***** This thread is now closed, please CLICK HERE to go to Volume 58 *****
==============================================================
Carry on Brexiting - or remoaning.
Last edited by: VxFan on Wed 26 Sep 18 at 01:54
|
What exactly wrong with Chequers Plan? Why both EU and Leavers are against it?
|
>> What exactly wrong with Chequers Plan? Why both EU and Leavers are against it?
In brief it's not Brexity enough for the leavers; too much 'rule taking'. Would leave us a vassal state they say. Surely you've heard Boris's suicide belt analogy?
Chequers covers free movement of goods but does nothing for services etc. Remainers want a closer link - EEA/Norway model for example.
This has been extensively covered in the media and there are articles on BBC website and those of both leave and remain supporting papers that will fill in the detail.
|
Its as brexity as you can get without crashing out.
Its not gonna happen tho unless the EU cave in on the NI border. May cant, she is only in power because of the unionists, and they wont accept any official or unofficial border between NI and the mainland.
|
|
The EU are also very unlikely to offer freedom of movement for goods and nothing else.
|
Well they've given her 28 days to come up with a new plan that they might accept, e.g. remain in the single market and customs union I guess. Plenty of time - its not as if we've had 2 years to think through what the EU might accept is it :-)
I would imagine even Rees Mogg's idea of a Brexit involved a trade deal and other things. She's achieved nothing so far.
It makes you wonder if this was a Remainer's plan... we tried but we failed to get a deal. We'll have to remain???
I don't think that's the right way but you do wonder because they've pitched a plan that was unacceptable. The EU always said you can't cherry pick the parts of the single market you'd like, e.g. freedom of movement of goods only.
Interesting 28 days.
|
|
I am surprised that the tactic of keep repeating the referendum until you get the answer you want hasn't been enacted. Maybe an indication that the politicians realise their jobs are on the line.
|
Only a crash out full fat brexit will satisfy the leavers.
If we negotiate a deal and it goes well after they will say "see it wasnt a problem"
If it doesn't they will say "See we didnt leave and look what happened."
Given that We need to say.
OK, sorry we tried, we are leaving the EU with no deal
That means that
a: There is no divorce bill, go whistle for your money
b:Sorry Eire, your border is closed. Find another way to get your stuff in and out of europe.
c: all you europeans currently living in the EU, you need to become british or sod off back home.
d: all you brits living in europe, you are on your own, your countrymen sold you up the river.
|
This is not the fault of those that voted leave, it is the fault of those who voted leave and then simply kept repeating "I voted leave" in their best Arthur P. Gumby voice and refused to think or discuss *how* we might leave and believed self-righteously that their work was done.
Not that we know any of those.
|
Like Hotel California, innit?
'You can check-out any time you like .........
But you can never leave!"
|
|
you can leave, but you can't take the towels with you
|
From a Guardian article:
Theresa May was left fighting to save her Chequers Brexit plan and with it her authority as prime minister after she was ambushed at the end of the Salzburg summit when EU leaders unexpectedly declared that her proposals would not work.
But we could have told her they would reject the freedom of movement of goods requirement 2 years ago. It was never going to be accepted. I assume she thought this late in the day they'd buckle and agree because of damage to the EU.
She also apparently said to the Irish taoiseach this morning that it was impossible to reach an agreement on the Irish border in 4 weeks or so.... We've had 2 years! The fact we have no solution after 2 years says there is no solution. Which means there will be a border anyway.
But are there implications relating to us going back on the Good Friday agreement if there is a border and we are the cause of that? This was a UN recognised treaty.
Last edited by: rtj70 on Thu 20 Sep 18 at 22:48
|
>> She also apparently said to the Irish taoiseach this morning that it was impossible to
>> reach an agreement on the Irish border in 4 weeks or so.... We've had 2
>> years! The fact we have no solution after 2 years says there is no solution.
>> Which means there will be a border anyway.
There is no solution to the Irish border if there is no deal. I dont know why no-one has had the balls to simply say it to the Irish. Or grabbed the irish by the balls to tell them.
|
The only solution to the Irish border is to remain in the single market... That will also help with the holdups that would happen at ports in the UK.
Right from the start I've said that the red lines for no-border and not remaining in the single market cannot co-exist.
This is a bit like a project at work.... some tough bits that I said needed doing first but the project wanted to get on with it and deal with them later. Soon the tough bits will hold up the project and nobody has really thought about them (I have a bit). End result project fails to deliver in time. And I told them this in March. Fell on deaf ears even though I explained in simple terms what was going to happen.
Conclusion... some project and service managers are either not smart or they hope for a miracle... A bit like Theresa May then.
|
"you can't take the towels with you"
Apparently the towels are all being used by the Germans.
|
How much worse could any of us done with this. We now have 4 weeks so we either compromise or.... well I'm not sure.
Could have a fall of Conservative leader in weeks. So an election of leader could take weeks.... months? And then the deadline is gone. Or an election and again the deadline is gone.
So is May going to spring a surprise and back down after saying she tried?
|
I read that EU demanded a second referendum.
UK should demand that all EU countries do the same to see what their citizens want i.e. whether to remain or leave in EU.
That would be fun.
|
>> I read that EU demanded a second referendum.
I don't know where you read that but it's not true.
One or two PMs (Malta and Czech Republic IIRC) expressed hope there might be a second referendum. The Maltese guy at least phrased it in terms that clearly recognised it was unlkely.
|
EU leaders want 2nd Brexit referendum
EU leaders are "almost unanimous" about wanting the UK to hold another referendum, the prime minister of Malta has said.
www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/45588997
|
>> EU leaders are "almost unanimous" about wanting the UK to hold another referendum, the prime
>> minister of Malta has said.
I heard the interview on the Today programme. He spoke for himself but also claimed it to be an almost unanimous view.
Expressing a liking for the 'almost impossible' is a long way from the 'demand' you alleged.
|
"Apparently the towels are all being used by the Germans."
I earn a frownie for that comment??? Get a life, somebody.
|
>>I earn a frownie for that comment??? Get a life, somebody.
Don't mention the WHOA!
|
Might try that with the gym. "I don't want to use your rowing machine or your exercise bikes, but I do want to use the cross trainer and free weights, oh, and your showers afterwards. And by the way, I don't want to pay my membership fees any more." And do it with every other "by the rules" gym member within earshot.
It would be the shortest conversation in history.
Hard Brexit = significant barriers to trade for thousands of British companies, massive operational difficulties for all European HQs based in the UK, and considerable economic damage as a result. Chaos on the island of Ireland.
Soft Brexit or 'deal' = Leavers will whine that it wasn't what they voted for and blame every downside from that point forth on the fact it wasn't done right and how everything would have been perfect if we'd told the EU to go forth and multiply.
The part I still struggle with is how people bought the line from the likes of Farage and Johnson that an arrangement that has been key to about 45% of our exports and a number of our key regulatory and legal frameworks for decades had no advantages, and that unpicking it would be "easy".
|
>> unpicking it would be "easy".
Exactly same way some unelected members of EU think imposing their own views on UK will be "easy" to sell as "advantages for UK".
I'd would have more respect for EU if they let go UK without any deal. Instead, they are trying every tricks under the Sun to make UK stay in.
Just because something "difficult" does not mean it should not be "attempted". Most good things in life are difficult. If attempted, those would become easy over time, if never attempted would remain difficult forever.
All these EU rules are based on negotiation - unlike laws of physics which are based on science and hence provable, man made laws are always negotiable.
Whether our politicans are doing good on negotiation, that's a different issue.
|
>>>>The part I still struggle with is how people bought the line from the likes of Farage and Johnson that an arrangement that has been key to about 45% of our exports and a number of our key regulatory and legal frameworks for decades had no advantages, and that unpicking it would be "easy".<<<
I am surprised that you struggle to understand it, the experience on here should give you some clues. What I find most difficult is the turkeys who voted for xmas from those areas where either the major employers were dependent on Europe, or the infrastructure had significantly been improved with European money.
|
>> infrastructure had significantly been improved with European money.
What is the reason for that? Did UK not have enough money so that had to beg from EU?
If that's the case, where did UK find money to pay EU in the first place?
If UK stops paying money to EU, will that money be diverted to improving those areas instead?
Or it is just another example of "Rotterdam effect"?
How many of the major employers there are European vs global multinationals? For example, is JLR considered British, Indian, EU or global?
|
>> What is the reason for that? Did UK not have enough money so that had
>> to beg from EU?
>> If that's the case, where did UK find money to pay EU in the first
>> place?
No begging involved - the EU had funds for (eg) disadvantaged areas.
Do you really think that, pre-devolution, Westminster/Whitehall would have made funds available to double track the A859 spinal road over the Isles of Lewis and Harris, to build causeways and upgrade the ferries to such places.
|
>> How many of the major employers there are European vs global multinationals? For example,
>> is JLR considered British, Indian, EU or global?
Does it matter what nationality the ultimate owner is. Many would say JLR is British but it is owned by TATA. But who owns TATA? And does it matter.
What would matter if JLR moved assembly of cars to Slovakia. Which is where they already assemble at least one model.
|
>>What I find most difficult is the turkeys who voted for xmas
>> from those areas where either the major employers were dependent on Europe, or the infrastructure
>> had significantly been improved with European money.
It's an interesting vote. Normally people vote for the political party that will make them wealthier. In the referendum they voted against an undemocratic Europe, or the whole principal of the elected politicians irrespective of the financial impact. It was, unusually, a vote on principals, not money. Did everybody understand that they might be poorer as a result? No idea, but Project Fear made that point quite clear, and anybody who did not know must have had their eyes shut.
I should argue that if the infrastructure had *already* been improved then Christmas had already happened. ;)
|
>>>I should argue that if the infrastructure had *already* been improved then Christmas had already happened. ;) <<<
OK point taken :) But I am sure I saw a TV interview with some welsh valley dwellers who were bemoaning that all the EU did was take money. The interviewer then responded with examples of the local projects that had received EU funding. They just did not understand.
|
But I am sure I saw a TV interview with some welsh valley dwellers who were bemoaning that all the EU did was take money. The interviewer then responded with examples of the local projects that had received EU funding. They just did not understand.
EU funding has kept the valleys and its population afloat for years. They don't get it.
|
I linked to one article about the lad stood in front of the sport centre other other buildings the EU had funded and he was saying what had they done for them. Then finally acknowledged the buildings by saying 'apart from them'... something like that.
My link was in volume 56 I think.
They are certainly like turkeys voting for Christmas. They probably thought it was a bit of a protest vote but now it looks like we will crash out with no deal at all unless May agrees to remain in the EEA (so no point leaving).
At least if we know there is no deal by October that's a few months to get some things in place. But it will be bad. None of the Tory Brexit supporters wanted no deal - they wanted a trade deal.
|
|
An area with a strong radical socialist tradition votes for Tory rejects...you honestly could write it into a novel.
|
There is no excuse for Britain not to join euro
www.ft.com/content/fa2a465a-30bc-11dd-bc93-000077b07658
That is an article from 2008. But see how funny it looks at current context. I think even hard core remainers now agree UK was right not to adopt Euro.
Financial market is VERY hard to predict. Most so called called experts get it wrong. Before reacting to any of so called expert's opinions, look up what else that expert predicted in the past and how many of those predictions came true.
Even Issac Newton, one of greatest men to ever lived on earth, lost money on stock market.
uk.businessinsider.com/isaac-newton-lost-a-fortune-on-englands-hottest-stock-2016-1
Hence, I don't believe in all those doom and gloom no deal Brexit predictions.
|
"I think people have had enough of experts."
I seem to recall once reading an article that the net contribution of economists to the world has been negative as they are generally so wrong. I realise that making statements like that makes one sound like the tin-hat brigade...
|
>> Even Issac Newton, one of greatest men to ever lived on earth, lost money on
>> stock market.
>> uk.businessinsider.com/isaac-newton-lost-a-fortune-on-englands-hottest-stock-2016-1
Newton was a brilliant scientist. Nothing about that qualifies him as an investment guru.
His losses occurred in what is known as the South Sea Bubble. He wasn't alone in doing so, it was a massive scandal and one worth reading up by anybody who wants to comment on economics or UK History.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Sea_Company
ISTR being told, when I worked in the offices of the Accountant General of the Supreme Court, that his role was created after the previous custodians of suitors cash lost a massive chunk in the South Sea Bubble.
|
>> Newton was a brilliant scientist. Nothing about that qualifies him as an investment guru.
Well, he was Master of the Royal Mint for twenty seven years too.
|
This is a 2016 news outlining which areas of EU receives more funding.
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/01/mapped-where-in-the-uk-receives-most-eu-funding-and-how-does-thi/
UK is still behind compared to several other EU nations. In fact, I personally observed how much fund Baltic states received during my recent visits to Estonia and Lithuania. The Tallinn airport, though small, looked very well constructed with lots of facilities and they did say it was done with EU grants.
Money from member states are put into a common fund and then EU decides whom and how much to redistribute.
So if UK leaves EU, there is no guaranteed way to prove that those areas of UK would not receive similar amount of grant (directly from UK govt). The news showed arguments from both sides.
A simple analogy is that me (=UK) handing over grocery money to my wife (=EU). She buys chocolate for me which I eat. It does not mean if my wife not buying me chocolate I can't buy chocolate with my own money :o)
|
>>Chocolate...
More like this I think...
You (UK) have a child (an impoverished area) that needs medicine.
The Mrs (EU) uses your money and other net contributors to provide the medicine.
After Brexit (and potentially before we joined the EU), you looked at your child and thought, sod that, I can save the money and spend it on the healthier children.
|
>> UK is still behind compared to several other EU nations. In fact, I personally observed
>> how much fund Baltic states received during my recent visits to Estonia and Lithuania. The
>> Tallinn airport, though small, looked very well constructed with lots of facilities and they did
>> say it was done with EU grants.
The Telegraph piece is quite explicit; the funding being mapped is explained as follows it’s their way of trying to give a boost to the poorest parts of the continent.. As one of the richest (per capita) countries in the EU it's no surprise that UK gets less than ex-Soviet Republics like the Baltic States.
The point is that poorer areas of UK, Western Scotland, Wales, Cornwall still got a chunk of that money. I've given you some examples from my own observation of a remote area I know well to illustrate how money was used.
While there's no way to prove that London wouldn't provide similar funds if it's a choice between roads on remote islands and headline projects in Tory heartlands (or even tax cuts) which do YOU think the current shower would choose?
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Fri 21 Sep 18 at 14:53
|
“UK Prime Minister Theresa May has said the EU must treat the UK with "respect" in Brexit negotiations.“
Why would that be then??
|
I feel cheated. All the Leavers that were saying two years ago the EU would be desperate for a deal with the UK seem to have been wrong.
Still a price worth paying?
|
Cameron said he would trigger article 50 on next day in case leave won. He didn’t.
I feel cheated.
|
|
How did that materially affect you? (If he indeed said it) If you don't know I'll wait while you run back to the little group to check what your opinion is.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Fri 21 Sep 18 at 18:31
|
It really is strange that every time most remainers are faced with something they know is a valid point they resort to attacking the person who said it?
At least car4play is in good company because we see it in the media all the time.
Could it be because they know that person could, just maybe, have a point but of course a remainer cannot be seen to concede anything?
Or is more complex than that?
Pat
|
>> Or is more complex than that?
>>
>> Pat
Well it's like this, when a brexiteer comes up with a sensible practical verifiable seriously advantageous reason for leaving the EU one that overcomes the obvious disadvantages I'll listen
Till then they remain in the "not fit to be given the vote" camp
Last edited by: VxFan on Sat 22 Sep 18 at 17:38
|
|
Don't forget, they could do that it's just that they don't want to, they forgot, thought the moment had passed, nobody would listen anyway etc etc.
|
>> Don't forget, they could do that it's just that they don't want to, they forgot,
>> thought the moment had passed, nobody would listen anyway etc etc.
It's not just here.
Over on Cyclechat there's a Tell Us the Benefits of Brexit thread that runs to 200 pages and 3,500 posts.
Still nothing to show....
|
>> Cameron said he would trigger article 50 on next day in case leave won. He didn't.
>> I feel cheated.
We'd have already crashed out with no deal if he had done that. Don't feel cheated just yet. But May is intent on getting no deal at the moment isn't she.
Claims the EU won't give her what she wants but they have said all along freedom of movement of goods means freedom of movement of the other things to and needs us in the EEA. She says we don't want that. So that's okay we can have no deal instead.
I bet the other EU leaders cannot believe May and co are being so thick.
Maybe I'll hold off booking any holiday for next April for now.
Last edited by: rtj70 on Fri 21 Sep 18 at 18:33
|
Traditional left wing voters voting for Tory rejects, well I guess that is a case of swinging from one extreme to the other, as has happened elsewhere in history. They don't see their current politicians working for them so choose ones that they think can, but go "large".
They probably don't think they will suffer materially from their decisions. The sports centre quoted above will probably serve only a small percentage of the local populace, despite good intentions. Like roads, they don't see they help bring work, goods and services.
Unless it's money in their pockets they don't see it as a benefit.
I guess retired people are protected from their decisions as much of their income is guaranteed. Those at the lowest end of the earnings spectrum are also pretty much guaranteed a minimum benefit though this could be cut in extremis.
Its us in the middle that will be squeezed. If we crash out, expect the £ to suffer and interest rates to rise if that kicks of inflation.
The "middle" are used to being squeezed. Near zero percent interest rates on savings means a real term haircut.
I am in two minds re my savings, do I take them out of the bank before the end of March, I don't want a Cyprus type deduction on the accounts.
|
>> I am in two minds re my savings, do I take them out of the bank before the end of March, I
>> don't want a Cyprus type deduction on the accounts.
Where would you safely move the money to if you did?
|
>> Where would you safely move the money to if you did?
>>
A safe deposit box.
|
I regard myself as retired but my income is not guaranteed. Many others like me too.
In my case I chose to cash in the paltry pension for a rather better sounding amount of dosh which I'm hoping will outlast me.
But that's by the by. It's not just the middle aged that may lose out.
|
Why hold off booking a holiday rtj70 ? I’m in Spain 29/03, probably returning home in April. Surely much better to be in Spain chillin on a beach, drinking cheap vino & G & Ts than looking over fields full of wet sheep in t’Dales.
And I’m back there in May.
Last edited by: legacylad on Fri 21 Sep 18 at 21:52
|
>> Why hold off booking a holiday rtj70
Because in the immediate aftermath of leaving with no deal there might not be flights. Although if we know there's no deal in October that gives another 6 months for them to sort out some agreements that will be needed.
There is a good chance of an election before then though so who knows. So that might push the March deadline back with no government in place.
Last edited by: rtj70 on Fri 21 Sep 18 at 21:58
|
What, like in the days immediately after 9/11? Actually I think there were, but they were exceptionally cheap
Long before the EU was dreamed of I’d fly all over Europe as a pre teen with my parents. Maybe they had the inconvenience of visas and such like. Bit like me going to Turkey and the USA last year.
|
If there are no agreements in place for flying there can be no flights. You know that right? This has nothing to do with needing Visas.
Long before the our EU membership we had agreements in place of our own. Now we rely on the EU agreements. Leave the EU and we need new agreements. At least if we know there's no deal 6 months before we leave then we can sort it. It also gives companies the time to relocate.
Last edited by: rtj70 on Fri 21 Sep 18 at 22:32
|
I assume legacylad you've seen this before:
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-45019603
|
Buy some very cheap flight tickets around March 2019.
If you plan cruise holiday buy tickets now before prices go up as everyone will stop flying and start using cruise ships.
|
Thanks for the link. No, I hadn’t seen it. I suppose I’ll have to wing it then ( intentional pun)
This Brexit thing is complicated. Best not getting involved and keep doing my utmost to wake up on a morning, which I hope to do tomorrow because I’m returning to Spain. Whilst I can.
|
|
The good news if they realise there is no deal (Rather than wait for parliament to reject it) we have time to plan and agree on what is needed to limit problems in a hard Brexit.
|
You really are a worry box rob. Like my missus really. I've read the links so no need to repost. I believe there will be some serious and unexpected outcomes for many as result of BREXIT, either floppy or erect. But I find it hard to believe that, whatever the outcome, all flights will be grounded
Once you get old like LL and me you'll realize that you can't wait around for politicians deliberations. A month might be a month too much.
Carpe diem and all that. :-)
|
>> I've read the links so no need to repost.
LL didn't know the implications. If I was him I'd still go - he's not working so getting stuck in the EU for a bit is not a problem.
Now it looks like a no deal is going to happen and we know it earlier then we can as a country sort things out. Whereas getting to March 2019 and then finding it's no deal is more of a problem.
But if we did get to March 29th with no agreements in place for flights they will indeed be grounded. Our arrangements to some non-EU countries also rely on EU agreements and there's the safety stuff too. Your head is half in the sand I think and you're assuming they will sort the agreements needed.
I think we're more likely to have a general election. And there are rumours Corbyn will soon be suspended.
|
|
The bit I find more worrying (so a worry box then) is May has handled Brexit so badly in leaving, but I fear she will do no better when we leave. She has been a nightmare in terms of achieving this.
|
So who would have done better and how would it have differed?
EDIT apart, of course, from us experts here
Last edited by: smokie on Sat 22 Sep 18 at 00:35
|
>> So who would have done better and how would it have differed?
There were and still are only two options for the future relationship and the EU made this clear from the start:
1. Remain in the EEA in some form (Norway agreement or actually be in the EU).
2. A trade agreement (like Canada) but that means you need a NI/RoI border and customers checks at all the borders.
I do not think the EU will ever allow freedom of movement of goods only without money, people and services. That is a defining characteristic of the EU.
Theresa May decided to go for the cake and still eat it approach hence Tusk's witty tweet.
Last edited by: rtj70 on Sat 22 Sep 18 at 01:00
|
>>And there are rumours Corbyn
>> will soon be suspended.
Where did you hear that? Not saying it's wrong I'm just surprised usual suspects in media are not over it like a rash.
|
|
That little known place called the Telegraph.
|
>> That little known place called the Telegraph.
Found it now. Had assumed it was associated with the anti-semitism farrago but in fact it relates to foreign trips made when he was a back bencher. All seem to have been to Middle East or North Africa and associated with his support for the Palestinian cause.
While the Telegraph are comparing his situation with that of Ian Paisley Junior those expenses involved a foreign government (Sri Lanka) and paid advocacy. Paisley made matters worse for himself by claiming defamation and threatening court action.
The Committee on Standards can discharge references if in case of oversights. It was the paid advocacy for a foreign government that did for Paisley.
I suspect that if JC admits to administrative oversights he'll get off.
|
>>I fear she will do no better when we leave.
She seems to have changed her stance abruptly and maybe MPs will close ranks in support, now that all this has happened:
www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/09/22/eu-religion-britain-against-federalist-fanatics/
(Needs subscription to view but is presumably from tomorrow's print issue)
|
What an utter balls up, from start to finish. From a ridiculously badly defined referendum to total rejection of the suggested deal.
Well, the EU needs to shape up or else we'll... ummm. urrr....
Well, they just better watch out, that's all.
|
Mrs B and I have been listening to Mark Mardell's podcasts on Britain and the EU from the fifties to date:
www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p062h50y/episodes/downloads
Well worth the time.
|
Maybe this explains it to some of the xxxx xxxx population, but I doubt it.
Apologies if it has been posted before,
www.linkedin.com/pulse/what-real-choices-facing-theresa-may-jeremy-corbyn-brexit-lock-qc/?published=t
|
If there is a 2nd referendum offered, the outcome could be:
[1] Leave wins again with similar margin.
[2] Remain wins by a small margin. Then leave voters will argue why not another referendum to see if people changed mind again. This will lead to a referendum every few years like general election. So it becomes a neverendum. This result is likely to break up both Labour and Conservative leading to an Anti-EU and Pro-EU parties.
[3] Remain wins by large margin.
[4] Leave wins by large margin.
Probability of [3] or [4] is low. In fact, I think probability of [1] is highest. Media might try to make people believe a majority of voters changed mind in favour of remain but in reality a lot of remain voters have now in favour of leave, especially after EU showed its dirty tricks already.
You may not like Daily Mail, but I think it is the newspaper which is closest to reflecting overall public sentiment.
|
But do you want to leave with no deal at all - so a cliff edge leave with a lot of things not sorted. There would be no transition period. If we wanted that outcome from the start we had 2 years to plan for it.
As for EU dirty tricks - what dirty tricks? They have said since before the election we could not get freedom of movement of one type (E.g. goods) and not the other 3. They have said we can either have the Norway model or similar or Canada style trade agreement.
The Government (and the newspapers) are not claiming the EU have dropped this bombshell at the last moment. They haven't. They been saying it all along.
So Movilogo do you want to still leave the EU without any deal in place at all?
The Daily Mail is writing incorrect articles as always and people like you believe them.
The two options have always been remain in the EEA (and contribute to the EU but no vote) or leave and have a trade deal. What is so hard to understand? Well May is finding it difficult I know.
Last edited by: rtj70 on Sun 23 Sep 18 at 19:13
|
>>do you want to leave with no deal at all - so a cliff edge leave with a lot of things not sorted
=UK would automatically fall back on World Trade Organization (WTO) trade rules. Those rules would apply automatically to UK trade with the EU and other countries with which the EU has free-trade deals.
~www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-45112872
|
|
Before we can trade on WTO terms we need agreed tariffs. Agreed with (I think) 156 nations. That will take time. Only takes one to disagree on something and nothing is agreed. Check it up.
|
>>So Movilogo do you want to still leave the EU without any deal in place at all?
>> The Daily Mail is writing incorrect articles as always and people like you believe them.
I don't mind leaving without a deal.
I am not saying Daily Mail always prints correct news but all newspapers are guilty of pushing opinions as facts.
|
"You may not like Daily Mail, but I think it is the newspaper which is closest to reflecting overall public sentiment. "
Never in a month of Sundays!
Meanwhile it seems that Labour are going to be the 'Remain' party. They clearly think that a Remain stance is an opportunity to get a favorable vote.
Now let me see:
If you have been a lifelong passionate Labour supporter, see Corbyn as a temporary issue and voted 'Leave' what are you going to do now which way are your loyalties going to lie.
Likewise if you have been a passionate Tory and voted 'Remain' would you switch your vote just to ensure a Remain scenario?
Other permutations apply.
|
Read the article linked to my sherlock above if you haven't already.
I think if Labour wants a second referendum they need to promise it but it happens after they win a General Election. At the moment (ignoring Brexit) Labour is unelectable. If they can deliver no Brexit they will win. Stop Brexit before another election, and they are back to being unelectable.
>> Likewise if you have been a passionate Tory and voted 'Remain' would you switch your vote
>> just to ensure a Remain scenario?
I'm not a Tory but if it was guaranteed we did not leave the EU I'd vote Labour. They will do damage to the country for sure but that's nothing compared to Brexit. But a second referendum is not guaranteed to change anything. So we could have the worst of both worlds.
Last edited by: rtj70 on Sun 23 Sep 18 at 19:45
|
I have been invited to a closed lunch with David Mundell this week.
As I understand it his positions cover no second referendum (agreed), no second independence vote (don't care much), believes that BREXIT risks increasing support for Scotch Independence (still don't care) supports the 'Chequers Plan' (not any more, I guess, though he said there was "no credible alternative") and I think supported Remain though he seems to be leaning the other way these days. Or perhaps he's just accepting.
A couple of things in here I shall bring up, I think.
www.davidmundell.com/brexit-and-scotland
Never knowingly met him, but a decent chap, by all accounts, we shall see.
I look forward to an interesting Thursday. I hope.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Mon 24 Sep 18 at 15:47
|
|
The Scottish independence question that has never been answered is "How can Scotland afford it?".
|
It will be fine... it's scaremongering again ;-)
If we know there is no deal soon you'd hope things are put in place for the flights. And we can also build big lorry parks at the ports etc. Plenty of time.
|
I am curious to know what the common people in other EU countries think about UK leaving EU.
Do they care? Are the anxiously waiting see effect on their local economy etc.? Is it only neighbouring countries like France, Holland are worried where as Scandinavia and Eastern blocks don't really care?
As none of these countries (except Ireland) are English speaking, it is difficult to read thru their mainstream media (Google translation doesn't always do a good job).
|
>> I am curious to know what the common people in other EU countries think about
>> UK leaving EU.
>>
>>
the bbc cover that quite a bit online, small business owners through to the average person on the street as well as european newspaper reviews. The last one was about Austria.
|
|
The people I've spoken to in Greece think we are mad to leave. They accepted terrible austerity to avoid being thrown out of the EU.
|
>> The people I've spoken to in Greece think we are mad to leave.
Survey result says otherwise.
www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2016/jun/23/is-britain-most-eurosceptic-country
|
>> Survey result says otherwise.
>> www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2016/jun/23/is-britain-most-eurosceptic-country
If you read the whole article the message is more nuanced.
|
>> >> The people I've spoken to in Greece think we are mad to leave.
>>
Well the man in the cafe in Mandamados today was very emphatic that we were right right to leave. He also told me that Churchill was right and that Germany should be bombed ever 50 years. He was also convinced that the Americans were controlling the world climate and referred me to a web site that would prove it.
Not sure how representative his views were.
|
Not sure how representative his views were.
While we haven't quite got to grips with loss of empire, the Greeks are still mourning the loss of theirs to the Romans
|
>> Germany should be bombed ever 50 years
They don't like Germans though do they for fairly obvious reasons. Definitely the case on Crete. I was told a story about someone shooting a German tourist in fairly recent years. Whether it's true or not I couldn't say.
And still Germans find Crete popular.
|
>> I am curious to know what the common people in other EU countries think about
>> UK leaving EU.
As others say there's plenty of material in our own media without needing to resort to Google translate. Somebody in one of these threads related the gist of a TV programme following EU built cars from factory to arrival in UK. People in Cuxhaven, where the cars were embarked for sea crossing, thought we were mad. They seemed well informed as to pros/cons, far more so than those in UK port of arrival - Immingham IIRC .
www.car4play.com/forum/post/index.htm?v=e&t=25716&m=568044
|
|
I see that "Public vote" has become Labour speak for another referendum. No doubt to be repeated untill they get the answer they want.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Tue 25 Sep 18 at 12:00
|
Labour is between rock and hard place.
They can get few more votes by supporting remain but lose votes due to lots of Labour supporters voted in favour of Leaving EU.
Their statement of "remain would not be an option" in second referendum was a sensible choice because it would have demonstrated they obeyed a democratic result.
But blatantly supporting remain starts a new game. LibDems also potraits themselves as Remain party. Gradually it is going towards polarisation - Remain party and Leave party.
|
>> Labour is between rock and hard place.
>> But blatantly supporting remain starts a new game. LibDems also potraits themselves as Remain party.
Labour sets out to be a democratic party. The membership, something like half a million, are largely young and recognise the referendum>Brexit scenario as an utter disaster. Non of the outies here have been able to articulate what the advantages will be. Even the hard Brexit favouring European Reform Group in the Tory party have failed to produce a worked through version of how exit will work. They've had 45 years to think it through FFS.
In some ways we're beyond Leave/Remain and into 'How the Hell do we Get Out of this FUBAR scenario'
>> Gradually it is going towards polarisation - Remain party and Leave party.
Possibly but the Tories are too fractured to be the leave party, or at least the leave at any cost party.
|
>> Labour is between rock and hard place.
>>
>>
JC is stuck between his MPs that want to broadly remain and labour voters who in large numbers want to leave. Then this his views which are instinctively anti eu, I think.
Hence they are in just as much of a bind as the tories.
|
>>I see that "Public vote" has become Labour speak for another referendum. No doubt to be repeated until they get the answer they want.
Brexit appears to transcend party politics (other than Lib Dem/SNP. I'll ignore UKIP since they are kaput currently).
Labour are playing the non-committal card which is exactly what any opposition should do while the governing party is in the throes of failing to govern and in hawk to the DUP shambles.
When/if a general election is called then the various parties will wheel out their manifestos (which they will obviously stick to fastidiously....)
>>The Scottish independence question that has never been answered is "How can Scotland afford it?"
Same answer as how the UK will afford the repercussions of Brexit I expect.
Last edited by: Lygonos on Tue 25 Sep 18 at 12:11
|
|
I am watching the BBC news ATM. Remain will be an option on Labour's Public vote. That will upset a lot of their voters.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Tue 25 Sep 18 at 12:15
|
>> I am watching the BBC news ATM. Remain will be an option on Labour's Public
>> vote. That will upset a lot of their voters.
They have suggested a referendum as one of the options in event of an impasse where May cannot finesse an offer that is (a) acceptable to EU and (b) gain a majority in the commons. They'd prefer a general election but a new referendum is next best choice.
Starmer ad-libbed from his pre published text to make clear that 'Remain' was not ruled out as an option. Since John McDonnell appeared in his Today prog interview yesterday to do exactly that we can surmise that there's some division in the Shadow Cabinet.
|
The Labour party dont know what to do. They know Brexit will be a financial disaster and they will be even less able to push through the economy ruining hard left plans they have, yet on the other hand all their electorate voted to leave.
The party membership and their electorial vote are incompatible
|
>> l yet on the other hand all their electorate voted to leave.
>>
As results were declared by Local Authority and not by constituency it's a bit of a challenge to match all seats with Leave/Remain tags and be confident as to result. Somebody tried here:
medium.com/@chrishanretty/most-labour-mps-represent-a-constituency-that-voted-leave-36f13210f5c6
What's certainly not true is that all Labour's electorate voted leave. Plenty of Labour seats in remain heartlands of London and other cities and some Tory vulnerabilities in Remain areas too if the party goes hard brexit.
There are other reasons too why listing towards remain as least worst option might not be the vote loser it first appears:
Given FPTP a snap election will be won or lost in the usual swing marginals. Can they make a good case there and not lose any more Mansfields?
Some surveys suggest people who voted out have swung to remain now the 'truth is out' about leave
Can those who voted out for reasons Pat mentioned last week (and there's more than a grain of truth in them) be won over by an offer that actually addresses their problems
A clutch of crinklies who voted out have shuffled of the register and been replaced by younger much pro remain.
I suspect that messing with the franchise compared to 2016 would be seen as too close to a gerrymander. There are though sound reasons for allowing settled EU migrants and UK ex-pats settled in EU a vote. There's also a strong case for 16-17yo's who will carry the weight of this after you and I are dead, never mind the crinklies.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Tue 25 Sep 18 at 15:07
|
>> >>The Scottish independence question that has never been answered is "How can Scotland afford it?"
>>
>> Same answer as how the UK will afford the repercussions of Brexit I expect.
>>
With the exception that UK currently is a net contributor to the EU, in revenue terms, while Scotland is a net recipient of UK funds compared to England.
In any case the UK will survive brexit and Scotland would survive independence, but along the way a lot of people will have a very hard time for a number of years and it is not likely, really, to be the sort of people on this forum.
Both brexit and Scottish independence are bad ideas, IMHO
|
Nice to be back old laptop kaput.
No more referendums.Maybe for all our sakes just leave and go to world trade agreements.This saga is already costing jobs we might as well go the whole hog.
|
>> Nice to be back old laptop kaput.
>>
>> No more referendums.Maybe for all our sakes just leave and go to world trade agreements.This
>> saga is already costing jobs we might as well go the whole hog.
Nice to have you back Dutchie.
My view is inevitably clouded my being a committed remainer but I don't think WTO is the simple remedy the Rees-Mogg and others would have us believe. It would be a disaster for the economy, create real practical problems with food supply chains and reinforces need for a 'hard' border between UK and Ireland.
|
|
There does not seem to be very much Brexit interest in France. A few minutes ago there were no leads online in France 24, Paris Match, Le Monde diplomatique or Marianne although Euronews had a few. My subscription to Le Canard Enchaine has lapsed but it seldom took any interest in the topic.
|
Hello Brompt.
I had no dog in this fight but I would have voted remain.The conservatives started this to give people a vote.Let them sort it out one way or the other.Labour is all over the place also regarding us leaving the E.U.
I am a social democrate,but politics at this moment is very confusing in the U.K.The North and South divide if that is the case.It is a melting pot of confusing in my opinion.Ukip keeps waffling about immigration.Don't worry Nigel the Poles are leaving.
|
There is utterly no point in a second referendum. It won't be a landslide in either direction so will resolve nothing.
Perhaps a General Election would clear it up a bit, perhaps not.
It is long past the point of arguing about whether or not we leave. We're leaving, and that's that.
It's all about how we leave and into what world we move. BEANO is largely inevitable, I think, but don't believe that is a good thing. It's not.
BEANO, at best, is a holding position for the UK so that it can continue to function for a period of time. It will allow both the Leavers and the Remainers to feel that we have left, to get used to the idea, and to shut up about it.
Then we have to work out what world we are going to build to replace our position the EU. That world has gone and will not return. We are going to spend 5 years making BEANO work, and then we're going to spend 5 years building a new environment for ourselves.
If we do it well, then 10 years from now we should be back to about where we were 5 years ago.
And we WILL be in some kind of club. It will be no different to the EU. But it will not be called the EU, we will accept jurisdiction of a non UK Court, and we will follow international laws, rules and regulations. so let's hope that leaving the EU is sufficient. Because, Leavers, that is *ALL* that you will achieve.
What we do not have time for in the next years is to put our heads in the sand, ignore reality, and keep coming up with the same ignorant, unrealistic idiots.
We need to face reality and get on with it.
We need to stop arguing if, and get on with working out how. And since every Leaver I have spoken to has been unable to put their goals, or their vision of the future, or their implementation plan, into anything more meaningful than "leaving the EU" I think we can assume that they will play little useful part in planning or determining that future.
We need a political party to stand up, say "We're out and that's it, and here's where we are going".
But I don't see any sign of that happening. Perhaps a GE will force it.
Last edited by: VxFan on Thu 5 Sep 19 at 10:08
|
Brexit Discussion - Volume 57 - movilogo
