Is UK Government Justified in Seeking to Add Clarity to The Withdrawal Agreement?

[Macnamara 1,760]

I think this is why boris is now 'self isolating' ie hiding: to avoid this key round of the brexit talks, no doubt to cause further delays

[Ziggy Sawdust 1,821]

6.5 billion human beings to be culled over the next ten years by the NWO  and you lot are talking 'politics'

Surely by now you've realised all politicians no matter what persuasion or what country they are in, are nothing more than puppets for the evil people that ARE running the world and currently destroying it!!......It's all a scripted show to keep you fools distracted. and believing you have a say in matters.  If you don't, A) Give your head a wobble and B) Consider using Mumsnet or Reddit .......they would be far more suitable for you than this place.

SMH.

[Bombadil 289]

15 minutes ago, Ziggy Sawdust said:

6.5 billion human beings to be culled over the next ten years by the NWO  and you lot are talking 'politics'

Surely by now you've realised all politicians no matter what persuasion or what country they are in, are nothing more than puppets for the evil people that ARE running the world and currently destroying it!!......It's all a scripted show to keep you fools distracted. and believing you have a say in matters.  If you don't, A) Give your head a wobble and B) Consider using Mumsnet or Reddit .......they would be far more suitable for you than this place.

SMH.

I concur

[Macnamara 1,760]

34 minutes ago, Ziggy Sawdust said:

6.5 billion human beings to be culled over the next ten years by the NWO  and you lot are talking 'politics'

 

brexit is not average politics because it was an attempt by the british people to break off from the trilateral commissions EU project in order to avoid falling into lockstep with the globalist agenda towards centralised world government

 

But instead the british government has refused to deliver brexit and is instead keeping us in lockstep with the globalists covid agenda

[jesuitsdidit 236]

Re Fishing

I'd say a 20% reduction every year for 5 years would be generous and we would expect good treatment in return.

[jesuitsdidit 236]

 

By Good Treatment I mean we are allowed a phased withdrawal over 5 years to give us time to adjust.

 

[jesuitsdidit 236]

 

I think it is unbelievably poor form for the EU to exploit our vulnerability at this time. They must know it is a very difficult situation for us.

If anything, I would have thought they would have been making a big effort to help make it as easy for us as possible and wish us well on our way.

Teresa May's government chose to do it all in one go rather than a phased withdrawal over up to 20 years as is allowed under the Accession Agreement. That I believe was a mistake.

I think it brings shame on the EU that they can do everything possible to make it as awkward as possible for us. It's clear that they still think this tactic will somehow make us decide to remain.

That shows how much they don't want us to leave.

 

Edited December 5, 2020 by jesuitsdidit

[jesuitsdidit 236]

 

The truth is a lot of businesses have been established by trading in the EU single market propped up by subsidies which promote inefficiency and businesses which would otherwise be unsustainable. This means that as we withdraw from this phony Alice in Wonderland world of fake prosperity a number of businesses will fail. This is inevitable. The government hope they can cobble together a deal which will protect these uncompetitive businesses in order to minimise the disruption.

 

The answer is to leave with No Deal and trade under WTO Rules as does Australia. This way we will be free to make a trade deal with the EU as and when we are ready.

Basically the EU in it's current form is a nonsense. 

 

[jesuitsdidit 236]

 

Anyway if my information is correct the EU will collapse soon so I wouldn't worry about it.

 

[jesuitsdidit 236]

 

The only way I can see it working is to have a 5 or 10 year decoupling period.

They would have annually reducing quotas from our fishing waters and

We would have annually reducing membership fees by the same amount.

 

So if a 5 year period is decided the reduction in fishing quotas for EU countries and membership fees for the UK would be 20% per annum.

 

If a 10 year decoupling period is decided then the annual reduction in quotas / fees would be 10%.

 

So for 2021 the EU boats would be entitled to 80% of their current quota and the UK would pay 80% of it's current amount in fees.

In 2022 the boats have 60% and we pay 60% etc etc.

If a 10 year decoupling period is decided then the reduction for both is 10% per annum.

 

[jesuitsdidit 236]

 

PS if no agreement exists to decide whether 5 or 10 years then it should be decided by a toss of the coin.

This could be the best of 3. 

There should be 2 coins used - a £1 and a €1 coin.

To decide which country goes first they should draw straws.

The UK side use the £1, the EU the €1.

 

[jesuitsdidit 236]

 

When tossing coin

The opposite side calls.

So when the UK side tosses the EU calls and vice versa.

 

[jesuitsdidit 236]

 

By the time 0% is reached a comprehensive trade agreement should be in place.

 

[jesuitsdidit 236]

 

My feeling is that the 5 year decoupling period is better for the UK.

We should obviously be free to move forward with our new program and not hampered by EU conformities.

It's solely to allow our businesses the time to adjust. It is not intended that the UK use this freedom to profit unfairly from having "one foot in both camps" during the decoupling period. This should be guaranteed by the UK.

So we would still have access to the Single Market but be free to trade under our own terms around the world. We would be unlikely to profit unduly during the 5 year decoupling as these new contracts would take time to bed in. 

UK could furthermore give guarantees not to exploit this as our position would be for the explicit purpose of allowing our businesses time to adjust and we should respect the good grace of the EU in allowing us to do this. Mechanism to be established to oversee fairness and proper functioning of the decoupling process.

 

Edited December 6, 2020 by jesuitsdidit

[jesuitsdidit 236]

There could be restraints on what UK can and cannot do during decoupling but these should not be unduly burdensome and on the basis that the UK is in process of preparing a new framework for itself and its businesses and nothing should happen to hinder that.

 

As and when UK finds satisfactory trade deals elsewhere and no longer needs to adhere to existing arrangements should be free to withdraw from contracts within EU.

 

 

[jesuitsdidit 236]

 

I don't think UK should offer 10 year decoupling period unless UK feels that is what they need.

My feeling is 5 year decoupling should be sufficient / preferable.

 

[jesuitsdidit 236]

 

Agreement contains possiblity to extend beyond 5 years if things move slowly during decoupling.

 

Extended years on basis of 20% fees/quotas per annum. Could possibly be increased say to 30% if this is more equitable.

 

I have no fixed idea of suitable % for additional years. It could be as high as 50%. Obviously higher percentage works against UK as means more GBP spent and more fish lost.

 

I assume negotiating teams can use common sense to fill out details.

 

Edited December 6, 2020 by jesuitsdidit

[jesuitsdidit 236]

 

If UK in a position to decouple before 5 year mark then fees stop, UK departs.

Fishing rights for EU fleets continue at 20% reduction per annum as a gesture of goodwill.

 

Edited December 6, 2020 by jesuitsdidit

[Grumpy Owl 2,430]

14 hours ago, jesuitsdidit said:

 

My feeling is that the 5 year decoupling period is better for the UK.

We should obviously be free to move forward with our new program and not hampered by EU conformities.

It's solely to allow our businesses the time to adjust. It is not intended that the UK use this freedom to profit unfairly from having "one foot in both camps" during the decoupling period. This should be guaranteed by the UK.

So we would still have access to the Single Market but be free to trade under our own terms around the world. We would be unlikely to profit unduly during the 5 year decoupling as these new contracts would take time to bed in. 

UK could furthermore give guarantees not to exploit this as our position would be for the explicit purpose of allowing our businesses time to adjust and we should respect the good grace of the EU in allowing us to do this. Mechanism to be established to oversee fairness and proper functioning of the decoupling process.

 

 

"Decoupling period" sounds like a new 'buzzword' to keep the UK tied to the EU.

 

We've been over this before with the 'single market' - EVERY country has 'access' to the single market, and the UK once it has left the EU will continue to have 'access' to the single market.

 

Having 'access' to, and being a 'member' of the Single Market are two seperate matters.

[jesuitsdidit 236]

 

If EU want up to 10 years access to UK waters we can accede.

This means

EU boats have access to UK waters taking 10% less each year over 10 years.

UK continues to trade with EU on current terms but aims to reduce trade with EU by 10% per annum down to the level it expects to exist once it has fully left.

So for example, if current trade with EU is £100bn PA and in 10 years time it's expected to be £60bn then we have to reduce annual trade by 4bn£ PA, over a 3 year average.

We continue to trade on current terms but are freed from EU constraints and can pursue Trade Agreements around the world and start trading with those countries without penalty as we would once we have left.

Our annual fees would reduce by 10% PA, as laid out in the Accession Treaty, but this amount is halved to account for the access to fishing.

So if our current annual fee is £10bn our 2021 fee would be £9bn but is halved to £4.5bn.

Our 2022 fee would be £8bn but is halved to £4bn.

If we can complete withdrawal before 10 years then our fees are recalculated to a greater reduction in fee on an equivalent annual basis and receive a reimbursement for monies overpaid.

If we leave before 10 years fishing continues for 3 years ie we give 3 years notice but fishing does not continue beyond 10 years.

So if we leave after 5 years fishing continues for a further 3 years = total 8 years. The remaining 3 years amount declines by 10% per annum.

If we are unable to decouple within 10 years we continue to pay 20% current fee pa and EU have access to waters taking 10% current amount. 1 years notice is given to EU fishermen. Fishing does not continue once we have left.

 

Edited December 7, 2020 by jesuitsdidit

[jesuitsdidit 236]

 

Add

 

At no time does UK have to abide by EU rules containing Socialist claptrap. Added expenses are reduced to a minimum. Once we have completed the transition and re-establishment process, ~20 years?, we can look at what we can afford in terms of better worker rights but not now.

We will be standing on our own feet in the world and do not need extra burdens.

The EU is not free to impose such burdens upon us.

 

[jesuitsdidit 236]

 

And recent changes to protect integrity of UK re NI are not interfered with.

[jesuitsdidit 236]

 

EU had better be careful how it treats UK or it could end up amassing problems for itself.

 

[jesuitsdidit 236]

 

This is assuming that the current fishing arrangements are broadly just.

If not, then the EU can expect what they are entitled to will be based on a policy that is just.

That may mean that they are entitled to less than the amounts I have laid out.

 

[jesuitsdidit 236]

 

The EU needs to understand their project is unsustainable in its current form.

The sooner they start reverting to the Trade Bloc model the better for all.

In case they hadn't noticed UK has paid in a lot of money and had very little in return in fact our progress has been hampered.

We are leaving, they won't like it.