Brexit - the end of the beginning - the negotiations begin

One thing is certain, you get a different impression of Juncker when he speaks German. English is not his strong point and I think sometimes when being interviewed he tries to be satirical and gets it wrong.

He's not so buttoned up and sometimes he acts a little bit uncontrolled but basically he does a good job.
I like him and find his comments honest - not always this politic-speak we have to get used to on the BBC.

I think he has slapped people in the face in jest

Perhaps if he does it to TM she will give him a hard slap back.
No, on second thoughts, she is a vicar's daughter, she will forgive his trespasses.

Does anybody remember him shouting at Farage, and then later kissing and hugging Farage ( when Farage was being jubilant about Brexit ) you couldn't say he was sober to be so changeable! I thought Juncker was going to propose.

I just cannot understand how anyone can remain in such an important job when they are a drunkard as he is reputed to be, although he denies this is true. How can anyone negotiate with a person who is not completely sober?
www.independent.co.uk/news/people/jean-claude-juncker-waves-off-speculation-over-drinking-while-drinking-four-glasses-of-champagne-a7307291.html

May invited Juncker to dinner. Was he supposed to refuse? It could have been a bit awkward at border control, if he was banned.

You know him well, do you roses?

Well, this is going to be fun, because May has just threatened to be a "bloody difficult woman".

Sounds like him Fitzy !

Just been looking at some of Junckers quotes:

"When it becomes serious, you have to lie."

This one on calls for a UK referendum over the Lisbon treaty: "Of course there will be transfers of sovereignty. But would I be intelligent to draw the attention of the public to this fact?"

"I am ready to be insulted as being insufficiency democratic. I am for secret, dark debates".

On the introduction of the Euro: "We decide on something, leave it lying around and wait and see what happens. If no one kicks up a fuss, because most people don't understand what has been decided, we continue step by step until there is no turning back"

He's an arrogant, allegedly drunken, rude unpleasant??????? who should be banned from this country.

Juncker is a very strange man.

Never the less, I bet Yanis is telling the truth!

Just a bit!

Varoufakis is also an expert in game theory (I believe he's written a book). He enjoyed winding the EU up and has made a living out of being controversial.

Sure, but he was just talking about their general use of deceitful and unhelpful tactics. Of course, he has a personal axe to grind!

But of course Greece were never actually leaving the Eu - that is one of the sticking points - they have no precedence.

Just heard Yanis Veroufakis on the radio. He Is very critical of the EU negotiation tactics, and further doesn't believe Juncker is in any way annoyed over the talks but is just playing the sort of games he saw happening all the time when he was negotiating with the EU on behalf of Greece. He also said that it's ridiculous of the EU to insist on sequencing negotiations - absolutely no reason whatsoever why trade talks can't run in parallel, at least to some extent negating the problem Juncker keeps going on about in terms of the time needed to look at the detail.

Should that report be correct it will play havoc with millions of lives. Not only the British partners of EU citizens but the children too - the position of the children would need to be made clear. All the immigrants would be needing to have private insurance so would probably mean it was not worth any foreign people working in UK.
As to the Uk citizens in the EU - those of working age and paying into the system would likely be fine as they will be paying the equivalent of NI. The retirees who have only a state pension and/or a small private one will be badly hit. The people living away from UK for years will not be eligible for NHS care if they return home - likely to be older people. It would be an absolute disaster all round as the money they would get for houses would not be enough to purchase in UK and their income would not allow them to rent and possibly pay for NHS care too and they would have insufficient funds to pay for healthcare in their adopted countries. People who left the UK as a UK pensioner with an S1 certificate would be OK and could slot back into the UK system and claim all benefits they were entitled to.
The EU are well aware of all this which is why they were amazed at the June deadline May wanted to impose.

The solution is in the UK's hands and always has been. The reason people come to the UK is for jobs. The UK could do a lot to reduce the pull factor.The UK could enforce more effectively laws against gang masters, who recruit Eastern Europeans at local rates then charge them extortionate amounts for board and lodging. Another issue is benefits. It's often forgotten that Cameron did actually win concessions from the EU on benefits.

So who are these categories of worker Starmer would exclude?

We've never been in Schengen, so it shouldn't be rocket science to control who comes into the country - although a few million will need to be spent on border control.

As for EU citizens already in the UK...the FAZ article claims that May told Juncker that those already here could stay and be treated like any other non-UK national ie they would lose benefits of being EU nationals, such as healthcare. Presumably, if that were reciprocal, UK expats in the EU would lose any healthcare they have. I don't know exactly how it works, but presumably expats would lose out, as well as tourists.

Unlike other European countries UK benefits don't depend on contributions, so conditions could be introduced which relied on contributions (which would, incidentally, be fairer to UK citizens who lose their jobs in their fifties after having contributed thousands).

POGS I think it's clear that KS would accept free movement as it now stands. Hence my earlier post as to whether the public (more specifically the Brexit supporters) could ever accept his solution (at least without another referendum?). It would get my vote.

durhamjen

From you link to Paul Mason:-

" Labour's position , is at last, fairly clear. It would not walk away without a deal, says Keir Starmer; that means it would negotiate beyond the artificial deadline of 2019, if necessary. It will not leave without “retaining the benefits of the single market and the customs union”

Starmer leaves open the option of staying in the single market but says the organisational outcome is “secondary”. This is a mistake. The first request to Europe should be a clear and bold one: to stay in the EEA on special terms while suspending freedom of movement for some categories of worker."

I keep asking 'HOW' can you stay in the Single Market when the UK would 'HAVE TO' comply with the 4 Pillars/Freedoms enshrined in the EU? Even the EFTA / EEA countries have to abide by the Freedom of Movement of goods, capital, services and persons. The EU from The EU Commission, Merkel, Tusk, Juncker all say 'NO CHERRY PICKING' .

Sir Keir Starmer came in for, quite rightly, a lot of comment after his speech for not showing an understanding of that point, he faced in two directions and that is not possible.

The only way the UK will stay in the EU/EFTA/EEA is to Remain the 28th Member of the European Union because the 4 Pillars/Freedoms is NONE NEGOTIABLE.

Please explain how Sir Keir Starmer and Paul Mason can say Labour will keep the UK 'Stay in the Single Market'.?

The Agreement on the European Economic Area (EEA) unites the 27 EU Member States and the three EFTA EEA States, Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway, in one Internal Market governed by the same basic rules and legislation. These rules cover the four freedoms, i.e. free movement of goods, capital, services and persons, plus competition rules and horizontal areas related to the four freedoms to ensure harmonised legislation in the EEA."

The EU is not going to change its negotiating strategy. May needs to get over it.

I don't think negotiations should be confidential. After all, one of the big themes of the VoteLeave campaign was about decisions made at secret meetings of élites.

If the "will of the people" means anything, May has a duty to consult with, listen to and inform the "people", but it seems to be her style to rush off to secret meetings.

Days after the referendum,she had a meeting with Murdoch, the purpose of which was confidential. She offered Nissan some kind of deal to stay in the UK, but nobody knows what the deal was. It was the same with Surrey County Council, when it threatened to put up Council Tax by some astronomical amount to cover adult social care.

If people really care about democracy, they should be worried about doing business in that way.

Have you noticed how Theresa May's focus is on herself? It's always about she will provide "strong and stable leadership" (or whatever), not the Conservatives. She's the leader of a party, not a president.

Maybe I'm reading more into this than necessary, but I smell a rat. Rumours have been circulating for a while that she's not popular with other Conservative MPs and it's obvious she doesn't like engaging with the public.

Three close advisors have resigned over the last couple of weeks and she's trying to impose some of her close team on constituencies where there are vacancies, including mine.

When she spoke of enemies in Parliament trying to derail Brexit.I thought at the time she meant her own backbenchers and I'm not convinced I was wrong.

I don't think she is in any way xenophobic but she seems to be banging her head against a brick wall in trying to get the EU to change their negotiating agenda and keep negotiations confidential. The EU is a very inflexible structure - Juncker can't keep going back to the 27 asking for changes to the process they signed off. I think she had to try but, as you say, there was little hope of success.

Theresa May, from the outset, was deluded that the whole process could be secret until she emerged at the end (dressed as Britannia perhaps?) to tell us she had got a great deal. This was never going to happen with so many people involved, along with the fact that she was not actually in charge of the process - the power inevitably resides with the 27.
Her track record as Home Secretary on immigration does not bode well. She has never shown signs of subtley or flexibility. He stance on refugees possibly reveals a worrying attitude to foreigners. One does wonder whether her recent slip of the tongue, claiming to be the party that "prevents tourism" reveals a deep xenophobia.

I certainly couldn't dispute it. In fact I wouldn't question it at all if it hadn't been for the Commission's statement that the talks were "constructive". But still, I don't for a moment think the report was simply made up. It's too detailed to be anything other than an official leak.