,
10 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
“[S]trong relationship with the single market underpinned by mutual institutions and obligations” is, I’m afraid, just more cakeism.
The correct term for the Single Market is the Internal Market. And the EU is under no obligation to a third state as to its Internal Market.
The correct term for the Single Market is the Internal Market. And the EU is under no obligation to a third state as to its Internal Market.
Even the EEA states do not put the EU under an obligation. They get input, but they do not decide or put the EU under an obligation as to the final form.
And they accept all Four Freedoms.
Because you don’t get a selective relationship with the Four Freedoms.
And they accept all Four Freedoms.
Because you don’t get a selective relationship with the Four Freedoms.
You don’t get to pick and choose. You accept all Four Freedoms, and you are in the Internal Market; or you do not, and you are not.
This is is simple, stark, and really should have got through by now.
This is is simple, stark, and really should have got through by now.
This “relationship” is an attempt to dress up cherry-picking. It’s not Norway; it’s Switzerland with added benefits. That’s not even there for Switzerland now.
Anyone saying this is Norway when it tries to cherry-pick the Four Freedoms is repeating spin.
Anyone saying this is Norway when it tries to cherry-pick the Four Freedoms is repeating spin.
And it won’t cut it as a backstop, either. Full alignment is a lot more than a strong relationship, however cakeist. So, that’s not gone away, either.
Change the red lines, then things change.
That means accepting FoM. Until they do, we’ll pass on the stale cake, thanks all the same. Feed it to the unicorn, the poor thing’s wasting away.
That means accepting FoM. Until they do, we’ll pass on the stale cake, thanks all the same. Feed it to the unicorn, the poor thing’s wasting away.
Oh, and see that bit about a vote on a deal or proposition that has gained the support of the House?
Deal means out. A proposition doesn’t mean remain, because if the House passed a vote to remain - to revoke - that would be effective to revoke.
Deal means out. A proposition doesn’t mean remain, because if the House passed a vote to remain - to revoke - that would be effective to revoke.
Now, you may protest I’ve a cynical nature. And I do.
But not half as cynical as those fobbing off the people who want a vote to remain with, maybe, might, if we feel like, on a deal to exit and not a vote to remain.
Same stitch-up as the conference, in other words.
But not half as cynical as those fobbing off the people who want a vote to remain with, maybe, might, if we feel like, on a deal to exit and not a vote to remain.
Same stitch-up as the conference, in other words.
As neatly summed up:
Addendum: great little spot. This isn’t even the mandatory “shall”, it’s a milk-and-water “should”.
