[Politics] Brexit

[Triggaaar]

Norway isn't part of the EU, so if we stay in, how could we make things difficult for them? 27 other countries have a vote too.

Because as a member of the EU, we would have a say in their agreements with the EU.

 

[cunning fergus]

I don't see it as black and white as you do. I also don't think scrapping CAP will do much for redistribution of wealth. Clearly, payments for doing nothing with the land, creates some problems, but so did guaranteed prices for production, creating wine lakes and butter mountains etc. If you open up the market to competition from places where animal welfare or environmental practices are lower, you damage the chances of standards here from being maintained and do nothing to encourage better practices elsewhere.
The EU recognises the issues CAP creates in developing countries, and is trying to find ways to improve this in balance with other objectives. You won't want to read this, but it may alter your views a bit if you find the time to. http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2018/603862/EXPO_STU(2018)603862_EN.pdf

I have read that doc before, I am unaware of reform since and frankly as this thread demonstrates in spades, 3rd countries will not benefit from the need for an effective working EU. Turkeys won’t vote for Christmas, and if EU politicians are not going to assist the U.K. post Brexit on what basis do you think EU politicians will meaningfully help other 3rd countries? That is absurd.

The origins of the CAP are reasonable, however as it stands today it is broadly speaking indefensible, I can accept some subsidies but 40% of the EU budget is obscene, if the EU was serious about deploying it on a socialist basis they would create an algorithm to make it means tested. Billionaire landowners will get nothing. They have had plenty of time to do that haven’t they?

 

[Triggaaar]

I'm pretty sure that we're already a member of the EEA, all EU members are.

Yes you're right, I mean the EFTA.

 

[Triggaaar]

More importantly has he actually said what IS an option?

Strong and robust negotiation.

 

[dingodan]

Boris says no deal is not an option

Not really.

He said he does not see how parliament can rule out no deal.

But he also said a no-deal Brexit that led to the imposition of tariffs between the EU and the UK is not going to happen.

He probably believes, as many do, that in the event of No Deal, we and the EU would immediately agree to tariff free access under a FTA.

"...taking into account the stated positions of both sides, the most probable option would be an FTA with zero-tariffs for all sectors."

"Overall, a bespoke deal like CETA + seems to be the most likely outcome of the negotiations. Although both sides are probably willing to accept zero or near-zero tariffs, the final outcome depends on other issues too."

http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2018/...s-but-the-eus-political-interest-matters-too/

 

[Mtoto]

I don't think we've been seeing this pendulum swing in our governments. After years of Tory rule, when Labour eventually got in it was with a right biased Labour government, and the Tory governments we've had since then have not exactly been to the right of the Tories.

It's not necessarily an equal swing - voting patterns across the population ensure that a right-of-centre government is the default. Sixty per cent of the country can be sick to death of the Tories and thoroughly hacked off with how their lives are unfolding but so long as the other 40pc - for the most part the better-off 40pc who are more likely to actually turn out and vote - are still willing to tick the steady-as-she-goes Tory box, FPTP will do the rest.

But Thatcher was a significant lurch to the right when the Conservatives returned to power in 1979 - poor old Macmillan spent his declining years railing against her in the Lords, scarcely able to believe what she was up to. And a Tory party intent on exiting the EU (and, as a result, the Thatcher-inspired single market) is another step in the same direction. The anti-European Tories were an oddball fringe 20 years ago. Not any more.

The Corbynistas decry Blair as a pseudo-Tory but the shift from the Thatcher/Major era to New Labour was a much more abrupt change of direction than you would ever expect to see in a parliament elected under PR. He also enjoyed absolute power with a huge majority in Parliament - having received 43pc of the vote. The Lib/Dems - in the middle ground - got 17pc, and a tenth of the number of seats. Corbyn, if he ever gets over the line, will go much further still.

Germany is the obvious comparison, in terms of population, size of economy etc. Sure, it sometimes takes them weeks to form a government after an election, but when they do, it represents a majority of the vote. Policies shift either side of the middle from time-to-time, but not very far from it. Looking at the current situation, which system would you say is more likely to deliver "strong and stable" government?

 

[Dave the OAP]

I'm not sure that Norway are in a position to demand payment. If we were discussing with them the option to join the EEA with Norway, and they made it difficult, they'd be made aware that one of our alternatives is to stay in the EU, where we could make things difficult for Norway.

so we piss off all of Europe and now you want to piss off norway too! Blimey

 

[Triggaaar]

so we piss off all of Europe and now you want to piss off norway too! Blimey

Piss them off? The suggestion is that they'd hold us to ransom over joining them - that would be them pissing us off.

 

[A1X]

BREAKING

Eton & Oxford educated former Foreign Secretary Alexander Boris de Pfeffeil Johnson accuses others of being "part of the elite".

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Piss them off? The suggestion is that they'd hold us to ransom over joining them - that would be them pissing us off.

Norway is quite happy in their treaty with Iceland, and Liechtenstein in EFTA. They are happy with their connection with the EU, although not part of it. Why should they admit the 'troublecausers' into their treaty?

 

[fanseagull]

BREAKING

Eaton & Oxford educated former Foreign Secretary Alexander Boris de Pfeffeil Johnson accuses others of being "part of the elite".

My God, next he'll be accusing other people of faithlessness in marriage, recklessly serving their own egos and aspirations, slipping into pointless latin phrases.... oh, wait a minute......

 

[Triggaaar]

And a Tory party intent on exiting the EU (and, as a result, the Thatcher-inspired single market) is another step in the same direction.

Except that the Tories didn't want to leave the EU. They said they'd let the people choose, and they thought the people would choose remain, thus silencing the right wing Tories that did want to leave. It's not FPTP that's seen this move to the right, it was a referendum.

The Corbynistas decry Blair as a pseudo-Tory but the shift from the Thatcher/Major era to New Labour was a much more abrupt change of direction than you would ever expect to see in a parliament elected under PR.

Yes, you get a lot more decisions made with a majority government than under PR.

Corbyn, if he ever gets over the line, will go much further still.

Agreed. That will be the odd one out in our recent history.

Germany is the obvious comparison, in terms of population, size of economy etc. Sure, it sometimes takes them weeks to form a government after an election, but when they do, it represents a majority of the vote. Policies shift either side of the middle from time-to-time, but not very far from it. Looking at the current situation, which system would you say is more likely to deliver "strong and stable" government?

I don't think 'strong and stable' is the best question, as FPTP is more likely to provide that, as you generally get a government with a majority, who can carry out their manifesto. It's unusual that we don't have a majority government, and obviously the Brexit issue has divided everyone. I agree that Germany's system usually leads to less lurching from left to right (not that I think we've seen much ourselves), and that could be better for the country. Although one issue with it is the constant concessions that would be made to the SNP etc.

 

[The Clamp]

Wrong again. I agree that the referendum wasn't binding BUT since then Parliament HAS passed a law, which is still in place, that says we WILL leave on the 29th March ..... unless another law is passed.

Quite right.

 

[ManOfSussex]

Norway is quite happy in their treaty with Iceland, and Liechtenstein in EFTA. They are happy with their connection with the EU, although not part of it. Why should they admit the 'troublecausers' into their treaty?

We don't need to join EFTA to enter into a Norwegian arrangement with The EU anyway.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

**** people who support this. Genuinely.

By and large, I find people are decent - with decent core values and moral compass.

Many people, sadly, are also easily led and manipulated, through misinformation and exaggeration. They are intrinsically decent people entirely unaware of quite what it is they are enabling.

Something like 60% of respondents polled, indicated support for the government's 'Hostile Environment' immigration policy. Physically introduce those 60% of people to the nurse in Edinburgh, her autistic son, and her soon-to-be-deported infirm and elderly parents and I would be astonished if anything more than a tiny few would agree (or have realised) that this should be the reality of what they thought they were supporting.

 

[Triggaaar]

Norway is quite happy in their treaty with Iceland, and Liechtenstein in EFTA. They are happy with their connection with the EU, although not part of it. Why should they admit the 'troublecausers' into their treaty?

The 'troublecausers'? Our population voted to leave the EU, that doesn't mean we're causing trouble for the sake of it. We were founding members of the EFTA and it's possible we'd want to rejoin. I'm just pointing out that if Norway make that difficult, they could create an enemy.

We don't need to join EFTA to enter into a Norwegian arrangement with The EU anyway.

Indeed.

 

[Notters]

[MENTION=35479]btnbelle[/MENTION] has actually made the case for remain. It surely cant be denied that:
a) people voted leave for a variety of different reasons.
b) at least 2% of those who voted leave would likely have wanted a customs union
c) remaining in the EU would be a closer outcome to leaving but staying in a customs union than no deal.

 

[Deleted member 2719]

I misled you in my previous tweet.
The Constitution Unit say 22-24 weeks laying out the correct procedures.
https://constitution-unit.com/2018/...ndum-on-brexit/amp/?__twitter_impression=true


Anyone who thinks JRM and Farage have common sense is taking the mickey. I didn't realise you were part of the Eton old boys network too.
I doff my cap to you.

Hell yeah, I will converse with anyone, the question is will anyone converse with me?

They are master debaters and they have both come along way.

 

[Garry Nelson's teacher]

Heard today an interview with a guy in Brexit-central Sunderland. He was of the opinion that if Nissan withdrew following a hard Brexit it would be a disaster for the place. Had this realisation and risk awareness changed his pro-Brexit view? "Nah, if Nissan goes, something else* will turn up." Sometimes your heart just sinks...…………..


* the something else would need to generate 7000 jobs lost in Nissan and goodness knows how many others in the supply chain and in any local businesses that sell anything to anyone who lose their jobs

 

[Baldseagull]

Only if that is allowed in the original act ...... I've not read every word but I haven't seen where that was put into the original act.

You can find it here: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2018/16/section/20/enacted

The relevant part reads;
(2)In this Act references to before, after or on exit day, or to beginning with exit day, are to be read as references to before, after or at 11.00 p.m. on 29 March 2019 or (as the case may be) to beginning with 11.00 p.m. on that day.

(3)Subsection (4) applies if the day or time on or at which the Treaties are to cease to apply to the United Kingdom in accordance with Article 50(3) of the Treaty on European Union is different from that specified in the definition of “exit day” in subsection (1).

(4)A Minister of the Crown may by regulations—

(a)amend the definition of “exit day” in subsection (1) to ensure that the day and time specified in the definition are the day and time that the Treaties are to cease to apply to the United Kingdom, and

(b)amend subsection (2) in consequence of any such amendment.