Brexit...

[Bailey]

1 hour ago, holystove said:

 

Boris' letter is utter nonsense.  Same hollow words as during the campaign, not one word about an alternative plan and for good measure he throws in a bit about EU regulations on trucks that is at best a half-truth.

I thought Davis' letter was more to the point. He said what it is about the current plan he doesn't agree with, however also not one mention of how May should go about it.  

Maybe so but it highlights why many people may have voted leave and why the whole thing was a pointless exercise, even if the examples arent exactly enlightening. 

The country has been at loggerheads over this for however many years and for what benefit? As pointless as they may be, if we as a country are unable to do the type of things he suggested (not that I am saying we should), then we really are just an annex (or colony as he said) to the EU abiding by their rules and regulations without an influence upon them. Every single tax payers pound spent, every word written in this thread, every heated debate or foul mouthed twitter rant has all been for nothing. 

To cap it all off you would think that removing Davis and Boris would make things a bit better in government and then May goes and appoints one similar clown and one bigger clown. 

[holystove]

6 hours ago, Bailey said:

Maybe so but it highlights why many people may have voted leave and why the whole thing was a pointless exercise, even if the examples arent exactly enlightening. 

The country has been at loggerheads over this for however many years and for what benefit? As pointless as they may be, if we as a country are unable to do the type of things he suggested (not that I am saying we should), then we really are just an annex (or colony as he said) to the EU abiding by their rules and regulations without an influence upon them. Every single tax payers pound spent, every word written in this thread, every heated debate or foul mouthed twitter rant has all been for nothing. 

To cap it all off you would think that removing Davis and Boris would make things a bit better in government and then May goes and appoints one similar clown and one bigger clown. 

But that is true for every country in Europe that isn'tt in the EU, why would the UK be any different?  This was always going to be the meaning of brexit. (except in case of 'no deal').

I don't have the feeling it has all been for nothing. The UK needed a big public debate about the EU because it couldn't continue being a half assed member state (see my posts on why I, as a European, backed brexit), and brexit resulted in more EU awareness on the continent as well.

 

[Newty82]

9 hours ago, holystove said:

This is an understandable but, imo, completely wrong reaction.  Your vote is very powerful and the only thing these bullshit artists fear is an informed voter who can break through their rhetoric and demand an honest response.

But how can you be informed if you are not told the truth? I remember a couple of years ago you said - I won't get the wording right here - you are qualified to a high degree within EU regulations or something? So if you 'live amongst it', you'll be well informed.

But how long did it take you to get such a qualification? And how long did people like myself get to become 'informed'? Many people in the UK are like me - work, kids, family life - not a lot of 'downtime'. Pre vote, I sat on many a night for hours reading up on many things regarding the EU....the history, the progress, finances, countries outside the EU...allsorts...and it was a minefield. Based on my fears about which way the EU is heading in the future I voted Leave. It was about weighing up the pros and cons.

Although I voted Leave, I said at the time that it will make little difference as I didn't believe we would fully leave...I didn't believe the system was set up to allow us to fully leave. I think we can all see some truth in that.

Furthermore regards to being informed...you are only taught what you are allowed to know. For example, a young technician working for the Volkswagen Audi Group would be taught all the ins and out about how the nice new technology 'work's to cut emissions. I doubt they were taught that it was a big deceptive cheat to falsify real emissions.

I'll always vote to the best of my ability. I'm not a Left man, nor a Right man. Not a Labour man, nor a Conservitive. I'll switch based on what is going on today. If more people had this approach, rather than sticking to one party, we might make more progress.

It seems to me that the vote is only a powerful thing if it sways towards the the way that the powers want it to sway. The 52% Leave vote being a great example.

[johnh]

Newty, not sure I understood your final point.  The powers that be wanted a 'remain' vote didn't they?

[Newty82]

2 hours ago, johnh said:

Newty, not sure I understood your final point.  The powers that be wanted a 'remain' vote didn't they?

Yeah exactly. They wanted the UK to remain.

Sorry...my point being that although Leave 'won' (I use that term loosely), as far as I am concerned, more effort has been  put into remaining 'in' as much as possible than it has to leave as cleanly as possible. Or, at least, more effort has been made into disturbing and corrupting the leave process.

Whether you are a Remainer or a Leaver, I think this should serve as an eye opener as to how things really work. It's a complicated web of deceit that we really aren't meant to understand.

I mean no offence or harm to anyone with my comments. I'm utterly frustrated by the whole thing. I have nothing against anyone who votes this way or that way. I'm just a bloke who goes to work, and wants to live his life as fruitfully as possible. I'm willing to work bloody hard to have that life, and I do...but I can mostly influence that. It's why I said in my original post that I no longer spend much time on this whole EU malarkey. Just got to plough on and make the most of what I can. Like all of us should really.

[johnh]

11 minutes ago, Newty82 said:

Yeah exactly. They wanted the UK to remain.

Sorry...my point being that although Leave 'won' (I use that term loosely), as far as I am concerned, more effort has been  put into remaining 'in' as much as possible than it has to leave as cleanly as possible. Or, at least, more effort has been made into disturbing and corrupting the leave process.

Whether you are a Remainer or a Leaver, I think this should serve as an eye opener as to how things really work. It's a complicated web of deceit that we really aren't meant to understand.

I mean no offence or harm to anyone with my comments. I'm utterly frustrated by the whole thing. I have nothing against anyone who votes this way or that way. I'm just a bloke who goes to work, and wants to live his life as fruitfully as possible. I'm willing to work bloody hard to have that life, and I do...but I can mostly influence that. It's why I said in my original post that I no longer spend much time on this whole EU malarkey. Just got to plough on and make the most of what I can. Like all of us should really.

Newty, thanks, yes, see what you mean now.  My excuse is the heat which frazzles my brain (even more than usual).

[holystove]

23 hours ago, Newty82 said:

But how long did it take you to get such a qualification? And how long did people like myself get to become 'informed'? Many people in the UK are like me - work, kids, family life - not a lot of 'downtime'. Pre vote, I sat on many a night for hours reading up on many things regarding the EU....the history, the progress, finances, countries outside the EU...allsorts...and it was a minefield. Based on my fears about which way the EU is heading in the future I voted Leave. It was about weighing up the pros and cons.

Although I voted Leave, I said at the time that it will make little difference as I didn't believe we would fully leave...I didn't believe the system was set up to allow us to fully leave. I think we can all see some truth in that.

Furthermore regards to being informed...you are only taught what you are allowed to know. For example, a young technician working for the Volkswagen Audi Group would be taught all the ins and out about how the nice new technology 'work's to cut emissions. I doubt they were taught that it was a big deceptive cheat to falsify real emissions.

I'll always vote to the best of my ability. I'm not a Left man, nor a Right man. Not a Labour man, nor a Conservitive. I'll switch based on what is going on today. If more people had this approach, rather than sticking to one party, we might make more progress.

It seems to me that the vote is only a powerful thing if it sways towards the the way that the powers want it to sway. The 52% Leave vote being a great example.

You are right that this is an incredible difficult issue and quite irresponsible for the Tories to force you to make a decision on.  I'm definitely not saying being a member of the EU cannot be questioned, but not through a yes or no question, where one side represents the status quo and the other side represents every other political vision (globalist, protectionist, inclusive, racist, capitalist, communist, ...).  This is the reason there is no clear vision for what to do with Brexit, because during the campaign it was everything at once.

EU membership has always been in question in the UK and as a result UK governments have a bunch of opt-outs in many fields of EU policy.  Now you are blowing all of that up to create the exact same thing but by a different name. 

I don't understand why you say the Leave vote is being ignored.  The UK is leaving on March 29th 2019.   It will no longer be an EU member.  The small margin by which Leave won means there is no mandate for the hardest of Brexit, so it is only right that the UK government seeks to retain most benefits of EU membership, while trying to minimize what they think are downsides.  The EU27 are (rightly) playing hardball so a lot of those "downsides" will still be there after March 2019, but that is just political and economic reality.

[johnh]

3 hours ago, holystove said:

You are right that this is an incredible difficult issue and quite irresponsible for the Tories to force you to make a decision on.  I'm definitely not saying being a member of the EU cannot be questioned, but not through a yes or no question, where one side represents the status quo and the other side represents every other political vision (globalist, protectionist, inclusive, racist, capitalist, communist, ...).  This is the reason there is no clear vision for what to do with Brexit, because during the campaign it was everything at once.

EU membership has always been in question in the UK and as a result UK governments have a bunch of opt-outs in many fields of EU policy.  Now you are blowing all of that up to create the exact same thing but by a different name. 

I don't understand why you say the Leave vote is being ignored.  The UK is leaving on March 29th 2019.   It will no longer be an EU member.  The small margin by which Leave won means there is no mandate for the hardest of Brexit, so it is only right that the UK government seeks to retain most benefits of EU membership, while trying to minimize what they think are downsides.  The EU27 are (rightly) playing hardball so a lot of those "downsides" will still be there after March 2019, but that is just political and economic reality.

Holy,  I would only dispute your point that the 'remain' side represented the status quo.  The EU has changed considerably since the days of the Common Market and will continue to do so, probably at an increasing rate.   It has been argued that Leave voters didn't know what they were voting for, neither did remain voters.

[MikeO]

 

[Newty82]

5 hours ago, holystove said:

You are right that this is an incredible difficult issue and quite irresponsible for the Tories to force you to make a decision on.  I'm definitely not saying being a member of the EU cannot be questioned, but not through a yes or no question, where one side represents the status quo and the other side represents every other political vision (globalist, protectionist, inclusive, racist, capitalist, communist, ...).  This is the reason there is no clear vision for what to do with Brexit, because during the campaign it was everything at once.

EU membership has always been in question in the UK and as a result UK governments have a bunch of opt-outs in many fields of EU policy.  Now you are blowing all of that up to create the exact same thing but by a different name. 

I don't understand why you say the Leave vote is being ignored.  The UK is leaving on March 29th 2019.   It will no longer be an EU member.  The small margin by which Leave won means there is no mandate for the hardest of Brexit, so it is only right that the UK government seeks to retain most benefits of EU membership, while trying to minimize what they think are downsides.  The EU27 are (rightly) playing hardball so a lot of those "downsides" will still be there after March 2019, but that is just political and economic reality.

Whenever I've read your posts on this, I've always found them very informative and balanced, so thanks for that.

One thing, I never said the Leave vote is being ignored. Not at all. I am saying it's not the result that 'the powers' wanted and I think behaviours since the result show this.

[MikeO]

 

[holystove]

In light of todays' article in the S*n where Trump blasts May for going "soft" on brexit, you should really read this article:

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/07/12/trump-backed-brexit-then-he-used-it-as-leverage-219001

 

[Bailey]

On 10/07/2018 at 07:16, holystove said:

But that is true for every country in Europe that isn'ttt in the EU, why would the UK be any different?  This was always going to be the meaning of brexit. (except in case of 'no deal').

I don't have the feeling it has all been for nothing. The UK needed a big public debate about the EU because it couldn't continue being a half assed member state (see my posts on why I, as a European, backed brexit), and brexit resulted in more EU awareness on the continent as well.

 

All the current EU countries can have their input into EU decisions, whereas if we are out of the EU but still going along with the majority of what they say then we will have no input at all.

From a UK point of view if basically all that happens is your points below in the second paragraph (which is essentially the white paper parts I have read) then yes everything that has happened hasnt been worth the fall out since announcing the vote. Its like buying a VW and sticking a Skoda badge on the front. Same car but a little less spec. 

On 11/07/2018 at 08:20, holystove said:

You are right that this is an incredible difficult issue and quite irresponsible for the Tories to force you to make a decision on.  I'm definitely not saying being a member of the EU cannot be questioned, but not through a yes or no question, where one side represents the status quo and the other side represents every other political vision (globalist, protectionist, inclusive, racist, capitalist, communist, ...).  This is the reason there is no clear vision for what to do with Brexit, because during the campaign it was everything at once.

EU membership has always been in question in the UK and as a result UK governments have a bunch of opt-outs in many fields of EU policy.  Now you are blowing all of that up to create the exact same thing but by a different name. 

I don't understand why you say the Leave vote is being ignored.  The UK is leaving on March 29th 2019.   It will no longer be an EU member.  The small margin by which Leave won means there is no mandate for the hardest of Brexit, so it is only right that the UK government seeks to retain most benefits of EU membership, while trying to minimize what they think are downsides.  The EU27 are (rightly) playing hardball so a lot of those "downsides" will still be there after March 2019, but that is just political and economic reality.

The most disappointing thing is that this appears to be our opening stanza. Despite the x million people who voted leave winning the referendum, our main starting point for negotiations begins with wanting to be more or less within the EU. I cant see many people being particularly happy with this. Remainers will think that we should just stay in the EU and the Brexiteers will realise that there isnt a lot that will change and probably also realise that we may as well have stayed inside the EU as well.  

 

[Newty82]

On 13/07/2018 at 11:20, Bailey said:

All the current EU countries can have their input into EU decisions, whereas if we are out of the EU but still going along with the majority of what they say then we will have no input at all.

From a UK point of view if basically all that happens is your points below in the second paragraph (which is essentially the white paper parts I have read) then yes everything that has happened hasnt been worth the fall out since announcing the vote. Its like buying a VW and sticking a Skoda badge on the front. Same car but a little less spec. 

The most disappointing thing is that this appears to be our opening stanza. Despite the x million people who voted leave winning the referendum, our main starting point for negotiations begins with wanting to be more or less within the EU. I cant see many people being particularly happy with this. Remainers will think that we should just stay in the EU and the Brexiteers will realise that there isnt a lot that will change and probably also realise that we may as well have stayed inside the EU as well.  

 

It's exactly how they wanted it to go!

I'm not at all surprised by any if it.

[johnh]

The thing I would like an answer to is:  Why did Theresa May discuss the White Paper with Merkel before it was presented to Parliament? Was this final confirmation that Germany runs the EU?  My view on how this will turn out is that Barnier will not be able to resist asking for major changes to the paper, which will not be acceptable.  We will then, finally, threaten to walk away with no deal.  It will then be back in the EU's court.

[MikeO]

16 minutes ago, johnh said:

The thing I would like an answer to is:  Why did Theresa May discuss the White Paper with Merkel before it was presented to Parliament?

You can ask her next time she drops in for a brew John.

[Bailey]

1 hour ago, johnh said:

The thing I would like an answer to is:  Why did Theresa May discuss the White Paper with Merkel before it was presented to Parliament? Was this final confirmation that Germany runs the EU?  My view on how this will turn out is that Barnier will not be able to resist asking for major changes to the paper, which will not be acceptable.  We will then, finally, threaten to walk away with no deal.  It will then be back in the EU's court.

I expect them to make changes like you say, a no deal to be threated, the EU to say go on then and for the Govt to either decide to stay in or ask for more time to negotiate. 

[holystove]

On 14/07/2018 at 23:29, Bailey said:

I expect them to make changes like you say, a no deal to be threated, the EU to say go on then and for the Govt to either decide to stay in or ask for more time to negotiate. 

You are right there will be changes to the new UK proposal, as it crosses several EU red lines.  May wants to stay in the Single Market, but only for goods, not capital, services and labour.  She doesn't want oversight by the European Court of Justice even though she does want to partly stay in the Single Market.  She proposes to collect customs duties for the EU, which is unacceptable as this would mean the EU27 outsourcing customs procedures to a non-EU member.  She wants the security and judicial cooperation to stay the same (so with all the UK opt-outs), which is impossible because a non-member can't have the same advantages.   I could go on and on.

I think it will end up with a "soft brexit" but this proposal, even though it's much softer than previous proposals, to me definitely falls in the category of "hard".  

I agree the UK will probably just end up asking for more time to negotiate, but I don't think they will threaten a no-deal scenario as the EU will just call their bluff knowing no-deal will cripple the UK.

 

 

[Haiku]

Well I think EU should dump UK completely. What's that soft brexit? Are they in or out? You can't just drop obligations and keep getting benefits only, what UK is trying to do. Not fair towards other EU members, who pay their cut to be part of EU. Not fair towards other countries based in Europe who want to be part of EU but are not. Why should UK get that VIP non membership status? Yep they still got one of the greatest economics and letting them operate freely on the EU markets is of benefit of the EU itself, but still it looks discriminatiоry getting so many benefits as a non member towards countries like Serbia for example.

[holystove]

After yesterday's votes in the House of Commons a soft brexit is further away than ever.  I don't see how the Irish border can be fudged any longer.  This could come down to a choice between "no deal" or "no brexit".

There is a massive responsibility for the UK politicians and UK media to clearly explain what no-deal means.   Polling shows that many believe no-deal means everything will stay as it is, while in reality it is the grinding to a halt of the entire UK (not just economically), the economic destruction of Ireland and an economic hit to the continental EU.  All because .... ?

[Bailey]

35 minutes ago, holystove said:

After yesterday's votes in the House of Commons a soft brexit is further away than ever.  I don't see how the Irish border can be fudged any longer.  This could come down to a choice between "no deal" or "no brexit".

There is a massive responsibility for the UK politicians and UK media to clearly explain what no-deal means.   Polling shows that many believe no-deal means everything will stay as it is, while in reality it is the grinding to a halt of the entire UK (not just economically), the economic destruction of Ireland and an economic hit to the continental EU.  All because .... ?

I believe there is a massive gulf between what people voted for and what they believe they can get from the EU and what the EU will actually agree to. 

The MPs resigning and voting against the chequers plan are essentially voting to try and get an amendment the EU wont agree to, whereas the chequers plan May drew up had more chance of success with the EU but stealthuly conceded many of the things the vote was about. 

[holystove]

2 hours ago, Bailey said:

I believe there is a massive gulf between what people voted for and what they believe they can get from the EU and what the EU will actually agree to. 

The MPs resigning and voting against the chequers plan are essentially voting to try and get an amendment the EU wont agree to, whereas the chequers plan May drew up had more chance of success with the EU but stealthuly conceded many of the things the vote was about. 

So what is the solution?  Where do we go from here?

[Matt]

1 hour ago, holystove said:

So what is the solution?  Where do we go from here?

To be honest, and it’s been one of my biggest gripes of the whole thing, this should’ve been planned and debated before the referendum even took place. To blindly stumble on must be bordering on criminal!

[Bailey]

9 hours ago, holystove said:

So what is the solution?  Where do we go from here?

That is the difficult part. Once the EU knock back the current proposal I think the Govt needs to basically get all MPs in one room, give each member a list of the knock backs and commentry on why, put that alongside a detailed assessment of the impact of no deal and set out why leaving the EU is a non-starter, in light of the initial aims of Brexit.

There will be plenty of backlash but I expect the reasonable people of this country to listen, although it would require a dedicated explanation to the public, somethig which hasnt happened following this chequers plan. 

[MikeO]

2 hours ago, Bailey said:

That is the difficult part. Once the EU knock back the current proposal I think the Govt needs to basically get all MPs in one room, give each member a list of the knock backs and commentry on why, put that alongside a detailed assessment of the impact of no deal and set out why leaving the EU is a non-starter, in light of the initial aims of Brexit.

There will be plenty of backlash but I expect the reasonable people of this country to listen, although it would require a dedicated explanation to the public, somethig which hasnt happened following this chequers plan. 

And you voted out Bailey, do you think more people who went the same way as you are now changing their minds due to the fiasco it's become? I've always thought that a (not going to happen/fantasy land I know) new vote would still be behind leaving but I'm sensing a change in mood. Comments below BBC articles for example used to have infinitely more upvotes for "brexit means brexit" style comments while now the mood faced with the reality has swung the to "this is unworkable/bad for us so let's just stop".

[Romey 1878]

1 hour ago, MikeO said:

And you voted out Bailey, do you think more people who went the same way as you are now changing their minds due to the fiasco it's become? I've always thought that a (not going to happen/fantasy land I know) new vote would still be behind leaving but I'm sensing a change in mood. Comments below BBC articles for example used to have infinitely more upvotes for "brexit means brexit" style comments while now faced with the reality has swung the the mood to "this is unworkable/bad for us so let's just stop".

Bailey didn’t vote as far as I can remember?

I’d vote leave again, no question. 

[holystove]

1 hour ago, Romey 1878 said:

Bailey didn’t vote as far as I can remember?

I’d vote leave again, no question. 

I remember you said you voted Leave because you were anti-establishment. Do you still believe Leave is the anti-elitist side?

What kind of Brexit would you prefer if given the choice?

[MikeO]

1 hour ago, Romey 1878 said:

Bailey didn’t vote as far as I can remember?

He went for leave in the vote in this thread so I was going from that.

[Bailey]

2 hours ago, MikeO said:

And you voted out Bailey, do you think more people who went the same way as you are now changing their minds due to the fiasco it's become? I've always thought that a (not going to happen/fantasy land I know) new vote would still be behind leaving but I'm sensing a change in mood. Comments below BBC articles for example used to have infinitely more upvotes for "brexit means brexit" style comments while now the mood faced with the reality has swung the the mood to "this is unworkable/bad for us so let's just stop".

I didn't vote in real life, only on this thread, but my idealogy would be to leave however I just dont see how its achievable at the moment. Part of the reason I didnt vote is because I didnt trust any govt to deliver it properly and also (and mainly) because the implications were a complete unknown.

Given that we are supposedly leaving in less than 12 months we still have no idea of the full extent of no deal. The deal currently tabled is to basically stay in the EU, but without a seat at the table, and I expect that any Brexiteer would detest that half in half out proposal far more than being fully in the EU.

The biggest problem is that we have a whole Parliament full of useless MPs who dont know their arse from their elbow, who act like spoilt kids, and seem incapable of working together. Both the two main parties are fractured quite severly and the PM doesnt changes her mind from day to day. How can any future plan for the UK in or out of the EU be built upon such unsteady foundations. I would also add, that I dont even believe half of these MPs even know what they are voting for either. 

 

[Palfy]

I voted remain but if I was given a second vote I think I would vote leave, because I want the the first time leave voters to feel what leave is undoubtedly is going to bring.

No hard feelings to leavers but you deserve your win and to feel what it's like.