OV9

Once this whole thing is done, I reading back through this thread will certainly be entertaining!

Interesting comments from Macron:

"I am not trying to read into the future but I do not think we shall grant any further delay. I think it is time to put an end to these negotiations and move on to the future relationship," Mr Macron said.

"There shall be no delay unless there are major changes," he added, referring to the prospects of an extension to allow for a general election or second referendum.

Asked about Boris Johnson, Mr Macron said he was "a real leader with real strategic thoughts and those who do not take him seriously are wrong and will continue to be wrong".

Rich B wrote: Fri Oct 18, 2019 3:39 pm Once this whole thing is done, I reading back through this thread will certainly be entertaining!

Doesn't it self destruct at that point?

Macron is a fucking idiot...

GG. wrote: Fri Oct 18, 2019 3:25 pm Oh and an impact assessment on what? A future trade deal that hasn't been negotiated? If you rejected it on the basis you haven't had someone attach some hypothetical made up figures to it then you're really just searching for an excuse.

An impact assessment of a proposed major change to our country is simply good governance. I am in equal parts amazed and appalled that a solicitor would apparently advise a client to sign an agreement without knowing what will happen as a result.

NotoriousREV wrote: Fri Oct 18, 2019 6:23 pm

Your term Brexit Fatigue is spot on. Even the habitual opposers have had a tit full and just want to get on with it.

NotoriousREV wrote: Fri Oct 18, 2019 7:01 pm

GG. wrote: Fri Oct 18, 2019 3:25 pm Oh and an impact assessment on what? A future trade deal that hasn't been negotiated? If you rejected it on the basis you haven't had someone attach some hypothetical made up figures to it then you're really just searching for an excuse.

An impact assessment of a proposed major change to our country is simply good governance. I am in equal parts amazed and appalled that a solicitor would apparently advise a client to sign an agreement without knowing what will happen as a result.

Yes, and surely there can just take the impact assessment from May’s deal and tweak it a bit if, as GG says, it’s just a tweaked version of May’s deal.

NotoriousREV wrote: Fri Oct 18, 2019 7:01 pm

GG. wrote: Fri Oct 18, 2019 3:25 pm Oh and an impact assessment on what? A future trade deal that hasn't been negotiated? If you rejected it on the basis you haven't had someone attach some hypothetical made up figures to it then you're really just searching for an excuse.

An impact assessment of a proposed major change to our country is simply good governance. I am in equal parts amazed and appalled that a solicitor would apparently advise a client to sign an agreement without knowing what will happen as a result.

You think solicitors advise on the financial impact of deals their clients may strike?

I think your getting confused with financial advisers. Lawyers advise on law - not whether something is good business judgment.

Jobbo wrote: Fri Oct 18, 2019 7:17 pm

NotoriousREV wrote: Fri Oct 18, 2019 7:01 pm

GG. wrote: Fri Oct 18, 2019 3:25 pm Oh and an impact assessment on what? A future trade deal that hasn't been negotiated? If you rejected it on the basis you haven't had someone attach some hypothetical made up figures to it then you're really just searching for an excuse.

An impact assessment of a proposed major change to our country is simply good governance. I am in equal parts amazed and appalled that a solicitor would apparently advise a client to sign an agreement without knowing what will happen as a result.

Yes, and surely there can just take the impact assessment from May’s deal and tweak it a bit if, as GG says, it’s just a tweaked version of May’s deal.

There already are figures floating around (by the economist) showing it being worse than May’s deal.

Of course they are masquerading as a forecast when in reality they cannot as they would have to assume a pure hypothetical as to what kind of FTA results at the end of the transition. As a result they’re bogus - end of story.

ETA: just checked again and those figures that have been bandied about assume a Canada minus FTA that they think Johnson will pursue. 1) it’s the impact of the trading arrangements not the WA and 2) that form of FTA is a total guess - it might not even be boris negotiating it!

GG. wrote: Fri Oct 18, 2019 7:42 pm

NotoriousREV wrote: Fri Oct 18, 2019 7:01 pm

GG. wrote: Fri Oct 18, 2019 3:25 pm Oh and an impact assessment on what? A future trade deal that hasn't been negotiated? If you rejected it on the basis you haven't had someone attach some hypothetical made up figures to it then you're really just searching for an excuse.

An impact assessment of a proposed major change to our country is simply good governance. I am in equal parts amazed and appalled that a solicitor would apparently advise a client to sign an agreement without knowing what will happen as a result.

You think solicitors advise on the financial impact of deals their clients may strike?

I think your getting confused with financial advisers. Lawyers advise on law - not whether something is good business judgment.

So you would never advise a client to ensure they understood the implications of any contract they signed, financial or otherwise?

NotoriousREV wrote: Fri Oct 18, 2019 7:56 pm

GG. wrote: Fri Oct 18, 2019 7:42 pm

NotoriousREV wrote: Fri Oct 18, 2019 7:01 pm

An impact assessment of a proposed major change to our country is simply good governance. I am in equal parts amazed and appalled that a solicitor would apparently advise a client to sign an agreement without knowing what will happen as a result.

You think solicitors advise on the financial impact of deals their clients may strike?

I think your getting confused with financial advisers. Lawyers advise on law - not whether something is good business judgment.

So you would never advise a client to ensure they understood the implications of any contract they signed, financial or otherwise?

That. I'm not in the legal profession, but part of my responsibility is to review contract clauses, assess the risk and if necessary propose mitigation. Effectively making an impact assessment before the contract is signed. If I'm doing that as part of basic corporate governance, it should stand to reason that for something so important it was mandatory.

Watching the house of commons live today it strikes me there’s movement towards support for Boris’ deal

revsRus wrote: Sat Oct 19, 2019 11:27 am Watching the house of commons live today it strikes me there’s movement towards support for Boris’ deal

well done mate - you’re the one person not watching the rugby!

I’m not watching the rugby, I’d rather watch paint dry. I’m not watching the HoC, either

That’s why the roads are quiet! I had a cracking drive on the drying roads just now

Yeah, seems like the end might be nigh. Open wide chaps, we're all going to have to take a bite of this shit sandwich.

Looks like a delay...

No letter at 11pm

Broccers wrote: Sat Oct 19, 2019 3:45 pm No letter at 11pm

Arrested for contempt of court on Monday