So the UK is finished says Theresa Mayhem

[Barrie Stevens]

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/apr/11/uk-stands-down-6000-no-deal-brexit-staff-after-spending-15bn

That's OK  then

[Freggyragh]

7 hours ago, woolley said:

The Chinese are very smart. They smile that smile at you. You know the one. And they nod amiably, but they will then go off and do whatever they will go off and do. Put your money in at your peril. Put your intellectual property in at your peril. If anyone has any doubts about this, study the history of the Joint Declaration on Hong Kong, and how that has panned out.

Ah, so you don’t want to trade with China after all? So much for ‘global Britain’.

To be honest, if you understood anything about how the Chinese view history you’d know what they think of the British. The Opium Wars, the destruction of the Old Summer Palace, the Peking Convention, the Boxer Protocol, the Unequal Treaties, the treatment of indentured Chinese ‘coolies’ (so disgusting even for 1903 that it was one of the issues that prompted  Churchill to quit the Tories) - there’s really not much good to say about the British in Chinese history textbooks.

With the UK’s lease on the New Territories due to end in 1997, Thatcher met with the Chinese in the early eighties to discuss arrangements for Hong Kong and Kowloon should the Chinese insist on the return on the New Territories. She was told that Britain wasn’t going to hand on or inflict another partition. They would not only have to keep to the terms of the New Territories lease, but hand back Hong Kong and Kowloon too, or the People’s Liberation Army would take it back. Of course, these were in the days before the Lisbon Treaty, so no one was obligated to support the U.K. in defence of its territory. To save face for the British, who arrogantly thought the Hong Kong Chinese might miss being imperial subjects of her majesty, the Chinese signed a Joint Declaration. The Chinese reaction of ‘Yeah, yeah, whatever mate, just fuck off and mind the door doesn’t slam your fat arse on the way out.’ 

You see, Thatcher was negotiating all alone. She didn’t have a trump card of access to the largest single market in the world. No wonder she was such an enthusiastic supporter of the free market.

https://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/thatcher-papers-for-1988-reveal-her-deep-enthusiasm-for-the-single-market

[pongo]

Seems to me, with respect to you both, as if you are both casually bringing uselessly old fashioned national stereotypes in here. As if  on the one hand 'they' all shared the same character traits. Or, on the other hand, that 'they' had a single common view of history which continues to shape business.

[pongo]

1 hour ago, woolley said:

The only reason they ever maintained unity was that the remain leaning idiots negotiating on behalf of - I can't bring myself to use the word "for" in this context - the UK never tested it. They went with the EU script all the way down the line. Should have dug heels in on day one and insisted on sorting out withdrawal and future relationship in one fell swoop and bugger Article 50.

Nobody with any ability to see the road ahead has ever had any doubt about the outcome of Brexit.

Britain is re defining and formalising its semi detached relationship with the EU. It makes no difference what the deal / no deal is called. 

Edited April 11, 2019 by pongo

[Freggyragh]

1 hour ago, woolley said:

The only reason they ever maintained unity was that the remain leaning idiots negotiating on behalf of - I can't bring myself to use the word "for" in this context - the UK never tested it. They went with the EU script all the way down the line. Should have dug heels in on day one and insisted on sorting out withdrawal and future relationship in one fell swoop and bugger Article 50.

It was Boris Johnson who insisted there was need to to prepare for no deal because Britain was going to get a great deal. Failure to prepare for no deal (if that was ever possible) is one of  the stupidest moves of the whole fiasco.

Trying to negotiate with individual states was another, turning up to negotiations with no notes and subsequently spending less than four hours in two years actually doing your job was another. David Davis is and was a leaver. So is Raab.

Failure to come anywhere close to matching third country trade deals was another catastrophic disaster - every failed deal has made the case for the Single Market stronger. Fox is and was a leaver. 

I’d say the idiotic failure to understand the Irish Border issue tops the lot though  

It’s been a bloody good show by the super-wealthy, but sooner or later they will have to contribute to our schools and hospitals.

 

[Barrie Stevens]

I took up a job in Hong Kong in 1972 and it was made plain then that it was all going to be handed over as per treaty...Even then they were appointing Chinese to jobs and letting the expats go...Strictly speaking UK was only obliged to give up the leased New Territories as Hong Kong island was by the legality of the time British due to conquest and colonisation. It was not part of the leasing arrangement.

Thatcher was urged not to give Hong Island away by critics citing legality and custom but I recall her saying the Chinese army was never an issue as all China had to do was turn off the water supply from their side of the border. In other words not viable so the whole lot was to leave on best terms possible. Military action was a non starter and UK forces there largely a token presence for border policing and security.

China expected to inherit a broken Hong Kong looted and the Treasury empty but not so.. UK did invest a lot in the infrastructure and works using Hong Kong Treasury to pay UK contractors as a way of capitalising. But the place was left in good shape with a treaty as best as could be got. 

The handover was in good spirit and a short while later the Royal Navy had to ask permission to enter Hong Kong on a visit...

Red China as we called it was fully represented in Hong Kong with many businesses and banks etc. Technically it was British but from 1949 onwards it was mainly pretend just that it suited China to leave it alone.

I recall a lot of foods imported to sustain Hong Kong and the territories came from mainland China. There was much dependency on what they thought in Peking then and there was only going to be one outcome and it happened as planned.

 

[Freggyragh]

11 minutes ago, pongo said:

Seems to me, with respect to you both, as if you are both casually bringing uselessly old fashioned national stereotypes in here. As if  on the one hand 'they' all shared the same character traits. Or, on the other hand, that 'they' had a single common view of history which continues to shape business.

I don’t know about Woolley, but my opinions on China are reasonably well informed - having first visiting the PRC in 1992 and most recently in 2018. I would never apply a stereotype to the character of Chinese people in general - who I have always found to be highly intelligent, creative, individually unique, and good company.   I talked about two things in my comment:

1.  The official Chinese Communist view of history. This is important to understand because it portrays Britain (quite accurately as far as Asia goes) as a nation of aggressive, racist thieves. It might be just me, but sometimes it seems that brexiters really think the rest of the world associates the U.K. with fair play and the Beatles. It’s also important to understand that the Chinese do have an official view on history that is hard for people who grew up in a democracy to understand. Have a look at some of the links below, and understand that when Xi says the Brits are the bad guys, no one dare argue. 

2. Britain’s weak position when negotiating with China back in the 80’s. 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/qz.com/1019826/hong-kong-handover-xi-jinping-invokes-opium-wars-at-the-inauguration-of-hong-kongs-new-leader/amp/

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/politics/article/2143085/hong-kong-textbooks-row-much-ado-about-nothing-says-carrie

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.economist.com/christmas-specials/2017/12/19/the-opium-wars-still-shape-chinas-view-of-the-west

[Freggyragh]

Hong Kong In 1972 - that must have been a pretty amazing time. 

Of course neither Thatcher or Deng wanted to mention the threats at the time, but the threat was definitely military:

https://www.scmp.com/article/48108/thatcher-reveals-dengs-threat-seize-hong-kong-day

[Barrie Stevens]

28 minutes ago, pongo said:

Nobody with any ability to see the road ahead has ever had any doubt about the outcome of Brexit.

Britain is re defining its semi detached relationship with the EU. It makes no difference what the deal / no deal is called. 

Basically we are going to try and recreate as far as possible the innocent or naïve days of the original Common Market we decided to remain in by way of a referendum way back. It has never been easy. On the other hand there has to be give and take by all. Britain will never sit easy in ever closer union like a federal system and is best kept outside the inner circle for all our sakes. On the other hand I do not believe Britain outside on its own will easily thrive and to some extent we should retain some sort of access to the EU laager...This appears to be the way we are going. Interesting to see if the IOM and CI get a unique deal like last time ie Protocol 3..

[Barrie Stevens]

6 minutes ago, Freggyragh said:

Hong Kong In 1972 - that must have been a pretty amazing time. 

Of course neither Thatcher or Deng wanted to mention the threats at the time, but the threat was definitely military:

https://www.scmp.com/article/48108/thatcher-reveals-dengs-threat-seize-hong-kong-day

Yes and we all knew that..It was all part of the act at the time....It was not discounted but part of the process of who is boss...

But the main point or reason for the final outcome was as Thatcher said, they could have just switched off the water...

The 1960s and 1970s were a time when someone would regularly stand on the steps of the Chinese legation or embassy or whatever in London waving Mao's little red book stating that Hong Kong will be liberated and that all imperialist reactionaries are paper tigers..

Part of the act...China practically ran Hong Kong by proxy anyway they just let the Brits do the governing...

This was time too when Hong Kong was often full of US Navy ships and Marines etc due to the Vietnam war.. We often saw battered little ships coming in, assault ships, carriers etc. China supported Vietnam and here they all were mixing and mingling in Hong Kong and Kowloon...And of course Britain stayed out of the Vietnam war...

[woolley]

59 minutes ago, Freggyragh said:

Ah, so you don’t want to trade with China after all? So much for ‘global Britain’.

To be honest, if you understood anything about how the Chinese view history you’d know what they think of the British. The Opium Wars, the destruction of the Old Summer Palace, the Peking Convention, the Boxer Protocol, the Unequal Treaties, the treatment of indentured Chinese ‘coolies’ (so disgusting even for 1903 that it was one of the issues that prompted  Churchill to quit the Tories) - there’s really not much good to say about the British in Chinese history textbooks.

With the UK’s lease on the New Territories due to end in 1997, Thatcher met with the Chinese in the early eighties to discuss arrangements for Hong Kong and Kowloon should the Chinese insist on the return on the New Territories. She was told that Britain wasn’t going to hand on or inflict another partition. They would not only have to keep to the terms of the New Territories lease, but hand back Hong Kong and Kowloon too, or the People’s Liberation Army would take it back. Of course, these were in the days before the Lisbon Treaty, so no one was obligated to support the U.K. in defence of its territory. To save face for the British, who arrogantly thought the Hong Kong Chinese might miss being imperial subjects of her majesty, the Chinese signed a Joint Declaration. The Chinese reaction of ‘Yeah, yeah, whatever mate, just fuck off and mind the door doesn’t slam your fat arse on the way out.’ 

You see, Thatcher was negotiating all alone. She didn’t have a trump card of access to the largest single market in the world. No wonder she was such an enthusiastic supporter of the free market.

https://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/thatcher-papers-for-1988-reveal-her-deep-enthusiasm-for-the-single-market

I know all about the history. The British always knew that Hong Kong Island and Kowloon were not viable alone, and that unless the Chinese saw an advantage for themselves in some kind of leasing arrangement then the whole lot would revert. It is uncontroversial. I'll tell you something about the present though. The Chinese see the EU for what it is. A paper tiger. Your words: "Yeah, yeah, whatever mate," are perfectly appropriate to anything they sign with the EU. They will just sell their stuff as they please because it is cheap. Largest single market or no.

[woolley]

1 hour ago, pongo said:

Nobody with any ability to see the road ahead has ever had any doubt about the outcome of Brexit.

Britain is re defining and formalising its semi detached relationship with the EU. It makes no difference what the deal / no deal is called. 

A semi-detached relationship with Europe is what Britain has ALWAYS had. Sometimes more, sometimes less, and this is far older than the EU, going back millennia. Only the present day EU enthusiasts see it any differently, as though it is something shiny and new, and this is why they are now aghast. All entirely predictable in the context of history; a tide that ebbs and flows.

[woolley]

1 hour ago, Freggyragh said:

turning up to negotiations with no notes

Not got over that bit of theatre yet? For goodness sake.

[woolley]

51 minutes ago, Barrie Stevens said:

I took up a job in Hong Kong in 1972 and it was made plain then that it was all going to be handed over as per treaty...Even then they were appointing Chinese to jobs and letting the expats go...Strictly speaking UK was only obliged to give up the leased New Territories as Hong Kong island was by the legality of the time British due to conquest and colonisation. It was not part of the leasing arrangement.

Thatcher was urged not to give Hong Island away by critics citing legality and custom but I recall her saying the Chinese army was never an issue as all China had to do was turn off the water supply from their side of the border. In other words not viable so the whole lot was to leave on best terms possible. Military action was a non starter and UK forces there largely a token presence for border policing and security.

China expected to inherit a broken Hong Kong looted and the Treasury empty but not so.. UK did invest a lot in the infrastructure and works using Hong Kong Treasury to pay UK contractors as a way of capitalising. But the place was left in good shape with a treaty as best as could be got. 

The handover was in good spirit and a short while later the Royal Navy had to ask permission to enter Hong Kong on a visit...

Red China as we called it was fully represented in Hong Kong with many businesses and banks etc. Technically it was British but from 1949 onwards it was mainly pretend just that it suited China to leave it alone.

I recall a lot of foods imported to sustain Hong Kong and the territories came from mainland China. There was much dependency on what they thought in Peking then and there was only going to be one outcome and it happened as planned.

 

Exactly so, Bazza. There was no confrontation in the 70s. Everyone knew that all would revert in 1997.

[Barrie Stevens]

23 minutes ago, Freggyragh said:

Hong Kong In 1972 - that must have been a pretty amazing time. 

Of course neither Thatcher or Deng wanted to mention the threats at the time, but the threat was definitely military:

https://www.scmp.com/article/48108/thatcher-reveals-dengs-threat-seize-hong-kong-day

Honkers in 1972 was still colonial and being British I did not need a work..   I had two servants...One learning the trade was known as a Watchee Learnee. A warehouse or store was  a Go Down...

It was often embarrassing as some Chinese called me Master and we spoke in Pidgin English...

I do not suppose they meant it but was still that colonial era. They let us parade and posture whilst they got on making money..

One work colleague married a Chinese girl and got sacked but he became part of the Chinese community...My employers paid any medical bills but the contract said not self inflicted wounds known as Bangkok drip...

There were Sikh body guards with single shoot Greener shotguns guarding jewellery shops.

I worked for shipbrokers and shipowners Harley Mullion. James R Mullion owned race horses and held the Ardenode stud. One son Roderick Mullion is still active the other Stuart Mullion married the daughter of Sir Douglas Clague Honkers businessman buried at Lonan...She was Dublin high society and spoke Mandarin and Cantonese being raised in Hong Kong but later was killed in a bad car smash in Ireland

By the time Chris Patten became Governor much of Honkers had changed and moved on. Some aspects of IOM remind me of Hong Kong such as the Governor, Government house, Tynwald fair, Chief Secretary and the inner core of Civil Servants and tax officials UK schooled and sometimes seconded....