[Politics] Brexit

[A1X]

The economical part is important of course, but in an even wider perspective, its about whether you could accept a United States of Europe or not. To me, its a no,

This is always my favourite Brexiter argument, I think what I like about it is the blind ignorance which decides that all other European nations are all acting as one with the same interests, and it's plucky old Britain taking them on.

Let's take, for example, Poland. Poland as a nation has spent the last century and a half fighting for it's right to be an independent nation. It took on the Tsar, then the Kaiser, then got it's independence in 1919. Only to lose it again in 1939 to the Nazis, before being overrun by the Soviets in 1944 and remaining under their thumb until the early 1990s. Now why are you so certain that a nation which has known what it is like to be subsumed into a larger entity it has no desire to be a part of would acquiesce so wholly to a "United States of Europe" without a fight? Or is it because actually Poland has a better understanding of the EU and realises it isn't the sort of totalitarian monolith which appears to exist in the fevered imagination of many Brexiters?

 

[A1X]

I've only read the BBC report but it is a muddled report. The implication is us still leaving on 31st Oct but then having until the end of 2020 to thrash out the finer details of a backstop alternative.

This is basically how the Withdrawal Agreement works. The backstop only kicks in at the end of the transition period if no alternative suitable to both sides has been agreed. This applied yesterday, last month, in March and indeed when the WA was finalised last December. What I think it demonstrates primarily is that many people in the Government oppose "the backstop" without actually understanding anything about what it is or what it does.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

The problem being, thanks to FPTP, the Lib Dems could have a majority government on around 38% of the vote. The rest of the 62% would be Tory ( hard leave ), Labour ( soft leave ), Brexit ( hard leave ) and SNP ( hard remain but overall they get a very small percentage of the overall vote when compared to the seats they get ). So splitting the vote percentages between the leave and remain parties could well mean well over 50% of people have voted for a leave party yet A50 would be revoked against the majority wish.

It depends how you define 'majority'. If the Lib Dems get enough seats to have a workable majority in parliament they will have a 'majority' by definition. In our present system that is the way it is and always has been.

Whether it is fair would be another question. But this opens a can of worms - those who find themselves in the minority often argue that this isn't fair because their views are disregarded. They have a point. But on some issues a middle ground isn't possible. Abortion, capital punishment and membership of the EU......very hard to find a half way house.

We have had minority governments in the past, where the majority of seats don't reflect the majority vote. Indeed in America Bush the younger was elected president on a minority vote, owing to their electoral college system - perhaps the most stark 'travesty' of unfairness possible? Not really.

Also, let us not forget, because turnout in the UK is never close to 100%, no government to my knowledge has ever benefitted from a true numerical majority of those eligible to vote. And without wishing to dig up old bones, the Brexit majority was not >50% of your actual electorate (say the last 3 words in the voice of Alf Garnett for proper emphasis)

So the bottom line is we have a system and we generally accept it, carping only when the outcome doesn't suit.

Anyway, I remain convinced we will tumble out with no deal in October, either with Boris not requesting an extension or doing so in a manner easily refused by br'er EU.

A Brexit supporting pal is convinced the EU will offer an extension, or accept one no matter how flimsy Boris' request 'because they are desperate that we don't leave'. I would find that amusing if it happens but I would esimate the chance of it is less than 10%.

Frankly I am surprised PPF bothers to read this thread anymore (unless he comes to gloat)






Oh.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

No idea if EU is preventing the UK from building homes as I dont know enough about how you've done it in the past. But I know for certain that Sweden's "million program" could not happen under EU jurisdiction. If UK and EU have identical ideas about how society should be run, then the issues listed dont apply to you; good for you, but to us it EU membership changed society on a deeper than economical level.

Please tell me which EU legislation prevented Sweden's housebuilding programme?

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

No idea if EU is preventing the UK from building homes as I dont know enough about how you've done it in the past. But I know for certain that Sweden's "million program" could not happen under EU jurisdiction. If UK and EU have identical ideas about how society should be run, then the issues listed dont apply to you; good for you, but to us it EU membership changed society on a deeper than economical level.

Blair said yesterday that the EU did not stop any legislation he introduced, that he did not back off bringing in any legislation in the fear of the EU blocking it, nor did the UK introduce any legislation he did not agree with because of pressure to do so by the EU.

All this 'taking back control' seems to be about reversing the legislation introduced by Blair. Who knew?

Anyway, that aside.....

I agree that the real objection to the EU is 'deeper than economical' though. Deeper than political clearly (see above) and deeper than economical.....

Emotional, then. An emotional response to foreigners getting a bit to near, a bit to chummy? Is there a word for that I wonder?

 

[WATFORD zero]

This is basically how the Withdrawal Agreement works. The backstop only kicks in at the end of the transition period if no alternative suitable to both sides has been agreed. This applied yesterday, last month, in March and indeed when the WA was finalised last December. What I think it demonstrates primarily is that many people in the Government oppose "the backstop" without actually understanding anything about what it is or what it does.

I can't understand why people get confused by a simple change of terminology. It's quite simple.

In any implementation/transition period (or whatever else it's going to be re-branded as) we stay in the Customs Union.

If, in that period (much like the last 3.5 years) no one can come up with an alternative to a hard border in Ireland, we stay in the Customs Union.

Call it backstop if what you want, but it's staying in the Customs Union

And before some pedant starts, yes I know it's a “single customs territory”

This has been the exact same situation (and exactly the same issue) since the day after the referendum, and long before, but was drowned out by people shouting 'PROJECT FEAR'

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Would anyone really vote for someone who so clearly puts their political career ahead of what the country wants

There were six council by elections yesterday. The LibDems took votes off both Conservatives and Labour, gaining a seat in Taunton, whereas the others were holds for the respective parties but reduced majorities.
So yes, the answer is people really will vote for someone who stands up for their principles.

https://www.markpack.org.uk/159809/...ses-in-council-by-election-results-in-so-far/

 

[theonlymikey]

I don't have justify anything Mikey, if ,might and maybe aren't on my agenda, Get ready for Brexit
Regards
DF

You absolutely do have to explain. You cannot throw idle rhetoric and run away like a cry baby when you're challenged.

Fairy "Who will pick up the Tab"

Me : "us" (with associated logical maths based on Norways deal)

Fairy : "I Don't have to explain myself"

All leavers : "the EU have no accountability" THE IRONY


A refresher in case you have forgotten. We currently pay in Net £9bn. Norway pay £140.00 per head per annum. At the same rate base on 67m people, our future bill for trade will be £9.3bn.

So come on then, put on your big boy pants and show me why it's a good thing to pay more to the EU than we do already without the member benefits.

For somebody who has posted more than anybody else in the thread this should be easy for somebody as informed as you...

 

[A1X]

I can't understand why people get confused by a simple change of terminology. It's quite simple.

In any implementation/transition period (or whatever else it's going to be re-branded as) we stay in the Customs Union.

If, in that period (much like the last 3.5 years) no one can come up with an alternative to a hard border in Ireland, we stay in the Customs Union.

Call it backstop if what you want, but it's staying in the Customs Union

And before some pedant starts, yes I know it's a “single customs territory”

This has been the exact same situation (and exactly the same issue) since the day after the referendum, and long before, but was drowned out by people shouting 'PROJECT FEAR'

And indeed the only realistic change to this scenario is where the post-31/12/2020 customs union applies, whether it is the whole of the UK or Northern Ireland only. That is basically the only wriggle room.

 

[The Clamp]

Okay, I may have got this one wrong in this picture, but the man is clearly a danger and an IRA sympathiser.
I can not say my source but you will have to trust me on this one.

You utter ****ing tool. Thick as mince.

 

[Deleted member 2719]

I'm no Lib Dem supporter and I think that their idea of revoking A50 is a terrible one - alienating half the country - but your post doesn't make sense. If revoking A50 is something the country doesn't want, how is supporting it good for her political career?

Whatever you think of the policy, it's an honest one. At least her voters know what they're voting for

My point is she is a liar just like all the rest, she has one aim in life PM and so many others spout the same about Boris, they are all the same they will lie to get what THEY want. The problem is Swinson she really thinks she will win and election off the back of it, it's never going to happen.

Im guessing you will vote for blow job, a man who seems incapable of opening his mouth without telling a lie?

Above: they are all liars, just trying to restore some common sense to the bubbleheads.

hahahahaha
That must be one hell of an embarrassing source.
A source that set you up to look a **** on a football forum.

I love hearing the 'I cannot reveal my source' fairy tale.
Its up there with the dozens of US Navy seals I 'chatted' with on American white power forums.
Youre full of shite.

Would you really put your family at risk?
It will all come out one day, but I ain't going to be the one to let go.

What you mean like our Prime Minister Johnson, who has done exactly that throughout his long political career and is incapable of telling the truth.

They are all liars, just trying to restore some common sense to the bubbleheads.

Oh my god, you utter goon.
What do you mean by got this one wrong, you get them all wrong.
Even 2 Profs wouldn't have made that cock up and he is as thick as a plank.
No offense intended.
Regards
RC

So I got the picture wrong maybe, but I have the BALLS to admit when I am wrong, that's me, I am consistent and have standards and morals and would never back the murdering IRA.

I can not say my source.....of a factually wrong, shoddy as f*** meme.

Why? Because it's embarrassing for them?

Read above if you're still stalking me.

It’s just lunacy people that are saying this policy is undemocratic, or not what the people want. The Lib Dem’s can only revoke article 50 if they are the party in power. For that to happen they would need a majority in parliament. And for that to happen, more people would need to vote for them than any other party. Meaning revoke article 50 would become the WILL OF THE PEOPLE! Its quite simple really.
I don’t actually think an election is the way out of this mess, as I think the remain vote will be split between labour and Lib Dem, and the conservatives will squeeze themselves back in for another period of austerity and cuts, possibly propped up by Farage this time rather than the DUP. What a joyful prospect.

I agree with you on all parts, except it's is what the country voted for so Swinson is undemocratic. Like you say she will never win but the worrying thing is she really believes she will, but austerity will not continue either, only in the minds of some.

People vote for the Tories all the time.

They are all LIARS.

24 hours away from this thread, and I've missed all the fun.

You truly are an absolute gift. In three posts, you've:

1. Posted a grainy picture of A MAN WITH A BEARD, posted by a (different) random idiot on the internet, because you wanted to believe it was Corbyn, so didn't give two ****s about looking at it properly.

2. Defended that shit****ery, by intimating that regardless of the ACTUAL patent falsehood you'd posted, your point was still valid, because - well you can't tell us, - nudge, nudge, top secret information that only you are party to.

3. Used a very odd meme to attack a politician for standing BY HER PRINCIPLES, yet accusing her of quite the opposite - accusing her of exactly what your chosen leader is absolutely - ABSOLUTELY - guilty of.

Amazing.

Same old Shite different day Hans, perhaps you should open up your Corbyn centrefold mag and let loose, you will feel much better for it.

There were six council by elections yesterday. The LibDems took votes off both Conservatives and Labour, gaining a seat in Taunton, whereas the others were holds for the respective parties but reduced majorities.
So yes, the answer is people really will vote for someone who stands up for their principles.

https://www.markpack.org.uk/159809/...ses-in-council-by-election-results-in-so-far/

I have no doubt she has principles but they are all about her climbing to power and she changes every five minutes just to get her votes. She is not to be trusted.

 

[daveinplzen]

Would you really put your family at risk?
It will all come out one day, but I ain't going to be the one to let go.
.

When you are full of diarrhea, its best to let it go Walt.

 

[birthofanorange]

So I got the picture wrong maybe, but I have the BALLS to admit when I am wrong, that's me.

"Maybe"? Not really impressed with your BALLS, tbh.

 

[birthofanorange]

Duplicate post.

 

[JC Footy Genius]

What specifically about the Canada deal do you like?

Tariff free trade for 98% of goods (helpful in reducing border checks)

Complete freedom to strike our own trade deals

No multi-billion-pound yearly payments to the EU

Allows regulatory divergence

No primacy of EU laws

Not dependant on surrendering immigration controls

to name but a few.

Obviously, as a much larger economy, there are areas we would need to adapt/change, prioritising access for the service sector being one. There are other issues but the Canada deal is a base to build from.

 

[WATFORD zero]

Tariff free trade for 98% of goods (helpful in reducing border checks)

Complete freedom to strike our own trade deals

No multi-billion-pound yearly payments to the EU

Allows regulatory divergence

No primacy of EU laws

Not dependant on surrendering immigration controls

to name but a few.

Obviously, as a much larger economy, there are areas we would need to adapt/change, prioritising access for the service sector being one. There are other issues but the Canada deal is a base to build from.

So the deal they have taken over 10 years to negotiate, still isn't fully implemented and has no service element, we use as a base, and then change it completely to what Britain would need from a deal ?

And what do we do about land borders with the EU ?

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Free trade.

Darren Grimes says he voted for Leave because of an 'EU policy' which doesn't actually exist.

If he is truly concerned about the economies of African countries, perhaps he should heed the advice of organisations such as the Fairtrade Foundation, which say a no-deal Brexit would be disastrous for producers in developing nations.

https://scramnews.com/leading-brexiteer-darren-grimes-says-voted-leave-eu-policy-doesnt-exist/

 

[JC Footy Genius]

And what do we do about land borders with the EU ?

To answer that I need you to Consult your crystal ball and tell me the exact sector by sector levels of regulatory alignment and tariff-free access we will have at the end of the trade agreement.

 

[JC Footy Genius]

Free trade.

Darren Grimes says he voted for Leave because of an 'EU policy' which doesn't actually exist.

If he is truly concerned about the economies of African countries, perhaps he should heed the advice of organisations such as the Fairtrade Foundation, which say a no-deal Brexit would be disastrous for producers in developing nations.

https://scramnews.com/leading-brexiteer-darren-grimes-says-voted-leave-eu-policy-doesnt-exist/

How are your efforts to censor a BBC journalist for reporting facts on twitter coming along?

 

[WATFORD zero]

To answer that I need you to Consult your crystal ball and tell me the exact sector by sector levels of regulatory alignment and tariff-free access we will have at the end of the trade agreement.

Quite apart from the fact that Canada +++++++++++++++ offers no solution to the NI border problem, has taken over 10 years to negotiate and still isn't fully implemented.

Here are a few Facts you wouldn't need a crystal ball for

Only 10% of Canada's external trade goes to the EU. Total trade between the two is worth about C$85bn (£50bn).
About 43% of UK external trade is with the EU. It is the UK's biggest trading partner. Total trade between the two is worth about £318bn.
Canada's main trade with the EU is in precious stones and metals, machinery, mineral ores, mineral fuels and oils, aircraft, aircraft parts and pharmaceuticals.
The UK exports goods worth £236bn to the EU across a wider range of industries than Canada. Motor vehicles and parts worth £18bn are the largest single sector followed by chemicals and chemical products worth £15bn.
Canada's services exports amounted to £11bn and were largely in management, research and development (R&D,) financial and IT services.
In contrast, the UK exports £27bn in financial services alone to the EU, and a total of £90bn in all services.
Agri-food trade between the two amounts to about £5bn.
Agri-food trade between the UK and the EU amounts to about £30bn.


Sounds like the perfect 'base from which to start'.

But why would we want to take a deal that's been specifically negotiated for Canada. It would be like taking a deal that's been specifically negotiated for Norway. I'm sure these deals are very good for Norway or Canada, but I think you may find our GDP splits, economy and political situation may be a little different.

What I would prefer to do is spend 40 years (I wouldn't want to rush it, could you imagine how that would end up ) negotiating the best deal possible for Britain. You know, getting the best of the customs union, trade etc whilst keeping vetoes over things like Schengen, the Euro etc and negotiating rebates. It will probably be quite hard work, extremely complex, and take a lot of people a lot of time to get the deal right for Britain, but it would be worth it.

Then maybe when we have got the best deal possible over the 40 years, we could throw it all away for something that would be far simpler to understand and easier to shout like Canada++++++++++++++