The 870billion Euro’s they’re adding to the pot has bypassed there rules apparently
No it hasn't
It falls under Covid emergency legislation.
Like the UK coronavirus act 2020
The 870billion Euro’s they’re adding to the pot has bypassed there rules apparently
An assumption based on a deduction based on the 'if' becoming reality.
Is it irony or hipocrisy to selectively quote from biased organisations that just support one (your own) point of view, and use these to support a biased reply just for the sake of feeling the need to find a contradictory response?One heck of a distortion of reality there. Not unusual from brexiteers.
This Comprehensive Agreement on Investment (CAI) is an EU wide agreement to replace 25 Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs) that are currently in existence between China and multiple EU nation states. These BITs have many drawbacks which the EU agreement seeks to address.
1 Risks of the status quoThis EU-China CAI has been in negotiation for about 8 year, but contrary to woody's claim, is not 'about to be signed'.
https://www.bruegel.org/2020/12/whe...-conclude-an-investment-agreement-with-china/
As things stand at the moment, concluding the CAI by the end of 2020 could be in jeopardy
https://www.ceps.eu/eu-china-comprehensive-agreement-on-investment/
View attachment 215259
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/legi...balisation/file-eu-china-investment-agreement
Additionally, the items referred to by woody are indeed included in the agreement and why it won't be finalised any time soon.
The EU expects adherence to International Labour Organisation Conventions, such as the right to set up labour unions, collective bargaining and avoidance of forced labour.I guess Brexiteers think it's fine to twist the truth, as exemplified by their inglorious leader.
https://www.bruegel.org/2020/12/whe...-conclude-an-investment-agreement-with-china/
A fair description of your OP, do you not think? Except that you provided no external quotes from anywhere, so we have no idea where you get your information from.Is it irony or hipocrisy to selectively quote from biased organisations that just support one (your own) point of view, and use these to support a biased reply just for the sake of feeling the need to find a contradictory response?
Widen your googling and if possible, mind. Otherwise you are just demonstrating what lack of understanding and reasoning you posses.
UK is currently benefiting from China's HR breaches.So, Bobby we aren’t benefiting from China’s human right breaches then, just the EU.
What has the ex-president of US got to do with it?which, with Trump Gone?...
Unlike yourself, I don't need to scramble around Google to quickly find stuff to support a narrow POV.A fair description of your OP, do you not think? Except that you provided no external quotes from anywhere, so we have no idea where you get your information from.
You will notice that I included three references to other information.
You included no references at all, almost as though you were ashamed of where you get your information from.l
I could use your method, and invent silly things to say because I want to put a point of view that is not supported by any websites.Unlike yourself, I don't need to scramble around Google to quickly find stuff to support a narrow POV.
By all means use Google to supplement your lack of knowledge, but I would suggest be careful with any sources you find. And if you are going to quote sources, please quote factual unbiased ones. Thanks.
Don't always just look for websites just to support a contradictory response. Sometimes the facts are facts, and you'll just look silly.
What has the ex-president of US got to do with it?
He wasn't pro-China either, so he has nothing to do with it, so why mention it?Nothing now, he's gone, but we know the Donald was hardly what could be described as pro European. If sleepy Joe is as pro European as some commentators suggest, that may well influence the EU's dealings with China.
The BITs still apply until the CAI kicks in, if it ever does.So Bobby. By the end of the year the EU will have lost its biggest customer & it’s potential new biggest customer.
That’s not a good outlook for the EU then.