Time-wasting UK makes post-Brexit deal unlikely, says Barnier

[GerryT]

The EU isn't a country at all.
It's a diplomatic institution governing a trade agreement between 27 countries.

Some prats in a palace blagging everyone for money.

I don't like the EU. I have had no say in what it is, was or ever will be.
No reason to accept blame for it at all.
I am not an EU member. Not an EU citizen and I accept no responsibility whatsoever for any of it's actions.
Nothing to do with me officer.

I never said the EU was a country, it's now 27 countries agreeing in areas to allow free trade in goods and services. With time it keeps adjusting the agreement to better improve that trading relationship. Again you throw in unsubstantiated comments, "blagging everyone for money", you should know that's utter nonsense, the EU cost the UK about 8b nett, the cost of brexit todate is well over 100b and the annual cost will be far in excess of 7b being outside the EU. You have every say in what the EU is, you might choose not to get involved, thats your business but its a democratically elected body and you had a vote. EU MEP's

I've provided you with examples of EU changing the goalposts.
You didn't like them.
I could provide more, but you wouldn't accept them either.
Making it a mugs game.

You have offered zero examples of the EU moving the goal posts, I mean zero. But I'll have a look at the below and see if you have one.

Edit.
Here we go.
The EU framed the exit negotiations with a WA to be agreed before trade talks could be.
They began their negotiation with a changing of the goalposts.
They now wish to discuss security as part of trade.
They tried to put it in the WA.

Wrong on all points. The first day in brexit was agreeing the steps, the joint (UK & EU) agreed route was first agree the separation which became the WA. Then discuss trade. This was never a goal post move. That's not moving the goal posts. Security needs discussion & agreement, the UK  really really wants this and its the UK side pushing for this, in fairness the EU wants it to. You need security co-operation between states trading, this is needed to combat smuggling, slavery, criminality. How you would even thing that security and trade would not be wrapped up together is bewildering. It's always been on the table to discuss & try agree a way forward. If it's agreed it goes in the WA as thats a legally binding agreement, otherwise it would go in the political declaration (which is where it was put, again a joint agreed document between UK and EU) and it then gets dealt with during the transition period.

They currently won't negotiate anything at all until unless we concede fishing grounds to them first.

Wrong, the EU has asked that a number of key items be discussed in parallel, to speed up the process,these are show stop items such as fisheries and the level playing field, if these can't be agreed then there's no point in talking about anything else. The EU is not doing a part agreement, they have from day one said it's a full deal or no deal, no cherry picking. Again no change from the EU side, totally consistent.

Their political declaration however respects our fishing grounds.

And why wouldn't it, strange remark. The EU totally respects the UK sovergnity, it has put zero blocks in the way to try stop the UK leaving and quite rightly so. Thats totally different to how the UK union treats Scotland,  if they want to leave it's a disgrace they have to go cap in hand to England requesting a referendum, so undemocratic.

They changed their goalposts on the Irish border 3 times.

Funny way of looking at it. The EU said the good Friday agreement has to be respected, when it looked like the UK were going to crap all over it they insisted on the backstop and did say if the UK came up with an alternative it would be considered. That's what happened the UK requested the first change putting all of the UK in a backstop, that was the UK moving goal posts, then Johnson improved that by asking that to be changed to a front stop, again the EU obliged, another UK change. You've a funny way of looking at things.

And flip flop on fisheries on an almost monthly basis.

Is that what you think, the EU have always said protecting EU interests in fishing was a priority, just like the GFA, EU citizens living in the UK, level playing field. They were always there. There's no flip flop.

Same for bank passporting.

That was never on the table, still isn't

Aircraft landing rights.

The EU conceeded allowing UK airlines to land in EU airports, thats not moving the goal posts, thats a win for the UK

Drivers lisences...

No change there, they don't work in the EU, maybe with some years a deal will be struck, hows that a goal post move. How would a UK lisense work in the EU

I can just go on endlessly as it happens.

So I will.
They had to have 100 billion.
They had to have a hard customs border in Ireland.
They had to have ECJ oversight. The ECJ had to be the arbitor for EU citizens remaining in the UK.

What 100b ? are your referring to the divorce bill, I think its about 32b at the moment. The UK agreed this, so it's due. Otherwise they wouldn't have agreed if it wasn't fair.

What's Barney's latest?
We respect your fishing grounds, but not the fish in them.
The dribble he comes out with.


Bluff after bluff after bluff has been called.
Most of them by Boris. Almost none of them by Mrs May.

Dribble, what are you on about. Don't you understand why countries have a joint approach to fishing and stock replenishment, fish don't respect a line in the ocean, no blue passports (made in france) there. That's what Barnier was talking about.

Again you have given zero examples of a goal post move. I'm starting to think you don't know what a goal post move means.

Talking about Bluff, Johnson's middle name, will he survive this latest scandal, in a long line of scandals. This time after the russian poising in the UK, and as foreign minister at a UN meeting to impose sanctions on Russia, get this, Johnson ditches his security detail, flies to Italy alone, no baggage, no security detail and meets with a Russian KGB agent. Denies it until its proven. And you use Bluff after bluff and bluff in a sentence regarding Johnson, so apt.
https://twitter.com/carolecadwalla/status/1196013796587913216?lang=en
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jul/26/boris-johnson-security-evgeny-lebedev-perugia-party

[Baff]

Every Remain campaigner fluffed that one.

[Borg Refinery]

Call me Dave.

[T00ts]

I don't believe I implied the EU were playing any games.

He stated both sides kinda wanted a loophole arrangelrnt without seeming weak - he's right

No you didn't imply that. But I don't agree the EU are worried one jot if they look weak. But it's important to the UK side, so the EU let the UK play to the domestic media/public and talk in terms of "winning" or "they need us more than we need them" etc... You never hear that talk from Barnier's team. Hence why I suggest that the UK is playing a game, or playing to the domestic Audience.

.

Yes the UK is.

I think the EU wants the best arrangement that doesn't hurt it, whether by loopholes or otherwise, that's a more accurate revision of my statement I think.

But they are sick of our timewasting and who could blame them... we should've decided with steely determination what to do 6 months after the ref and not left our country and the EU hanging.

Aw come on. We had a referendum where Cameron might just as well have been wrapped in an EU flag and they were made only too aware of it.

Everyone including Boris seemed to say he was a secret Brexiter and all his past positions show him to have been, look into it, posted something bout it to Thomas on here.

IMHO he deliberately fluffed the remain campaign badly.

Then poor May couldn't carry through because she put her trust in the wrong people.

IMHO incompetence + weakness and a secret Remainer who wanted a 'please anyone enough' truce deal, just a total ground shifter who would've dobe anything to quieten down the HoC, utterly unprincipled.

So the EU settled back in their seats waiting for the UK to implode. Trouble is the scenery has changed and the EU has the wrong glasses on. Of course they want to get the most beneficial circumstances for themselves, quite apart from the public flogging the commissioners will get if anyone the other side of the channel suffers. What really really grates is that the EU have decided that once an EU member then forever subservient to their whims. If they were negotiating with any other country the talks would be substantially different.

I don't think so, they benefit from a good deal just as we do, they aren't known for spiting themselves.

If we agree now they will move the goal posts and continue to do so and if it undermines our future they will give the continental shrug once again.

Probably, they are tough negotiators, but they are asked to be.

Whoa you just lost me - who fluffed the remain campaign?

[Sheepy]

Which is why they have failed to make very many deals.
And will continue to fail to make many deals.

Their problem is they are too large with too many conflicting interests internally.

Or they could just be bureaucrats who are full of it.

[Baff]

Which is why they have failed to make very many deals.
And will continue to fail to make many deals.

Their problem is they are too large with too many conflicting interests internally.

[Borg Refinery]

I don't believe I implied the EU were playing any games.

He stated both sides kinda wanted a loophole arrangelrnt without seeming weak - he's right

No you didn't imply that. But I don't agree the EU are worried one jot if they look weak. But it's important to the UK side, so the EU let the UK play to the domestic media/public and talk in terms of "winning" or "they need us more than we need them" etc... You never hear that talk from Barnier's team. Hence why I suggest that the UK is playing a game, or playing to the domestic Audience.

.

Yes the UK is.

I think the EU wants the best arrangement that doesn't hurt it, whether by loopholes or otherwise, that's a more accurate revision of my statement I think.

But they are sick of our timewasting and who could blame them... we should've decided with steely determination what to do 6 months after the ref and not left our country and the EU hanging.

Aw come on. We had a referendum where Cameron might just as well have been wrapped in an EU flag and they were made only too aware of it.

Everyone including Boris seemed to say he was a secret Brexiter and all his past positions show him to have been, look into it, posted something bout it to Thomas on here.

IMHO he deliberately fluffed the remain campaign badly.

Then poor May couldn't carry through because she put her trust in the wrong people.

IMHO incompetence + weakness and a secret Remainer who wanted a 'please anyone enough' truce deal, just a total ground shifter who would've dobe anything to quieten down the HoC, utterly unprincipled.

So the EU settled back in their seats waiting for the UK to implode. Trouble is the scenery has changed and the EU has the wrong glasses on. Of course they want to get the most beneficial circumstances for themselves, quite apart from the public flogging the commissioners will get if anyone the other side of the channel suffers. What really really grates is that the EU have decided that once an EU member then forever subservient to their whims. If they were negotiating with any other country the talks would be substantially different.

I don't think so, they benefit from a good deal just as we do, they aren't known for spiting themselves.

If we agree now they will move the goal posts and continue to do so and if it undermines our future they will give the continental shrug once again.

Probably, they are tough negotiators, but they are asked to be.

[Baff]

The EU isn't a country at all.
It's a diplomatic institution governing a trade agreement between 27 countries.

Some prats in a palace blagging everyone for money.

I don't like the EU. I have had no say in what it is, was or ever will be.
No reason to accept blame for it at all.
I am not an EU member. Not an EU citizen and I accept no responsibility whatsoever for any of it's actions.
Nothing to do with me officer.



I've provided you with examples of EU changing the goalposts.
You didn't like them.
I could provide more, but you wouldn't accept them either.
Making it a mugs game.


Edit.
Here we go.

The EU framed the exit negotiations with a WA to be agreed before trade talks could be.
They began their negotiation with a changing of the goalposts.
They now wish to discuss security as part of trade.
They tried to put it in the WA.

They currently won't negotiate anything at all until unless we concede fishing grounds to them first.

Their political declaration however respects our fishing grounds.

They changed their goalposts on the Irish border 3 times.

And flip flop on fisheries on an almost monthly basis.


Same for bank passporting.
Aircraft landing rights.
Drivers lisences...

I can just go on endlessly as it happens.

So I will.
They had to have 100 billion.
They had to have a hard customs border in Ireland.
They had to have ECJ oversight. The ECJ had to be the arbitor for EU citizens remaining in the UK.


What's Barney's latest?
We respect your fishing grounds, but not the fish in them.
The dribble he comes out with.


Bluff after bluff after bluff has been called.
Most of them by Boris. Almost none of them by Mrs May.

[GerryT]

Quick example.
They offered us a Canada style trade deal. Canada +.
Now they don't.

All trade deal offers are still on the table. Really Really bad example. You do know the Barnier Step diagram explains all this in a very easy format, if your not familiar.. https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-options/stairway-to-brexit-barnier-maps-out-uks-canadian-path-idUKKBN1ED23R
But remember that the UK wanted a Canada++ which was unicorn stuff. From day 1 this chart outlines everything the UK could have had from a very simple agreement to a full FTAand all these options are still available.

Quick example.
They offered us the membership in a trade organisation.
Then they changed it to a political federation.

In your opinion, again a totally crap example. First it's not true and secondly you were asked to give examples of the EU moving the goal posts wrt brexit, that's what you said. This is not in the same decade of brexit, and it's not true.

Quick example.
They offered us a single market in services.
But they never delivered one.

Huh what are you on about. Again nothing to do with brexit talks or a promise made to the UK by the EU where the goal posts were moved. FTA's don't include services, leaving the EU was always leaving the single market for services. THe EU is not perfect and it does have a single market for services, it's not perfect and getting better every year. you'll soon know that you've left in January

Comedy example.
They offered Tony Blair the first presidency of the EU.

Still not an example of goal post moving.

Baff I'm finding you find it difficult to follow a conversation and you make points of your opinion, usually totally detached from reality and do you ever back up you points with some facts ?
YOu talk about the EU as if it were another country that the UK joined with. DOn'tyou understand that the UK was the EU when it were a member. But it went from bossing others around to making joint decisions. And I'll add the UK had far more say than most countries, in the top 4. If you don't like what the EU has become then look to yourselves for the blame.

So back to you, can you provide an example of the EU moving the goal posts, still nothing.

[Baff]

There has been plenty of Teutonic movement.

[GerryT]

I wasn't aware of any tectonic movement!

That's correct nothing tectonic.

[T00ts]

Aw come on. We had a referendum where Cameron might just as well have been wrapped in an EU flag and they were made only too aware of it. Then poor May couldn't carry through because she put her trust in the wrong people. So the EU settled back in their seats waiting for the UK to implode. Trouble is the scenery has changed and the EU has the wrong glasses on. Of course they want to get the most beneficial circumstances for themselves, quite apart from the public flogging the commissioners will get if anyone the other side of the channel suffers. What really really grates is that the EU have decided that once an EU member then forever subservient to their whims. If they were negotiating with any other country the talks would be substantially different.

If we agree now they will move the goal posts and continue to do so and if it undermines our future they will give the continental shrug once again.

The EU has being very consistent it what it wants and what's on offer. There has been no goal post moves from the EU side. If you thing they have, can you give an example.
The UK on the other hand didn't even know what brexit meant, people had different versions of what it meant for them. From the start the UK red lines meant only a very basic deal could be struck. THe EU have being sitting back, not waiting for the UK to implode, but more for the UK to tell the EU what it want's and NOT what the UK doesn't want which is the usual message.

Quick example.
They offered us a Canada style trade deal. Canada +.
Now they don't.


Quick example.
They offered us the membership in a trade organisation.
Then they changed it to a political federation.


Quick example.
They offered us a single market in services.
But they never delivered one.

Comedy example.
They offered Tony Blair the first presidency of the EU.

I suspect that offer was made in about 2004 on finalisation of the new treaty so that Blair ditched the promise of a referendum in 2006 and signed Maastricht in 2007. He ditched his country for a palm full of silver.

[papasmurf]

Comedy example.
They offered Tony Blair the first presidency of the EU.

That is scary not comic.

[Baff]

Aw come on. We had a referendum where Cameron might just as well have been wrapped in an EU flag and they were made only too aware of it. Then poor May couldn't carry through because she put her trust in the wrong people. So the EU settled back in their seats waiting for the UK to implode. Trouble is the scenery has changed and the EU has the wrong glasses on. Of course they want to get the most beneficial circumstances for themselves, quite apart from the public flogging the commissioners will get if anyone the other side of the channel suffers. What really really grates is that the EU have decided that once an EU member then forever subservient to their whims. If they were negotiating with any other country the talks would be substantially different.

If we agree now they will move the goal posts and continue to do so and if it undermines our future they will give the continental shrug once again.

The EU has being very consistent it what it wants and what's on offer. There has been no goal post moves from the EU side. If you thing they have, can you give an example.
The UK on the other hand didn't even know what brexit meant, people had different versions of what it meant for them. From the start the UK red lines meant only a very basic deal could be struck. THe EU have being sitting back, not waiting for the UK to implode, but more for the UK to tell the EU what it want's and NOT what the UK doesn't want which is the usual message.

Quick example.
They offered us a Canada style trade deal. Canada +.
Now they don't.


Quick example.
They offered us the membership in a trade organisation.
Then they changed it to a political federation.


Quick example.
They offered us a single market in services.
But they never delivered one.

Comedy example.
They offered Tony Blair the first presidency of the EU.

[Nick]

As far as most Europeen's

I wasn't aware of any tectonic movement!