Each morning at 8am, for example, there is what is called “coordination” in Geneva, where all EU ambassadors, including until recently the British ambassador, meet to discuss what is on the agenda for decisions at the various UN agencies such as the WTO, the World Health Organization and numerous other bodies that decide international conventions and regulations Britain abides by.
Lions with flamethrowers is the correct answer to that sort of nonsense.
From elsewhere in that article:
“Royal Navy personnel released after they accidentally steered their boat into Iranian waters.”
Hasn’t the British government’s position always been that those sailors weren’t in Iranian waters but the Iranians plucked them from international waters? Has Dennis made a boo boo here?
The Iranians are brown Mahometans. The wicked Brits are (mostly these days) white Westerners. It is their moral duty to prove the Mahometans right, especially if they were wrong.
Each morning at 8am
What? After a night of heavy diplomatic intercourse over a bottle or so and on Sundays?
“There is a mass of information and experience shared in these meetings as the EU decides on common lines to take – the UK, however, can no longer take part and will miss out on vital insights.”
Rather than 3.57% of a “common line”, we now have 100% of our own line.
Is the Iran/notIran thing this controversy? It all boils down to where an unmarked un-agreed maritime border is deemed to be. Straight line extension of agreed land border, or median line between land. Iran and Iraq have never agreed a maritime border, so who’s in the right?
He’s Denis. I’m Dennis.
Wogs are always a bit shorter.
I remain utterly uninterested in the opinions of this convicted and imprisoned fraudster.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-24989402
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-25492017
“… Boris Johnson should be first to recognise the status of European Union representatives. His father, Stanley, was a European commission official for many years …”
So that’s why.
Ummmm….
The ground rule seems to be that if you represent a nation state then you can have protected status.
Thus if an organisation wishes to have ambassadors, they can do so. Generally, if any ambassadors are accepted, all must be. If the EU itself recognises ambassadors to the EU, then GB has a right to one; not recognising the GB ambassador while recognising one from elsewhere would be … inconsistent.
But under no circumstances can the EU be deemed a nation state; if it were, the various German, French etc ambassadors would have been retired.
That is, the article is – quelle suprise – just another Remoaner knee-jerk
It’s one way to increase Council Tax receipts – 25 or so EU diplomats and their dependents previously being exempt from Council Tax of course, and incidence of the exemption falling on landlords.
@asia seen: “each morning”, in Brussels, means Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday mornings. As for 8am, well, it’s always 8am somewhere!
“If you won’t stop causing a commotion, then I will ask you to leave.”
Nigel: “Exactly”
Rather than 3.57% of a “common line”, we now have 100% of our own line.
This. I’m prepared to accept (for the sake of argument, at least) that the views of an EU representative may carry more weight in international discussions than those of a UK representative, though I doubt it’s a great deal more in most cases. But if those views are promoting a line that’s disadvantageous to the UK (which they are, as often as not, because of British exceptionalism), that’s not a great argument.
The EU just lost one of its UN vetos, don’t forget.
It will be interesting to see if pressure comes on France to give its to the EU. Because the French won’t like that one little bit.
Richard North long ago pointed out that much of the shite pushed by the EU came from the UN first and that the UN shower of shite are every bit as much our foes as the EU.
“Rather than 3.57% of a “common line”, we now have 100% of our own line.”
And Mr Ecks re Richard North.
The critical point is not to have our voice heard in/by the EU: it’s to have it heard at the level above where the actual decisions are being made. Who cares about the stuff we agree with amongst the EU ambassadors? The whole point is to voice the stuff where we DON’T agree with the EU line.