[W:#7426]How will Brexit go?***W:46]***

Re: Brexit

Snazzy said:

I do feel that a better deal was possible than the one Mrs May got, had someone else been Prime Minister.

Click to expand...

I share the feeling. Remainer that I am, it cannot be denied that this deal was bad for numerous reasons.

And May not being ousted today (as she won't be) gives little hope for any future. Forget any crap of hers about reaching across aisles to seek any majority, she's utterly incapable of that alone on not even being able to spell compromise.

Manc Skipper said:

Freedom of movement is reciprocal, More than a million Britons living or working in Europe are screwed by Brexit, (though they didn't get a vote) while 3M Europeans who live and work in the UK (who didn't get a vote either) will be forced to register to get permission to continue living here in their own homes!

Click to expand...

Well, the deal that was actually held provisions for those already in (i.e. Brits in the EU and EU citizens in the UK). It also held provisions that any further European migration beyond this be regulated at the immigrant country's discretion (IOW both the UK's and the EU's).

We can say bye-bye to that now.

We can also say good-bye to the Good Friday accord.

They might as well scuttle negotiations at this point and go for a hard Brexit. Anyway, things can always be renegotiated later. :mrgreen:

Re: Brexit

celticwar17 said:

Copyright laws,

Click to expand...

cant have vastly different copyright laws in a common market.

Immigration/refugee Laws

Click to expand...

Highly limited and only with member states that agree to it. The UK was and is exempt. The UK is and always has been fully in control of its own immigration refugee and immigration policies with non-EU peoples.

Internet Laws,

Click to expand...

This is recent, because the member nations including the UK demanded it. It is needed to combat criminal activities and protect the consumer. Now is the current suggestions good.. well that is another debate, but lets put it this way. At the moment Internet laws are up to each country, which causes problems. For example, in Denmark and UK citizens are barred accessing pirate sites and such, but not in other parts of the EU. Of course a VPN kinda ****s that up but hey, no one ever said that politicians were tech savvy

economic regulations that do not benefit the country,

Click to expand...

What do you mean? There are vastly different economic regulations per country. Taxes and rules are widely different from country to country.

labor laws,

Click to expand...

Only involved in an anti-discrimination purpose. Else the EU has kept out of labour laws as much as they can. But when a country goes out of its way to break the basic treaty rule of all EU citizens are equal, then the courts have to step in.

product bans,

Click to expand...

yes, and? Can you name one product ban that the UK is against?

and the sovereignty to not be punished for wanted to change any of these things.

Click to expand...

Have no idea what that means. Sovereignty was partially and very limited given up when the UK joined so the terms and conditions were known. It is no different than the Postal Union, NATO, UN and so on and so on.

Re: Brexit

Chagos said:

~ Forget any crap of hers about reaching across aisles to seek any majority, she's utterly incapable of that alone on not even being able to spell compromise.

Click to expand...

That line has been repeated by those in her own party, across the aisles and further along in Parliament. The only thing that can happen now is (as in 1940) Parliament to take control from May and put forward a range of proposals.

I stand by my position - we follow through with Brexit (much as I disagree with Brexit) and respect the referendum. I would ask the same if Remain had won. What we need is to agree the form of Brexit - I think we will end up within a customs union and have rescinded our place at the top table as well as our rebates.

Meanwhile, Stephen Baker said last week - the damage is done. Europe is looking to Stuttgart and Paris to take over as the Banking centres of Europe and many other industries will be following suit (not just Rees-Mogg's own capital investment company)

Re: Brexit

PeteEU said:

cant have vastly different copyright laws in a common market.



Highly limited and only with member states that agree to it. The UK was and is exempt. The UK is and always has been fully in control of its own immigration refugee and immigration policies with non-EU peoples.



This is recent, because the member nations including the UK demanded it. It is needed to combat criminal activities and protect the consumer. Now is the current suggestions good.. well that is another debate, but lets put it this way. At the moment Internet laws are up to each country, which causes problems. For example, in Denmark and UK citizens are barred accessing pirate sites and such, but not in other parts of the EU. Of course a VPN kinda ****s that up but hey, no one ever said that politicians were tech savvy



What do you mean? There are vastly different economic regulations per country. Taxes and rules are widely different from country to country.



Only involved in an anti-discrimination purpose. Else the EU has kept out of labour laws as much as they can. But when a country goes out of its way to break the basic treaty rule of all EU citizens are equal, then the courts have to step in.



yes, and? Can you name one product ban that the UK is against?



Have no idea what that means. Sovereignty was partially and very limited given up when the UK joined so the terms and conditions were known. It is no different than the Postal Union, NATO, UN and so on and so on.

Click to expand...

Again, Countries should have agency over their own countries... Or at least, I do not have ANY issue understanding why someone would want to have countries to have their own agency in all of these subjects.

It's OKAY that you do not want your country to have agency over these subjects... it is NOT okay for you to try to force others to want what you want.

This 100% a personal preference issue... and since it is a personal preference, a vote to opt-out of being a part of the EU, is perfectly reasonable.

Continue to try to boast the advantages of having a large multi-government bureaucracy, but I don't think you should try to punish or ridicule others who do not want that..... In the end it is their choice and their sovereignty of what they prefer to whom makes the laws that govern their land.


You are claiming the EU doesn't impose economic regulations on countries who may be unwilling/not wanting to have such regulations? Not every decision by the EU is unanimous!!!

Re: Brexit

celticwar17 said:

Again, Countries should have agency over their own countries... Or at least, I do not have ANY issue understanding why someone would want to have countries to have their own agency in all of these subjects.

Click to expand...

Simple, together with others that country is stronger and more powerful. It is the same reason that the 50 states of the US are still together in the United States. UK alone will always been second fiddle to Germany and France due to higher populations and frankly better educated peoples. Denmark will always be a small player and Spain and Italy would always be devaluing their economies to keep in place anti-competitive practices dating back centuries.

Before the road to the common market was put in place, there were rules like the following. All German wine going to France had to go through one specific border crossing that was only open for a few hours a couple times a week. All French electronics got the same treatment by the Germans. This was just one of thousands of petty stupid trade hindrances put in place over the centuries that the EEC/EU has gotten away with.

It's OKAY that you do not want your country to have agency over these subjects... it is NOT okay for you to try to force others to want what you want.

Click to expand...

Not forcing anyone. The UK entered willingly (and frankly desperately) into the EEC/EU and has been helping make any and all decisions on how the EEC/EU has evolved. Them wanting out now, is frankly pathetic and based mostly on lies and the political ambitions of right wing Tories who thinks the UK actually matters on the world stage still... news flash, it does not.

This 100% a personal preference issue... and since it is a personal preference, a vote to opt-out of being a part of the EU, is perfectly reasonable.

Click to expand...

I dont disagree, however any vote should be made on the facts and not lies dont you agree? Any vote should be made with as much truthful information as possible no? It should also be possible to be able to change their minds no? Countries have elections every 4 to 5 years and can dump out a politician because he or she was a bad idea.. but not a fundamental change like being a member of the biggest economic group on the planet? Funny how that goes eh?

Continue to try to boast the advantages of having a large multi-government bureaucracy, but I don't think you should try to punish or ridicule others who do not want that..... In the end it is their choice and their sovereignty of what they prefer to whom makes the laws that govern their land.

Click to expand...

It is an advantage. Europe would not be what it is today if it was not for the EU and the common market. I am old enough to remember the "dark days", with limited competition in pretty much all industries, protective government policies that drove countries closer and closer to bankruptcy and ultimately if we went back to the early 1900s and before... war. I remember having one telephone company, one tv station... government owned. I remember having few choices on the supermarket shelves... dont get me wrong we had everything we would want, but only 1 or 2 brands. There was next to no competition because industries were being protected by government. The UK went "almost" bankrupt doing this for **** sake.

You are claiming the EU doesn't impose economic regulations on countries who may be unwilling/not wanting to have such regulations? Not every decision by the EU is unanimous!!!

Click to expand...

Most are unanimous though.. something like 98% as it has always been EU policy to achieve this with compromise. And I would like to see the 2% cases on a case by case situation and who is against it and why. So show us some examples. And on the major issues there has to be a unanimous vote. The non-unanimous votes are often on small rather irrelevant things that need harmonizing to make trade have less friction and one government not wanting to do it because of domestic protection.. which is fundamentally against EU rules in the first place (unless there is an agreed exemption.. like banks in the UK)

But if you are so anti-EU.. then you must be anti-UK and US as well no? Would California or Scotland not be better off not being part of an economic union like they are today? The dollar and pound must be absolutely against all your principles then? How far down are you willing to go.. counties in California, Wales, Scotland .. or even cities being fully independent with their own currency and legal systems?

Chagos said:

Well, the deal that was actually held provisions for those already in (i.e. Brits in the EU and EU citizens in the UK). It also held provisions that any further European migration beyond this be regulated at the immigrant country's discretion (IOW both the UK's and the EU's).

We can say bye-bye to that now.

We can also say good-bye to the Good Friday accord.

Click to expand...

Ireland won't let that go, even if the DUP can be bribed, and the EU will continue to back them. Incidentally, the NI government hasn't met for two years because of a DUP scandal involving the current leader.

May survives the No-confidence vote 325 to 306. The EU's top Brexit negotiator said he is preparing for a chaotic "no-deal" departure of Britain from the 28-nation bloc.

Seems to me that May has no viable Plan B. March 29 will be here before you know it. A hard and chaotic Brexit will almost certainly ignite a deep recession in Britain.

Rogue Valley said:

May survives the No-confidence vote 325 to 306. The EU's top Brexit negotiator said he is preparing for a chaotic "no-deal" departure of Britain from the 28-nation bloc.

Seems to me that May has no viable Plan B. March 29 will be here before you know it. A hard and chaotic Brexit will almost certainly ignite a deep recession in Britain.

Click to expand...

British embassy in Spain has officially sent out a message to all Brits in Spain to get Spanish residence and drivers license before March 29th... sad...

To you subjects of Her Majesty:

Help me understand how Teresa May loses a Parliamenary vote by an historical margin and the following day survives a vote of “no confidence.”

Re: Brexit

Chagos said:

Frankly I don't care in the least whether Brexiteers or their opposites condemn, endorse or assess my analysis in any other chosen way, the current fracas shows my assessment to be pretty much spot on.

I'm not here to massage anybody's sensibilities but to call spades where I find them to be spades.

That would incidentally extend to you as well, your above "throw-in" being what's really silly in its total non-sequitur quality.

If you think that one side today calling another whatever holds any pertinent relevance to what actually caused the country's massive division (long before this whole fustercluck), you are merely uttering your extreme ignorance on what governs emotions in the UK and in its history since the end of WWII.

And in the spirit of calling spades just that, people who have nothing of import to bring to the table should go and eat elsewhere.

But that's merely my opinion, to be taken or left at whose ever discretion.

Click to expand...

Since triumphally calling 17m people 'thick' represents the peak of your analysis, I think we can all see how value-less your 'input' is.


A cynic might call your views, I don't know, arrogant, irrational, child-like, maybe even 'thick' ....... you know, if they were calling a spade a spade .

Chagos said:

You really should stay out of issues you're totally clueless over.

Alone the silly perception of Remainers being responsible for the shambolic outcome of negotiations shows just how clueless you are.

Maybe Satellite reception isn't so good in St. Petersburg these days (not having been there for some years, I wouldn't know) but anyone here with half a brain could see last night where "shambolism" actually hailed from.

Click to expand...

This comes from a man who described one side of the argument and their supporters as 'thick'. :lol:


Who peddles utterly puerile and simplistic arguments in here.

Re: Brexit

Infinite Chaos said:

That line has been repeated by those in her own party, across the aisles and further along in Parliament. The only thing that can happen now is (as in 1940) Parliament to take control from May and put forward a range of proposals.

Click to expand...

I'd be very much for that. What I'd be for even more is to see it happen.

I stand by my position - we follow through with Brexit (much as I disagree with Brexit) and respect the referendum. I would ask the same if Remain had won. What we need is to agree the form of Brexit - I think we will end up within a customs union and have rescinded our place at the top table as well as our rebates.

Click to expand...

I think that the general confusion includes the issue of taking whatever to the people once again. The original question of stay or go can hardly be it, since that would be pretty contemptuous along the lines of "this time get it right".

On the one hand I don't see the democracy deficit in that which everyone harks about (even referendum votes by the people should have the chance of being corrected by the people), but in this climate it's a good way to start a violent revolution. OTOH the triggering of Article 50 had to pass parliament first and did, so opening the Pandora's box of "did people really vote to leave" would be, mildly put, of the same prevaricating nature we all want to see stopped.

So what should be put to the people is, in my book, the what and how of leaving and not the idiotic yes or no that brought us all to this mess.

Meanwhile, Stephen Baker said last week - the damage is done. Europe is looking to Stuttgart and Paris to take over as the Banking centres of Europe and many other industries will be following suit (not just Rees-Mogg's own capital investment company)

Click to expand...

I believe we're probably talking about Paris and Frankfurt (not Stuttgart) where banks are concerned, but yeah.

Manc Skipper said:

Ireland won't let that go, even if the DUP can be bribed, and the EU will continue to back them. Incidentally, the NI government hasn't met for two years because of a DUP scandal involving the current leader.

Click to expand...

...and let's not forget that they were the only party opposing the Good Friday agreement.

Rexedgar said:

To you subjects of Her Majesty:

Help me understand how Teresa May loses a Parliamenary vote by an historical margin and the following day survives a vote of “no confidence.”

Click to expand...

Opportunism of wanting to keep what one has (government power).

Those on the ruling side that crashed the deal want to prevent being held accountable. As in being driven from power (preferably with cat 'o nine tails).

Dropping May now would have led to elections and neither the Tories nor the medieval Northern Irish scums want to give Corbyn's Labour any chance there.

To the DUP Corbyn is Sinn Fein.

Re: Brexit

Chagos said:

I'd be very much for that. What I'd be for even more is to see it happen.
I think that the general confusion includes the issue of taking whatever to the people once again. The original question of stay or go can hardly be it, since that would be pretty contemptuous along the lines of "this time get it right".

On the one hand I don't see the democracy deficit in that which everyone harks about (even referendum votes by the people should have the chance of being corrected by the people), but in this climate it's a good way to start a violent revolution. OTOH the triggering of Article 50 had to pass parliament first and did, so opening the Pandora's box of "did people really vote to leave" would be, mildly put, of the same prevaricating nature we all want to see stopped.

So what should be put to the people is, in my book, the what and how of leaving and not the idiotic yes or no that brought us all to this mess.
I believe we're probably talking about Paris and Frankfurt (not Stuttgart) where banks are concerned, but yeah.

Click to expand...

I agree with this, but note that most people who want a referendum are interested only in cancelling Brexit completely, as if the status quo pre 2016 can be reinstated as if nothing had happened. They want Remain on the ballot - again.


Logically however the choice should be :

No deal

Or an off the shelf EFTA arrangement - Norway plus.

Re: Brexit

Westphalian said:

Since triumphally calling 17m people 'thick' represents the peak of your analysis, I think we can all see how value-less your 'input' is.


A cynic might call your views, I don't know, arrogant, irrational, child-like, maybe even 'thick' ....... you know, if they were calling a spade a spade .

Click to expand...

I really don't care what you want to make of it, your "contributions" here having so far been pretty much irrelevant.

Consider the analogy of the flag pole and the ape climbing it, before you make yourself look even more foolish than you're doing already.

Westphalian said:

This comes from a man who described one side of the argument and their supporters as 'thick'. :lol:


Who peddles utterly puerile and simplistic arguments in here.

Click to expand...

see previous post, last sentence.:roll:

Re: Brexit

Rexedgar said:

To you subjects of Her Majesty:

Help me understand how Teresa May loses a Parliamenary vote by an historical margin and the following day survives a vote of “no confidence.”

Click to expand...

A range of reasons, firstly Conservatives would have had to abandon their party and vote with Labour and secondly the Democratic Unionist Party have agreed to support her in return for a sizeable £10billion in investment in Protestant ideals and goals in Northern Ireland.

Conservatives seem to have a unifying fear of a Jeremy Corbyn govt - which they would in effect be voting for. It's actually interesting that the two least popular leaders in recent times are facing each other across the aisles. I have a feeling a more charismatic, centrist Labour leader might have encouraged more Conservatives to vote with Labour - however Conservatives have learned from the past when they did not stick together that the voting public don't like split parties.

Chagos said:

~ I believe we're probably talking about Paris and Frankfurt (not Stuttgart) where banks are concerned, but yeah.

Click to expand...

Ah well. Small details here and there.

Rexedgar said:

To you subjects of Her Majesty:

Help me understand how Teresa May loses a Parliamenary vote by an historical margin and the following day survives a vote of “no confidence.”

Click to expand...

Irrational fear of Jeremy Corbyn./
/

Re: Brexit

Westphalian said:

I agree with this, but note that most people who want a referendum are interested only in cancelling Brexit completely, as if the status quo pre 2016 can be reinstated as if nothing had happened. They want Remain on the ballot - again.


Logically however the choice should be :

No deal

Or an off the shelf EFTA arrangement - Norway plus.

Click to expand...

Yeah, thanks for confirming what I outlined previously.:roll::doh

Re: Brexit

Chagos said:

I really don't care what you want to make of it, your "contributions" here having so far been pretty much irrelevant.

Consider the analogy of the flag pole and the ape climbing it, before you make yourself look even more foolish than you're doing already.

Click to expand...

Wow ........... what lack of self awareness.


Leavers are 'thick'?


You know, that's the biggest piece of trash, nonsense posted in this thread. Even a child would blush at such a ludicrous contribution to a totally complex argument.

Re: Brexit

Westphalian said:

Wow ........... what lack of self awareness.


Leavers are 'thick'?


You know, that's the biggest piece of trash, nonsense posted in this thread. Even a child would blush at such a ludicrous contribution to a totally complex argument.

Click to expand...

Why don't you just go away (out of this thread) as you promised some days ago?

With which I'm going to end this pointless discourse with you, seeing how it adds nothing to either information value or meaningful discussion.

Re: Brexit

The EFTA argument:

https://www.conservativehome.com/th...ket-2-0-and-an-efta-type-plan-for-brexit.html


Whilst I can understand that there are different views about the future of Europe, and that some prefer No Deal, I am mystified why some regard Common Market 2.0 as a retreat from Brexit. This is far from the case.

 For years, many Eurosceptics would have been very happy to see Britain in an EFTA-style relationship with Europe rather than be a member of the EU. Such an arrangement, advocated by Brexiteers in the past, would gets Britain out of the CAP and CFP.

Common Market 2.0 also means an end to Britain being subject to the jurisdiction of the European Court, and brings us out of political union. All these things were what many Leavers felt was most objectionable about membership of the EU.

The plan also safeguards jobs and ensures stability for business and our economy through membership of the Single Market. But members have far more powers to derogate from it (Norway obtained derogations from 55 proposed Single Market laws and Iceland from 349 legal acts).