Secretary General of the International Chamber of Commerce. wants to add something to your list:
If you read my post, I have explained.
It might be an idea for folk to quieten down - take time out/relax. This thread risks becoming argumentative and possibly worse.
I don’t understand this comment. Whose approach? Works that well for whom? If you mean, Barnier’s approach doesn’t work that well for the UK, well Barnier is a spokesman of the EU and I don’t think the EU gives a stuff any more whether or not their approach works for the UK or not. Why should they? Their approach is designed to look after the EU. They tried to be accommodating to the UK and all they got back was demands for the impossible, threats and insults.
5 Likes
I don’t understand Darren’s stance at all - he claims debate is useless and complains about Barnier’s comments and then gets annoyed that others actually do seem to care what is happening.
Perhaps he finds the additional stress on his cognitive dissonance uncomfortable.
Argument is good. Democracy depends on it. Stifling argument is bad. Tyranny depends on it.
You are a perceptive person, Stella: you must have realised our democracy is at a point of unprecedented crisis. Trump supporters baying “Send them back!”. Our likely do-or-die PM waving a kipper and telling us there is whey to make the Mars bars we all depend on.
Nothing to argue for? I disagree.
1 Like
I am really not annoyed. Honestly.
My comment is about two parties (the UK Gov and the EU). Both seemly entrenched in their positions but wanting to move forward.
My point is that language matters (as we have seen on this forum) and if one truly does want negotiate, then presenting the other side with (maybe justified and realistic) threats won’t help any. I am not blaming Mr Barnier for his position just his method.
This isn’t to say the UK side haven’t done the same
Its just the way i see it. I didn’t want this thread to be hijacked into a general discussion on Brexit. We have all had so much of that already.
However I would like to think that if we kept it cordial and respectful, any further negotiations would be more productive.
The UK government has certainly backed itself into a corner - and Johnson’s bluster is wedging him even more firmly into that corner.
If, by your comment that “the boat sailed” or “The good and the bad of Brexit is long gone… 3 years ago” you mean that the die was set three years ago then I think that you are probably correct - we were set on this path post Lancaster House and it would have taken a herculean effort to change course - but if you want to extend that to the argument that we should now not even try to change direction then that is where I disagree with you.
As a software developer you must recognise the problem of the local minima or maxima when searching for an optimal solution - which seems to describe the present situation quite well.
If you want to suggest that where we have got with Brexit is anything other than a disaster then I’m afraid I will have to disagree with you on that point as well.
I am still curious what your suggestion is to beak the deadlock.
Darren - as far as the EU is concerned, the negotiations ended a couple of months ago. The EU has broken up its negotiating team and reassigned the people who were in it to different roles. Until or unless the UK changes its red lines, negotiations will not be reopened. The EU is simply waiting for the UK to either sign the only deal on offer, or exit with no deal. For either scenario the EU has a comprehensive action plan ready, it just needs to know which to activate.
Can you quote one threat (as opposed to warnings) that the EU has made to the UK at any time during the negotiations?
Can you quote one time the EU has insulted (as opposed to criticised) the UK or any UK representative?
The MB interview was done weeks ago, you have to question the timing of it’s release by the BBC just days before the new PM is decided.
The other thing that I would ask of Darren is how he feels the EU are “entrenched” - as opposed to, say, consistent in their approach to the UK as a (soon to be) third nation.
Except that it isn’t going to change anything for that PM (nor is it going to change who that PM turns out to be).
What are you driving at here?
Barnier hasn’t said anything which is not already common knowledge.
Sorry Peter - you seem to be misunderstanding what I was attempting to say. I never said “nothing to argue for”.
I said …
We are all aware of Dinner Party Rules etc.
There is no desire to stifle excellent debate.
I am sure no-one wants to see anyone dash off a heated/knee jerk reply to someone else’s dig or loaded question and then find themselves in “hot-water” as a result . This can happen so easily as you will have seen in the past.
Which is why I asked everyone to relax etc etc etc.
2 Likes
[quote @Stella] This can happen so easily as you will have seen in the past.
[/quote]
Om mane padme hum
Om mane padme hum
Om mane padme hum
Om mane padme hum
Om mane padme hum
Aaaaahhhhhh 
This just seems like a bit of political ‘shit stirring’ on the BBC’s part.
Perhaps Brexit discussions should have their own section?
Well, just when you thought it was safe to go out…
BoJo’s minders were fast asleep and he got kippered 
What a total wanker!
Can you actually believe that he could actually be running the country in a week’s time 
Dunkin Donot must be spitting feathers 
and if you think for one minute that he’s going to get one over (certainly not a leg over) on Ursula van der Leyen then think again.
He’s going to be so out of his depth he may never surface again…
2 Likes
The laugh is that the regulations that he was complaining about are actually UK regs (within an EU framework admittedly), not EU ones.
1 Like
Jeez, UK is going for a new record foolishness.
1 Like
The country is a bleeding laughing stock.
Who possibly could take it seriously?
1 Like