[Politics] Brexit

[Fitzcarraldo]

Yes plenty of the media along with you were guilty of race baiting and frothing at the bit, loads of conjecture before the facts on what was a sensitive issue murder. You may well be comfortable with race-baiting because you were not alone and well hey others were doing it as well anyway, so that`s ok then. Personally I would never want to be comfortable being a c### like that.
Sums you up really.

You WERE comfortable with race-baiting though, weren't you?

 

[Ernest]

He was quiet last night; probably having dinner with Pele and Franz Beckenbauer.

 

[The Clamp]

The financial settlement was never going to be a set in stone figure, annoyingly the major press and media all characterised it as a fee when it was always about what we would be responsible to pay for, and some of those things are impossible to set an exact figure to.

The last thing the Tory's want is an exact figure and breakdown of what we are being charged for. Much better for May that it remains ambiguous so they can put any spin they wish on the final (enormous) payout.

 

[dingodan]

I didn't like the sound of this deal to start with, but I've come to the conclusion that it's pretty clever really.

The EU feel like they have won, remainers will feel like they have got a softer kind of Brexit, and in the end this means that we will leave the EU without anyone trying to trip us up before the finish line, so we will actually get out.

The part that worried me was the "alignment" part, but that's just a promise being made by this current government. I'm sure any trade deal will be made to be contingent on that, but that's fine. I've always said I don't mind us following 100% of the rules of the EU, as long as we are doing it voluntarily.

If you take any one of the EU's rules which disadvantage us, today all the government can do is shrug and say, "They are EU rules, we are members, we must obey". But once we have left any arrangement we have with the EU will be voluntary. In future the response to a bad EU regulation might be, "They are EU rules and if we want to continue our trade deal with them we must obey", but that is a far better situation. Because if the people really feel strongly that they want to dis-align, in this or that area, then they can vote at the ballot box and elect a government prepared to do that, even if it means that we compromise our trade arrangement with the EU, it will be in our hands and our decision.

When you consider that in future we will have vastly more important and beneficial trade arrangements around the world, the strong need to have a trade deal with the EU which everyone believes exists today won't be such a big deal.

I wonder if our negotiators have taken the view that any deal which gets us over the line is a good deal, because once we are over that line we can do whatever the people of this country decide, our hands will no longer be tied, and that is really what this has all been about.

 

[ManOfSussex]

It's a bad,bad day for the grizzlers and terrorist apologist, apologists (Corbynistas) when they focus on Farage.

Not really. I appreciate as NSC's official account for The Conservative and Unionist Party, Activate and Vote Leave you're towing the official line too, but you know as well as I do Farage was merely stating publicly what the other public school, Euro sceptic, odd-balls, who are Tories were saying privately, hence the interest. 'Nothing's agreed until everything's agreed' appears to be the official line they'e taking for now, but you know what's coming down the line eventually.............

Those Euro sceptic odd-balls have got a decision to make though - go against their principles or risk bringing down the Conservative and Unionist Government at some point by stabbing May in the back and risk Jeremy Corbyn et al that you're so obsessed about getting into Downing Street. In fact, the oncoming situation is best summed up by the greatest freakoid ever to lead UKIP -

 

[GT49er]

I didn't like the sound of this deal to start with, but I've come to the conclusion that it's pretty clever really.

The EU feel like they have won, remainers will feel like they have got a softer kind of Brexit, and in the end this means that we will leave the EU without anyone trying to trip us up before the finish line, so we will actually get out.

The part that worried me was the "alignment" part, but that's just a promise being made by this current government. I'm sure any trade deal will be made to be contingent on that, but that's fine. I've always said I don't mind us following 100% of the rules of the EU, as long as we are doing it voluntarily.

If you take any one of the EU's rules which disadvantage us, today all the government can do is shrug and say, "They are EU rules, we are members, we must obey". But once we have left any arrangement we have with the EU will be voluntary. In future the response to a bad EU regulation might be, "They are EU rules and if we want to continue our trade deal with them we must obey", but that is a far better situation. Because if the people really feel strongly that they want to dis-align, in this or that area, then they can vote at the ballot box and elect a government prepared to do that, even if it means that we compromise our trade arrangement with the EU, it will be in our hands and our decision.

When you consider that in future we will have vastly more important and beneficial trade arrangements around the world, the strong need to have a trade deal with the EU which everyone believes exists today won't be such a big deal.

I wonder if our negotiators have taken the view that any deal which gets us over the line is a good deal, because once we are over that line we can do whatever the people of this country decide, our hands will no longer be tied, and that is really what this has all been about.

Pretty fair summary that. For all that remainers have been gleefully mocking the agreement - the EU has shafted us - the Norway model - freedom of movement - staying in the single market (we're not) - and all sorts of rubbish along those lines, there is one vital thing they haven't noticed (or have maybe just shut their eyes, put their fingers in their ears and chanted 'la,la, la,la') and that is that this agreement has effectively ended their pipe-dreams of overturning the referendum, weaselling out of leaving and maybe, in another universe, cancelling Brexit altogether. There's no longer any 'if' about Brexit happening.
Both sides are now working on 'how', not 'if'. Onwards and outwards!

 

[WATFORD zero]

Pretty fair summary that. For all that remainers have been gleefully mocking the agreement - the EU has shafted us - the Norway model - freedom of movement - staying in the single market (we're not) - and all sorts of rubbish along those lines, there is one vital thing they haven't noticed (or have maybe just shut their eyes, put their fingers in their ears and chanted 'la,la, la,la') and that is that this agreement has effectively ended their pipe-dreams of overturning the referendum, weaselling out of leaving and maybe, in another universe, cancelling Brexit altogether. There's no longer any 'if' about Brexit happening.
Both sides are now working on 'how', not 'if'. Onwards and outwards!

Fair summary of the last week for Brexiteers.

"Well at least we're still leaving "

 

[5ways]

I didn't like the sound of this deal to start with, but I've come to the conclusion that it's pretty clever really.

The EU feel like they have won, remainers will feel like they have got a softer kind of Brexit, and in the end this means that we will leave the EU without anyone trying to trip us up before the finish line, so we will actually get out.

The part that worried me was the "alignment" part, but that's just a promise being made by this current government. I'm sure any trade deal will be made to be contingent on that, but that's fine. I've always said I don't mind us following 100% of the rules of the EU, as long as we are doing it voluntarily.

If you take any one of the EU's rules which disadvantage us, today all the government can do is shrug and say, "They are EU rules, we are members, we must obey". But once we have left any arrangement we have with the EU will be voluntary. In future the response to a bad EU regulation might be, "They are EU rules and if we want to continue our trade deal with them we must obey", but that is a far better situation. Because if the people really feel strongly that they want to dis-align, in this or that area, then they can vote at the ballot box and elect a government prepared to do that, even if it means that we compromise our trade arrangement with the EU, it will be in our hands and our decision.

When you consider that in future we will have vastly more important and beneficial trade arrangements around the world, the strong need to have a trade deal with the EU which everyone believes exists today won't be such a big deal.

I wonder if our negotiators have taken the view that any deal which gets us over the line is a good deal, because once we are over that line we can do whatever the people of this country decide, our hands will no longer be tied, and that is really what this has all been about.

Nope. Before it would have been "they are EU rules, we can try to amend them" once we have left these EU rules are not voluntary - they are spoonfed to us and we must sit there and say we like it. If we don't like any part of it we have to chuck it all in which would be immensely damaging.

There are no more important or benefical trade agreements than with the RICHEST MARKET in the world that we can see on a clear day on the Sussex coast. You are delusional if you think China or the US will become a more important market for UK producers.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Can they spare a little for me ... please pretty please

We’ve given enough charity to the UK over the past week

 

[dingodan]

Nope. Before it would have been "they are EU rules, we can try to amend them" once we have left these EU rules are not voluntary - they are spoonfed to us and we must sit there and say we like it. If we don't like any part of it we have to chuck it all in which would be immensely damaging.

There are no more important or benefical trade agreements than with the RICHEST MARKET in the world that we can see on a clear day on the Sussex coast. You are delusional if you think China or the US will become a more important market for UK producers.

"If we don't like any part of it we have to chuck it all in which would be immensely damaging." - Is a political argument, and it will be made. But if voters don't agree with that, then it won't matter. I'm not arguing whether we should or shouldn't align or dis-align with the EU. I'm arguing whether we can or can't, and once this is done, if it's deemed by voters to be in our interests, we can. Which was never the case while we were inside the EU.

How important a particular market is, or will become, for UK producers depends on the trade arrangements we end up with. This is going to be the first time in a long time that we will have had a chance to find out what kinds of relationships we can forge with other markets, and those other arrangements won't include the complications that come with dealing with 27 countries trying to act as one, and they won't include the future risks which are destined to befall countries dealing in the European currency either. The EU is a big market (and we would never stop trading with them, it may just one day not be through a direct trade deal) but it is also comprised on nations who are not facing up to the massive economic, monetary and political challenges which they face and which are increasing in potential severity year on year.

 

[Baldseagull]

Where are you chaps getting your interpretation information from that is suggesting fridays agreement must be a Norway model?

Top EU geezer M Barnier`s understanding in his press conference after the agreement is the only option left is a free trade model such as Canada, you know that same thing us leavers have been prattling on about for ever, out of the EU and a bespoke free trade agreement.

BRUSSELS (Reuters) - The future free trade agreement between the European Union and Britain will have to be along the same lines as the one the EU has with Canada, the EU’s chief Brexit negotiation Michel Barnier said on Friday.

Barnier said that there was no other option, given Britain’s terms for a future relationship with the EU, after it leaves the bloc in 2019. Britain does not want to be part of the EU’s single market, customs union or be subject to rulings by the European Court of Justice.
“If you take that - what are you left with? Just one thing: a free trade agreement on the Canadian model,” Barnier told a news conference.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...britains-terms-eus-barnier-idUSKBN1E218W?il=0

If M Barnier recognises we are out of the single market, out of the customs union,free of the ECJ and obviously able because of that to end free movement how is it you are being informed after all this time that the Norway model is still realistic?
I rather think he has a better grasp on this than some of you.

Because the only model that works for not having a border for Northern Ireland would involve being in the single market, even then there would be stops and checks if we are not also in the customs union. This problem has not been resolved, it has been pushed off into the distance with a promise that if there is no deal, we will remain so close to EU customs and single market regulations as to make smuggling pointless. I rather think M. Barnier is doing his best to not let it show they have just successfully castrated Brexit.

 

[Baldseagull]

Maybe a bit upset that the gravy train might be a little dry in years come. I think I know who's the winner here and it's not France or Germany who will have to foot a much bigger bill in the future to keep the dreams alive

France and Germany will be quite happy at the moment, they have got an agreement that we will not drop them in the hole for current spending or pensions of persons employed during our membership, and can use that period to enhance their trade relations with Canada and Japan, whilst we cant do much as we don't know what we are doing yet. And a good chance of some extra revenue from financial jobs and business moving out of London.

 

[5ways]

"If we don't like any part of it we have to chuck it all in which would be immensely damaging." - Is a political argument, and it will be made. But if voters don't agree with that, then it won't matter. I'm not arguing whether we should or shouldn't align or dis-align with the EU. I'm arguing whether we can or can't, and once this is done, if it's deemed by voters to be in our interests, we can. Which was never the case while we were inside the EU.

How important a particular market is, or will become, for UK producers depends on the trade arrangements we end up with. This is going to be the first time in a long time that we will have had a chance to find out what kinds of relationships we can forge with other markets, and those other arrangements won't include the complications that come with dealing with 27 countries trying to act as one, and they won't include the future risks which are destined to befall countries dealing in the European currency either. The EU is a big market (and we would never stop trading with them, it may just one day not be through a direct trade deal) but it is also comprised on nations who are not facing up to the massive economic, monetary and political challenges which they face and which are increasing in potential severity year on year.

It's not simply a political argument, it's not just rhetoric. It is people's jobs and business and has wide-ranging implications for many sectors. Whether voters agree or not this is a fact. Aligning with the EU is not really a choice but an obligation by the government to protect British jobs and workers as I see it.

The EU has problems, but so does China, the US or any country you look at closely. Yet in 30 or 50 years it will still be one of the largest economies in the world. I do not see why we will strike better deals representing a fraction of global GDP compared to the EU. Our leverage is much reduced, and our position made more fragile.

 

[Baldseagull]

It's been obvious most don't know what they're talking about for about 18 months After spending endless months forecasting imminent doom, cliff edges, grounded planes, recession, future generations lives ruined, shroud waving about cancer I suppose now telling fibs about staying in the single market/cutoms union and the Norway model is to be expected.'Hard' Brexit would be terrible now they are saying this is 'Soft Brexit which is also terrible, May couldn't get the deal/no agreement to move on = diaster, shambles etc, May does get a deal = disaster, shambles etc.

There has been a lot of fudging of issues to get to the next phase. 'The Uk will maintain full alignment' being a case in point. As the (pro Remain) Times points out ... 'is important to note that the word “alignment” does not carry legal weight in European law so it is essentially a political fix that is unenforceable.'

If you guys had never mentioned leaving without paying a bean and relying on WTO rules for trading, we would not have mentioned grounded planes. The cancer (and other diseases) treatment will be affected with even a Canada or Swiss type deal, who on average get new treatments about 6 months later than the EU or US do.

 

[Baldseagull]

I didn't like the sound of this deal to start with, but I've come to the conclusion that it's pretty clever really.

The EU feel like they have won, remainers will feel like they have got a softer kind of Brexit, and in the end this means that we will leave the EU without anyone trying to trip us up before the finish line, so we will actually get out.

The part that worried me was the "alignment" part, but that's just a promise being made by this current government. I'm sure any trade deal will be made to be contingent on that, but that's fine. I've always said I don't mind us following 100% of the rules of the EU, as long as we are doing it voluntarily.

If you take any one of the EU's rules which disadvantage us, today all the government can do is shrug and say, "They are EU rules, we are members, we must obey". But once we have left any arrangement we have with the EU will be voluntary. In future the response to a bad EU regulation might be, "They are EU rules and if we want to continue our trade deal with them we must obey", but that is a far better situation. Because if the people really feel strongly that they want to dis-align, in this or that area, then they can vote at the ballot box and elect a government prepared to do that, even if it means that we compromise our trade arrangement with the EU, it will be in our hands and our decision.

When you consider that in future we will have vastly more important and beneficial trade arrangements around the world, the strong need to have a trade deal with the EU which everyone believes exists today won't be such a big deal.

I wonder if our negotiators have taken the view that any deal which gets us over the line is a good deal, because once we are over that line we can do whatever the people of this country decide, our hands will no longer be tied, and that is really what this has all been about.

I think we will struggle to export Japanese models of cars into India and the US, Astons might be alright. The EU will continue to be our largest trading partner.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

The cancer (and other diseases) treatment will be affected with even a Canada or Swiss type deal, who on average get new treatments about 6 months later than the EU or US do.

Like before [MENTION=5101]BigGully[/MENTION] will be along shortly with a detailed expert analysis and picking apart of your claim...... I wonder if his response will stretch beyond two words this time?

 

[Baldseagull]

Pretty fair summary that. For all that remainers have been gleefully mocking the agreement - the EU has shafted us - the Norway model - freedom of movement - staying in the single market (we're not) - and all sorts of rubbish along those lines, there is one vital thing they haven't noticed (or have maybe just shut their eyes, put their fingers in their ears and chanted 'la,la, la,la') and that is that this agreement has effectively ended their pipe-dreams of overturning the referendum, weaselling out of leaving and maybe, in another universe, cancelling Brexit altogether. There's no longer any 'if' about Brexit happening.
Both sides are now working on 'how', not 'if'. Onwards and outwards!

I think you are getting a bit ahead of yourself there mate. We have just moved on to the bit where we expose further the incompatibility of making our own rules, and having full access to the single market, paying no fees and trying to divvy up quotas that third countries will want to have their say on.

 

[GT49er]

"Well at least we're still leaving "

No "At least" about it. It's a fact.

I think you are getting a bit ahead of yourself there mate. We have just moved on to the bit where we expose further the incompatibility of making our own rules, and having full access to the single market, paying no fees and trying to divvy up quotas that third countries will want to have their say on.

No, I'm not getting ahead of myself at all. I have highlighted the most significant part - no, the only significant part of your text. The rest is just a manifestation of 'hanging on to a pipe-dream'. You're not the only one.

 

[BigGully]

Like before [MENTION=5101]BigGully[/MENTION] will be along shortly with a detailed expert analysis and picking apart of your claim...... I wonder if his response will stretch beyond two words this time?

You guy's just lurch from one impending doom to another, of course recent events have kind of knocked the wind out of your sails and so you are back to the UK not accessing drugs for cancer, one of your more inappropriate scare stories.

It's like a drug for you guy's if, you seem not able to function unless you can add utterly depressing consequences of Brexit and post it on here, schizophrenically shifting from one failed prediction to another, its like a AA meeting of like minded loons.

 

[dingodan]

It's not simply a political argument, it's not just rhetoric. It is people's jobs and business and has wide-ranging implications for many sectors. Whether voters agree or not this is a fact. Aligning with the EU is not really a choice but an obligation by the government to protect British jobs and workers as I see it.

The EU has problems, but so does China, the US or any country you look at closely. Yet in 30 or 50 years it will still be one of the largest economies in the world. I do not see why we will strike better deals representing a fraction of global GDP compared to the EU. Our leverage is much reduced, and our position made more fragile.

Your first paragraph is 100% a political argument, you've kind of missed my point. Maybe you are right, maybe you are wrong, but what you believe will not dictate whether we do or don't break our alignment with the EU. What most voters believe will. If most voters believe it is more in our interests to no longer align with a particular EU policy, and they vote in a government which takes that position, then we will break our alignment. Whether that's a good or a bad thing is a separate question. What you are saying is that you don't believe we should, so we can't. Maybe we shouldn't, but we still can.

Sure, everyone has problems, but the EU is in a more precarious position than most, and I'm sorry but nobody knows what will be the case in 30 or 50 years. I'd personally be very surprised if there is still an EU or a Euro in 30 years.