[Politics] Brexit

[Theatre of Trees]

I voted to leave the EU so we can control our own borders.

But the bit about borders wasn't on the voting slip. We voted to get a divorce but not for the terms.

 

[nicko31]

I voted to leave the EU so we can control our own borders. Canada did a trade deal with the EU but it doesn't include free movement of people, so why can't we?

There is a slight difference with Canada, Europe isn't currently their cash cow providing them with 45% of their trade.

Its taken 9 years and CETA still isn't signed. For us, in 9 years half the leave voters will be either dead or half dead

 

[Deleted member 22389]

There is a slightly difference with Canada, Europe isn't currently their cash cow providing them with 45% of their trade.

Its taken 9 years and CETA still isn't signed. For us, in 9 years half the leave voters will be either dead or half dead

Your comment proves my point, you don't need to be a member of the EU to get a trade deal and you don't have to accept the free movement of people either.

 

[BigGully]

There is a slight difference with Canada, Europe isn't currently their cash cow providing them with 45% of their trade.

Its taken 9 years and CETA still isn't signed. For us, in 9 years half the leave voters will be either dead or half dead

and the young naive voters will be older, wiser and would have experienced real life with all its responsibilities and so it goes on .....

 

[heathgate]

If the EU start to talk about punitive trade restrictions on the UK transactions... then of course those agreements already out there hat don't include a clause stating the need for free movement, can be used in court as a precedent case to support our wishes. Anything the EU does to us has to be supported by laws that clearly demonstrate we are not being singled out.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

 

[Baldseagull]

Leaving aside you have jumped on the " thick " wagon (is that really necessary)
Yes it is the kind of access being discussed. Hannan has been very clear. That silly video and soundbites does not reflect what he has said in public

http://www.conservativehome.com/the...er-but-we-could-do-even-better-than-that.html

or the blog he entitled "Repeat after me. Single market membership and single market access are not the same thing."
which ends with "We should leave the EU precisely so that we can embrace a global, free-trading, deregulated future. Control over our immigration policy? That’s just an incidental bonus"

http://www.conservativehome.com/the...gle-market-access-are-not-the-same-thing.html

Oh dear, it really does not matter what he has said elsewhere, we were discussing an edited video which you claimed changed the meaning, so you provided the full interview, here is the video you provided of the full, in public, interview with Dan Hannan. Watch and listen, pay particular attention from 1:00 to 1:14.


Now tell me again, were you incorrect, and Dan Hannan is talking about enjoying the current trading arrangements, or are you incapable of understanding?
I would add, that to my recollection, it very much reflects what he said elsewhere, including the day after the referendum.

 

[Baldseagull]

Leaving aside you have jumped on the " thick " wagon (is that really necessary)
Yes it is the kind of access being discussed. Hannan has been very clear. That silly video and soundbites does not reflect what he has said in public

http://www.conservativehome.com/the...er-but-we-could-do-even-better-than-that.html

or the blog he entitled "Repeat after me. Single market membership and single market access are not the same thing."
which ends with "We should leave the EU precisely so that we can embrace a global, free-trading, deregulated future. Control over our immigration policy? That’s just an incidental bonus"

http://www.conservativehome.com/the...gle-market-access-are-not-the-same-thing.html

Having read the pieces you provided, I can see nothing that suggests Hannan is advocating a position where we do not enjoy the trading arrangements we currently do, he seems to be advocating a Switzerland plus model.

 

[Yoda]

and the young naive voters will be older, wiser and would have experienced real life with all its responsibilities and so it goes on .....

Harsh! I'm over half way to my pension yet voted remain. Does that mean I'm naive and not wise?

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

i would feel more comfortable with the government having a full understanding of the people's wishes when then go into negotiations rather than just their skewed interpretation (we know that most of them would have voted remain). At least this way people have some chance of getting what they want.

I agree that it would be very difficult to implement but given the importance of what happens next i can't help but wonder if it would be worth it.

you don't live here
regards
DR

 

[BigGully]

Harsh! I'm over half way to my pension yet voted remain. Does that mean I'm naive and not wise?

I cannot know, it was the poster that said that half of Brexiteers would be dead or nearly dead 9 years from now, the implication was clearly that older Leave voters had less of a stake in the political decision of the referendum.

I suspect in his mind you are a valid older voter purely because you voted Remain.

 

[nicko31]

I would feel more comfortable with the government having a full understanding of the people's wishes when then go into negotiations rather than just their skewed interpretation (we know that most of them would have voted remain). At least this way people have some chance of getting what they want.

I agree that it would be very difficult to implement but given the importance of what happens next i can't help but wonder if it would be worth it.

Nice idea, I don't think that will happen. More likely see what can be achieved, then ask parliament or maybe even hold another public vote, I'm pretty sure we'll be given an ultimatum

Of course by then real impact of Brexit will start to take effect, we'll be booming just you wait

 

[Brighton Mod]

Undoubtedly it is a lose, lose situation, but for the EU, a good deal for Britain could encourage the French, especially if Le Pen is in charge, to take the same route, from there it is as good as over. There is also for the EU the opportunity for a large part of the financial business currently located in London to remain in the EU by relocation, which would soften the blow for the EU.

Would the financial sector want to go to Europe given the way the industry fought against the restrictions and more regulations placed on them by Brussels. I don't think finance and the EU are very good bedfellows.

 

[McTavish]

I voted to leave the EU so we can control our own borders. Canada did a trade deal with the EU but it doesn't include free movement of people, so why can't we?

Not saying you can't have such a trade deal but it was certainly not in the terms of the referendum. It would be possible to leave the EU and continue to have free movement of people just as it would be possible to not have it. Both would have implications for the ease or even possibility of getting other things that might be desirable. My point is that it's complicated whereas you have said that it's not.

 

[Jim in the West]

I hope 100% of them realise any attempt to undermine or dilute the referendum result under the guise of parliamentary scrutiny would not be in the interests of the country or democracy.

But we now know that the majority of people in the UK would vote to stay in the EU, were there to be a Referendum today. As a nation we're actually more pro-EU than France and Italy.
I wonder if this information will make any difference to the Brexiteers?

 

[Notters]

I marked the box to Leave, Leave means leaving the European Union, nothing complicated about it. I knew exactly what I was voting for. There was nothing on the form about having another referendum on the terms. So let's say we have another referendum and people reject the terms, so what then, another referendum and another referendum until people get the result they want and then we don't Leave at all. I wasn't sodding born yesterday and once again this is just further delaying tactics from the Remainers because they didn't and cannot accept the result.

I voted to leave the EU so we can control our own borders. Canada did a trade deal with the EU but it doesn't include free movement of people, so why can't we?

You've just contradicted yourself massively there.

 

[Soulman]

But we now know that the majority of people in the UK would vote to stay in the EU, were there to be a Referendum today. As a nation we're actually more pro-EU than France and Italy.
I wonder if this information will make any difference to the Brexiteers?

I did not realise that "majority" of the people in the UK would vote to stay in the EU if there was a vote today.

 

[studio150]

Thought I would cheer up the leavers with this latest news item

http://news.sky.com/story/theresa-may-hints-at-transitional-brexit-deal-10666368

They must be pleased that could be a soft landing with no cliff edge fall

 

[ManOfSussex]

Thought I would cheer up the leavers with this latest news item

http://news.sky.com/story/theresa-may-hints-at-transitional-brexit-deal-10666368

They must be pleased that could be a soft landing with no cliff edge fall

Which was what Phillip Collins was suggesting in his Times column on Friday.

How May can break free from Brexit muddle

Philip Collins

Rather than rushing through a bad agreement the PM needs to seal a transitional deal to take us past the next election

In the three-dimensional game of chess beyond the looking glass the White Queen believes six impossible things before Brexit. Her foreign secretary is impossible with the Italians about trade in prosecco and fish and chips, uses a rude word to the Czechs while being impossible about the movement of people, and is upbraided by the Dutch finance minister for talking impossible nonsense about a customs union.

Meanwhile, the prime minister insists she has a plan for the country’s departure from the European Union but refuses to say what it entails. Mrs May has already had to listen, at PMQs, to a Tory MP ask if his Italian parents will be permitted to stay. This is never going to last. There are just too many impossible things here.

It is not unreasonable for the prime minister to wish to keep her detailed thoughts secret. A comprehensive wishlist would be an open invitation to critics to denounce its contents and deplore what was missing. It would inevitably, thanks to the trading nature of negotiating, ensure that some of the wishes were denied. The published list would therefore have to include dummy options that the prime minister was secretly prepared to lose. Then she would be denounced, either for dishonesty or for not bringing home the bounty promised.

None of this makes silence a virtue. Representatives of the government had a hissy fit about the Deloitte report leaked to The Times this week but its contents brought a truth into the public realm: Britain’s process for leaving the EU is a shambles, or “Mickey Mouse land” in Kenneth Clarke’s phrase. The most complex task of postwar British politics — at least 500 separate projects — is going to require more civil servants than are employed across the EU. The official forecast for next week’s autumn statement will set the bill for Brexit at £100 billion over the next five years. The chancellor hopes to hand out goodies for those who are just about managing — the “jams” — but, as the White Queen knows too well, it is going to be “jam to-morrow and jam yesterday but never jam to-day”.

There is an inescapable sense of nobody taking back control. This is no great surprise, really. The Leave campaign was recklessly cavalier about how easy leaving the EU was going to be. Disentangling Britain from a series of legal treaties is not one event but many. The EU has about 50 international trade agreements from which the UK benefits, all of which will now have to be begun again. It will be a mammoth task even to replicate these arrangements, let alone improve on them. Maybe one day Liam Fox will return triumphant from Bosnia-Herzegovina with a new deal. Next stop Costa Rica, Mauritius the week after.

Dr Fox cannot even start until Britain’s relationship with the EU is settled. The laws that frame the markets for financial services, employment, restructuring and insolvency, data protection and intellectual property have all been painstakingly drafted in chambers of the EU. Pension law, competition, telecommunications and media are almost as complicated. There are some bills, such as the Equalities Act, in which some provisions refer to the EU and some do not. That’s not to mention clauses whose parentage and application is a matter of legal dispute. Somebody is going to have to go through all of it and say yes or no to every clause. Every change will be the subject of well-informed corporate and charity lobbying.

It is going to be fabulously complicated. If the referendum question had only been “can you really be bothered?” we would have voted to remain. This negotiation can only be done badly in two years and it probably cannot be done at all. “Divide a loaf by a knife: what’s the answer to that?” asks the White Queen. On the current trajectory it is likely that Britain will crash-land out of the EU in 2019 with no completed deal. It’s hard to put a figure on how bad that will be but make mine a large one. A crash landing is in nobody’s interests, least of all the prime minister’s. It is bad enough that she is inviting the charge of drift that could easily stick. Drift could soon come to define the government and its leader.

It’s even worse, though, to drift towards a cliff-edge. Mrs May needs to make us think she has a plan and the best way to convince us is to have one. The best answer is therefore to accept that half a loaf is better than none.

Mrs May should signal now that Britain will seek a transitional deal, prior to the comprehensive terms on which departure from the EU will be sought. It is entirely possible that Britain could successfully apply to the European Economic Area (EEA), which is an agreement to secure the free movement of goods, services, capital and people between Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway and the 28 member states of the EU. This would permit us to opt out of those EU laws, such as fisheries policy, which we found burdensome. We would have bought temporary certainty on commercial and social policy. Crucially, we would also have bought time to do a proper negotiation and Mrs May would have the scope to play poker her own quiet way.

This does present trouble politically, though. First, there is the minor problem of explaining to Dr Fox what most people have realised already, which is that his department is defunct. The bigger issue will be explaining that EEA membership includes the free movement of people. The abolition of free movement is the only European topic on which Mrs May has not been inscrutable. There is a risk of being denounced by those zealots who fear a temporary deal will end up being the basis of a permanent settlement. That is still better than landing with a thud in 2019. Mrs May will have to ask the people to take her bona fides on trust. The 2020 general election would then become, in part, a plebiscite on which team is trusted to replace the interim deal with an enduring relationship.

The White Queen has the great advantage of living her life backwards. She is given foresight through the benefit of hindsight. The White Queen screams first and only later pricks her hand on a brooch. Mrs May should be screaming silently to herself right now as she stares into the looking glass. If she wants to avoid the prick she needs a plan she can discuss in public. At the moment she is pulling a fast one which is no cleverer for the fact that she’s doing it so slowly.

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/past-six-...y-can-break-free-from-brexit-muddle-x6l877x99

 

[ThePompousPaladin]

I did not realise that "majority" of the people in the UK would vote to stay in the EU if there was a vote today.

I voted stay, i would vote leave now - you can't mess around with democracy like that...
We've had the vote.

 

[Jim in the West]

I voted stay, i would vote leave now - you can't mess around with democracy like that...
We've had the vote.

Of course you can. The Referendum was merely advisory. Now that we have a clearer idea of what a post-Brexit world might look like, we're all in a better position to assess things. At some stage someone sensible will hopefully say "I know we had a Referendum, but Brexit is clearly going to be an economic and political disaster. Let's re-evaluate." If that happened the whole world could breathe a sigh of relief and we could get back to doing the things that are being sacrificed in this crazy Brexit project (like properly funding the NHS, for example).