Brexit

Fed up talking videogames? Why?

Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?

Remain a member of the European Union
201
79%
Leave the European Union
55
21%
 
Total votes: 256
User avatar
Death's Head
Member
Joined in 2009

PostRe: Brexit
by Death's Head » Thu Apr 20, 2017 6:40 pm

Moggy wrote:
Hexx wrote:
Brussels wants UK to pay for relocation of EU agencies out of London, leak suggests

According to a leaked draft of the European commission’s proposed Brexit negotiating guidelines, Brussels is going to ask the UK to pay the costs of relocating EU agencies out of London.

Politico Europe, which obtained the document (pdf), says the approach it proposes is “hardline” and “more in-your-face ... than EU officials had previously suggested”.

The European Medicines Agency (EMA) and European Banking Authority (EBA) are both currently based in London’s Canary Wharf. The document says the UK should pay for them to move to the continent, saying:

The United Kingdom should fully cover the specific costs related to the withdrawal process such as the relocation of the agencies or other Union bodies.

Politico Europe says this could even lead to the UK being asked to pay “the travel and expenses of negotiators on both sides, as well as extraordinary summit meetings of EU leaders”.


The DM and Breitbart just melted down. :lol:

To be fair, I can't see why the UK should pay specifically for the relocation of agencies. We should be paying a fair settlement of course, but it would be a bit cheeky to demand the UK pay the full costs for an office move.


We should say they can stay, but as we are no longer going to be part of the EU there is a massive fee to run EU business from a non EU country. :nod:
If the UK agrees to pay anything towards moving costs it will be ridiculous. What is in it for us?

Yes?
User avatar
Moggy
"Special"
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Brexit
by Moggy » Thu Apr 20, 2017 6:48 pm

Death's Head wrote:
Moggy wrote:
Hexx wrote:
Brussels wants UK to pay for relocation of EU agencies out of London, leak suggests

According to a leaked draft of the European commission’s proposed Brexit negotiating guidelines, Brussels is going to ask the UK to pay the costs of relocating EU agencies out of London.

Politico Europe, which obtained the document (pdf), says the approach it proposes is “hardline” and “more in-your-face ... than EU officials had previously suggested”.

The European Medicines Agency (EMA) and European Banking Authority (EBA) are both currently based in London’s Canary Wharf. The document says the UK should pay for them to move to the continent, saying:

The United Kingdom should fully cover the specific costs related to the withdrawal process such as the relocation of the agencies or other Union bodies.

Politico Europe says this could even lead to the UK being asked to pay “the travel and expenses of negotiators on both sides, as well as extraordinary summit meetings of EU leaders”.


The DM and Breitbart just melted down. :lol:

To be fair, I can't see why the UK should pay specifically for the relocation of agencies. We should be paying a fair settlement of course, but it would be a bit cheeky to demand the UK pay the full costs for an office move.


We should say they can stay, but as we are no longer going to be part of the EU there is a massive fee to run EU business from a non EU country. :nod:
If the UK agrees to pay anything towards moving costs it will be ridiculous. What is in it for us?


We've said they can stay. The EU (rightly) don't want their internal agencies based in a non member country.

We should pay something towards their removal, it's us deciding to leave after all, but it's not fair to say the UK has to pay the whole amount.

User avatar
Errkal
Social Sec.
Joined in 2011
Location: Hastings
Contact:

PostRe: Brexit
by Errkal » Thu Apr 20, 2017 6:50 pm

I don't see what is wrong with expecting us to pay, the move is occuring because of our retarded decision so it should be our cost to bear.

However it should only be moved / paid for once the leave is finalised.

User avatar
Meep
Member
Joined in 2010
Location: The north of Ireland.

PostRe: Brexit
by Meep » Thu Apr 20, 2017 9:09 pm

Obviously the agencies cannot stay here, that would be ridiculous, however no one is technically forcing them to relocate so I don't see how the UK is liable of any expenses.

Let's be real here, the UK is going to have a massive post-Brexit bill creating the bureaucracy and functions previously taken care of by the EU, with ongoing costs and salaries even after that; which will be a quite a squeeze on the treasury. There isn't really the luxury of goodwill payments.

User avatar
Death's Head
Member
Joined in 2009

PostRe: RE: Re: Brexit
by Death's Head » Thu Apr 20, 2017 9:12 pm

Moggy wrote:
Death's Head wrote:
Moggy wrote:
Hexx wrote:
Brussels wants UK to pay for relocation of EU agencies out of London, leak suggests

According to a leaked draft of the European commission’s proposed Brexit negotiating guidelines, Brussels is going to ask the UK to pay the costs of relocating EU agencies out of London.

Politico Europe, which obtained the document (pdf), says the approach it proposes is “hardline” and “more in-your-face ... than EU officials had previously suggested”.

The European Medicines Agency (EMA) and European Banking Authority (EBA) are both currently based in London’s Canary Wharf. The document says the UK should pay for them to move to the continent, saying:

The United Kingdom should fully cover the specific costs related to the withdrawal process such as the relocation of the agencies or other Union bodies.

Politico Europe says this could even lead to the UK being asked to pay “the travel and expenses of negotiators on both sides, as well as extraordinary summit meetings of EU leaders”.


The DM and Breitbart just melted down. [emoji38]

To be fair, I can't see why the UK should pay specifically for the relocation of agencies. We should be paying a fair settlement of course, but it would be a bit cheeky to demand the UK pay the full costs for an office move.


We should say they can stay, but as we are no longer going to be part of the EU there is a massive fee to run EU business from a non EU country. :nod:
If the UK agrees to pay anything towards moving costs it will be ridiculous. What is in it for us?


We've said they can stay. The EU (rightly) don't want their internal agencies based in a non member country.

We should pay something towards their removal, it's us deciding to leave after all, but it's not fair to say the UK has to pay the whole amount.

If we've said they can stay, it is their choice to move and they need to pay the associated costs. If they want us to pay it needs to be tied into a general Brexit deal.

Yes?
User avatar
Return_of_the_STAR
Member
Joined in 2008
Location: Northampton

PostRe: RE: Re: Brexit
by Return_of_the_STAR » Thu Apr 20, 2017 10:21 pm

Death's Head wrote:
Moggy wrote:
Death's Head wrote:
Moggy wrote:
Hexx wrote:
Brussels wants UK to pay for relocation of EU agencies out of London, leak suggests

According to a leaked draft of the European commission’s proposed Brexit negotiating guidelines, Brussels is going to ask the UK to pay the costs of relocating EU agencies out of London.

Politico Europe, which obtained the document (pdf), says the approach it proposes is “hardline” and “more in-your-face ... than EU officials had previously suggested”.

The European Medicines Agency (EMA) and European Banking Authority (EBA) are both currently based in London’s Canary Wharf. The document says the UK should pay for them to move to the continent, saying:

The United Kingdom should fully cover the specific costs related to the withdrawal process such as the relocation of the agencies or other Union bodies.

Politico Europe says this could even lead to the UK being asked to pay “the travel and expenses of negotiators on both sides, as well as extraordinary summit meetings of EU leaders”.


The DM and Breitbart just melted down. [emoji38]

To be fair, I can't see why the UK should pay specifically for the relocation of agencies. We should be paying a fair settlement of course, but it would be a bit cheeky to demand the UK pay the full costs for an office move.


We should say they can stay, but as we are no longer going to be part of the EU there is a massive fee to run EU business from a non EU country. :nod:
If the UK agrees to pay anything towards moving costs it will be ridiculous. What is in it for us?


We've said they can stay. The EU (rightly) don't want their internal agencies based in a non member country.

We should pay something towards their removal, it's us deciding to leave after all, but it's not fair to say the UK has to pay the whole amount.

If we've said they can stay, it is their choice to move and they need to pay the associated costs. If they want us to pay it needs to be tied into a general Brexit deal.


I don't agree that we should pay. It's their choice to move it. However I guarantee that we will pay one big lump sum to leave the EU. It will happen, otherwise no agreement will occur.

Image

GRAPL Heavyweight Champion 2010, Runner Up 2017, tag team Champion 2011, 2015, Wrestlemania PPV Winner 2012 and your current all time highest GRAPL points scorer.
Fixture feeling champion 2013.

I'm a Paul Heyman guy!
User avatar
Squinty
Member
Joined in 2009
Location: Norn Oirland

PostRe: Brexit
by Squinty » Fri Apr 21, 2017 12:45 pm


User avatar
Garth
Emeritus
Joined in 2008
Location: Norn Iron

PostRe: Brexit
by Garth » Sat Apr 22, 2017 12:18 am

Trump puts EU ahead of Britain in trade queue
Merkel lands Brexit victory for Brussels

Britain has been pushed behind the European Union in the queue to strike a free-trade deal with the United States, officials in Washington have said.

President Trump has softened his opposition to negotiating with the bloc as a whole after attempts by his officials to open talks with individual European nations were rebuffed.

During a private conversation last month, Angela Merkel, the German chancellor, convinced Mr Trump that talks on a US-EU deal would be simpler than he thought, sources close to both sides of the discussion told The Times.

This led to a “realisation” in the Trump administration that a trade deal with the EU — allowing the tariff-free exchange of goods and services — was more important to US interests than a post-Brexit deal with Britain, a source close to the White House said.


The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) trade deal between the EU and US, shelved after Mr Trump’s election victory, could now be revived or a new deal proposed.

The EU is America’s biggest trading partner: US exports to the bloc last year were worth $270 billion; it imported goods worth $417 billion. In the same period the US exported $55 billion in goods to Britain and imported $54 billion.

The development threatens to embarrass Boris Johnson, the foreign secretary, who after meeting Mr Trump’s advisers in January claimed that Britain would be “first in line” for a deal. A year ago Barack Obama warned that the UK would be at “the back of the queue” if it left the EU. Speaking alongside David Cameron in London, he said: “Maybe at some point down the line there might be a UK-US trade agreement but it’s not going to happen any time soon.”

Mr Trump’s change of heart has been put down to Mrs Merkel’s intransigence. After her trip to Washington, she briefed cabinet colleagues on what she said were “very basic misunder- standings” by Mr Trump on the “fundamentals” of the EU and trade.

“Ten times Trump asked her if he could negotiate a trade deal with Germany. Every time she replied, ‘You can’t do a trade deal with Germany, only the EU’,” a senior German politician said. “On the eleventh refusal, Trump finally got the message, ‘Oh, we’ll do a deal with Europe then.’ ” Cecilia Malmström, the EU’s trade commissioner, will visit Washington next week for informal talks with Wilbur Ross, the US commerce secretary, and other Trump officials. The EU and Mrs Malmström are keen not to appear to plead for the reopening of TTIP negotiations but will discuss the “economic and strategic rationale” for a deal if the American side does the same.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/trum ... -l7t8zwn7k

Edit:
Image

Image
User avatar
Lagamorph
Member ♥
Joined in 2010

PostRe: Brexit
by Lagamorph » Sat Apr 22, 2017 12:25 am

Image


Lagamorph's Underwater Photography Thread
Zellery wrote:Good post Lagamorph.
Turboman wrote:Lagomorph..... Is ..... Right
User avatar
Errkal
Social Sec.
Joined in 2011
Location: Hastings
Contact:

PostRe: Brexit
by Errkal » Sat Apr 22, 2017 6:19 am

It is almost like trading with a large group of countries in a single deal offers a better deal or something......

User avatar
Errkal
Social Sec.
Joined in 2011
Location: Hastings
Contact:

PostRe: Brexit
by Errkal » Sat Apr 22, 2017 6:22 am

There is also the minor detail of we can't join the queue for at least 2 years.

User avatar
Harry Ola
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Brexit
by Harry Ola » Sat Apr 22, 2017 7:20 am

Why are we continuing down this path? And why is the only politician speaking out against it Tim Farron?

Every thing now points to disaster and the self-immolation of our economy.

The Banks are moving out taking 6% of our GDP with them. Trade deals are looking less and less likely. We are having to cosy up to monsters in the hope of some future deal. There's an enormous bill coming our way just to get out and the best we can hope for over the next few years is a transitional deal.

And all because we do not like Polish shops on our High Streets.

Oh and leaving may not change our need for immigration, other than there may be far fewer jobs with our economy plunging headlong of a cliff.

Image
User avatar
Squinty
Member
Joined in 2009
Location: Norn Oirland

PostRe: Brexit
by Squinty » Sat Apr 22, 2017 7:30 am

If that's true, god, the government in England is really, REALLY strawberry floating inept. The guy wants to make his country great again by any means possible. Putting your faith in someone like that is completely misguided.

I don't even feel vindicated anymore when things like this come up. Just concern and anger at the situation.

User avatar
Moggy
"Special"
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Brexit
by Moggy » Sat Apr 22, 2017 8:51 am

One of the few things Leave supporters had left was this amazing deal Trump was going to give us. Top of the queue!

:lol:

User avatar
Hyperion
Member
Joined in 2009
Location: Beyond the wall

PostRe: Brexit
by Hyperion » Sat Apr 22, 2017 9:03 am

Garth wrote:Image


That Queen Trollface fits brilliantly

Image Image
User avatar
Moggy
"Special"
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Brexit
by Moggy » Sat Apr 22, 2017 9:11 am

Racing certainty

Her horse finished 5th.

:lol:

User avatar
KK
Moderator
Joined in 2008
Location: Botswana
Contact:

PostRe: Brexit
by KK » Tue Apr 25, 2017 10:09 am

Anecdotal of course, but myself and a few friends have noticed a massive drop off in eBay sales the last month. Can't shift a damn thing, even with heavy discounting. Even with eBay's general bullshit, I'm just wondering if this is a sign that in the overall economy people are beginning to stop buying all of a sudden. I had to drop a Dyson fan from £250 (RRP) to £125 just to get rid of it. I mean that is ridiculous.

Image
User avatar
Rex Kramer
Member
Joined in 2008
AKA: rich_brad29

PostRe: Brexit
by Rex Kramer » Tue Apr 25, 2017 10:16 am

I think there was a recent report that said that consumer spending was significantly down in March.

Image
Current castaway: Rax can be found here. All the previous contributors can be found here.
Tackling the pile of shame part 2 - http://grview.grcade.co.uk/articles/the-7-commandments-of-tackling-the-pile-of-shame/
User avatar
Hexx
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Brexit
by Hexx » Tue Apr 25, 2017 10:31 am

KK wrote:Anecdotal of course, but myself and a few friends have noticed a massive drop off in eBay sales the last month. Can't shift a damn thing, even with heavy discounting. Even with eBay's general bullshit, I'm just wondering if this is a sign that in the overall economy people are beginning to stop buying all of a sudden. I had to drop a Dyson fan from £250 (RRP) to £125 just to get rid of it. I mean that is ridiculous.


I'd have given you £126 for it
Those things are beasts.

User avatar
Denster
Member
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Brexit
by Denster » Tue Apr 25, 2017 2:39 pm

£130.

Moggy wrote:For £350m I'd join the Tory Party. :lol:

Return to “Stuff”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 45 guests