***** This thread is now closed, please CLICK HERE to go to Volume 75 *****
IMPORTANT - PLEASE READ
Before discussions start in this thread, I would like to point out that any petty arguments, personal attacks, or any other infringement of house rules, etc. will be deleted where we feel fit from now on.
We will not give notice that we have deleted something. Nor will we enter into discussion why something was deleted. That will also be deleted.
It seems that discussion about Brexit brings out the worst in some people.
Be nice, Play nice, and control your temper. Your co-operation would be appreciated.
Last edited by: VxFan on Thu 10 Jan 19 at 10:42
|
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46426380
I thought it quite interesting, laying down some of the timelines and processes required.
Bit that stuck out for me was this;
'suggests it is highly unlikely that both the legislation and campaign process could be completed by 29 March 2019 - the UK's scheduled leaving date'
So A50 would have to be extended, can anyone see that happening?
|
I don't see a second referendum happening, not really because it's unlikely they could get it done in time but because there is no real reason for it except a lot of Remain (and a few Leave) voters feeling a bit cheated by the first one, and it's almost definite that whatever result it delivers it will not please a large lump of the electorate.
I can however see an agreement to a short extension to enable negotiations to be completed but I can also see pressure on all sides to actually get on and get it done within the time-frame. As I said about, Nicky Morgan on QT said it's now not much over 100 days till 29 March, and that really isn't long.
|
|
Mr. Juncker said in exasperation that TM's proposals were nebulous (as they were). The French word he used was "nebuleux". If he was referring to her personally he would have said she was being "nebuleuse" so she attacked him on false terms.
|
|
It's interesting to remember, perhaps, that Mrs May has to go home and answer for her job to her party, her parliament, and her electors, whereas none of the negotiators on the EU side appear to be answerable to anyone, least of all an electorate.
|
|
Maybe those countries take electing MEPs more seriously than to send a bunch of deluded fockwits to represent them?
|
>> whereas none of the negotiators
>> on the EU side appear to be answerable to anyone, least of all an electorate.
>>
....really.....?
The EU negotiators are, quite naturally, negotiating on behalf of the EU, not any of the individual members......
BUT, all facets of any agreement are subject to ratification by all members of the Council of the European Union and the European Parliament, the Parliament of the United Kingdom and the legislatures of all EU member states.
Why do you think May keeps bypassing the EU negotiators and appealing to Heads of State if they have no influence on the final deal?
In addition, the EU negotiators are working to a clear negotiation plan/strategy that has already been ratified through the same process by the EU27.
You could, therefore, say that the EU negotiators are being, and will be, held much more robustly accountable than the UK negotiator(s) (whoever they happen to be today), but are at the same time making a much more professional job of it, and have a much more informed, and less obstructive, set of stakeholders.
|
I think cliff's point is more about the degrees of separation between themselves and the electorate on each side.
Seems reasonable to me, whether this has any bearing on the outcomes is another matter.
|
>> I think cliff's point is more about the degrees of separation between themselves and the
>> electorate on each side.
>>
"none of the negotiators on the EU side appear to be answerable to anyone, least of all an electorate."
....doesn't read like that to me.
Nonetheless, negotiators who are acting on behalf of 27 different sovereign states as a grouping are patently going to be doing so in a different model to those who are acting on behalf of a single one (there is by design going to be at least one more degree of complication - note, however, that whilst the EU negotiators are answerable to the EU, they are also answerable in parallel to the individual states - ultimately through each of their political heads; a position which would be not much different from that of the UK negotiators if it weren't for the fact that Ms May seems to want to do most of it herself!).
And, reading the OP, if one were to take another, only mildly cynical, view, one could postulate that Ms May has only just survived answering for her job to her party, and is fervently avoiding the same with her parliament, and her electors. ;-)
|
|
It seems you've written similar or at least the way I way I read it. Different models in that they are further away directly from an electorate. But no matter I don't think it's a massive point, I'm sure CP is capable of explaining the point further.
|
What can New Zealand teach us about Brexit?
www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-46546204
|
>>
>> Seems reasonable to me, whether this has any bearing on the outcomes is another
>> matter.
>>
No, I don't suppose it does really, it was just an observation sparked by the latest spat over the meaning of the word nebulous.
If the head of an elected government had been invited to Britain for talks, he/she would have been shown respect and not insulted by a mere official.
There used to be a protocol that countries' representatives dealt with opposite numbers of equivalent status - heads of state met heads of state, prime ministers met prime ministers, and officials talked to officials.
The recent charades have been curiously reminiscent of Neville Chamberlain pathetically clutching his brolly grovelling up the steps to listen to a rant from Hitler.
Not very dignified.
|
...nope; still don't get that.
The jury is still out as to whether Ms May was insulted, or whether it was her proposals that were described as "nebulous". (they are - this is the woman who, in order to keep her job as PM, told the MPs of her own party that she wouldn't lead them into the next election, or possibly didn't, according to the diametrically opposed views of the people who were actually in the room and reported immediately afterwards - I'm still not sure she's fully clarified her position, even now).
In addition to that, it appears to be Ms May that keeps inviting herself to Europe, not the other way around.
But, that aside, as above, Ms May is negotiating with the EU; regardless of whether you like the way they are appointed, Jean-Claude Junker and Donald Tusk hold the most senior roles in the EU, and are of the equivalent standing to the UK PM, and therefore appropriate for the purposes of these meetings.
The whole thing is further complicated by the fact the Ms May is such a control-freak, she seems to want to do all the negotiation herself (and shield any results from her Cabinet, Parliament et al.) whereas the negotiations should really be being held at an "officers" level, with Michel Barnier heading up the EU side of this work.
So, how do you think the EU, and the EU27 feel when Ms May completely sidetracks the appropriate protocols, and heads off to try to wheedle things out of the individual political leaders of the 27. It seems to me that they have been very patient and polite in this matter, albeit that the approach has proved singularly unfruitful.
|
Top post TNE; sums it up admirably.
It's reported this morning that she's furious with Tony Blair because he had the audacity to go on the Today programme and advocate a second referendum.
|
I don't want to go to the conspiracy theory but from the start of the talks after the referendum, it had to be damage control.
The wishes of the people who voted Brexit could never be fulfilled the way they wanted it to be.
Theresa May maybe from taking advice tried to divide and conquer.It is an old trick but to make it work is not easy if you are against a block of 27 countries.Of course there is sympathy for her position from the continent.But don't go by the smiles and handshakes.Mafia members will smile at you before the bullet if you are chosen.
There is a lot at stake here, Junker will listen to Angela Merkel make no mistake.Listening to the Dutch M.E.P.this morning on the Andrew Marr show they are waiting for a decision from our parliament.The sooner the better this can't be dragged out into the new year.
|
|
Good post Dutchie - I agree with what you say there.
|
>> . It seems to me that they have been very
>> patient and polite in this matter, albeit that the approach has proved singularly unfruitful.
>>
OK, if you say so. It just doesn't seem very becoming for a British Prime Minister, as an elected office holder, to have to go off to kowtow to the paid staff of an organisation. :)
We made that mistake the other way round once. Britain sent a civil servant to negotiate with Stalin, Germany sent the Foreign Minister and concluded the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact.
Oh well, it's all a bit irrelevant really. The whole exercise was probably doomed from the start.
Roll on the next referendum to sort it all out. And if that doesn't satisfy everyone we can just have another. :)
|
>> OK, if you say so. It just doesn't seem very becoming for a British Prime
>> Minister, as an elected office holder, to have to go off to kowtow to the
>> paid staff of an organisation. :)
>>
...nope, still (still) don't get it.....
That seems to be the same woolly and jingoistic thinking that got us into this mess in the first place.... ;-)
So, the British Prime Minister, a salaried member of the British Government, nominated, and elected to that position, by members of her own political party, has been meeting with the salaried President of the European Commission (the former Prime Minister of Luxembourg) who was nominated by the European Council (the Heads of State/Government of the EU member states), and voted for by the European Parliament.
Now, I (and the general political view is of equivalence of European Commissioners with state Ministerial posts) see that as at least equivalent official standing, but a real argument could be made that Jean-Claude Junker's position is more democratically underwritten.
|
|
I, too, would like to give TNE's post the thumbs-up but it seems I am not a "Qualified User". How do I get qualified?
|
>> I, too, would like to give TNE's post the thumbs-up but it seems I am
>> not a "Qualified User". How do I get qualified?
You have to be logged in. Try again now you've posted!
|
www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-46592394
FFS, somebody somewhere is taking the mick.
|
"Enter the word or phrase you are looking for"
Search
Remoaners
A derogatory term meaning a person who complains about Britain leaving European Union and/or the outcome of the Brexit referendum.
:o}
|
I suppose if you are working in an industry which could be negatively affected by leaving the E.U.
You will be anxious if your job is on the line.Sovereignty I reckon will be the last thing on your mind feeding a family.
|
What a very juvenile post. Why start schoolboy insults out of the blue?
At whom are you aiming it?
|
Are you talking to me F.M?
|
No, absolutely not you Dutchie.
I was talking to Dog and his out of the blue response to my post where he was whining about remoaners.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Mon 17 Dec 18 at 16:33
|
From the many posts I have read on this forum.You are very expertise at throwing insults at peoples post who you don't agree with.
So don't give me your often childish tantrum behaviour at me mister.
Shall we leave it at that?
|
|
My apologies I went off a tantrum there must be old age creeping up.
|
>> From the many posts I have read on this forum.You are very expertise at throwing
>> insults at peoples post who you don't agree with.
>>
>> So don't give me your often childish tantrum behaviour at me mister.
>>
>> Shall we leave it at that?
I think you and Mark cross-posted there.
|
>> www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-46592394
>>
>> FFS, somebody somewhere is taking the mick.
Hoping to make amends for his utter stupidity and arrogance in allowing this situation in the first place?
|
>>Hoping to make amends for his utter stupidity and arrogance in allowing this situation in the first place?
The idiot was recently heard to say that he didn't regret calling the referendum, that it was the right thing to do, and anyway he'd promised to do so.
He didn't seem to cover either why he had promised to do so or why he had in any case made such and utter cock up of it.
Last edited by: VxFan on Wed 29 Jan 20 at 10:30
|
Vote in Parliament to be week commencing 14th January. Our Theresa does like to defer things doesn't she?
Looking forward to another 4 weeks of arguments ;-)
|
|
4 weeks of increasingly lacking content, I should think.
|
>> www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-46592394
>>
>> FFS, somebody somewhere is taking the mick.
>>
If he's able to help, I don't think anyone should be turned away.
|
>>
>> If he's able to help, I don't think anyone should be turned away.
>>
There's a long queue of former PMs and other has-beens eager to shove their oars in.
|
>> There's a long queue of former PMs and other has-beens eager to shove their oars
>> in.
Well lets be honest, none of them got us into a mess this big (except David Cameron who got us into this mess, or maybe Gordon Brown who set up us for the fall and David gave us the push)
|
He said if the deal is rejected, that "would shatter the bond of trust between the electorate and Parliament".
What bond would that be then?
|
Entirely agree.
But you know what's really sad? The comment will have an impact and some people will give it credence.
|
|
May's "deal" is BRINO and deserves rejection.
|
May's deal would deliver Brexit. Since the referendum only said leave, then discontinued membership is the correct democratic result. Of course if it had ever been agreed or known what people wanted, then that might be different. But it wasn't.
If it means non-membership, as far as I can see that is the *only* thing people agree on, then it will do that for absolute sure. Refusing May's deal might very well mean that not even that will be delivered.
|
>> www.conservativewoman.co.uk/seeds-of-hope-could-sprout-from-the-brexit-debacle/
The author starts from a false premise that Brexiteers did not vote for Norway or Canada ++
He cannot possibly know that.
|
>>The author starts from a false premise that Brexiteers did not vote for Norway or Canada ++
>> He cannot possibly know that.
Precisely.
The question was: "Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?"
The vote was to for the United Kingdom to leave the European Union. That's it. Nothing more. May's deal will take the UK out of the EU. Box ticked, democracy upheld. If our politicians can stop squabbling, stabbing each other in the back and jostling for each other's jobs for more than a few minutes, the UK will cease to be an EU member state as of 29th March 2019, exactly as per the mandate given by the referendum result.
The terms of leaving were never voted on, because the question was never asked. What people like or don't like about the EU, what bits they want to keep, not keep, whether they want hard or soft Brexit, or whether they were concerned about specific issues pertaining to EU membership etc etc are irrelevant.
The repeated bleating of hardline Brexiteers that 'this isn't the Brexit we voted for' is nothing more than conjecture, and is abject nonsense. No such question was ever asked.
Last edited by: DP on Mon 31 Dec 18 at 12:13
|
The message appears to be that a deal which has not been detailed, discussed or negotiated, or even summarised, cannot happen if May's deal is accepted.
Gosh, we'll be lucking to get away from the overbearing EU into a world of dealing with gentle, benevolent partners like the US.
I wonder what other things would have to change for this deal to happen? There's a list in the back pocket, no doubt.
www.bbc.com/news/uk-46720323
|
Brexit Con of the Century.
There will be chaos at the ports. Only the occasional root vegetable will be sold in the supermarkets.
The factories and farms will run out of workers, and the planes will all be grounded on the runway.
blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/12/five-brexit-myths-that-will-be-exposed-next-year/
|
Of course it won't be the end of the world but surely the whole idea of Brexit was that we would be better off, not that things will only be bit worse than they are now.
Remind me. What exactly are the benefits of Brexit and when will we all see those benefits?
|
|
I and many others, voted Leave (and would again) to leave the EU, not to be better orf.
|
>> I and many others, voted Leave (and would again) to leave the EU, not to
>> be better orf.
You selfish git prepared to make everyone worse off to satisfy your ignorant racism. Does the country deserve someone like you? parasite.
|
|
I rather think you crossed the line there.
|
|
Which line? Is it in any way not factual?
|
|
Line 1 of the House Rules I suggest.
|
>> Line 1 of the House Rules I suggest.
Brexit will fix that.
I am bemused tho. I have been called a "remoaner" for the last two years, by a bloke who has spent the last two years moaning about Brexit.
|
You really should stop fretting about it all Dog :-)
Just ignore the headlines, especially the old ones. I think most right thinking people already are.
Stuff will undoubtedly be different. The whole exercise would have been pointless if it wasn't. Some will affect us and some won't. But IMO it will not all just go without a hitch, and without having some adverse impacts.
Also IMO the "BREXIT MPs", of all political colours, should take a large chunk of responsibility for that. They seem to be the ones most determined to make it messy.
|
|
Maybe a few Remain MPs contributed to 'the mess'.
|
>> Maybe a few Remain MPs contributed to 'the mess'.
No. Leave broke it, leave owns it.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Thu 3 Jan 19 at 09:26
|
>> No. Leave broke it, leave owns it.
Says a Remainer. 30 months of Remain's crusade to overturn the vote fairly won by Leave has weakened the hand of negotiations with the EU resulting in the bad deal May has ended up with.
|
>> Says a Remainer. 30 months of Remain's crusade to overturn the vote fairly won by
>> Leave has weakened the hand of negotiations with the EU resulting in the bad deal
>> May has ended up with.
Your fault, you broke it you fix it.
|
>> Says a Remainer. 30 months of Remain's crusade to overturn the vote fairly won by
>> Leave has weakened the hand of negotiations with the EU resulting in the bad deal
>> May has ended up with.
Nonsense. 30 months of asking for the impossible and discovering that the land of milk, honey and unicorns promised by Farage and BoJo is a fallacy is more like it. Discovering that the UK isn't important enough for the EU to rip up its rulebook, roll over, and give us all the good stuff without any of the commitments. Like we were told by prominent Brexiteers they would do...
We never had much of a hand to negotiate with. German cars and French wine can be covered by a trade deal, or if it comes to it, WTO. The services sector which inconveniently makes up 80% our GDP (and which currently runs a tasty £29bn surplus with the EU) cannot, unless we sign up to the single market (a la May's deal. Which Brexiteers don't want.
The responsibility for the crap we are in right now lies solely with the Brexiteers. Not the EU or remainers, none of which incidentally want Brexit at all.
Last edited by: DP on Thu 3 Jan 19 at 10:19
|
|
A sense of reality would be welcome on all sides. Perhaps you might contribute by accepting the fact that nearly half of the votes cast were to remain and no long term solution is possible without compromise. Dropping the childish term “remoaners” would be a start.
|
>>Dropping the childish term "remoaners" would be a start.
That childish term was in the article I posted, I'm just a cut & paste merchant remember.
:)
|
>>to overturn the vote fairly won by Leave
fairly?
illegal spending on campaign?
lies on buses?
lies on what would happen
fairly??
|
|
Hey dog, YOU caused all this, so stop your whining about it.
|
>>I and many others, voted Leave (and would again) to leave the EU, not to be better orf.
To leave. That's it. Nothing else.
Nothing about ECJ, nothing about Fisheries agreements. Nothing about Freedom of Movement. Nothing about immigration. Nothing about passports. Nothing about anything except the one thing - Leave.
So stop whining about what else you are entitled to because of the vote. Because that would be nothing. Absolutely nothing.
The country will be worse off. Everybody knows that, even your idol Farage concedes it.
You all just whine about a price worth paying. But a price worth paying for what? Neither you nor anybody else has ever managed to say what the price is being paid for.
|
>>Nothing about ECJ, nothing about Fisheries agreements. Nothing about Freedom of Movement. Nothing about immigration. Nothing about passports. Nothing about anything except the one thing - Leave.
I leave all that stuff to the party I voted for at the last election.
>>The country will be worse off. Everybody knows that, even your idol Farage concedes it.
In the short term, yes but, nobody has envisioned what the future of the UK would be if we remained in the EU with its fancy ideas for further integration plus a European defence force.
You can't see it now but in the future your grandchildren will thank the 17.4 people who voted Leave.
Whine over, and out.
|
>>I leave all that stuff to the party I voted for at the last election.
So you are a supporter of May's transition deal? Or happy for Corbyn and the Labour Party to argue it through to decide whether or not they a second referendum?
>>You can't see it now but in the future your grandchildren will thank the 17.4 people who voted Leave.
Most unlikely that they will have any respect for your reasons for doing so, however much others have been able to repair the damage you did.
|
WTO Terms mean, and this is a 100% non-negotiable statement - there will be a hard border between NI and Ireland.
Here is some happy reading about no-deal preparedness...
ec.europa.eu/info/brexit/brexit-preparedness/preparedness-notices_en
Read only if you have some happy pills next to you.
And understand that as it stands right now, there is NO deal.
If you want Brexit, then support TM's deal. Because nobody in their right mind, even our worthless media-focussed politicians, would conceivably instigate a no deal exit, so I believe the choices are;
1) TM's deal
2) Brexit delay
3) Brexit cancellation
The only additional conceivable 4) is a renegotiation of the Transition deal. Unlikely, but possible I guess, However, I assure you, NOTHING material will change, though perhaps some face saving repainting will occur to allow some of our self-serving, despicable politicians to pretend they won some victory as they decide to support the transition deal.
And please, try to remember, it is a transition deal. The actual deal has yet to be seen.
If TM's deal is accepted, then control of everything will pass from the Government, and therefore the electorate. Our industries will make their own agreements over which we will have no democratic control at all. No business will ever risk become this exposed to the vagaries of the politicians, media and lemmings ever again.
Which is pretty bad news for the less powerful companies.
The twenty month transition will ensure that not only does Brexit become BEANO, never again will the electorate have any control over the matter whatsoever.
If you are revenue generating/earning, in employment, reasonably well-off then that will be no threat at all and may even represent opportunity.
But if in anyway you require state support, I suspect it's going to be pretty unpleasant as the years go by.
Dog made some comment about our Grandchildren being grateful. Well, the well-off and successful ones will be, perhaps. But that will be a much smaller group.
|
Sorry to move to something else but...
Is it just down here that the new ferry contract debacle is on the news?
Latest is that they cut and paste the T&Cs from a fast food delivery firm onto their website, when they were publicly shown up they hastily changed them.
Strangely for a private company the Government have stepped in to say on their behalf that it was made in error.... er No Sh$$T Sherlock!
|
...there has to be more dodgy provenance to this whole thing than you could shake a stick at.....
There are some interesting rumours as to who is ultimately behind the firm, and it looks to me as though some of them might have legs.
In addition, the UK government bypassed EU procurement law by pleading an "urgent requirement due to unforseen circumstances" - despite with the other half of the tongue declaring that they've been assiduously preparing for no-deal for years. (the nature and value of the contract is such that it should be open-tendered, and advertised as such in the OJEU).
In less fraught times, I would have expected a clear intervention under EU law, but maybe they've decided the Nelson touch would be more diplomatic. ;-)
Whatever, I have no doubt the current Government have never had any intention of using it, the contracts are simply a way of spending your and my money to ramp up the rhetoric in Ms May's "my way or the highway" stance, whilst continuing to run down the clock.
...and, given Grayling's record, whoever cast him as Machiavelli in this wants their bumps feeling (though, you know, I could *almost* believe he hasn't understood the slightest part of what's been going on, :-(
The already discredited £350M per week is looking remoter and demoted with every passing hour.
|
>>So you are a supporter of May's transition deal? Or happy for Corbyn and the Labour Party to argue it through to decide whether or not they a second referendum?
If it was a choice between May's deal, another referendum, or Corbyn in number 10, I would reluctantly go for May's deal.
I still think something can be pulled out of the hat before the 29th of March - to the benefit of the UK AND the EU.
We all (all 28) have a lot to lose if there's no deal.
Regarding a no deal scenario, maybe there's something to be done involving regulatory alignment in NI with the EU which has already been discussed I believe .. perhaps it's in 'the hat'.
The common travel area system remains in place if we 'crash out' so that part of any border would remain invisible.
Howls about NI having referendum on reunification with the RoI, after all, they did vote (55.8%) to remain in the EU :)
Orf now to watch David Koresh (Branch Davidians) on BBC 4. get it on iPlayer
|
>> The common travel area system remains in place if we 'crash out' so that part
>> of any border would remain invisible.
No it won't, and no it doesn't. At all.
Free movement of people across the European Union is only possible if a country is part of the European Economic Area. To be part of the EEA, you have to be either an EU member state, or a member of the European Free Trade Association (currently Norway, Switzerland, Iceland and Liechtenstein), as these two bodies are the only two contracting parties.
If Britain leaves the EU with no deal, and has not (re)joined the EFTA as of March 29th, free movement will cease. The cost of this to the economy will be eye watering. There is not a single business leader that I have spoken to who would consider this anything other than a disaster for the UK economy and for jobs.
Where I do agree with you is that it will be a disaster for all concerned, but the pain on the EU's side will be split across a number of countries, if not all 27. On our side, we will cop the lot, and with a services based economy that relies on the single market rules for its trade with the EU (a £29bn annual surplus that puts our £39bn "divorce bill" into context, and a big part of the rationale behind May's deal), This is not a level playing field. Far from it.
Then you have this idea that the direction the EU is going is a bad one, and we voted leave because we don't want to be a part of it. This makes absolutely no sense. The EU will continue along its current path, but now without the UK being able to influence or moderate it in any way. It won't just go away.
I have yet to read or hear any argument from a leave voter that convinces me that Brexit was anything other than a decision taken on emotion rather than logic. If it continues on its present course, it risks the prosperity and opportunity of an entire generation, and for what?
Last edited by: DP on Fri 4 Jan 19 at 09:15
|
>> No it won't, and no it doesn't. At all.
The Common Travel Area between UK and Republic of Ireland predates EU and will remain after. Not just movement between the two states, it affects benefits as well; where the Habitual Residence Test applies then residence in Republic (or IoM/Channel Islands) counts same as being in UK:
www.citizensadvice.org.uk/benefits/coming-from-abroad-and-claiming-benefits-the-habitual-residence-test/the-habitual-residence-test-an-introduction/what-is-the-habitual-residence-test-EWSNI/
A border for goods though would inevitably involve checks on people and vehicles crossing the border so as to deter smuggling etc. Those checks constitute a 'hard' border which is contrary to spirit and letter of Good Friday Agreement and carries serious risks to the peace process.
|
Basically DP, I, like a lot of folk, am BoB. I take on board what you say there though.
I'll continue to keep an open mind on the subject, listen to both sides of the persuasion and would be interested to hear what a Brexiteer has to say on your esteemed post.
|
>>I have yet to read or hear any argument from a leave voter that convinces me that Brexit was anything other than a decision taken on emotion rather than logic
Surely many of them like JRB did it purely on the grounds that it will ultimately line their own pockets?
|
Who JRB?
I think imputing reasons to why people voted the way they did is probably less important than deciding what version of leaving we want (or least dislike, as applicable - surely the erstwhile remainers are entitled to a say in that?)
FWIW I think that, as far as the mainstream vote goes, people who felt they were doing well were more likely to vote for no-change, and those who felt they were becoming worse off were more inclined to want change.
Regardless of that, I think that even if we were heading for a no-deal departure, a transition period would still be desirable since no adequate preparations have been made. The stupid ferry contract is just a symptom of that.
Incidentally, how did a non-existent business even know about and get into negotiations over such a contract? We should be told.
|
The issue is that's what we've already got, an agreement for a transition period and a statement as to what happens if no agreement is reached in that period. Little else.
I'm not sure how one could agree less unless it was agree nothing. I guess you could simply go for an extension of the leave date.
|
>> The issue is that's what we've already got, an agreement for a transition period and
>> a statement as to what happens if no agreement is reached in that period. Little
>> else.
So go for the transition period, is all I meant.
If an agreement (between ourselves, let alone with the rest of the world) as to the final destination can't be reached in an extended transition period, it certainly can't be reached by 29th March.
|
30 Brexit no-deal truths:
1: It will allow the UK to cash in, not crash out - the UK will not have to pay the £39billion divorce bill.
2: It avoids the corrosive uncertainty which the transition period would bring.
3: The UK will be able to use administrative measures to solve Irish border issue, without the need for a backstop.
4: After resolving the Irish border issue, the UK as a whole will be able to enter a Canada +++ style free trade deal, such as the one suggested by Donald Tusk.
5: WTO is a safe haven, not a hard option. Six of the EU’s top 10 trading partners trade under WTO rules.
6: UK exports to countries trading on WTO terms have grown 3 times faster than to the Single Market.
7: EU tariffs on exports from the UK would amount to less than half the UK’s current net contribution to the EU budget.
8: The UK is already a WTO member so would not need to rejoin it.
9: We can start to trade on the new tariff schedules as soon as we leave, without waiting for agreement from other WTO members.
10: The UK is making good progress in replicating the EU’s most important preferential trade arrangements - Switzerland has already agreed to carry over existing preferences.
11: The UK could take up Japan’s invitation to join the Trans-Pacific Partnership.
12: Bilateral trade deals do not have to take a long time to renegotiate. The average renegotiation time is 28 months.
13:“Micro” trade agreements will not be a big issue.
14: Scares about delays to imports are ‘ludicrous’, because Britain will control its borders.
15: There will be no medicine shortages.
16: There will be no food shortages.
17: Manufacturing supply chains and other goods deliveries will not be significantly affected.
18: The UK will not run out of clean water.
19: HMRC’s computer systems will be able to handle extra customs declarations, even if its new system is not fully online.
20: France is determined to prevent delays at Calais for fear of losing trade to Belgian and Dutch port.
21: A new traffic routing system will prevent serious delays to incoming lorries.
22: Planes will continue to fly to and from the EU.
23: Planes will continue to fly to the US and elsewhere.
24: Aircraft manufacturers will still be able to export parts, such as Airbus wings, despite claims to the contrary.
25: British haulage companies will still be able to operate between the UK and the EU.
26: Trade in animals, plants and food will continue after Brexit.
27: UK citizens will not face high mobile phone roaming charges when travelling to the EU.
28: UK car manufacturers have obtained approvals to sell their models to the EU.
29: New VAT rules will not affect the cash flow of importers.
30: British opera singers, musicians and other performers will still be able to tour the EU
www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1067595/brexit-news-no-deal-lord-lilley-wto-rules-30-truths-report
Also:
globalchange.com/10-truths-about-brexit-and-reality-about-impact-of-a-hard-brexit-including-what-would-actually-happen-about-the-irish-uk-border.htm#
brexitcentral.com/dover-can-handle-no-deal-brexit/
blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2018/11/29/a-no-deal-brexit-would-be-a-liberation-not-a-crisis/
moneyweek.com/498512/relax-a-no-deal-brexit-will-be-fine/
And one for the Remoaners:
www.economist.com/leaders/2018/11/24/the-truth-about-a-no-deal-brexit
|
|
Most of those truths are not in fact truthful. They are wishes.
|
>> 30 Brexit no-deal truths:
3 .What are these 'administrative measures' ?
5. If WTO is so good why do nations strive for free trade deals?
8. Are you sure?
14. An oxymoron if ever I saw one
15/16 We hope (see 14)
17. See 14
22. If it's that simple why have Easy Jet transferred a large proportion of it's fleet to Austrian Registry while Ryanair contemplates a UK subsidiary.
23. Are you sure
26. You hope
27. You've no way of knowing - it depends on the mobile companies.
Looks as though this stuff comes from Peter (Lord) Lilley. He came out with same on Today programme a few weeks ago and lost the plot when BBC's expert challenged his 'facts'.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Sun 6 Jan 19 at 16:06
|
From the BBC...
"But Mr Corbyn called Mrs May's deal a "Frankenstein monster of a deal".
"The government is trying to run down the clock in an attempt to blackmail this House and the country into supporting a botched deal," he said.
"We're now told, if we don't support it, the government is prepared to push our whole economy off a cliff edge.""
Is this Corbyn conceding that "No Deal" is a disaster of epic proportions?
Because if so, that means there are only, at least in his mind, two options; Accept the TM Deal or Achieve a Better deal, and one assumes he prefers the "negotiate a better deal".
There are what, 55 week days left?
Nobody, surely nobody, can believe that someone can renegotiate such a deal in 10 weeks? It took TM 19 months to negotiate the current deal on offer.
So therefore one assumes that Corbyn's desire, should he have his way, is to delay Brexit beyond the 29th March.
I wonder how far beyond? And why doesn't he just come out and say it? And how do supporters of Leave feel about that? The sentient ones, I mean.
This would be so much easier if our politicians would just tell the truth from their perspective and stop the media spinning.
I've been telling you for some time;
1) If you want Brexit to happen, support TM's deal
2) TM's deal is a transition deal, not an exit deal
3) Nobody, not anybody at all, has got the slightest idea what a "better" deal might be.
4) "No Deal" exit is a cliff edge.
Anybody who talks about a +++ deal is an idiot. Probably a media and lemming manipulating idiot.
Anybody who suggests that vanilla WTO Terms will work is clearly drunk or dead. or at least brain dead.
It will be, as I said the other day, a disaster from which many people (mostly remain supporters) will profit, and which will hurt many people (typically leave supporters). But not the politicians.
But what will the "disaster" actually be?
Well, truth be told I do not think it will be a big bang disaster. It will be the beginning of a direction of travel. Tony Blair once described the importance of "direction of travel" and he was quite right. He was despicable in many ways, but not a stupid man.
Last edited by: VxFan on Wed 29 Jan 20 at 10:28
|
Corbyn wishes to be in charge.
Why would he want to agree to anything other than a Tory created disaster.
The Tories have been able to blame Labour for every ill in the world since 2008. Corbyn sees Brexit as an opportunity for payback.
In spades.
If he becomes PM he knows he'll likely have 2 terms on the strength of being able to blame his disastrous government on the current shower.
They're all awful.
|
Yvette Cooper is today attempting to bring in a cross party Bill to limit Government funding in event of a No Deal these effectively scuppering the idea.
Apart from the possibly disastrous consequences it is all rather fascinating and exciting. More plot twists and characters than an airport novel.!
|
And MPs are now whining to the Metropolitan police about being verbally abused
Seriously you useless bunch of self absorbed fantasists, do you wonder why the general populous hold you in contempt?
(Ironic that the cash strapped police can't "protect" them)
|
>> And MPs are now whining to the Metropolitan police about being verbally abused
Bit harsh there Zeddo. If one of those nutters abusing Anna Soubry, who is as far as you get from a self absorbed fantasist, had been armed and motivated we could have had a second MP assassination.
And it's not just MPs either; young remain campaigner Femi Oluwole and Guardian journo Owen Jones were also vilely abused. I do though think College Green's time as a space for political presentation/interviews has passed. A return to the 'Westminster Studio' is called for.
|
|
As an observation, both the brexit referendum and the indyref one in Scotland and their aftermath have been a heaven sent opportunity for the less civilised members of society to let the violence in throught, word and deed flow.
|
>> And it's not just MPs either; young remain campaigner Femi Oluwole and Guardian journo Owen
>> Jones were also vilely abused. I do though think College Green's time as a space
>> for political presentation/interviews has passed. A return to the 'Westminster Studio' is called for.
>>
Plenty of "Leave" voters and campaigners have been vilely abused.
I have a touch of "they don't like it up 'em" coming on,
Last edited by: VxFan on Wed 9 Jan 19 at 01:59
|
>> Plenty of "Leave" voters and campaigners have been vilely abused.
As they are responsible for this mess, its well deserved. One only has to see the insults thrown around the European Parliament by Farage to see where that was born.
Last edited by: Zero on Tue 8 Jan 19 at 20:42
|
>> And MPs are now whining to the Metropolitan police about being verbally abused
Justifiably in my view. This is up close and personal. They should be asking themselves who the Nazis are, if it was the MPs that they are accusing then i would be the protesters would have had a bullet in the back of the head by now.
Free speech is available to us in this country, this goes way beyond it. It looks as if it falls within the definition of assault to me, and as such is a criminal act.
That could be argued, but for the police to look on is unacceptable.
|
Cobblers.
They are lucky the army are not rolling in to depose them all.
Last edited by: Zero on Tue 8 Jan 19 at 17:10
|
All that happening is they are being shouted at. From quite a long way away. Its not exactly assault now is it. MP's hurt feelings are Certainly NOT something a cash strapped police should be bothering with.
|
>> All that happening is they are being shouted at. From quite a long way away.
It started off 'quite a long way away' but it got pretty close as Ms Soubry returned to the Palace of Westminster. See also the guys challenging Owen Jones.
|
The clip on the Beeb appears to include some fairly up-close offensiveness when she was making her way back to Parliament, as well as the distant chanting from the edge of College Green.
It may not be life threatening but I don't understand how anyone can condone that kind of offensive behaviour, whether or not she's an MP.
|
Grayling is full of crap (repeatedly) from even this single sentence.
Mr Grayling told MPs that Seaborne would not get any money from the government if the service did not run and the contact award was "done properly in a way that conforms with government rules"
Seaborne are dredging Ramsgate harbour and apparently acquiring a ship/ships, an IT system, and will be signing contracts with Ostend. With no money from government? Who is going to work on behalf of Seaborne if they don't have a bank balance?
As for the "conforms to government rules"...
|
I think you underestimate the calibre of those running the company.
They have already carried out the complex task of identifying the essentials as to what it takes to set up a ferry company
“ Key to the success of the venture is the identification, acquisition and operational management of suitable freight ferries.”
(From their website)
|
The Mayor of Ostend says that it is impossible for his port to be ready.
hmmmm.
And to take an excerpt from your statement " operational management"; that's just about where it will crash and burn without leaving the gate.
|
....I think CG's irony light was obscured, Mark. ;-)
The website statement
“ Key to the success of the venture is the identification, acquisition and operational management of suitable freight ferries.”
is there because they really didn't want to publicly state,
“ Key to the success of the venture is the securing of the Government as a guarantor, as no-one else would divvy up for such an iffy enterprise”.
|
....and isn't it odd that we've had more "drone action" just as the Government were facing another key vote that they looked like losing........
Headlines, what headlines?
(Conspiracy theorist, moi?)
|
>>....I think CG's irony light was obscured, Mark. ;-)
Sorry. Long day.
|
Quite an interesting article in it's own right, about legal moves to force manufacturers to make devices last longer an be easier to repair. Washing machines for example, but seemingly it will refer to all manufactured goods. Ought to be a good thing really, the laws of unintended consequences to one side.
These laws will be passed by the EU, and apparently 18 US States are likely to follow suit.
www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-46797396
However, good as the idea is, down near the bottom are these comments;
"The British government has welcomed the new rules and will almost certainly need to replicate them if UK firms are to export to Europe.
And there you have it, in a nutshell. Why Brexit will be no more than Beano. We'll just be following EU Rules and Regs we didn't vote for and cannot veto, because our companies and business will decide for us. There will be no vote, no veto, the thoughts and feelings of the electorate won't matter because nobody will ask them.
Now tell me again about this sovereignty and right to self-determination that Brexit will bring back?
FIdiots.
|
>> www.conservativewoman.co.uk/the-n-word-is-outlawed-except-to-describe-brexiteers/
What a load of carp. If all that happened was some nutters chanting at Anna Soubry the author might just have a point, albeit rather weak. The nazi stuff is heavily overstated though; Ms Soubry has a perfectly legitimate view that voting out was a mistake. Did you think, on the morning after the 1997 GE, that it was illegitimate to challenge Labour's win?
The issue though isn't chanting; it's the fact that a bunch of these nutters attach themselves to Ms Soubry and follow her back to Member's entrance getting in her personal space, making threats and filming her at close quarters. That's at least arguably illegal intimidation.
|
Brexit Discussion - Volume 73 - sooty123
