Brexit

You believe everything you read in the papers? I certainly don’t, whether I agree with their political perspective or not. Everyone came out of those negotiations spinning wildly, there’s no way for any of us to know with certainty what was said in the negotiations. Yes, it’s a fact that the deal was rejected three times. I don’t accept it’s a fact that Barnier threatened May or that May folded or what the internal dynamics of that negotiation were. What you’re reporting is what people with vested interests said what happened, whether they are politicians, SPADs or journalists. That’s a very different thing. How do you know that the EU hasn’t threatened legal action? I certainly don’t. Maybe they have. Only the people close to the negotiations know what actually happened. The rest of us are all on the outside, trying to work out what happens next. Given that Johnson’s trip to France and Germany last week was simultaneously a triumph and a disaster according to the papers, I try not to present what I’ve read or heard as a verifiable fact unless I can do so for myself.

They talked for weeks. They gave summaries of what was said. The summaries were written to service the respective audiences, be they in the UK or the EU. The daily statements would have been agreed between both parties to state an agreed view on progress made during that day.

Transcripts of the negotiations weren’t released. The whole picture of the negotiations, who played hardball, who demanded what, who failed to understand all the issues, that all stayed in the room. There will be hundreds of books published on the negotiations in decades to come, and many of them won’t agree on what exactly happened. What was published in the press were stories that people wanted to present.

If you really think that you got wholly independent, objective, accurate reports which properly reflected the nuances of negotiations involving hundreds of people, well...

This isn’t a remain/leave perspective. It’s about understanding what are facts and what are opinions being presented as facts. And there have been a darn sight too many of the latter over the last four years.

And with that, I have a show to go to tonight. And that’s a fact.

It’s just a really bad look to the rest of the world - the countries we are going to need to negotiate with next - if we publicly renege on something we already publicly agreed to in negotiations.

We will be treated very differently by people negotiating with us because we are not seen as stable or reliable. It’s a bit like how credit companies charge you more interest if they think you are a higher risk. It will cost us more to do business in the future because we have shown ourselves to be at risk of defaulting.

Sorry, missthelma, I missed this earlier. But basically it’s exactly as londonpostie has laid out. There are things all lawyers on all sides seem agreed that we owe. And the UK has committed to paying that. Then there are the things we haven’t really “signed on the dotted line for” and there’s some disagreement as to whether we’re actually liable for it. Johnson has said it will not be paid in the event of no deal - so we actually, finally have someone who understands how to negotiate effectively instead of caving into all of the EU’s demands and hoping they chuck us some morsels.

As pointed out above, there aren't any such things. There may be a debate over exact quantum, but not over the obligations.

Despite what a lot of Brexiteers seem to think, the EU owes us nothing - we are the ones breaking contract, we are the ones who have to pay the damages. Contract law 101, and it really isn't more complicated than that at its heart.

"While the legal advice we have received differed, the stronger argument suggests that the UK will not be strictly obliged, as a matter of law, to render any payments at all after leaving."

In no way to me does that infer that actually we don't have to pay anything.
It's about as valid as posting this quote from another BBC news article:

It's all manipulation of the people and the BBC News team do a great job of regurgitating it out to people willing to believe anything they read.

The very best thing about all the coverage today has been listening to the different songs that the xylophone man has been playing in the background. Some really inspired choices!

As you were...

Glockenspiel!

Xylophones are wooden bars, glockenspiels are metal bars. Then there's vibraphones and marimbas......

Then castanets, whoops that is Spanish - better not go there, anything Euro.

Good to know, thanks - I work in digital so I know the SEO benefits of linking, just didn’t want to break any board rules! (Some do allow 3rd party links, some don’t.)