[Politics] Brexit

[Baldseagull]

I see the bile-spouters have a new target in Leadsom.I'm sure she will give less than 1 f**k about the opinions of some never-has-beens on a football fan site!
In more interesting statistics out this week,confirmation of who is benefitting from the EU joke;
View attachment 80813

Are you sure the latest statistics only go to 2014?

 

[GT49er]

I didn't say I expected it, but it as an option.

A second referendum? No it isn't. Even if you believe the Lib Dems will win the next General election (!!!) the chances are the EU won't let us rejoin anyway

 

[beorhthelm]

I don’t think Sir Ivan's comments were "snide." Rather, after a life time’s work as a diplomat and many years of top experience with dealing with our EU neighbours, he set out genuine concerns. And as our man in Brussels, he should know more than most - perhaps more than any other - about what the other EU countries are really thinking. He’s worked with three Prime Ministers, Labour and Conservative. I think that sort of experience makes him someone whom we should all listen to.

can we reign back on the "life long diplomat". a bit of background reading shows he's a life long civil servant, spending time in Treasury and No10 as well as a stint in private sector. he's been ambassador for 3 years. he set out his objections, as a clear europhile who isnt happy about the transition (and probably kept out of the loop for that reason). he certainly should be listened to, with this background in mind, and also consider he should have done a better job of supporting Cameron's "negotiation" last year. we may not have had the Brexit outcome had he expressed a skeptical view on the outcome of the vote to the Europeans, warning them of the feeling and consequences of giving Cameron so little to take back.

contrast to the incoming chap, who's been in the Foreign Office for 30 years, having been ambassador in the more prickly environments of Russia and Ukraine.

 

[Baldseagull]

of course, well known that Japanese and Korean car owners have to wait for their cars to be repaired. and the extra costs of those vehicles. less well known is often parts for cars made in EU are shipped in from outside EU, from Mexico, Turkey, South Africa, Brazil, US, apparently this is all going to be a problem if we leave the EU. or just more scaremongering or positioning to get a slice of hand out?

Our terms of trade with those nations have been negotiated on our behalf, by the EU for EU members, it is all subject to change once we leave, which was rather the point for many of the campaigners. You now have to trust that the UK trade negotiators (are there any yet?) will get a better deal or at least as good a deal as the EU.

 

[Baldseagull]

A second referendum? No it isn't. Even if you believe the Lib Dems will win the next General election (!!!) the chances are the EU won't let us rejoin anyway

I am sure they would, but without the rebate, and exemptions from various aspects.

 

[Baldseagull]

A second referendum? No it isn't. Even if you believe the Lib Dems will win the next General election (!!!) the chances are the EU won't let us rejoin anyway

I should also have said, if the terms of membership were significantly different in any way, I don't see the issue with asking the question again.

 

[GT49er]

I am sure they would, but without the rebate, and exemptions from various aspects.

"Without exemptions from various aspects" - that would be without exemptions from Shengan, membership of the Euro and commitment to greater political unity - I think even some Lib Dems might baulk at that; certainly it wouldn't be acceptable to the electorate.

 

[beorhthelm]

Our terms of trade with those nations have been negotiated on our behalf, by the EU for EU members, it is all subject to change once we leave, which was rather the point for many of the campaigners. You now have to trust that the UK trade negotiators (are there any yet?) will get a better deal or at least as good a deal as the EU.

WTO rules are they have to be at least as good. for our side, its up to us if we want to remove import tariffs, and then there would be no increase costs, infact a good deal cheaper for about everything. i know this is blind spot for the remainers, many well paid commentators keep missing this point, but its within our gift to reduce or remove import tariffs as we please. the only negotiation is if we want reciprocal arrangements, and just how much effort that would take would depend on what products/services and countries you are talking with. Japan for example might be happy to have a bilateral free trade on cars as it suits them (they sell us loads while some of our marques are popular there).

 

[Baldseagull]

"Without exemptions from various aspects" - that would be without exemptions from Shengan, membership of the Euro and commitment to greater political unity - I think even some Lib Dems might baulk at that; certainly it wouldn't be acceptable to the electorate.

Give at a few years, it will look like a great idea then.

 

[Baldseagull]

WTO rules are they have to be at least as good. for our side, its up to us if we want to remove import tariffs, and then there would be no increase costs, infact a good deal cheaper for about everything. i know this is blind spot for the remainers, many well paid commentators keep missing this point, but its within our gift to reduce or remove import tariffs as we please. the only negotiation is if we want reciprocal arrangements, and just how much effort that would take would depend on what products/services and countries you are talking with. Japan for example might be happy to have a bilateral free trade on cars as it suits them (they sell us loads while some of our marques are popular there).

You are of course correct, we can drop our pants and let anyone sell anything without tariff here. Would be pretty tough on UK manufacturing though.

Forgot to add, could you elaborate on the WTO rules that ensure we get rates as good as we have now, or is their another meaning to what you posted?

 

[Behind Enemy Lines]

can we reign back on the "life long diplomat". a bit of background reading shows he's a life long civil servant, spending time in Treasury and No10 as well as a stint in private sector. he's been ambassador for 3 years. he set out his objections, as a clear europhile who isnt happy about the transition (and probably kept out of the loop for that reason). he certainly should be listened to, with this background in mind, and also consider he should have done a better job of supporting Cameron's "negotiation" last year. we may not have had the Brexit outcome had he expressed a skeptical view on the outcome of the vote to the Europeans, warning them of the feeling and consequences of giving Cameron so little to take back.

contrast to the incoming chap, who's been in the Foreign Office for 30 years, having been ambassador in the more prickly environments of Russia and Ukraine.

The life- long diplomat thing should have read civil servant but he's held important EU roles since 2012 so vital experience nevertheless. As such his thoughts should not be dismissed as the Government did and others have done on here. I think unfair to point the finger at him about Cameron's EU negotiations. You can't possibly know that. But allow me then to indulge in a bit of speculation of my own: If David Cameron had had some political bottle, he'd have "put up" against the Eurosceptic right as John Major did and seen them off. He'd then have had no need to call a referendum and would still be in Number 10 today so avoiding the complete waste of time and absolute mess of withdrawing from the EU without a single coherent sign of a plan of how to do so.

 

[beorhthelm]

... I think unfair to point the finger at him about Cameron's EU negotiations. You can't possibly know that.

we have the evidence of the outcome of the negotiations. as the lead diplomat between UK and EU he bears some responsibility, as his very job is to lay the ground work for Cameron, identifying and communicating the mood of European leaders and likewise giving them a view of the situation "back home" on a diplomatic (i.e. non-public) level.

 

[ManOfSussex]

we have the evidence of the outcome of the negotiations. as the lead diplomat between UK and EU he bears some responsibility, as his very job is to lay the ground work for Cameron, identifying and communicating the mood of European leaders and likewise giving them a view of the situation "back home" on a diplomatic (i.e. non-public) level.

I saw on Sky News yesterday that he canvassed the opinion of his EU opposite numbers prior to Cameron coming for a 'deal' and relayed that he wouldn't get very far in negotiations. Cameron didn't listen. Just like he didn't listen to Sir Lynton Crosby who told him he wouldn't get anywhere either etc.

 

[beorhthelm]

I saw on Sky News yesterday that he canvassed the opinion of his EU opposite numbers prior to Cameron coming for a 'deal' and relayed that he wouldn't get very far in negotiations. Cameron didn't listen. Just like he didn't listen to Sir Lynton Crosby who told him he wouldn't get anywhere either etc.

is he supposed to be our ambassador or theirs? I understand it gets blurry over in Brussels for the europhiles, however part of his remit would be to aid Cameron's objectives not just report back "bit tricky situation guv".

 

[ManOfSussex]

is he supposed to be our ambassador or theirs? I understand it gets blurry over in Brussels for the europhiles, however part of his remit would be to aid Cameron's objectives not just report back "bit tricky situation guv".

Which he did. Not all of Cameron's objectives, which his own right hand man Sir Lynton Crosby told him also, were going to be met by concessions from The EU, as we know full well. As Cameron couldn't even listen to what Sir Lynton Crosby was telling him about these negotiations, the subsequent referendum and the result of it, what hope was there of him listening to an unpalatable truth our ambassador was telling him.

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

Which he did. Not all of Cameron's objectives, which his own right hand man Sir Lynton Crosby told him also, were going to be met by concessions from The EU, as we know full well. As Cameron couldn't even listen to what Sir Lynton Crosby was telling him about these negotiations, the subsequent referendum and the result of it, what hope was there of him listening to an unpalatable truth our ambassador was telling him.

ALL WATER UNDER THE BRIDGE , still struggling to face up to reality i see
regards
DR

 

[GT49er]

Give at a few years, it will look like a great idea then.

Good luck with your dreams, then!

 

[Chief Wiggum]

The life- long diplomat thing should have read civil servant but he's held important EU roles since 2012 so vital experience nevertheless. As such his thoughts should not be dismissed as the Government did and others have done on here. I think unfair to point the finger at him about Cameron's EU negotiations. You can't possibly know that. But allow me then to indulge in a bit of speculation of my own: If David Cameron had had some political bottle, he'd have "put up" against the Eurosceptic right as John Major did and seen them off. He'd then have had no need to call a referendum and would still be in Number 10 today so avoiding the complete waste of time and absolute mess of withdrawing from the EU without a single coherent sign of a plan of how to do so.

Interesting article that would appear to back up your point of view

http://reaction.life/farewell-sir-ivan-rogers-unlikely-hero-brexiteers/

'The reason a key role for Sir Ivan was a non-starter in the Brexit talks to come is that he was one of the central figures involved in David Cameron’s appalling renegotiation with the EU, which was a dismal failure.
Indeed, on re-reading Tim Shipman’s magnificent account of Brexit (All Out War) Sir Ivan emerges as one of the unwitting heroes of the whole business, if you voted to Leave. Brexiteers should give thanks for his efforts, because he and like-minded souls – unintentionally – made Brexit more likely by being far too cautious during Cameron’s renegotiation.
Perhaps those officials assumed Remain would always win the referendum no matter what the shape of the deal, or perhaps they were so conditioned by EU membership to think of everything from a UK in the EU perspective, but whatever the explanation, officialdom played a major role in dooming the talks. A decent deal – with migration control – could have seen off Leave, but it was never even attempted'

 

[vegster]

Interesting article that would appear to back up your point of view

http://reaction.life/farewell-sir-ivan-rogers-unlikely-hero-brexiteers/

'The reason a key role for Sir Ivan was a non-starter in the Brexit talks to come is that he was one of the central figures involved in David Cameron’s appalling renegotiation with the EU, which was a dismal failure.
Indeed, on re-reading Tim Shipman’s magnificent account of Brexit (All Out War) Sir Ivan emerges as one of the unwitting heroes of the whole business, if you voted to Leave. Brexiteers should give thanks for his efforts, because he and like-minded souls – unintentionally – made Brexit more likely by being far too cautious during Cameron’s renegotiation.
Perhaps those officials assumed Remain would always win the referendum no matter what the shape of the deal, or perhaps they were so conditioned by EU membership to think of everything from a UK in the EU perspective, but whatever the explanation, officialdom played a major role in dooming the talks. A decent deal – with migration control – could have seen off Leave, but it was never even attempted'

Like the deal we have been told we can't get, full access to the EU market but without free movement !

 

[nicko31]

How is that a threat? He is stating fact, that if you want to ditch free movement and contributions, you can't then get the type of access that countries that do play by the rules get.

Think few really understand how the Germans think, they have been saying all the way along there will be no cherry picking. When they say something they mean it

If we buy less Bimmers and Audi because of tariffs the lower pound so beit, the political factor will always be the overriding factor, history tells them that.

Hard Brexit will mean hard times, and learning the hard way