To wish the EU would stop being so arsey with us!

[GreatAuntPrudish]

Juncker is an utter prick - leaking details of the dinner at No.10.
Then there's Barnier, Hollande and other EU officials warning us how ugly it's going to get.

Poland and France wanting to extract every last billion out of us!

They're playing into May's hands - giving her the opportunity to look like the Boudicca of the 21st century when she is actually an utterly useless PM.

I wish they'd show some consideration for the 48%

I'm a Remainer - still want to stay in EU - but it's starting to piss me off so there's little chance the leavers who were starting to wobble will want to stay now.

The Daily Mail are relishing it

"STOP calling Brexiteers thick/rascist./didnt know what they were doing/xenophobic."

If I had a penny for every time I saw a leaver post that, and I had to pay a penny for every time I saw a remainer actually calling leavers racist, I'd make a profit.

don't want petty EU arses running my life!)

Oh really. And how were they going to be, anyway ?

and they want their EU citizens to have a right to stay in the UK. Hmmm...are they saying the same for Brits living in Europe

It's the starting point of negotiations. That is how a negotiation works. Honestly I despair.

We say "We'll kick all them forin people out" and the EU says "We'll kick all the Brits out" and undoubtedly we will end up in a negotiated situation where both sets have rights to reside and work but access to healthcare and other benefits is nominally restricted.

Why on earth should the EU treat the UK nicely. It was fine as it was, the majority vote was to leave and it will have catastrophic results. There is no advantage to the EU to being anything less than harsh and demanding, sadly.

The career of at least one of my DC has effectively been ruined

and they want their EU citizens to have a right to stay in the UK. Hmmm...are they saying the same for Brits living in Europe

www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/29/brexit-rights-of-eu-nationals-eu27

I think its the UK thats being obstructive about this no suprise there not the EU

and they want their EU citizens to have a right to stay in the UK. Hmmm...are they saying the same for Brits living in Europe

Yes, of course. It's always been reciprocal. :) It's the UK who don't want EU citizens.

Brexit means Brexit

Nice one leavers.

I think its the UK thats being obstructive about this no suprise there not the EU

Sorry, are you being ironic? That article you linked to said "The EU leaders took just four minutes at a special summit to agree unanimously an uncompromising opening stance in the Brexit negotiations. Leaders said they would not discuss a future trade deal with the British government until “sufficient progress” is made on the issues of Britain’s estimated €60bn divorce bill, the rights of EU nationals in the UK, and the border in Ireland."

So if we roll over and accept their red lines then they will think about negotiating on what's important to us? They are the obstructive ones; it is 'sequencing' as described in Mr Varoufakis' article.

Shame, the op and others just get their viewpoints from the fake news sites formerly known as the national media

Don't be so patronising. I've followed Red's thread since last June and get my information from many sources - not fake news. I started this thread in AIBU to get the views of ordinary posters/voters. I know May is being an utter arse but I think the conduct of the EU is strengthening her position..

No surprise. No willingness to negotiate beforehand so why should they now? As someone points out , if the uk makes a success of leaving there will be a rush for the door so there is a strong incentive for the eurocracy to make life very difficult.

Still, more fool us for applying and following EU policies. Most of the other countries just ignored what didn't suit, we should have done the same.

Who is going to fund and run the EU Army? Where are they going to sell the goods that they no longer want to sell to the UK. There are many prosperous nations (and not so prosperous) with whom we can trade.

Canada
Australia
India
China
Japan
USA

So so many. I dare say we will cope. It's not ideal. But we will be okay.

Just cos nanny state UK isn't pandering to them anymore they throw their toys out of the pram.

No, they're just declining our demand to give us their pram and toys to take home with us, after we've stamped our foot and told them we don't want to play with them any more.

To use your metaphor, which wasn't a great one to start with....

So so many. I dare say we will cope. It's not ideal. But we will be okay.

Of course we will. It will not be overnight but, in the long term, it will be OK. I take the long-term view.
I have never been happy that we have so much of our trade tied up with one bloc, we shouldn't have all our eggs in one basket.

Sorry, are you being ironic? That article you linked to said "The EU leaders took just four minutes at a special summit to agree unanimously an uncompromising opening stance in the Brexit negotiations. Leaders said they would not discuss a future trade deal with the British government until “sufficient progress” is made on the issues of Britain’s estimated €60bn divorce bill, the rights of EU nationals in the UK, and the border in Ireland."

Yes. The problem is, that's what the rules say. That the trade deal comes after the exit deal. We signed a treaty to that effect - one that gives significantly more negotiating clout to the EU rather than the leaving country. They are approaching this as a professional negotiation, to get the best deal for them and their citizens, within those rules.

We knew the rules going in and what the likely approach would be. It is slightly pathetic to start complaining now about the meanies who won't negotiate about 'what's important to us' which appears to be having our cake and eating it.

If we want them to bend the rules for us, we probably should have tried being slightly more professional and even flexible and polite ourselves.

Surely at least one answer to all those saying "why should the EU bother with us now" is the sheer amount of cash we contribute? If it's correct that we're the second largest net donor, I'd have thought this would provide some motivation ... or is the prospect of losing all that lovely money precisely what's really rattling them?

Sylvia try Google!

We have been in NATO since its inception in 1949. It is a treaty organisation that ensures collective defence. Thus, if Russia decided to invade us, the rest of NATO is bound, under Article 5 of the Washington treaty, to come to our aid. If Russia decided to invade Latvia, Lithuania or Estonia, we then go to their aid, indeed, we already have committed troops, warships and planes there under the RAP (Readiness Action Plan).

Target 2:www.ifre.com/target-2-imbalances-rise-again/21242227.fullarticle amd tjis, if you have 15 minutes moneyweek.com/videos/investment-tutorial-what-is-target-2-22700/ is informative and understandable for the layman.

Jassy The problem is, that's what the rules say. Where does it actually say that in the Treaties please? Where is it laid down in black and white that this is the detailed process that must be followed?

All I can find is this from A50 'In the light of the guidelines provided by the European Council, the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union.' which rather suggests that it can be done in parallel, as a trade deal would come under 'the framework for its future relationship with the Union.'

"Where are they going to sell the goods that they no longer want to sell to the UK. There are many prosperous nations (and not so prosperous) with whom we can trade.

Canada
Australia
India
China
Japan
USA

So so many. I dare say we will cope. It's not ideal. But we will be okay."

We already trade with these countries. We just do it under the banner of the EU and have things like centrally negotiated e.g. Health safety and environmental regulations. What benefits are you seeing in the future?

Future relationship does not equal trade deal as a separate entity.

We seem to want to fully separate from the EU - ie define the future relationship and negotiate a trade deal on the basis of being a third country, despite not yet being a third country and the rules allowing trade deals to be done only with third countries.

It's probably possible but would require a huge amount of goodwill and I'm not sure we've done much to encourage that. And they have shifted to being willing to start trade talks once significant process on the exit deal has been made, which most seem to be ignoring.

But it's not unreasonable for the EU to say 'let's follow the treaty and EU law in its entirety,work out institutions and money and borders and visas and our relationship with each other as separate entities and what sort of transitional arrangements there might be, and then we'll look at what sort of trade deal might work for both of us.'

...and then we'll look at what sort of trade deal might work for both of us.

Look how long that took Canada. Why do their bits get done straight away and ours get kicked into the long grass.

Look how long that took Canada. Why do their bits get done straight away and ours get kicked into the long grass

These aren't 'their bits'. We're the ones who asked to leave. These are issues that need to be sorted out for everyone to clarify how we work as two separate entities because we've said we are leaving, and everyone needs to figure out how that works.

Everyone knew before the referendum how long Ceta took, that the trading partners we might seek said they would prioritise the EU deals they had in train, and that the EU had set out that this was how they saw the process working. None of this should be surprising or dismaying for those who voted leave, it was a known situation.

The thing you have to remember is that, unlike most political or commercial negotiations where both parties are at the table voluntarily, the EU doesn't want to be in this negotiation at all. They see no benefit in this situation and therefore no way to achieve a mutually advantageous result.

They are, rather, coming from a position of trying to minimise damage to themselves from the situation, which is quite a different beast.

ringring

I haven't read to the end if the thread yet but your post at 11.14 is basically advocating that the EU uses it's power to force the people of the UK to abandon the democratic decision they have made to leave the EU. It doesn't surprise me to read that but it does shock me.

Some Leavers conveniently overlook the fact that we might be one of the largest contributors to the EU budget ATM - but that's also because we have one of the largest populations.

If you look at it by GDP per head, we are (iirc) only 8th, only just above Ireland and Italy

So yes, as a net contributor the UK will be missed - but not as much as might be thought.

So you think that we have been well and truly kippered by the EU and should shut up and accept it? It's this sort of thinking that made people vote Leave. We were supposed to be in a mutually beneficial trading block, not locked in a straightjacket.
I wanted out before we got any deeper into this quicksand. Another ten years and it would probably be impossible to leave the Ever Closer Union.