The UK votes to leave the European Union |OUT2| Mayday, Mayday, I've lost an ARM

Status
Not open for further replies.
Losing the EU institutions is hardly a surprise. But the main take from that story is how May's focus on internal party politics and domestic concerns has managed to upend 500 years of foreign policy and create a united Europe.

Unfortunately, I don't see that changing, at least while the main threat to May's position comes from the Eurosceptic wing of the Tory party, who'd stab her in the back if she even thought of compromising from the hard Brexit plan.
 
Carswell said recently he had every confidence in May to deliver Brexit, because most politicians don't care about the script they are reading, they just care about being the star of the play. That's unfortunately very true.

It constantly shocks me how little the Tory party cares about EU opinion. They would crawl over backwards to get a good headline in the Mail or Sun, and fucking the country in the upcoming negotiations doesn't seem to matter at all.
 
tuxfool said:
Perhaps I didn't explain it well. The UK would be replicating the same laws to facilitate regulation but would have equivalent entities to the CJEU and EMA.

Thus the UK would be forced to use the same laws but they would be applicable only inside the UK. Clearly I know very little about this, but do other countries essentially copy the rules set out in the EMA or FDA? For smaller countries it would seem like a good course of action.
Click to expand...

This is an unprecedented action on behalf of the UK, no-one left the existing framework but instead they built up their own agencies and rulesets in parallel. For instance you have Swissmedic performing the EMA-esque admin stuff in Switzerland, but you can't submit a EU eCTD (this is the container of all files of any drug you want to apply to market) in it's unaltered form to CH, it needs to be reworked. Nowadays, most countries base their applications on the eCTD so it shouldn't be too hard to do, but that's 20 odd years of work by UK professionals in this area thrown away for no good reason other than FURRNERS.

For the UK to get drugs to market they will need to be created in the new framework and at increased cost to the drug maker. And if they don't see the benefit in creating a separate license for the UK, it might not make to market as it was previously covered by the EU license.

Some of the better known OTC products could go away to be replaced by cheaper generics produced in the UK.


Anyway, just wanted to post this.

C9mOsy2XcAEeRRD.jpg


--

edit

We won't let you leave!

C9lkCCuWsAAiN5Q.jpg
 
Maledict said:
Carswell said recently he had every confidence in May to deliver Brexit, because most politicians don't care about the script they are reading, they just care about being the star of the play. That's unfortunately very true.

It constantly shocks me how little the Tory party cares about EU opinion. They would crawl over backwards to get a good headline in the Mail or Sun, and fucking the country in the upcoming negotiations doesn't seem to matter at all.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it seems as if both Cameron and May forgot that diplomacy was a thing, and they had to actually engage with European leaders, who had their own papers and people to worry about. They've managed to alienate our allies on the continent, and we're now left with only Flanders in wanting trade negotiations to happen alongside the divorce arrangement.

Hopefully we see some improvement in our diplomatic skills and somehow end up with a good deal, but it looks a bit grim based on past performance.
 
If the Brexit team is in denial over such obvious and (relatively) small losses like the European Banking Authority and the European Medicines Agency, then this is going to get very ugly.
 
DarthMasta said:
Wait, is this politics as usual, ammo to prove to folks back home just how meanie the EU is, or are your politicians straight up idiots?
Click to expand...

Our ruling party (the Tories) are in full coddle-the-brexiters mode and don't want to break their delusion and positive thinking bullshit until it's too late.
 
DarthMasta said:
Wait, is this politics as usual, ammo to prove to folks back home just how meanie the EU is, or are your politicians straight up idiots?
Click to expand...

I suspect it was more:
A) The Brexit team don't want the optics of Brexit costing jobs. Because they keep pushing this idea that Brexit will be better for Britons, and give us more opportunities, so losing thousands with an obvious, 1:1 connection to the consequences of the Leave vote is something they'd like to prevent.
B) I suspect they may have wanted those agencies as some kind of leveraging or a means to ease negotiations after Brexit is dealt with. Ie, if things are tense about cooperation, gently remind them that we're still 'partners', and that we (would) have several of their agencies still situated in this country.

The EU response on both points was a raised middle finger.
 
tuxfool said:
Perhaps I didn't explain it well. The UK would be replicating the same laws to facilitate regulation but would have equivalent entities to the CJEU and EMA.

Thus the UK would be forced to use the same laws but they would be applicable only inside the UK. Clearly I know very little about this, but do other countries essentially copy the rules set out in the EMA or FDA? For smaller countries it would seem like a good course of action.
Click to expand...

I work in a similar area to medicine (other controlled chemicals of various types). A lot of small countries will mutually recognise EU or USA approvals. Sometimes they recognise the whole thing and just need some forms and a rubber stamp (and an admin fee or disguised bribe, because this includes those sorts of small countries). Other times, they still do a limited national assessment to cover specific concerns of that country.

We will probably do the latter for a lot of our chemicals. We don't have the money or staff to duplicate EU bodies like ECHA or EFSA.

And the idea that the EMA would stay here is insane. This was never seen as possible, even by the craziest leave supporter.
 
Camp Freddie said:
And the idea that the EMA would stay here is insane. This was never seen as possible, even by the craziest leave supporter.
Click to expand...
What's crazier in Davies's position is he thinks he can hold them hostage. Like he thinks them leaving is under negotiation or that the EU will wait 2 years to begin the complicated logistical task of relocating these agencies.
 
This reminds me of an interesting fact - When the lines for what constitutes London were re-drawn in the 60's we ended up with the slightly perverse situation where Surrey County Council - location in Kingston - isn't actually in Surrey. They've had 50 years to move it but haven't bothered.
 
Stallion Dan said:
No, because EU had the decision. They chose poorly.
Click to expand...

They chose to put the European Union institution in a country where European Union citizens can actually enter easily. That no longer goes for the United Kingdom. So they can either move it or make it hard for employees ot actually work. Hard to understand. If you don't want European Union citizens working in your country, you can't have institutions where a lot of European Union citizens work.
 
Meadows said:
hmm, maybe this thread has calmed down a bit so we can have some reasonable discussion. I guess I'll check in and see...

giphy.gif
Click to expand...

It's difficult to have a reasonable discussion when the best "argument" Leavers can come up with is 'the EU is mean to us'.
 
So long people really think that the EU has no right to stand for its members any discussion with the Leaver crowd here is pointless.

At this point they aren't more than trolls.
 
Stallion Dan said:
No, because EU had the decision. They chose poorly.

UK want a situation that benefits both, EU chooses one that is exactly what EU don't want. UK has no fault here, EU doing same shit that caused Brexit in first place, they wont learn.
Click to expand...

UK doesn't want a situation that benefits both. UK wants a situation that benefits UK. We had a situation that benefited both, which, yes, meant concessions from both sides on things.

UK voted, one of the key arguments was whether the UK wanted free movement and as a result EU people working in the UK. They voted against it. So the EU is making motions to leave the UK, like the UK public voted for.
The UK is only getting what they voted for. That EU institutions would leave the UK was no secret.
 
Denmark to contest UK efforts to 'take back control' of fisheries

The British government's plan to "take back control" of its waters after leaving the EU is about to be challenged by a claim from Denmark that its fishermen have a historical right to access to the seas around Britain dating back to the 1400s.

Officials in Copenhagen have mined the archives to build a legal case that could potentially be fought in the international court of justice in the Hague, although officials hasten to say that this is not their intention.

Denmark is seeking a Brexit deal that recognises the right of its fleet to continue to exploit a hundred shared stocks of species such as cod, herring, mackerel, plaice and sand eel.
Officials say 40% of Danish fishermen's annual take is from waters within the 200-nautical mile exclusive economic zone around Britain, over which the UK may seek to impose greater control when it leaves the EU. Some of Denmark's coastal communities are almost entirely economically dependent on access to UK waters.

The development suggests that leaving the EU will not reap the dividends promised by prominent leave campaigners, including the foreign secretary, Boris Johnson, who has claimed that the union's "crazy" common fisheries policy has halved UK employment in the industry.

The Danish position is likely to be mirrored by the seven other member states who will be affected if the UK seeks to limit access to its waters to EU fleets after 2019, it is understood.
Click to expand...
 
It seems the Danes have a very tenuous case but it's telling that even one of the areas most cited as disadvantaging Britain won't necessarily improve post-Brexit.
 
They surely can't launch an election at this stage of brexit negotiations? You either do it before it has started or after a deal has been laid out...
 
So watching Sky News this is either GE or military action.

Spain mobilizing forces as we speak.


Maybe this could be an announcement about northern ireland?
 
I thought after the Brexit repercussion, other countries would stop wanting to leave the EU. It's just bad news for the Uk all the time (as expected). But it doesnt seem to be the case, the "exit" parties are still strong around Europe.
 
Stallion Dan said:
EU trying to keep what it only got as part of EU while stating UK loses what it only got as part of EU.

Wow.
Click to expand...
It's international waters. Current arrangements are based on the EU. New treaties must be signed. Claims are open season.

Fisheries are also hilariously hard to enforce.
 
Theonik said:
It's international waters. Current arrangements are based on the EU. New treaties must be signed. Claims are open season.

Fisheries are also hilariously hard to enforce.
Click to expand...
The rights to fish there belonged to the UK, only shared due to the EU, no EU, rights should be with UK again.
 
Stallion Dan said:
The rights to fish there belonged to the UK, only shared due to the EU, no EU, rights should be with UK again.
Click to expand...

It's not clear the rights to fish there did belong exclusively to the UK. The international maritime treaty only regulated new claims developed from that point, it specifically does not supersede any rights or agreements that predate the treaty (hence why the Spanish keep going on about the precise text of the Gibraltar treaty). If Denmark could produce historical documents from even the 1800s, for example, where the UK acknowledged Danish customary rights, that would be us snookered.
 
Stallion Dan said:
The rights to fish there belonged to the UK, only shared due to the EU, no EU, rights should be with UK again.
Click to expand...

That's not how international law works. These countries have a valid historical claim to fish in those areas and international law will almost certainly rule in their favor. As denmarks minister put it - their fishermen have been buried in Scotland and England for centuries. There's no way we can block them out.

Fishing was never really part of the eu issue. It was used as a scapegoat by the government as it was easier than explaining that market economics, technology changes and rapidly depleting fish stocks meant that it was always going to have less jobs than before. My favorite was Boris Johnson saying we lost 50% of our fishing jobs thanks to the EU - which means we've lost 11,000 low paying, dangerous as hell jobs in total since joining the EU. Even if we got them all back, that's10% of the jobs were already committing to losing in london alone thanks to Brexit.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
Resetera and the pedo problem (updates)
NSFW  43 44 45 46 47
2K
491K
notkeylime replied
  • Locked
What relaxes you the most?
0
4K
Halo is Back replied
  • Locked
What is the most painless way to commit suicide?
3
4K
EviLore replied
The Crisis in Venezula
2
2K
God Enel replied
Nutrition and studies - what does the science say?
10
8K
mekes replied
Top Bottom