I mean it in the sense that in negotiations both sides expect some flexibility from the other party, but if you go in with the best deal you are prepared to offer them, first of all you are selling yourself short... there might be things you want but you wont ever get if you don't ask... it might be nothing to them but might be important to you.
My point is that when negotiating you should certainly work out your bottom line where you give way the most you are prepared to give and get the bare minimum to make it actually worth while... but you hide that information... you never open with that offer.
You look at a padded out ideal solution where you have a gun to their heads and can have anything an everything you want... that could be an opening offer... obviously they wont accept that because it will likely have nothing in it for them, but as you discuss you will give up stuff... especially stuff you don't really want, and you let them have some of their wants... the ones they seem to think are most important and you will end up with something that has to be better than your take it or leave it deal.
They will feel you gave up a lot of things you seemed to want but will also feel they got what they wanted and you can both sign the agreement.
Hopefully with the agreements regarding the Tempest go well, but keeping agreement and focus is going to be difficult and to keep funding... I mean if they can only give nurses and healthcare workers a 1% increase, how much can they commit to a plane like this?
I would think if your politicians had any brains they would give the healthcare workers a 10% pay increase and offset the extra cost by giving themselves a pay cut of 10%... but those greedy
would never consider that... I wonder how far from minimum wage those nurses and healthcare support people are getting, compared with the money UK politicians get along with the cars and free travel and other perks...