[Politics] Brexit

[Lincoln Imp]

I might do if you ever provided a link or a screenshot of the article,as I requested.I can't find it anywhere!

I did in fact fall in the recycling bin and was rescued only when my wife attempted to wheel it round to the front of the house. No joy in finding the Times piece but I'm told today's S Times touches on the 2016 decline in motor industry investment on page 4 of its business section. Good luck with your approach to the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders - love to know how you get on.

Best wishes, BSM

 

[Lincoln Imp]

All fine - except for perpetuating the myth that the EU was willing and available to accept reform. It wasn't, it isn't, and never would be, IMHO.
And it would be even less likely to co-operate with suggestions for change emanating from the UK! If it ever had been open for reform, and had listened instead of ploughing on regardless and relentlessly with its very own agenda, we probably wouldn't be having this discussion now!

I know it's bad form to quote yourself and for that I apologise, but I wonder if you are falling into the trap of assuming that the future will be the same as the past? My notes of a few days ago may be relevant...

Tectonic plates are moving. Elections this year in the Netherlands, France and Germany will be played out against the background music of uncertainty about immigration legislation. Leading politicians in the first two of those countries are opening discussing the possibility of changing rules. Alternative for Germany is playing its UKIP-style role on the subject, as is Grillo in Italy.

And now, even senior figures within the Commission itself - vice president anyone? - are talking about change.

All this is new. If Le Pen's right-wing populists achieve an heroically narrow defeat in France - perhaps the most likely outcome - then the effect will further shake the complacency, just as a similar result in Britain last year would have done. It is arrogant to assume that it is just what happens in England that affects things and Brexiteers mustn't assume that if their narrow victory had gone the other way then everything would have stayed the same.

Further afield, we have changing views in the Visegrad countries, who would surely have supported British efforts to lead on the issue, and Scandinavian nations such as Finland, whose leaders are again raising the matter. To the best of my knowledge, none of these countries is likely to walk away from the union. But their accumulating strength will certainly see the EU evolve, whoever leads their efforts. That would probably have been Britain but for our decision to walk away.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

All fine - except for perpetuating the myth that the EU was willing and available to accept reform. It wasn't, it isn't, and never would be, IMHO.

This is something I've never understood. The UK has done many good things over the years, and led in so many ways. Two world wars and one World Cup etc. Are you really telling me that Britain can't now overcome a bunch of suits? Sorry, I just don't believe it.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

I know it's bad form to quote yourself and for that I apologise, but I wonder if you are falling into the trap of assuming that the future will be the same as the past? My notes of a few days ago may be relevant...

Tectonic plates are moving. Elections this year in the Netherlands, France and Germany will be played out against the background music of uncertainty about immigration legislation. Leading politicians in the first two of those countries are opening discussing the possibility of changing rules. Alternative for Germany is playing its UKIP-style role on the subject, as is Grillo in Italy.

And now, even senior figures within the Commission itself - vice president anyone? - are talking about change.

All this is new. If Le Pen's right-wing populists achieve an heroically narrow defeat in France - perhaps the most likely outcome - then the effect will further shake the complacency, just as a similar result in Britain last year would have done. It is arrogant to assume that it is just what happens in England that affects things and Brexiteers mustn't assume that if their narrow victory had gone the other way then everything would have stayed the same.

Further afield, we have changing views in the Visegrad countries, who would surely have supported British efforts to lead on the issue, and Scandinavian nations such as Finland, whose leaders are again raising the matter. To the best of my knowledge, none of these countries is likely to walk away from the union. But their accumulating strength will certainly see the EU evolve, whoever leads their efforts. That would probably have been Britain but for our decision to walk away.

Good points eloquently made. In short, a huge missed opportunity.

 

[cheshunt seagull]

I know it's bad form to quote yourself and for that I apologise, but I wonder if you are falling into the trap of assuming that the future will be the same as the past? My notes of a few days ago may be relevant...

Tectonic plates are moving. Elections this year in the Netherlands, France and Germany will be played out against the background music of uncertainty about immigration legislation. Leading politicians in the first two of those countries are opening discussing the possibility of changing rules. Alternative for Germany is playing its UKIP-style role on the subject, as is Grillo in Italy.

And now, even senior figures within the Commission itself - vice president anyone? - are talking about change.

All this is new. If Le Pen's right-wing populists achieve an heroically narrow defeat in France - perhaps the most likely outcome - then the effect will further shake the complacency, just as a similar result in Britain last year would have done. It is arrogant to assume that it is just what happens in England that affects things and Brexiteers mustn't assume that if their narrow victory had gone the other way then everything would have stayed the same.

Further afield, we have changing views in the Visegrad countries, who would surely have supported British efforts to lead on the issue, and Scandinavian nations such as Finland, whose leaders are again raising the matter. To the best of my knowledge, none of these countries is likely to walk away from the union. But their accumulating strength will certainly see the EU evolve, whoever leads their efforts. That would probably have been Britain but for our decision to walk away.

I work on a number of transnational EU projects and the UK partners are hugely respected and valued for the perspectives and our practicality and many other qualities we bring and we will be badly missed. We had a key role to play in bringing about change but we are now reduced to the role of supplicants and outsiders making taudry deals with the likes of Erdogan who can smell our desperation.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

For you, any engagement outside of the EU region is worthless and pointless, you cannot find any grain of advantage outside of your preferred EU region, I cannot think of you once stating the advantage of any singular member state outside of Germany anyway, not once.

I admit I cannot see any advantage in cosying up with either the US or Turkey over Europe. This is because, all things considered, I think Europe as partners is way better arrangement. I am happy to listen though. What will either of these countries bring which will be preferable? How will the person on the street benefit?

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

I work on a number of transnational EU projects and the UK partners are hugely respected and valued for the perspectives and our practicality and many other qualities we bring and we will be badly missed. We had a key role to play in bringing about change but we are now reduced to the role of supplicants and outsiders making taudry deals with the likes of Erdogan who can smell our desperation.

Quite. And you just know the Trump deal, whatever it actually is, will end in tears and recrimination.

 

[GT49er]

I know it's bad form to quote yourself and for that I apologise, but I wonder if you are falling into the trap of assuming that the future will be the same as the past? My notes of a few days ago may be relevant...

Tectonic plates are moving. Elections this year in the Netherlands, France and Germany will be played out against the background music of uncertainty about immigration legislation. Leading politicians in the first two of those countries are opening discussing the possibility of changing rules. Alternative for Germany is playing its UKIP-style role on the subject, as is Grillo in Italy.

And now, even senior figures within the Commission itself - vice president anyone? - are talking about change.

All this is new. If Le Pen's right-wing populists achieve an heroically narrow defeat in France - perhaps the most likely outcome - then the effect will further shake the complacency, just as a similar result in Britain last year would have done. It is arrogant to assume that it is just what happens in England that affects things and Brexiteers mustn't assume that if their narrow victory had gone the other way then everything would have stayed the same.

Further afield, we have changing views in the Visegrad countries, who would surely have supported British efforts to lead on the issue, and Scandinavian nations such as Finland, whose leaders are again raising the matter. To the best of my knowledge, none of these countries is likely to walk away from the union. But their accumulating strength will certainly see the EU evolve, whoever leads their efforts. That would probably have been Britain but for our decision to walk away.

For the first part of your post (and sorry, I meant to reply to the one which you repeated) - if tectonic plates are moving, then I would suggest it is because of Brexit.
As to the Visegrad countries joining up with the UK to take on the German domination of the EU.......well, Britain and its allies versus Germany and hangers on. Hmm. We went there twice in the last century, didn't we?
We're leaving. I appreciate you didn't want to, but now it's happening, isn't it best for you to accept the realpolitik of the situation and seek out the positives? Some of us had to make the most of it for over 40 years after voting not to join the EEC in the first place (and we never even had a choice about joining the EU).

 

[BigGully]

I admit I cannot see any advantage in cosying up with either the US or Turkey over Europe. This is because, all things considered, I think Europe as partners is way better arrangement. I am happy to listen though. What will either of these countries bring which will be preferable? How will the person on the street benefit?

But the EU is already cosying up to the USA and Turkey and the rest of the world and so it should, otherwise your political and trading policy becomes Germany and perhaps France and a little bit of Italy and Spain, where does the EU's principles start and finish, the razor wires of Hungary, the 'financial wall' of Turkey the cited punitive measure towards the UK's and its democratically referendum vote, where exactly is it

 

[GT49er]

Good points eloquently made. In short, a huge missed opportunity.

Good points eloquently made. In short, a huge fantasy wish-list. Sorry, we were never going to lead the EU to the bright and sunny uplands. They didn't want or welcome our input. They're hell bent on a US of Europe; we're thankfully out of it.

 

[GT49er]

This is something I've never understood. Sorry, I just don't believe it.

Well, I believe that!

 

[Soulman]

Good points eloquently made. In short, a huge fantasy wish-list. Sorry, we were never going to lead the EU to the bright and sunny uplands. They didn't want or welcome our input. They're hell bent on a US of Europe; we're thankfully out of it.

TBH, this is how i feel, and i suppose where i differ from those who wanted to Remain. I felt that the EU was getting more a two run EU, Germany pulling the strings with France their running mate. I felt we were slowly get pushed aside although our financial input was gratefully received.
I think that there was genuine surprise when we voted to leave, but i do feel that aside from the big two (Germany and France) many in the other countries support our stance.
I really think a lot are waiting and watching, and the EU could (i hope) just fall apart.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

The fact is you don't like Trump, and you don't think he should be President........that's fine by me, but you are making an false argument to suit your prejudice.

We can find plenty of examples of world leaders political or otherwise that have deceived their electorates or populations. No one would have voted for Blair if he had said he would take this country into an illegal war? So that line of argument is simply facile.

In contemporary times Trump is a political outlier, he speaks directly and candidly. This has its obvious problems particularly as President of the US, however you and others need to accept that he is in office largely because of his candour, quite simply people understand what he represents.

His comments on torture are a case in point, he thinks it work but went on to say interrogation would be a matter for his defence chief, who has (I think) already confirmed he does not support it.

Whilst Trump's comments are prima facia shocking, the hard facts are that torture and rendition practices have taken place under previous political regimes in the US and UK with leaders that would espouse views that they didn't support torture. Isn't this part of the reason why Jack Straw will shortly be up in court.

All of this hysteria about Trump what Trump says feeds into what seems to me to be a childish attitude to what we want from politicians where we rather they were dishonest, and ignore reality. Say what you want about Trump's comments, there is no doubt he WILL act in the interest of the US, and he will largely do what he says.

That Obama constantly told the US public and wider world that he would shut Guantanamo but didn't after 2 terms of office is an example of his deceit. There's little doubt that Trump had had it as a central policy it would be shutting down pdq.

Steady on. Read what I wrote again. When did I say I don't think he should be president? I said I am intrigued by what he's done so far (which is everything he said he'd do, not what I was expecting). I admit its not what I would have voted for, had I been a US voter, but I'm not. It is far too early to judge his presidency, and right now I'd find it hard to predict what would happen. And I was criticising Obama - yes, absolutely no excuse for not closing Guantanamo. And yes, everyone has used torture, and I suspect plenty, including the UK still does (when it suits).

I shall continue to watch this all with interest, and in the meantime, calm down, dear. I may have prejudice (we all do), but I am a scientist so I try to avoid floating false arguments to suit or service any hoped-for outcome. Things are what they are.

 

[portslade seagull]

Quite. And you just know the Trump deal, whatever it actually is, will end in tears and recrimination.

For Merkel maybe

 

[cunning fergus]

I know it's bad form to quote yourself and for that I apologise, but I wonder if you are falling into the trap of assuming that the future will be the same as the past? My notes of a few days ago may be relevant...

Tectonic plates are moving. Elections this year in the Netherlands, France and Germany will be played out against the background music of uncertainty about immigration legislation. Leading politicians in the first two of those countries are opening discussing the possibility of changing rules. Alternative for Germany is playing its UKIP-style role on the subject, as is Grillo in Italy.

And now, even senior figures within the Commission itself - vice president anyone? - are talking about change.

All this is new. If Le Pen's right-wing populists achieve an heroically narrow defeat in France - perhaps the most likely outcome - then the effect will further shake the complacency, just as a similar result in Britain last year would have done. It is arrogant to assume that it is just what happens in England that affects things and Brexiteers mustn't assume that if their narrow victory had gone the other way then everything would have stayed the same.

Further afield, we have changing views in the Visegrad countries, who would surely have supported British efforts to lead on the issue, and Scandinavian nations such as Finland, whose leaders are again raising the matter. To the best of my knowledge, none of these countries is likely to walk away from the union. But their accumulating strength will certainly see the EU evolve, whoever leads their efforts. That would probably have been Britain but for our decision to walk away.

For once I agree with you, the EU is on the cusp of change, the prevailing political mood of European electorates is moving away from the EU's founding principles and particularly open borders.

Personally I think Le Pen will lose, Fillon much more likely to win in my view (if he survives the investigation he has at moment) however he is a French political equivalent of John Redwood, and no friend of the EU.

Unfortunately for the EU enthusiasts, this situation is of their own making, they covered their ears and closed their eyes to all the warnings, particularly with the euro.

Before the EU referendum one of the channels ran a programme where ex EU politicians "war gamed" the pre referendum settlement Cameron was after, and then a second "war game" based on Brexit. Those that took part all explained after that having gone through the Brexit negotiation they would have offered more in the pre settlement negotiation. This is typical of the arrogance of the today's political class......not least the EU.

They have drained the well of trust, crying about spilt milk now just won't cut it.

 

[portslade seagull]

Steady on. Read what I wrote again. When did I say I don't think he should be president? I said I am intrigued by what he's done so far (which is everything he said he'd do, not what I was expecting). I admit its not what I would have voted for, had I been a US voter, but I'm not. It is far too early to judge his presidency, and right now I'd find it hard to predict what would happen. And I was criticising Obama - yes, absolutely no excuse for not closing Guantanamo. And yes, everyone has used torture, and I suspect plenty, including the UK still does (when it suits).

I shall continue to watch this all with interest, and in the meantime, calm down, dear. I may have prejudice (we all do), but I am a scientist so I try to avoid floating false arguments to suit or service any hoped-for outcome. Things are what they are.

With you on this one. It's one mighty big hole he is digging at the moment.

 

[pastafarian]

Good points eloquently made. In short, a huge missed opportunity.

Except its all meaningless.
On the matter of immigration there is no evidence to suggest The EU are ready to change.
In fact we have evidence as we speak to the contrary. Just look at Switzerland right now. The EU are not willing to budge.
The Swiss gov has been forced to back track on a legally binding referendum on immigrant quotas after the EU played hard ball.
If the EU was prepared to evolve on immigration they could be showing that right now towards Switzerland......but they are not.
As you can imagine in a country that relies on direct democracy this is curdling even the cow bells amongst many citizens.

There is no use pretending that somehow if we had stayed in this issue would be resolved. It simply would not. Its nice to see remainers recognising immigration across Europe is out of control and the legislation needs to evolve but its a bit late for that, you probably should have listened much earlier, and the bosses at the top of the EU dont care what you think anyway.
We are best off out of it.

 

[cunning fergus]

Steady on. Read what I wrote again. When did I say I don't think he should be president? I said I am intrigued by what he's done so far (which is everything he said he'd do, not what I was expecting). I admit its not what I would have voted for, had I been a US voter, but I'm not. It is far too early to judge his presidency, and right now I'd find it hard to predict what would happen. And I was criticising Obama - yes, absolutely no excuse for not closing Guantanamo. And yes, everyone has used torture, and I suspect plenty, including the UK still does (when it suits).

I shall continue to watch this all with interest, and in the meantime, calm down, dear. I may have prejudice (we all do), but I am a scientist so I try to avoid floating false arguments to suit or service any hoped-for outcome. Things are what they are.

I did read what you posted previously, you introduced a comparison with Hitler..........hardly the hallmark of a neutral debate, I am sure you would agree.

At the moment Trump is implementing what he said he would do in his campaign, we will see what happens.........I will remain calm and keep the Hitler comparisons under wraps till he signs off a Bill on building industrial size ovens.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I did read what you posted previously, you introduced a comparison with Hitler..........hardly the hallmark of a neutral debate, I am sure you would agree.

At the moment Trump is implementing what he said he would do in his campaign, we will see what happens.........I will remain calm and keep the Hitler comparisons under wraps till he signs off a Bill on building industrial size ovens.

Sorry, I always like to bring in a Hitler allegory into a conversation, if at all possible. But an allegory isn't really a comparison. Hitler didn't just build ovens, he also thought the unthinkable, then made it happen. That is iconoclasic, and by definition, not doctrinaire, which makes it impossible to predetermine whether or not it is good. One thing it isn't is principled. There again, principled isn't always good/effective (vide Corbyn). Intdresting times . . . .

 

[JC Footy Genius]

It takes two to tangle but I'm not sure you can say that one side of the argument 'kept the thread going' when most posts come from the other. As for any negativity, in one sense that is unavoidable given the discussion is between people who think the New Britain will be great and those who think it won't be. This started within days of the referendum when Brexit voters said that the rising stock market was evidence that all was well and Remain voters countered that it wasn't. If Remain had won and the markets had risen the Remainers would have said it was evidence of good times ahead and Brexiters would have said it wasn't.

Funny how we remember things. I thought this started with some who had voted remain being incredulous that their view didn't prevail unleashing numerous diatribes against everyone who voted differently to them. The first stock market reference was the big fall immediately after the vote supposedly being a sign that the predicted economic armageddon was on the way. When the FTSE 100 finally made a recovery some Brexiteers pointed out perhaps the predictions were wrong and were told this measure no longer counts as the FTSE 250 is more relevant. When the FTSE 250 recovered they moved the goal posts once more ... repeat ad nauseam. Then we were told by people who 'respect the result' that we didn't really know what we were voting for so diluting or reversing the decision is completely reasonable and ok.

Personally, I was willing to give a bit of leeway to those who voted differently venting their angst as this was a big shock and a momentous decision. But week after week, month after month of patronising incessant negativity by a few people has resulted in a quite understandable backlash. To be fair most people who voted remain on NSC have either steered well clear of this nonsense or stated they actually do accept the result and wish to give it a chance. Also, it must be obvious that some people only populate this thread to provoke a response from or have a dig at the other side.

It would be nice if we could all give 'New Britain'/Brexit a chance before righting it off but I can't see that happening, can you?