Negotiating with the EU
Posted: 03 Dec 2017, 16:02
Hasn't changed since day 1.
If you go to the Google search and click on the top link you should get your one article click through to the FT.
It is a very interesting read.
It starts out.
Brexit right?
Brexit again right? Cameron and all that..
Brexit again right?
This is why we were offered a referendum in 1975 and again in 2016. It is what I would have voted to leave if I were living in the UK.
It is also a very clear what we have to do.
Or put another way, the leaders of the EU (France and Germany), have nothing to gain and everything to lose by allowing the UK to walk away with influence, economy and power intact.
The only way to deal with that is to put them into a situation where they have MORE to lose than they can afford. That is NO brexit bill, NO trade deal and WTO tariffs on the goods they import to us (100% more than we export to them).
If you measure it that way, then look at what our politicians are doing and what they are saying, you can imagine that they are trying to make the worst pigs ear of brexit that they possibly could.
Ces't la Vie.
If you go to the Google search and click on the top link you should get your one article click through to the FT.
It is a very interesting read.
It starts out.
The 280-page report is stamped “CONFIDENTIAL” for good reason. Britain’s chief negotiator is crushingly frank: from the start, Europe’s position amounted to making the UK “swallow the lot, and swallow it now”. And this, he admitted, “by and large, we had to do”.
Brexit right?
Written for the eyes of ministers, his personal reflections are of the most sensitive kind. Britain’s opening strategy had failed, the official explained. The UK embarked wanting to change the European project, but within six months had given up, realising the onus to change was on Britain itself.
Brexit again right? Cameron and all that..
Transition matters became the main topic, along with Europe’s extortionate financial demands. The UK negotiating hand was weak, with France trying to “squeeze every advantage out of the British desire for early progress”. On the matter of money, meanwhile, Germany had been “rather less generous . . . than we had hoped”.
Brexit again right?
But the paper was actually written 45 years ago, six months before Britain joined the European Community. Sir Con O’Neill’s report, held in the National Archives, recounts the 1970-72 accession talks he led. It is a rare account of what it is like to make demands in Brussels when national destiny is at stake. It also offers insights into the current talks — especially into which side holds the most leverage.
This is why we were offered a referendum in 1975 and again in 2016. It is what I would have voted to leave if I were living in the UK.
It is also a very clear what we have to do.
London is hopeful the calculus of EU leaders will change in trade talks. But Britain’s veteran diplomats are unconvinced. Sir Ivan Rogers, Mrs May’s former EU ambassador, noted it is “virtually never the case” that EU leaders are “less purist, less theological, more pragmatic and commercially driven than the ivory towers of Brussels”.“The keepers of the true flame, and defenders of the integrity of the project, are so often the leaders,” he said in a recent speech.
Or put another way, the leaders of the EU (France and Germany), have nothing to gain and everything to lose by allowing the UK to walk away with influence, economy and power intact.
The only way to deal with that is to put them into a situation where they have MORE to lose than they can afford. That is NO brexit bill, NO trade deal and WTO tariffs on the goods they import to us (100% more than we export to them).
If you measure it that way, then look at what our politicians are doing and what they are saying, you can imagine that they are trying to make the worst pigs ear of brexit that they possibly could.
Ces't la Vie.