Name: ジョンソン氏、英国がEUのルールに従う必要はないと発言 (Johnson says ‘no need’ for UK to follow EU rules)
Uploaded: 2021-01-14T10:24:34.000Z
Duration: 7 min 22 s
Description: VoiceTubeの動画で発音を聞きながら英語表現を覚えよう！学べる英語：

Thank you for coming to Greenwich from Di.

様態の副詞

I invite you first of all to do it's actually done before to raise your eyes to the heavens.

This is the settlement off a long on divisive political question, but the Royal Naval College in the shadow of Canary Warf, Boris Johnson told his audience, including many ambassadors.

The new settlement Britain wanted was a trading relationship with the you that was not like Switzerland.

We want a comprehensive free trade agreement similar to Canada.

As he spoke, the U was explaining that if Britain wanted tariff free trade like Canada, it came with Maur restrictions in the Canada trade deal specific and effective guarantees to ensure a level playing field over the long term.

Over the long term, that means mechanism to up ordered the high standards.

We haven't social environmental climate talks and stated matters back in Greenwich for us, Johnson sounded like he might be saying no toe all of that.

There is no need for a free trade agreement to involve accepting you rules on competition policy subsidies, social protection, the environment or anything similar.

If the you didn't budge, then Boris Johnson said he'd settle for Australia's relationship with the you know free trade Agreement on Tariffs.

The question is whether we agree a trading relationship with the U comparable to Canada's or more like Australia's Andi.

I have no doubt that in either case, the UK will prosper mightily.

Boris Johnson said he wanted to negotiate with the U.

On trade straight away and defended their farming industry on issues like genetically modified crops in doing free trade deals.

We will be governed by science and not by mumbo jumbo because the potential is enormous.

And can I just put 21 quote from Michelle Barnier?

You said you can't possibly be surprised by the requirements that the U is wanting to put on Britain.

If we get to a Canada style trade agreement, it's all in the political declaration, robust commitments because of geographical proximity.

We're not Canada for the political declaration.

It makes it very clear that both sides will commit to high standards and I think everybody here this morning will agree that I quite laboriously explained in many instances the UK standards are higher than those of the EU, a trading relationship corresponding to Australia's With the you that that is a new euphemism for no deal, isn't it?

We have come out on the basis of that of that deal.

We have a trading relationship along lines the U has with Australia.

We would love to have a closer relationship with the Australian.

Yeah, but the one do you have the moment?

I couldn't possibly speak on behalf of Britain.

It's been this choice, trust you is concerned.

Do you think 10 years from now Britain will be a bit more like the United States in the weight regulates runs itself?

Maybe we'll be more like great Britain, you know, I think both of our countries share so many things together.

It's hard to predict, but I know that good things are gonna happen.

Veterans of the trade scene said these talks were still in the opening chest beating phase.

We have a long while toe wait before signs of movement and agreement could be detected out.

So how have Boris Johnson's words gone down in Europe?

Here in London today was one of Germany's most influential politicians from the ruling Christian Democrats.

Norbert Rockin Chair off the Budget Stag Foreign Affairs Committee are Europe editor Matt Frei went to talk to him and started by asking about Boris Johnson's implication that he could settle for no deal.

I think it's it's it's a mostly a tactical rhetoric addressing the domestic audience s so I think in a way you have to take it seriously, are what the prime minister is telling.

But I think at the end of the day, after several months off negotiations, so let's say in summer, then there will be a clear alternative.

Either we, we are able to inflict harm on both sides always seize opportunities, so I think at the end the pragmatic view will prevail.

Because because at the end it will be boiled down to this alternative harm.

Worse is opportunities, and why not sell opportunities on advantages to the people and to the citizens into the voters instead of that harm and disadvantage.

Of course, everyone wants opportunities, and no one would admit to trying to impose harm.

But this government is not prepared to take any rules from Brussels in the kind of cobbling together future trading relationship.

So is it even possible toe have that kind of compromise?

However, there is a danger if this rhetoric on both sides very principled, very sharp, will prevail on and endure for long time.

There is a danger that at the end of the day, both sides are at least one site does not see howto exit in a face saving way.

However, I think there is the key, perhaps might be in the difference between a level playing field on.

Nobody expects the Brits to follow European rules, but a level playing field is something different.

There is considerable damage also to the German economy.

If this doesn't go well, there's not frightened people in Berlin.

Yes, this is the reason why we do not want tohave disadvantage on dhe.

This is the reason why we want why we insist to to not engage in the mutual disadvantaging disadvantage, imposing style but into the different styles.

I mean, the tone is very robust of the moment.

Yeah, I think we should nevertheless opt for pragmatism, staying cool and sober and not, um, orient ourselves to rhetoric.

But toe facts on the economic realities Nobody can.