[Politics] Brexit

[nicko31]

We are leaving the EU. One day you realise this.

I'd say 40% chance we are not, at the start of the year I would have said 5%. Nothing is certain, parliament log jammed we need real world solutions not the fantasy and empty rhetoric you've been posting on here for the last 2 and a half years

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

I'd say 40% chance we are not, at the start of the year I would have said 5%. Nothing is certain, parliament log jammed we need real world solutions not the fantasy and empty rhetoric you've been posting on here for the last 2 and a half years

Quite. It’s pretty obvious May’s plan is doomed to failure. Who knows what will happen next? 2 years of negotiation and she’s come up with something no one in the country wants and only those promised a peerage will vote for in parliament. That’s a pretty spectacular failure for a party which once said “it’s the easiest deal in the world” and “they need us more than we need them” etc.

It’s clear Moog and co don’t have the numbers to do anything so a hard Brexit will not happen. May’s plan won’t happen. So what’s it to be? With every passing day Norway or no Brexit gets closer and closer. I just hope May spins this out for as long as possible now.

 

[Lincoln Imp]

Quite. It’s pretty obvious May’s plan is doomed to failure. Who knows what will happen next? 2 years of negotiation and she’s come up with something no one in the country wants and only those promised a peerage will vote for in parliament. That’s a pretty spectacular failure for a party which once said “it’s the easiest deal in the world” and “they need us more than we need them” etc.

It’s clear Moog and co don’t have the numbers to do anything so a hard Brexit will not happen. May’s plan won’t happen. So what’s it to be? With every passing day Norway or no Brexit gets closer and closer. I just hope May spins this out for as long as possible now.

In idle moments I have often wondered what would happen if the EU27 offered the UK the right to resume EU membership on current terms at any point during the basic transition period. It would completely transform the dynamic - the Brexiteers wouldn't be able to keep their balls of illusion in the air for that long, especially against a background of the voting public continuing to become less Eurosceptic.

 

[Blue3]

Quite. It’s pretty obvious May’s plan is doomed to failure. Who knows what will happen next? 2 years of negotiation and she’s come up with something no one in the country wants and only those promised a peerage will vote for in parliament. That’s a pretty spectacular failure for a party which once said “it’s the easiest deal in the world” and “they need us more than we need them” etc.

It’s clear Moog and co don’t have the numbers to do anything so a hard Brexit will not happen. May’s plan won’t happen. So what’s it to be? With every passing day Norway or no Brexit gets closer and closer. I just hope May spins this out for as long as possible now.

You may well be correct but the problem with stringing it out is no one can plan I was listening to some sheep farmers bleating on about it

 

[nicko31]

Quite. It’s pretty obvious May’s plan is doomed to failure. Who knows what will happen next? 2 years of negotiation and she’s come up with something no one in the country wants and only those promised a peerage will vote for in parliament. That’s a pretty spectacular failure for a party which once said “it’s the easiest deal in the world” and “they need us more than we need them” etc.

It’s clear Moog and co don’t have the numbers to do anything so a hard Brexit will not happen. May’s plan won’t happen. So what’s it to be? With every passing day Norway or no Brexit gets closer and closer. I just hope May spins this out for as long as possible now.

She's still going through the motions, she'll get a few vague non binding statements from the EU but will change nothing and won't get the loons and the DUP on side.

Starting to be a bit of chatter of a "dictators vote" from May, my deal or no deal. But parliament would tell get her to "foxtrot oscar".

The ECJ have ruled regarding the withdrawal of A50, the ERG are back in their box. The answer is staring us in the face....

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

You may well be correct but the problem with stringing it out is no one can plan I was listening to some sheep farmers bleating on about it

Farmers voted over-whelmingly to leave. I think the phrase is, they need to get over it, they won? (Or in short, **** ‘em...the ones who voted to leave that is. I have every sympathy for those who didnt)

 

[golddene]

In an ideal world, May realising that what was voted for is impossible to deliver without further and further damage to our economy, our country and more division, and with the total impasse we have all seen from all sides of the House with no likelyhood of any solution they can come up with to unite even her own party, let alone the political ruling classes and the nation as a whole, without destroying our union maybe forever, she comes back to the house announces the new year will see a further referendum that must be run on all sides without lies, media bullshit, vested interests must be exposed before any campaigning by all parties whether they be remain, leave, rich, poor, and have an honest debate with all we know now, all pitfalls of remaining, likely outcomes of leaving etc etc then put it back to the electorate. One more thing and NO talk of any general elections by any party. Let the electorate decide with every member of our society to be given the opportunity to vote with all the facts with age restrictions extended from 16 to infinite. Let those who are going to be affected throughout their lives whether young right through to old decide. This is too important to allow vested interests on all sides and MUST be driven for the people by the people and whatever the out come the decision must be followed, Leave, remain, half in half out whatever just get it done.

 

[Is it PotG?]

In an ideal world, May realising that what was voted for is impossible to deliver without further and further damage to our economy, our country and more division, and with the total impasse we have all seen from all sides of the House with no likelyhood of any solution they can come up with to unite even her own party, let alone the political ruling classes and the nation as a whole, without destroying our union maybe forever, she comes back to the house announces the new year will see a further referendum that must be run on all sides without lies, media bullshit, vested interests must be exposed before any campaigning by all parties whether they be remain, leave, rich, poor, and have an honest debate with all we know now, all pitfalls of remaining, likely outcomes of leaving etc etc then put it back to the electorate. One more thing and NO talk of any general elections by any party. Let the electorate decide with every member of our society to be given the opportunity to vote with all the facts with age restrictions extended from 16 to infinite. Let those who are going to be affected throughout their lives whether young right through to old decide. This is too important to allow vested interests on all sides and MUST be driven for the people by the people and whatever the out come the decision must be followed, Leave, remain, half in half out whatever just get it done.

How, given the current predicament, would we proceed should the vote fall on the side of 'Leave' once more?

I get the feeling that those wishing to stay seem keen on the vote, possibly confident of winning this time (if not, next time or the next). There is no suggestion of how we might proceed given a 'Leave' vote, which is the status quo.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

The softest of soft Brexits is what TM has negotiated.

Another vote will revoke article 50, it's option 2 on both of my posts intentionally, so as not to confuse people who are simple

You are getting Increasingly desperate but you are not going to get the chaos you've been hoping for.

Maybe you and your little anarchist chums should set your sights a little lower, maybe breaking one of those computer games you spend so long on

To be fair, your options do keep changing ever so slightly - they're certainly not consistant and when you're challenged about them you go all politician like. And Pasta is correct, you very rarely answer a question yet always chase people to answer yours. I can only assume you're a politician.

You are also still banging on that a 'no deal' isn't at all possible. Yet the primary purpose of the meeting of EU leaders this week is to continue plans and actions in the event of a no deal. Note the word continue - they have already spent millions upon millions of Euros on a no deal. They will spend plenty more. An EU spokesman this week even put the chance of a no deal as high as 60%. Yet here you are saying a no deal is IMPOSSIBLE. If only the EU had consulted you first, they could have saved millions. Because a retired civil servant with a mate still there feeding him info is going to know so much more than those actually involved in the process !

 

[Westdene Seagull]

Farmers voted over-whelmingly to leave. I think the phrase is, they need to get over it, they won? (Or in short, **** ‘em...the ones who voted to leave that is. I have every sympathy for those who didnt)

To use your line towards GT49er - with all due respect, what do you know about farming in the UK ? My uncle is a farmer, admittedly about to retire, and knowing some of the horrors he's had to deal with from the EU around farming I can quite understand why so many farmers voted leave.

 

[golddene]

How, given the current predicament, would we proceed should the vote fall on the side of 'Leave' once more?

I get the feeling that those wishing to stay seem keen on the vote, possibly confident of winning this time (if not, next time or the next). There is no suggestion of how we might proceed given a 'Leave' vote.

That has to fall to the people who want "Leave" to decide, they want Leave then they have to demonstrate how their leave would work for everyone and if they want it and are campaigning for it then must have realistic outcomes and eventualalities for their want. They are paid to govern us let them show truthfully HOW.

 

[Is it PotG?]

That has to fall to the people who want "Leave" to decide, they want Leave then they have to demonstrate how their leave would work for everyone and if they want it and are campaigning for it then must have realistic outcomes and eventualalities for their want. They are paid to govern us let them show truthfully HOW.

But the Eurocrats have said it's this deal or nowt. Where is the wiggle room (aside from going No Deal)?

 

[golddene]

But the Eurocrats have said it's this deal or nowt. Where is the wiggle room (aside from going No Deal)?

That is the half in half out option on the table now.

 

[Is it PotG?]

That is the half in half out option on the table now.

Then it works as per the vote basically. The half voting in get their way, the outers theirs. Everyone's a winner.

 

[Blue3]

I suspect no really thinks Mrs May can get any alterations to the deal that will satisfy ERG or if yesterday's vote was a reflection of the numbers within our society who also agree with the ERG I estimate there numbers to be no more than 20% of the nation as a whole say 20 million assuming that is correct that would leave 90% who are either happy with Mrs Mays deal or would want to stay my thoughts are if another referndum were held and three questions posed

Stay in EU
Hard Brexit from EU
Mrs Mays deal with EU

How that would turn out assuming everyone who voted before voted again and had not changed their minds regarding staying or leaving

 

[daveinplzen]

To use your line towards GT49er - with all due respect, what do you know about farming in the UK ? My uncle is a farmer, admittedly about to retire, and knowing some of the horrors he's had to deal with from the EU around farming I can quite understand why so many farmers voted leave.

Did your father trouser EU subsidies? Not attacking your father, but I was always hearing about these and how they kept many farmers afloat, so curious more than anything

 

[vegster]

To use your line towards GT49er - with all due respect, what do you know about farming in the UK ? My uncle is a farmer, admittedly about to retire, and knowing some of the horrors he's had to deal with from the EU around farming I can quite understand why so many farmers voted leave.

But farmers will still need to follow EU standards in order to export to the EU while at the same time losing subsidies and grants ? " Turkey's .. etc " ?

 

[Westdene Seagull]

Did your father trouser EU subsidies? Not attacking your father, but I was always hearing about these and how they kept many farmers afloat, so curious more than anything

Nope, my father was a Bank Manager so I doubt he got any subsidies from the EU !

 

[ManOfSussex]

To be fair, your options do keep changing ever so slightly - they're certainly not consistant and when you're challenged about them you go all politician like. And Pasta is correct, you very rarely answer a question yet always chase people to answer yours. I can only assume you're a politician.

You are also still banging on that a 'no deal' isn't at all possible. Yet the primary purpose of the meeting of EU leaders this week is to continue plans and actions in the event of a no deal. Note the word continue - they have already spent millions upon millions of Euros on a no deal. They will spend plenty more. An EU spokesman this week even put the chance of a no deal as high as 60%. Yet here you are saying a no deal is IMPOSSIBLE. If only the EU had consulted you first, they could have saved millions. Because a retired civil servant with a mate still there feeding him info is going to know so much more than those actually involved in the process !

How are our plans and actions and how ready are we for a no deal? 'Sub optimal' is the answer. If you still think no deal is sustainable for long for The UK, you might as well believe in pretty pink fairies.

 

[Garry Nelson's teacher]

The Tale of Ron and Joan. A Parable.


Once upon a time there was a group of friends. These were 10 couples who lived in the same area and had known each other for some years. Over the course of an evening’s drinking in the local pub they begun to talk about holidays they’d had.

Most of the couples enjoyed foreign holidays in various places, other than Ron and Joan who were more into ‘staycations’ in the UK.

The idea emerged that maybe it would be a good idea to pool resources and go somewhere together. This, they thought, made a lot of practical sense. Firstly it would save a lot of money. Rather than 10 couples travelling to different places in 10 cars, they could share expenses and only take 5 cars. They could also negotiate a significant discount on the holiday property rental.
The main issues were
1. Could they all agree on going to the same place?
2. Given that some of them had done very well for themselves and others hadn’t was there a case for people to contribute slightly differing amounts?

The couple that had the biggest problem with each of these issues was (you guessed it) Ron and Joan. They didn’t like the idea of subsidising others and they weren’t too keen on the foreign holiday idea. But they went along with it with the assurance that after the first year of the holiday experiment the situation would be reviewed.

The first holiday was a great success. They planned it carefully, agreed on the venue and had a great time. As for the finances, someone worked out that the saving per couple compared with the cost if each couple had gone individually was around £400.

Ron wasn’t totally impressed but agreed that on balance it had been a good break and – being a bit close to his wallet – was pretty keen on the saving. He’d also learned a smattering of French. But what grated was that his and Joan’s contribution was still rather unfair. So to keep him quiet the group gave them a 10% discount on subsequent holidays.

The next few years’ holidays were a great success. Indeed the group realised that not only could they use their collective buying power to negotiate good holiday deals but they could also bulk buy domestic consumables - and even swap skiils. Again an anorak in the collective worked out that the total deal saved them approximately 10% of their annual incomes (Ron thought it was nearer 5% - but fair enough.)

While the other 9 couples enjoyed this arrangement, Ron was getting edgy. He thought his (DIY) skills were of more value than those of Pete who was a decent if not perfect gardener. Ron felt he had lost control and was being ripped off. Most of the others thought that Pete was pretty good but that John was a pain. But they put up with him, for the common good.

It was when Ron started gazing lovingly at holiday brochures from Scarborough that the writing was on the wall. Ron’s appearances at the group meetings was now characterised by niggling and the odd temper tantrum. Even Joan was known to slam her handbag on the bar on occasions.

After 6 months of this it was clear that Ron and Joan would have to withdraw from the arrangement. As Joan said ‘with that saving of the contribution we can shop where we like and when we like. We can buy what we like and go on holiday where we like. That £1500 will be most welcome.’ And they opened a bottle of brown ale to celebrate.

Meanwhile in the pub, the remaining 9 couples were a bit gloomy. The resident anorak was in the corner and doing loads of calculations. “The net effect of Ron and Joan pulling out”, he announced. “will cost us all the equivalent of 1.7% of our average incomes.” There was a grown – although one or two of those present thought it was a price worth paying.

“But what”, asked another, “will it cost poor Ron and Joan?”

“About 9%”, came the reply. “but at least they’ve taken back control ………..and we’ll be glad to see the back of them.”