Spare a thought for Penka the cow. An innocent victim of EU rules, so it is claimed. At face value a case of uncaring EU bureaucracy, but where does one draw the line?

https://www.independent.co....

However, as one commentator on the article observed, the straying of livestock across the Irish border must be a daily occurrence that will test the strict application of sanitary regulations come the end of March next year. Rather than a collar with owner's contact details, will cows be let loose to graze with a copy of the relevant certificate of health around their neck just in case?

sounds like a problem that can be solved
https://twitter.com/bbcnire...

Milking it for all it's worth ;-)

Pull the udder one, it's got bells on.

:D

My question now is very simple. Is there any point in persisting with advocating that the Uk remains in the EEA and rejoins EFTA as Barnier has been shown to not understand what the EEA means(whether deliberately or not) and asserts this lack of understanding to his masters the European Council? Nor has the European Council shown the slightest interest in understanding.

Is it so that the Uk goverment also does not understand what EEA membership means?
Are we simply wasting our time while the Irish border is pushed to the front of the stage by unseen hands and the real questions evaded?

Is the UK advocating staying in the eea? If not, what's your point?

It is not. We are -the Leave Alliance plus a heap of business and MPs . Even if not,what is the purpose of wholesale distortion of another model and that prevents any discussion of an alternative

Discussion by whom? It's a bit late to be formulating a plan isn't it?

You are right. The continuous wrong assessment of the EEA started with Cameron,continued with May,a million hard right commentators and now the EU's chief negotiator..

Time for a quote from 'Darkest Hour'

yes, clearly our predicament is the fault of remainers

well two of the four I mentioned are remainers. Barnier although he does not have a vote and Cameron. I dont think May or the million hard right commentators are remainers when i last looked.

All those mentioned are remainers.

''My question now is very simple. Is there any point in persisting with advocating that the Uk remains in the EEA ''

Yes.

And the reason,now the EU heads of government have endorsed an error strewn document?

It makes no difference. Leaving the single market will mean ruin.

Are you trying to distinguish between the EEA and 'the single market'?

No.

Is this the 'error-strewn' document (aka slide) that you've been referring to?

https://ec.europa.eu/commis...

Yes thats the one.The word 'now' is rather jejune since the slide was issued the week before Christmas and was rather lost although there was praise in the Guardian etc for showing how things really were.I

I think that there are people behind the scenes who know exactly where we are going and nothing can stop them, therefore I see little point in pushing against the goads. However that doesn't mean that Efta/Eea is not the best way to leave the EU. Although, perhaps it is better to say it's the only way to leave the EU.

Since Barnier is meeting (together with Juncker) with Erna Solberg on Tuesday, before she in turn has discussions with Theresa May in Downing Street, I'm sure they'll straighten out this perceived 'lack of understanding' before the end of the week.

Well they have not done so since December 17th . Nor is Solberg the right person.
Are you suggesting that Barnier will sort it out by issuing a statement 'I apologize to the British government and the EU Heads of government for presenting a slide to the EU leaders in December which purported to explain how Norway Iceland and Leich relate to European Union membership. I now realize that I was wrong on every point in that assessment. I with draw this slide .and I now resign all my offices in the EU with immediate effect'
Otherwise what 'sorting out' can be done?

The principal barrier to the UK taking up the EFTA/EEA option lives in No.10 Downing Street, so it does not matter what the EU (or EFTA) thinks: they are never going to have to deal with it while she is still in office.

And it isn't as if some of her likely successors are any less hostile to that option than she is, albeit sometimes for different (and equally erroneous) reasons.

So the fact that Barnier hasn't got a clue about the eu and its institutions and is broadcasting lies, is no problem?

Did I say that Barnier hasn't got a clue about the eu and its institutions? No I didn't.

Did I say that Barnier is broadcasting lies? No I didn't.

If you won't to put words in other people's mouths, I suggest you take up writing plays. (After all, you do seem to have a talent for making things up.)

Every word you say is correct but I suppose one of our hopes is that either by change of opinion or force majeure this situation will change.
We dont want a 'triple coffin lid' where we finally get the Uk government sensible and then find that we have to burst aside the errors of the EU as well.

The EU will, at least temporarily, be disarmed, either by joy or because they're in shock, so things may not be as bad on their side as you now think.

Oh, sorry Anthony - I thought you were referring to Barnier's recent mention of 'Norway Plus', which I know you took umbrage with. I don't remember that particular slide, though.

https://twitter.com/Pickard...
Times article . Cliff edge doomsday.

I'm totally shocked!

http://eureferendum.com/blo...

Hold the front pages for pictures of petrol tankers coming through Dover! It is all rubbish

That *one* bit is slightly baffling. Petrol comes from refineries, there might well be second-order reasons why petrol would run out, but it isn't a first wave problem. That doesn't make the whole scenario rubbish.

"there might well be second-order reasons why petrol would run out,"

Because the Pound falls through the floor..?

I was thinking because the drivers have no food and the petrol stations are smashed up! In theory the oil industry holds an emergency reserve of 67.5 days of fuel as directed by the energy act 1976 implementing a requirement of some EU directive I can't be bothered to look for.
That might be 67.5 days for ambulances and other emergency services rather than for normal cars.

Food deliveries will start grinding to a halt long before the 67 days is up and rationing will kick in.

And we know how popular that can be.

So, that's their plan. "Throw open Britain's borders in the event of a no-deal Brexit. ...We are entirely dependent on Europe reciprocating our posture that we will do nothing to impede the flow of goods into the UK. ... Davis has sought to persuade civic leaders in key ports such as Calais and Antwerp to tell their central governments that goods must keep flowing."

I thought they were so happy about WTO rules? Maybe someone hand them a copy? Like, for instance, about most favoured nation rules?

The times where countries "reciprocated" have gone with GATT. So on second thought, maybe they rather would like a time machine.

We are entirely dependent on Europe reciprocating our posture

Given that "our posture" will involve us being on our knees, I think it's likely that we'll be more subject to the reciprocating action that senior official mentioned than any reciprocal action.... :eek:

You have hit the nail on the head, LL. He is effectively asking civic leaders in Antwerp to drop barriers to ALL MFN's if they are to comply with WTO rules.

A) It's not their call.
B) It's feckin' mental.

More of "going to Berlin and Paris for trade deals". Sheesh!

What he is asking for is for legitimate traders to drive past customs without declaring goods. It is smuggling as a government policy. This is failed state stuff.

South African sanction-busters come to mind. Except the rest of the world imposed sanctions on the SA economy - the UK has chosen to impose sanctions on itself!

Thanks for spotting. No thanks to the Times. Is there anyone who believes that they did not know before?

Now they come up with the unknown sources, "a source said", "a spokesman" etc.
http://eureferendum.com/blo...
They could have published an investigative journalism article long ago, possibly taking cues from OGH's blog, or at the latest when the EU Commission published their preparedness notices, and asking the government some tough questions.

But they preferred to stay quiet and mislead the public with noise and irrelevance and distraction as all the others did, in the country where the Prime Minister calls unpatriotic those who ask where she leads them and what it is that is to be found in her surprise box once it is opened.

Booker's column in the Telegraph tomorrow is also on the Task Force's 'Notices to Stakeholders' and what it means for a post-Brexit UK. Perhaps Dr North will highlight it in his own upcoming blog post…

The problem is that a substantial number of people believe that the EU is just posturing - after all, this is what they have been told innumerable times, among others by David Davis himself.

In addition, the government has spread the narrative that it is in the EU's interest to keep trade flowing and the borders open, so that it must be "punishment" if the EU does not "reciprocate".

If the Times lets this stand, as an information from a "senior official", without explaining why the EU cannot legally "reciprocate", this article is irresponsible, still chiming in with the government's narrative.

Any information about it on the other pages?

Bring it on, we will be back in within the year.

Yes, but at what cost? I'd rather we navigate Efta membership and reach a compromise or change our minds before leaving than see that sort of destruction.

Why ponce about with EFTA when we have full membership with none of the perceived downsides aka Schengen, Euro ?

https://twitter.com/open_br...

From sunlit uplands to rain-drenched swamp-lands. ;-)))

Yes and the pseudo leavers like Farage will say that people voted to be worse off and poorer. There are going to be some very angry people...

there are no "pseudo leavers" or for that matter "pseudo remainers", there are people who voted leave and people who voted remain

the attempt at labeling smacks of rewriting history - see oldgit post above