have lost his position if only to show there is transparency in the EU. So you agreed that there is no transparency in the EU. Yet you try and make out that the opposite is true.
The Commission has just proposed that. So of they can propose things.
And WILL change the rules on vetos...so they only apply in ever decreasing circumstances over a protracted time period. Anything important to feeding the machine will be steamrollered through
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
So it’s yes
People will respect you if you admit things
So the veto can be rendered worthless - we are in agreement
Accession of Turkey to the European Union - Wikipedia
Turkey is negotiating its accession to the European Union (EU) as a member state, following its application accede to the European Economic Community, the predecessor of the EU, on 14 April 1987.
Turkey signed a Customs Union agreement with the EU in 1995 and was officially recognised as a candidate for full membership on 12 December 1999, at the Helsinki summit of the European Council.
Negotiations for full membership were started on 3 October 2005. Progress was slow, and out of the 35 Chapters necessary to complete the accession process only 16 had been opened and one had been closed by May 2016.
How? How can vetos be rendered worthless without unanimous consent? A veto stops vetos been rendered worthless. Please explain how you come to your conclusion- with a relevant link ( Brexit Party or UKIP links don’t count ). Do you know what a proposal is? Ever turned down a proposal at JLR? Or do they just enact all proposals without discussion and agreement?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?