Brexit & Rugby

[FLIP]

Widely reported this morning that the British government still don't have a plan for Brexit, and that they need 30k more civil servants to help out when they do..which sounds like a good plan for the Sir Humphrey's.

This?

Ah sure you could have thrown that together yourself in a couple of hours.

Turns out that the memo was written by Deloitte who were no doubt trying to weasel into some well paid make busy consultancy work.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37983948

[Oldschool]

FLIP - The other side of the coin.

[paddyor]

Preparations for what?
Exactly and finding the answers to that question is exactly what they are paid to do
That and report back to us so that we can slag them off.
The first thing I'd do is don the paranoia hat.
There has to be an opportunity in this for the likes of the French and some of our other friends in the EU to screws us.
Juncker is dangerous, ask the greeks.
One thing that does come to mind - productivity is always an issue and now that I think of it the other obvious thing is fiscal prudence ie stop spending that fiscal space.

1)This is a preexisting condition independent of Brexit. If we are not already aware of this threat going forward we probably have too much ground to make up.

2)Syriza bought an election with someone elses money and were told no by the people they intended to stiff. The manner in which Varoufakis ran that economy to the brink is on him frankly. Some of the loudest voices in the room denoucing them were their fellow pigs. In fact Juncker had shag all to do with it. He actually has no control of the council of minister and EcoFin or for that matter the ECB.

3)Again a preexisting condition independent of Brexit (of course some would argue that fiscal expansion is what's in order, cf UK & USA).

Going long on tinfoil FTW, doesn't really help you suss out who your enemies are and what threats you face. We'd probably be better devoting our energies to what will be a very fluid situation.

[Oldschool]

Preparations for what?
Exactly and finding the answers to that question is exactly what they are paid to do
That and report back to us so that we can slag them off.
The first thing I'd do is don the paranoia hat.
There has to be an opportunity in this for the likes of the French and some of our other friends in the EU to screws us.
Juncker is dangerous, ask the greeks.
One thing that does come to mind - productivity is always an issue and now that I think of it the other obvious thing is fiscal prudence ie stop spending that fiscal space.

1)This is a preexisting condition independent of Brexit. If we are not already aware of this threat going forward we probably have too much ground to make up.

2)Syriza bought an election with someone elses money and were told no by the people they intended to stiff. The manner in which Varoufakis ran that economy to the brink is on him frankly. Some of the loudest voices in the room denoucing them were their fellow pigs. In fact Juncker had shag all to do with it. He actually has no control of the council of minister and EcoFin or for that matter the ECB.

3)Again a preexisting condition independent of Brexit (of course some would argue that fiscal expansion is what's in order, cf UK & USA).

Going long on tinfoil FTW, doesn't really help you suss out who your enemies are and what threats you face. We'd probably be better devoting our energies to what will be a very fluid situation.

Exactlty - It's called preparation - Full circle.

[Peg Leg]

Preparations for what?
Exactly and finding the answers to that question is exactly what they are paid to do
That and report back to us so that we can slag them off.
The first thing I'd do is don the paranoia hat.
There has to be an opportunity in this for the likes of the French and some of our other friends in the EU to screws us.
Juncker is dangerous, ask the greeks.
One thing that does come to mind - productivity is always an issue and now that I think of it the other obvious thing is fiscal prudence ie stop spending that fiscal space.

1)This is a preexisting condition independent of Brexit. If we are not already aware of this threat going forward we probably have too much ground to make up.

2)Syriza bought an election with someone elses money and were told no by the people they intended to stiff. The manner in which Varoufakis ran that economy to the brink is on him frankly. Some of the loudest voices in the room denoucing them were their fellow pigs. In fact Juncker had shag all to do with it. He actually has no control of the council of minister and EcoFin or for that matter the ECB.

3)Again a preexisting condition independent of Brexit (of course some would argue that fiscal expansion is what's in order, cf UK & USA).

Going long on tinfoil FTW, doesn't really help you suss out who your enemies are and what threats you face. We'd probably be better devoting our energies to what will be a very fluid situation.

Exactlty - It's called preparation - Full circle.

Your glib remarks are a testament to the entire Brexit campaign. Obfuscating and flippant.

The Brexit campaigners mounted a populist movement built on falsehoods and mistrust of a community that has provided so much for the UK in the past number of years.
The xenophobic rhetoric was focused on border and financial control (the success of the latter cast as being ultimately dependent on the former) allowing the UK to attract the type of inward investment the UK wants, juxtaposed with the narrative that it was big business and globalisation that has them in this mess. It was an ugly campaign that belittled the people in the EU that have worked to support the UK (via various forms of invstement, trade agreements, local grants and of course administration) and appealed to a sense of anti-government, which is the opposite of what they now need, because for the past number of years the standards and institutions they have relied on have been performed centrally in Brussels.

Now they have instructed the European community that they wish to leave.... no wait, they have held a vote to inform their own government that they wish to leave, they have no idea how they are going to put the structures in place to do so and are likely calculating the cost of same.

If your in a meeting discussing how to progress or change as an organisation to be more inclusive and one of the attendees takes the chair and says something akin to
"My associates and I held an EGM and have this prepared statement: To hell with you, I'm off to set up on my own, I can do this better without you or your people, I will decide who I want in my office from now on, so stick you and your ridiculous restrictions. In addition, I will continue to hold my seat at the table and vote in all participatory decisions until I have my new improved empire fully established- even if in doing so is a conflict of interest for my position on this committee"

What support would you propose giving that person as a fellow committee member (other than directing him to the door)?

[Laighin Break]

Should this be moved to the General Chat sub as it seems to have very little to do with rugby at this stage?

[Oldschool]

Peg Leg.
As you explain it, it sounds reasonably accurate except for the fact that you are suggesting that the EU were innocents in the process.
They weren't, however at this stage, it doesn't matter who is to blame.
It behoves both parties to do their best to ensure that the damage done is minimised.
Taking the hump isn't going to achieve anything and the EU needs to realise this.
A starting point for both parties for example might be to look at arrangements the EU has with countries like Switzerland.
If they take a "we're going to teach them a lesson" approach there will be more than one loser and Ireland will be one of the big losers.
I see England and Ireland struggling to deal with the situation
I see the EU doing nothing. We'll only talk to you after you press the "go" button.
That's a negotiating tactic.
We should be asking, as one of the likely losers, is that really good enough?
The EU has to engage and has to be seen to engage..

[Oldschool]

Should this be moved to the General Chat sub as it seems to have very little to do with rugby at this stage?

You're right of course.
It's probably relevant to the IRFU bid for RWC 2023 but there is a thread for it already.

[Peg Leg]

The EU has to engage and has to be seen to engage..

It must engage and I would more than expect that it is, the UK will not pull the trigger without several exit supports and promises for the future.
It absolutely must not be seen to engage in supporting the exit and move to soft measures. It lessens their bargaining power and would leave them open to further EUexits

[Oldschool]

The EU has to engage and has to be seen to engage..

It must engage and I would more than expect that it is, the UK will not pull the trigger without several exit supports and promises for the future.
It absolutely must not be seen to engage in supporting the exit and move to soft measures. It lessens their bargaining power and would leave them open to further EUexits

Wouldn't disagree with the main thrust of what you say.
Unfortunately Ireland finds itself in the great Star Trek dichotomy.
The needs of the many outweighs the needs of the few.
For Ireland that attitude must not be accepted.
We got burned in 2008 for the good of the many and just look how that worked out fir the many never mind the few.
Had Trichet had his way they'd have burned the bones as well. Our deposit accounts would have been emptied too and if you doubt that ask yourself why every EU country has had to pass bail in legislation for bank accounts. Totally undemocratic legislation - the citizen's rights go to the bottom of the pile - sh!t flows down.
Hence my less than enthusiastic expectations of the EU.
That bail in legislation is dynamite waiting to go off.
It makes the banks even less responsible for their f^ck ups but gives them more authority to make those f%~k ups.
When you're left holding the can it's time to beware.

[paddyor]

Peg Leg.
As you explain it, it sounds reasonably accurate except for the fact that you are suggesting that the EU were innocents in the process.
They weren't, however at this stage, it doesn't matter who is to blame.
It behoves both parties to do their best to ensure that the damage done is minimised.
Taking the hump isn't going to achieve anything and the EU needs to realise this.
A starting point for both parties for example might be to look at arrangements the EU has with countries like Switzerland.

The EU's relationship with Switzerland is the result of multiple rounds of multilateral trade deals over decades. I'd agree it would be good if they could develop a similar relationship but it would take years to do. And even then, the EU Swiss relationship is a bit soured at the moment and at risk of breaking down(over free movement of people), so you don't get the same stability as more formal structures. The Canadian deal might be a good blueprint but wouldn't give them the same

If they take a "we're going to teach them a lesson" approach there will be more than one loser and Ireland will be one of the big losers.
I see England and Ireland struggling to deal with the situation
I see the EU doing nothing. We'll only talk to you after you press the "go" button.
That's a negotiating tactic.

So is witholding when you are going to trigger art 50 and announcing plans to name and shame companies that employ foreigners (connected to how EU nationals in Britain are treated post Brexit & vice versa of course).

We should be asking, as one of the likely losers, is that really good enough?
The EU has to engage and has to be seen to engage..

This is a f*cking terrible idea. If you want backdoor discussions then why not just dispense with the whole process and let Germany France and the UK go off and do a deal (as David Davis wants) that 2 years down the line anyone of the 27 can (and likely will) just reject. Much better to keep it formal and above board.

[Oldschool]

Peg Leg.
As you explain it, it sounds reasonably accurate except for the fact that you are suggesting that the EU were innocents in the process.
They weren't, however at this stage, it doesn't matter who is to blame.
It behoves both parties to do their best to ensure that the damage done is minimised.
Taking the hump isn't going to achieve anything and the EU needs to realise this.
A starting point for both parties for example might be to look at arrangements the EU has with countries like Switzerland.

The EU's relationship with Switzerland is the result of multiple rounds of multilateral trade deals over decades. I'd agree it would be good if they could develop a similar relationship but it would take years to do. And even then, the EU Swiss relationship is a bit soured at the moment and at risk of breaking down(over free movement of people), so you don't get the same stability as more formal structures. The Canadian deal might be a good blueprint but wouldn't give them the same

If they take a "we're going to teach them a lesson" approach there will be more than one loser and Ireland will be one of the big losers.
I see England and Ireland struggling to deal with the situation
I see the EU doing nothing. We'll only talk to you after you press the "go" button.
That's a negotiating tactic.

So is witholding when you are going to trigger art 50 and announcing plans to name and shame companies that employ foreigners (connected to how EU nationals in Britain are treated post Brexit & vice versa of course).

We should be asking, as one of the likely losers, is that really good enough?
The EU has to engage and has to be seen to engage..

This is a f*cking terrible idea. If you want backdoor discussions then why not just dispense with the whole process and let Germany France and the UK go off and do a deal (as David Davis wants) that 2 years down the line anyone of the 27 can (and likely will) just reject. Much better to keep it formal and above board.

Using Switzerland or Canada or etc. So there is no need to spend many more years re-inventing the wheel.
Free movement of people is fine in theory and is simply a mantra the EU have adopted for god knows what reason.
There are obvious ways of dealing with this issue and the EU have chosen to simply stick with their mantra and ignore reason.
I've no idea why just like I've no idea why they decided bananas must be straight.

Negotiating tactics - I think we've already established that nobody seems to know what they are doing and that's not a criticism more an observation and it's not surprising.
My point is that nobody is being fooled by such obvious negotiating tactics so lads wise up and grow up or two years down the road we'll be none the wiser.
It's a divorce maybe they should hire some divorce lawyers or councilors to explain to them how to go about it - both (all) parties.
Ireland definitely does not want a messy divorce because we have most to lose. We could end up having to seriously consider our options if the EU and GB can't come up with an amicable resolution.

If the EU doesn't engage then what?
The EU is refusing to address the issue that provoked the problem - "Free movement of people".
As far as they are concerned it's a show stopper. They don't even know what it means because they haven't defined it and they haven't thought thru' the consequences. It's simply a mantra or a stick to beat somebody with when it suits them.
And it's a burning hot issue all over the EU, not just in GB so if they want the EU to start breaking up that's where it's going to come a cropper.
Austria building fences as one example should really be telling us all - THERE IS A PROBLEM.
OK they're racists, problem solved - NOT. Name calling is just that. (Not accusing you of name calling BTW - that's directed at the EU/GB/???)
There are many reasons why people are racist or maybe more importantly why they act on their racist tendencies and the EU is steering us towards that danger instead of away from it.

[rooster]

It won't happen for a while, Supreme Court will say it has to go to vote but then an Act of Parliament has to be drawn up which will allow all to go forward.
I would put a few Euros on Brexit not happening the way things are going

[paddyor]

Using Switzerland or Canada or etc. So there is no need to spend many more years re-inventing the wheel.
Free movement of people is fine in theory and is simply a mantra the EU have adopted for god knows what reason.
There are obvious ways of dealing with this issue and the EU have chosen to simply stick with their mantra and ignore reason.

The Canadian deal doesn't include services which accounts for the bulk of the UKs exports to Europe so it's not much use and as I said the Swiss model is proving unstable. Until the UK understands what it wants from trade deals (and the signs are it's not sure at all) then other models are useless. Their economy is very different than Canada and Switzerland (e.g their reliance on fin services).

New idea, how about instead of reinventing the wheel we form a common market..........

I've no idea why just like I've no idea why they decided bananas must be straight.

A Brussels ban on bendy bananas is one of the EU’s most persistent myths.

Bananas have always been classified by quality and size for international trade. Because the standards, set by individual governments and the industry, were confusing, the European Commission was asked to draw up new rules.

Commission regulation 2257/94 decreed that bananas in general should be “free from malformation or abnormal curvature”. Those sold as “extra class” must be perfect, “class 1” can have “slight defects of shape” and “class 2” can have full-scale “defects of shape”.

Nothing is banned under the regulation, which sets grading rules requested by industry to make sure importers – including UK wholesalers and supermarkets – know exactly what they will be getting when they order a box of bananas.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... n-cornwall
To be clear local industry standards were supranationalised with industry approval. Johnson referenced this one launching the leave campaign from the £350m bus.

Negotiating tactics - I think we've already established that nobody seems to know what they are doing and that's not a criticism more an observation and it's not surprising.
My point is that nobody is being fooled by such obvious negotiating tactics so lads wise up and grow up or two years down the road we'll be none the wiser.
It's a divorce maybe they should hire some divorce lawyers or councilors to explain to them how to go about it - both (all) parties.
Ireland definitely does not want a messy divorce because we have most to lose. We could end up having to seriously consider our options if the EU and GB can't come up with an amicable resolution.

BREAKING: Negotiator in negotiating tactics shocker; House prices to go up!

I don't know what you are driving at here. Negotiators negotiate. It hasn't really started at all and won't until art 50 is triggered which the Brits are still trying to figure out. They're not even sure what they want though 50% of the country are increasingly leaning towards hard Brexit. There's really nothing to be done until they trigger art 50.

If the EU doesn't engage then what?
The EU is refusing to address the issue that provoked the problem - "Free movement of people".
As far as they are concerned it's a show stopper. They don't even know what it means because they haven't defined it and they haven't thought thru' the consequences. It's simply a mantra or a stick to beat somebody with when it suits them.

ahem

Free Movement - EU nationals

Free movement of workers is a fundamental principle of the Treaty enshrined in Article 45 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and developed by EU secondary legislation and the Case law of the Court of Justice. EU citizens are entitled to:

look for a job in another EU country
work there without needing a work permit
reside there for that purpose
stay there even after employment has finished
enjoy equal treatment with nationals in access to employment, working conditions and all other social and tax advantages

http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=457

They do indeed know what it means and it's clearly defined as one of the 4 freedoms of the single market. If they didn't and hadn't defined it in EU law countries would never have implemented it.

And it's a burning hot issue all over the EU, not just in GB so if they want the EU to start breaking up that's where it's going to come a cropper.
Austria building fences as one example should really be telling us all - THERE IS A PROBLEM.
OK they're racists, problem solved - NOT. Name calling is just that. (Not accusing you of name calling BTW - that's directed at the EU/GB/???)
There are many reasons why people are racist or maybe more importantly why they act on their racist tendencies and the EU is steering us towards that danger instead of away from it.

Actually free movement of people is a pet hate of the Brits mostly. It isn't conflated with the refugee crisis the way it was in Britain. My guess being that the no.s of non EU nationals immigrating to the UK, which for the most part has exceeded EU immigration is the reason there. So it's not just Eu migrants that are flooding in it's people from the rest of the world too but the EU gets blamed because it's foreigners innit. And yes, London is the prime entry point for non EU nationals to enter the EU.

[Oldschool]

Paddyor.
I think you are confused.
It's not about the principle, it's about the implementation of the principle.

[Peg Leg]

Paddyor.
I think you are confused.
It's not about the principle, it's about the implementation of the principle.

G'way outta that, you've had your hyperbolic argument torn asunder by fact and reason. Go and get yourself a class 1 Banana and relax.

[paddyor]

Paddyor.
I think you are confused.
It's not about the principle, it's about the implementation of the principle.

No, I'm not the one citing the banana myth. I'm done with this for the moment. Whatever you thinki the "implementation fo the principle" is....you're probably wrong!

[Oldschool]

Paddyor.
I think you are confused.
It's not about the principle, it's about the implementation of the principle.

No, I'm not the one citing the banana myth. I'm done with this for the moment. Whatever you thinki the "implementation fo the principle" is....you're probably wrong!

I've decided to take Peg Leg's advice too.

[domhnallj]

Paddyor.
I think you are confused.
It's not about the principle, it's about the implementation of the principle.

No, I'm not the one citing the banana myth. I'm done with this for the moment. Whatever you thinki the "implementation fo the principle" is....you're probably wrong!

I gave up with this a while back, the banana thing just confirmed that its useless to discuss Brexit with Oldschool.

[domhnallj]

It won't happen for a while, Supreme Court will say it has to go to vote but then an Act of Parliament has to be drawn up which will allow all to go forward.
I would put a few Euros on Brexit not happening the way things are going

Its getting more and more complicated. The appeal by May and her goons to allow them to use royal prerogative will hopefully be thrown out. Interestingly, one of the judges sitting on the appeal has said that a simple one liner act and vote in parliament (the apparent fall-back position) won't cut it either since brexit it involves removing citizens rights granted when the UK signed up for the European project. The judge predicts quite a long wait until that gets sorted before article 50 can eventually be invoked.