[Politics] Brexit

[Baldseagull]

You really are an EU fanatic Baldseagull, are you not? Great Britain will NEVER gain enough influence in the EU due to obvious historical reasons. £'s are what they want, not us.

No, not a fanatic, there are plenty of issues with the EU that really need addressing, Westdene has touched on a couple, the CAP and Animal Welfare. I personally think that having a common agricultural policy is a good idea, but it needs trimming down, it is full of unintended consequences, and ends up subsidising some rather large and profitable corporations.

What are the obvious historical reasons that prevent us from ever having influence? To my mind the issue has been that many UK governments have not tried to engage with the EU and do the horse trading required, and have just seen it as an arena in which to battle for exemptions and opt outs.

 

[jaghebby]

Good grief .... how many times does the same question have to be parroted by remainers ? Read the rest of the thread for your answer.

Well there are 9300 pages and I am not going to go through them all. I have dipped in and out of the thread over time and I have never seen an answer to my question - "How would ordinary peoples every day lives improve with Brexit?" So that's why I asked if you can't answer the question than that's fine. It just seems that most leavers actually can't answer or it just won't!

 

[JC Footy Genius]

You really are an EU fanatic Baldseagull, are you not? Great Britain will NEVER gain enough influence in the EU due to obvious historical reasons. £'s are what they want, not us.

Baldy knows that's all true, As a committed europhile he's probably the only remainer on this thread who really understands the importance of the referendum (only chance we will ever get to leave) and what voting remain really meant but he's in full grooming mode tonight. It's laughable to think he would really believe or trust anything negotiated by Cameron or any Tory, he also knows the whole project of ever closer union is reliant on avoiding consulting the citizens of Europe and when they do get a say (see EU constitution) ignoring/circumventing their democratic voice.

 

[Baldseagull]

Great post. It allays the fears regarding the ever closer union and the part the UK would okay in such a scenario much more eloquently than I could ever explain.

And in fact more knowledge. You have to ask yourself why myself and more people don't know that the EU were going to write the UK out of the closer union in future treaties.

I guess there's lots of information readily available now that should have been available pre-referendum.

Immigration has always been an interesting one. It was played on very heavily by leave. Nigel Farages misleading billboards and Aaron Banks paying an ex marine and a few paid brown actors to sit in a dingy to build the perception of how easy it is for people to come to the UK.

More interestingly, is that despite this, people who voted for the supposed benefit of less immigrants must surely feel disappointed at the developments.

Not only will the people in the EU be given visa free access, that more people will be coming in on top from non-EU countries thought this OZ style points system, Boris Johnson's scrapping targets to reduce net immigration. And finally after all that, he's advocating an illegal immigrant amnesty.

Alas, a Tory is finally partaking in some social justice, but the man on the street who is staring into the face of a recession because of voting leave due to worries about immigration must be scratching his head and wondering what the hell happened.

Accountability they ask for. Well Cambridge Analytica took your personal information, took a bung from leave and told you just how to be the good little brexit puppet they needed. Do you not care about your basic human rights being breached in such a way?

You have to laugh. I wonder how many a brexiteer has spouted the words un-elected beaurocrats. What was there reward? An un-elected dimwit who idolizes Otto Von Bismarck. A man who knows not a lot but still believes he's more legally clued up than the former Attorney General.

Too many people are being ignored. 1.3% of the electorate swung the vote in favour of leave. Such a small majority of that, gives you a mandate to execute article 50 and find a middle ground. In my opinion, that would have been the labour proposed customs union.

But, we've pandered to the right wing ERG, who complained a customs union would be "brexit in name only". But that's just it, the referendum question on the ballot simply called for brexit in name only. Anybody that has added caveats on and re-wrote just what brexit meant, is un-democratic and inconsiderate it's unfathomable in the extreme.

To purposely pursue a no deal brexit that only 25% of the public think is a good outcome is an act of sheer distain towards the UK public. Or plebs as they probably refer to us.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

The info was out there, but you had to look for it, Cameron tried to make more of the fact that we were not under any obligation to ever closer union, but as it was something he was trying to claim he "won" from the EU, when in fact it was already the case, and all he had won was that they would have it put in explicitly in the Treaty, he was mocked for not really having won anything.
It was a really bad idea that the PM and Chancellor were leading the Remain campaign, when the Leave side was blaming immigration for all our ills, they could not admit that actually, all that lack of housing, lack of social care, lack of school funding, over stretching of the NHS etc. was actually mostly due to their austerity measures, not too many migrants clogging up the country, they were contributing far more to the economy than they were using in services. Also, it would have suited them to have a fairly narrow win so they could lean on the EU for more concessions.
Another fail of the remain campaign was to keep attacking the £350 million for the NHS lie, on the basis that the figure was wrong, they should have been attacking the idea that we would be any better off at all, and there would most likely be less money available. Saying that the true figure was £250 million not £350 million, was just giving more air time to the lie that we would be able to spend more on the NHS.

Leave were selling hope and change, remain was selling more of the same. I get that many people thought the status quo was so shite that change had to be better, and were persuaded. I don't get how so few can admit to themselves that they were taken in

 

[Baldseagull]

Baldy knows that's all true, As a committed europhile he's probably the only remainer on this thread who really understands the importance of the referendum (only chance we will ever get to leave) and what voting remain really meant but he's in full grooming mode tonight. It's laughable to think he would really believe or trust anything negotiated by Cameron or any Tory, he also knows the whole project of ever closer union is reliant on avoiding consulting the citizens of Europe and when they do get a say (see EU constitution) ignoring/circumventing their democratic voice.

There is plenty put in place by Tories that I believe and trust. I may or may not like it, but I can't deny it's existence or legal force. One such thing was the European Union act.
I desire what you fear, but I can't make it happen. It does not make my points any less truthful, no further step to closer union could happen unless both houses and the public via a referendum gave approval.
Your inferences of EU circumventing citizens democratic voice is not understood, could you be more specific?

 

[sydney]

Additionally YouGov polling showed 68% of university graduates voted remain. 50/50 split on people educated to A-Level or equivalent. 70% of people only educated to GCSE/O-Level standard or lower voted leave.

no shit...!

 

[Westdene Seagull]

Hello mate, thanks for posting your reasons. I hope you don't mind me saying why I think they are not good reasons for leaving the EU.

The Treaty of Rome, the one we first signed up to includes the phrase "ever closer union", the later treaties do not make that aim any stronger. In David Camerons renegotiation, he was keen to have that not apply to the UK. The EU said "It is recognised that the United Kingdom, in the light of the specific situation it has under the Treaties, is not committed to further political integration into the European Union. The substance of this will be incorporated into the Treaties at the time of their next revision in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Treaties and the respective constitutional requirements of the Member States, so as to make it clear that the references to ever closer union do not apply to the United Kingdom”
It was also the case that the European Parliament act was in force, which made it law that no material Treaty changes or new Treaties could be agreed to by a UK Government without having the support for it in a referendum and in the House of Lords. So, unless a majority of the UK felt it was a good idea, no further steps towards Union could be taken.

We can remain and never move towards any closer union

We can reduce VAT, but within certain parameters set by the EU, too much variance between rates would cause issues for the single market. But in Hungary it is 27%, Luxembourg 17%, in or out, you and I won't be choosing VAT rates obviously, and any party wanting to can cut rates down to 15% standard rate. Before we joined the EU or EEC if you prefer, we had purchase tax, which was never lower than 25%.


We cannot strike an independent trade agreement with anyone whilst a member of the EU customs union. But we do have trade deals via the EU customs union. We would not get any better deals with the countries that the EU has deals with, but it is possible we could get deals done with countries that the EU does not currently have deals with. The EU though is by far our largest trading partner and will continue to be so, a deal with them is not going to be as good as current arrangements. The EU Japan trade deal is the worlds biggest single trade deal as the Japanese and EU economies make up more than one third of global GDP.



We may be able to ban the export of live animals for slaughter, but there is some suggestion that this would infringe WTO rules, so this may not be as simple as it seems. But if it is possible under WTO rules, doing it through the EU would have a wider effect.
This part might have some legs.

As the UK alone, I don't think it would be easy to effect changes in Italian Farming practices for Dairy herds. It is far better to write to your Brexit MEP and ask them to try and do something useful whilst there in the Parliament and join this group https://www.eurogroupforanimals.org/



There is an issue over this "secure our borders" phrase. If you mean we can refuse entry to people from the EU if we feel like it, just because, then yes this is something we cant do, but it is also something we would not do if we could, EU citizens are likely going to be included in the dozens of countries we have visa free travel with. If you mean we would have more security via our borders, then that is unlikely, we currently share information with other EU countries about suspected terrorists, extremists, kiddy fiddlers and other criminals, this co operation may not be there or be as comprehensive after leaving. https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-b...at-threat-senior-police-officer-idUKKCN1UX0M5


We loaned money via the EU to Portugal and Ireland, total 6.5 Billion Euros, it has been repaid. We also made loans to them and other Eurozone countries as required by our IMF membership total 4.5 Billion Euros, we also chose to lend Ireland a further 3.5 Billion Euros, at an interest rate above that which we borrowed at. All have been repaid, and the last deal made money for the UK treasury. In 2011 the EU leaders agreed that the UK and other EU countries which are not in the eurozone, should not be part of any future eurozone bailouts.
Yes, some of our contributions go to aid development in other EU countries, but also regions of the UK. This is I suppose going to be affected by your ideology, if you believe as I do that the wealthiest in a society should contribute the most financially, and the less well off should receive the most help, then this is fine.

There is a question of why you don't believe being part of a federal Europe would be good for the UK, I think most people just don't like the idea without any real solid reason other than a lack of trust. Of course a full federal EU could not operate the way the current EU does, and would need to have a different structure, but the treaties state that its aims are "the process of creating an ever closer union among the peoples of Europe, in which decisions are taken as openly as possible and as closely as possible to the citizen". To me this says that the more local layers of government should have as many powers as possible.

Far too many points to respond to each one and most have been debated to death already but I pick up the European Parliamnet Act bit.

I agree, as things stand, any changes would have to go to referendum but this act can be revoked by any government - lets say, heaven forbid, the Lib Dems managed to form a government in their own right ( unlikely I know ! ) - I wouldn't trust them not to revoke it. Equally, lets say one of these referendums was held - how can we trust a government to abide by it ? I'll use the 2016 referendum as an example !

Just as an observation, we belong to two unions - the UK and the EU. One union has spent years moving power back towards the people - devolved governments in Scotland, Wales and sometimes NI - mayors for major cities and more powers devolved to local councils. All making easier for.people to influence outcomes. Yet by it's very nature the EU moves power further away from the person in the street - in centralises it in Brussels, and when they get bored of Brussels they move the power to Stratsburg. It's almost as though both unions are travelling in completely different directions.

 

[WATFORD zero]

Far too many points to respond to each one and most have been debated to death already but I pick up the European Parliamnet Act bit.

I agree, as things stand, any changes would have to go to referendum but this act can be revoked by any government - lets say, heaven forbid, the Lib Dems managed to form a government in their own right ( unlikely I know ! ) - I wouldn't trust them not to revoke it. Equally, lets say one of these referendums was held - how can we trust a government to abide by it ? I'll use the 2016 referendum as an example !
.

So, you are worried about closer union but agree that the EU have done everything they can to ensure that Britain can't have a closer union without a referendum.

However, you don't trust the British Government not to override this, and because you don't trust the British Government, you think we should trust the British Government's current 'plan?' of a catastrophic 'no deal'. Okey Dokey

 

[Garry Nelson's teacher]

Well there are 9300 pages and I am not going to go through them all. I have dipped in and out of the thread over time and I have never seen an answer to my question - "How would ordinary peoples every day lives improve with Brexit?" So that's why I asked if you can't answer the question than that's fine. It just seems that most leavers actually can't answer or it just won't!

I can't stand to see a person disappointed, so I'll have a crack this one. I'll assume that our Brexit friends will agree with each of these points. 'Ordinary people' will be likely to see:


1. Prices in the shops will rise, The weaker £ will raise the prices of everything we import for everywhere.

2. Some things will not be as available. Not sure of the details. But who is?

3. Holidaying abroad will be more expensive just about everywhere (see 1 above)

4. Visiting EU countries might be less easy

5. Unemployment will rise. This will be the case for jobs in sector dependent on EU markets and supply chains. But there will be a knock-on effect.

6. After any artificial Boris-funded election spending spree, public services will suffer. Economic growth will fall (as night follows day) and there'll be less to spend on them.


7. If they have elderly relatives in care homes (or simply use the NHS) they will notice staff shortages as the EU nationals stop coming and/or return home.


8. They might notice that country is riven by rather more strife. At the very least they might well notice that people feel let down - promises about don't seem to be delivered. They might wonder where the £350 million went.

9. They will wonder why our politicians seem to STILL be spending all their time negotiating with the bloody EU after we've left!

10. THEY WILL GET A BLUE PASSPORT!! OK - they might not be able to afford to use it, but that is a very small price to pay.

 

[Lever]

No, not a fanatic, there are plenty of issues with the EU that really need addressing, Westdene has touched on a couple, the CAP and Animal Welfare. I personally think that having a common agricultural policy is a good idea, but it needs trimming down, it is full of unintended consequences, and ends up subsidising some rather large and profitable corporations.

What are the obvious historical reasons that prevent us from ever having influence? To my mind the issue has been that many UK governments have not tried to engage with the EU and do the horse trading required, and have just seen it as an arena in which to battle for exemptions and opt outs.

This expresses my view better than I could. Thank you.

 

[WATFORD zero]

I can't stand to see a person disappointed, so I'll have a crack this one. I'll assume that our Brexit friends will agree with each of these points. 'Ordinary people' will be likely to see:


1. Prices in the shops will rise, The weaker £ will raise the prices of everything we import for everywhere.

2. Some things will not be as available. Not sure of the details. But who is?

3. Holidaying abroad will be more expensive just about everywhere (see 1 above)

4. Visiting EU countries might be less easy

5. Unemployment will rise. This will be the case for jobs in sector dependent on EU markets and supply chains. But there will be a knock-on effect.

6. After any artificial Boris-funded election spending spree, public services will suffer. Economic growth will fall (as night follows day) and there'll be less to spend on them.


7. If they have elderly relatives in care homes (or simply use the NHS) they will notice staff shortages as the EU nationals stop coming and/or return home.


8. They might notice that country is riven by rather more strife. At the very least they might well notice that people feel let down - promises about don't seem to be delivered. They might wonder where the £350 million went.

9. They will wonder why our politicians seem to STILL be spending all their time negotiating with the bloody EU after we've left!

10. THEY WILL GET A BLUE PASSPORT!! OK - they might not be able to afford to use it, but that is a very small price to pay.

And the people responsible for all of this will deny any responsibility completely for what they have done and will continue trying to blame everything and everyone else :

 

[Westdene Seagull]

So, you are worried about closer union but agree that the EU have done everything they can to ensure that Britain can't have a closer union without a referendum.

However, you don't trust the British Government not to override this, and because you don't trust the British Government, you think we should trust the British Government's current 'plan?' of a catastrophic 'no deal'. Okey Dokey

You don't half make things up !

 

[CHAPPERS]

Parliament is sovereign!

[tweet]1159731772554448897[/tweet]

 

[WATFORD zero]

So, you are worried about closer union but agree that the EU have done everything they can to ensure that Britain can't have a closer union without a referendum.

However, you don't trust the British Government not to override this, and because you don't trust the British Government, you think we should trust the British Government's current 'plan?' of a catastrophic 'no deal'. Okey Dokey

You don't half make things up !

That trading group morphed slowly into a political union with the British electorate having no say on it ( thank you Tony Blair ). The aim of that political union, and they no longer hide it, is complete political, economic and fiscal union.
.

Tick

I agree, as things stand, any changes would have to go to referendum but this act can be revoked by any government

Tick

I agree, as things stand, any changes would have to go to referendum but this act can be revoked by any government

Tick

lets say, heaven forbid, the Lib Dems managed to form a government in their own right ( unlikely I know ! ) - I wouldn't trust them not to revoke it.

Tick

And you've wanted 'no deal' all along

 

[Westdene Seagull]

Tick

Tick

Tick

You see - you're believing your own hypebole. Despite you suggesting it was the EU that was the enabler to the European Parliament Act it wasn't - it was an entirely UK developed, written and passed act - no EU involvement what so ever. They made a glib promise to CMD that 'ever closer union' could exclude the UK but no act was ever passed at EU parliament level to make it hard and fast.

As for your implication on 'no deal' - I'd prefer a deal - I've never support an out and out no deal regardless but I'm prepared to accept a no deal over remaining if a deal can't be struck - which appears to be the situation we're now in.

 

[A1X]

Because I think we could do with a laugh

[TWEET]1159216665596432386[/TWEET]

 

[Garry Nelson's teacher]

Latest economic data: UK on edge of recession after a -0.2 fall in GDP growth for Q2.

My goodness Project Brexit is going well! What better time to leap into the economic unknown.

 

[ManOfSussex]

Latest economic data: UK on edge of recession after a -0.2 fall in GDP growth for Q2.

My goodness Project Brexit is going well! What better time to leap into the economic unknown.

It's just project fear by remoaners in the msm etc . You should focus on the good news stories they don't report:

Travel Firm Creates Six New Jobs

An independent travel firm is opening a new store in Oldham, creating six new jobs.

https://www.oldham-chronicle.co.uk/...-news/129597/travel-firm-creates-six-new-jobs

 

[beorhthelm]

Parliament is sovereign!

irrelevant right now as they are sitting on their hands, too scared to act. brexit is default, so if no one does anything, we leave. instead of coordinating a response to halt this with legislation, opposition and parliament prattle on about 2nd referedums, motions of confidence, letters to the civil service to say its not fair.

 

[Bob!]

irrelevant right now as they are sitting on their hands, too scared to act. brexit is default, so if no one does anything, we leave. instead of coordinating a response to halt this with legislation, opposition and parliament prattle on about 2nd referedums, motions of confidence, letters to the civil service to say its not fair.

It's tough to do that with Parliament in recess though...