On 29/12/2020 18:24, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Mon, 28 Dec 2020 08:14:38 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

On 27/12/2020 17:40, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Sat, 26 Dec 2020 17:09:50 +0000, Andrew
wrote:

On 25/12/2020 10:17, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Nope You are. Name ONE person who has been 'deplatformed' by the right.

Theresa May. Thesame bunch of people are the ones described by John
Major as bar-stewards.

And in 2005 the brainless Kippers gave Tony Blair another 5 years
in office by splitting the non-Labour vote in all the marginals.

Fabulous tactics on Nigel's part. He really is the ONE MAN without
whom we would never have left the EU's death embrace.

And we still haven't. Ok we arent moored alongside, but the cables still
connect us

Not *remotely* as much as before, though. They get themselves in the
**** with the Euro and it's their problem; no more bail-outs from UK
taxpayers!
I take heart from the ERG's announcement today that they're happy with
the deal and it preserves full sovereignty. Nigel's been very quiet,
too so that's a good sign. Looks like we've successfully avoided the
BRINO that Treason May was hoping to saddle us with, the old bitch.

I read quite a lot of it and I have read the ERGS legal report. I think
basically what it boils down to is that the EU has got everything it
wanted on level playing fields *on paper* but that the sanctions for
giving them the finger are weak and would amount as I understand it, to
placing tariffs on goods that were cheapened thereby. That's from the
ERG. The ERGs point is that how it pans out depends on the government,
whether it meekly hangs on to the EUs tailcoats or strikes out boldly on
its own. Same for state subsidies. And the principle of reciprocity
means we could e.g, bitch about Germany subsidising its manufacturing...
I laughed when I read a lot of it. You could see loads of oversight
committees, working parties and if course the Joint Resolution Board (or
whatever it is where they pass round a spliff and agree to disagree).
That was EU input. And then you could see in the small print where they
could recommend away, but there was no requirement to follow those
recommendations!

And that it seems was the tenor of the whole document - loads of EU
'thou shalt' with loads of UK 'or else? bugger all!' . Up to the break
clause which say 'if you or we don't like it,just announce it will cease
to apply in one year' presumably with WTO as a fallback...

In short it looks like a complete fudge with the EU trying to impose
conditions and us letting them, but trying to make sure they are
ineffective, time limited, able to be revised, or in the final analysis
thrown overboard.

In reality it stops the Germans panicking up to a point because they
get their market access and at least on the face of it assurances we
wont compete unfairly. But it has more legal loopholes than you can
shake a stick at. My guess is that it isn't ultimately with a damn. It
will get is to customs declarations even if its tariff free, so all the
mechanisms to deal with borders will be in place, and if we feel lucky
next year punk, we can blow the deal to hell and go WTO with a lot less
pain. Or not.

--
"Corbyn talks about equality, justice, opportunity, health care, peace,
community, compassion, investment, security, housing...."
"What kind of person is not interested in those things?"

"Jeremy Corbyn?"