"chequers"

[Khandro]

The Chequers plan is rubbish, I have yet to hear anyone of any political persuasion think it is a good or even workable proposal, and yet the media is spinning it as if we should all be on tenterhooks to see if our dear leader can pull it off against EU adversity.
What is needed is either a completely different plan (enter Boris?) or no deal at all.
Would you agree?

[Spicerack]

New Judge //No I wouldn't.//

naomi24// No I wouldn't agree.//

You both agree with khandro really. You just didn't bother reading the question properly.

[New Judge]

certainly did read the question properly. It was this:

"What is needed is either a completely different plan (enter Boris?) or no deal at all.
Would you agree?"

I don't agree we need one or the other. We only need the one

[Garaman]

//The UK cannot be allowed to be better off after Brexit - we must be punished and humiliated. //

I don't agree with the second part, but I would have expected the first. Some do seem to think we should be able to cherry pick what suits us. You wouldn't expect to be able to leave a club and then be allowed to enjoy the benefits more after you have left, or would you?

[New Judge]

"You wouldn't expect to be able to leave a club and then be allowed to enjoy the benefits more after you have left, or would you?"

No I would not so at least that's one thing we can agree on. Any deal will inevitably involve "cherry picking" - but that will be on both sides. The cherries that the EU pick will entail the UK retaining some (or probably many) of the disadvantages of EU membership. The cherries that the UK is allowed to keep will amount to next to nothing.

There is a grave danger that is Mrs May's plans are accepted we are in for "BRINO" (Brexit In Name Only). The UK needs to leave, lock stock and barrel. Then it can begin to negotiate a trade deal (in the same way as normal countries might). This should have been announced on June 24th 2016 then the "negotiations" (which have been nothing of the sort) might have proved a bit more fruitful.

[dannyk13]

The odds on the EU accepting 'chequers' are astronomical.May failed in her attempt to get Macron onside.

[New Judge]

Let's hope so.

[Garaman]

//The UK needs to leave, lock stock and barrel. Then it can begin to negotiate a trade deal (in the same way as normal countries might). This should have been announced on June 24th 2016 then the "negotiations" (which have been nothing of the sort) might have proved a bit more fruitful.//

I'm not really sure what you think that would have achieved, NJ. If we don't like what is on offer we can leave with no deal. If we had announced we were leaving with no deal would we have negotiated something better by now? I doubt it. Negotiations normally take the time allotted to them so at this moment in time we would probably be in a similar position.

[Old_Geezer]

But, it would have focussed minds. At present the EU sees verbal dissent and delaying activities in the UK and thinks we won't leave on no deal so they can stand firm. If they knew we were definitely off, no bluff, they'd have to reconsider how they're presently ignoring their own businesses who want to ensure continued unfettered trade.

[Khandro]

"How the PM persists in her make-believe plan is beyond my powers of guessing
Theresa May has certainly pulled off one truly remarkable feat, She has united Brexiteers and Remainers alike with the EU, in all pouring scorn on her tortuous Chequers White Paper proposal as wholly unworkable.

Yet, despite its universal rejection, she still blindly persists in pushing her make-believe plan as her only offer for the showdown October meeting when the final terms of our leaving are meant to be agreed."

Christopher Booker in today's Telegraph

[naomi24]

Spicerack, //You [NJ/Naomi] both agree with khandro really. You just didn't bother reading the question properly.//

I read the question properly and as I said I don’t agree with Khandro. Khandro suggested two options. I don’t agree that there are two options. There is only one.

[Khandro]

n. // I don’t agree that there are two options. There is only one.//

There must always be more than one in any negotiation, - some variation on Boris' "cake and eat it" maybe, it seems unlikely, but the EU has an enormous amount to lose without a deal, oh, if only we had Donald.

May's 'plan' is dead in the water, the Brexiteers don't want it, the remoaners don't want it and the EU doesn't want it, but still she persists with this nonsense. One has to seriously ask, does she have bats in the belfry?

[naomi24]

Khandro, //There must always be more than one [option] in any negotiation//

We shouldn’t be negotiating at all. We should have fulfilled our obligations - and left.

[Khandro]

n. Our 'obligations' are what we have negotiate.

[naomi24]

Khandro, no - obligations are not what we're negotiating.