[Politics] Brexit

[Blue Valkyrie]

Here is a CP from the Bruges Group and there version of the benefits of leaving.

“We often hear much wailing and doom and gloom from those who, for various personal and mostly self indulgent financial reasons, why we should remain in the EU. These people, who many have big fat EU pensions or receive grants and other hand outs from the EU seem to care little for the democratic will of the British people who, by a majority of 1.4 million, voted to leave the EU on the 23rd June 2016. In fact, from members of the CIB, banking and MPs they are actively doing everything to prevent the promise of honouring the vote to leave the EU - I see them as modern day barbarians hammering at the doors of democracy with the intent of destroying Parliament, our constitution and our very freedom to govern ourselves as a free democratic nation.



We often hear that leaving the EU will be a disaster, people will lose their jobs, food will be in short supply and much else. One thing we never hear though, is why? Those who predict disaster do not tell us why, what are they basing their depressing predictions on?


In realty we have to ponder how the UK managed to survive without the EU and become a powerful global trading nation for the best part of a thousand years before we became embroiled in the European community? How did we ever manage to feed ourselves and fight against tyranny in Europe in two world wars, not to forget stopping Napoleon from forming his version of a European Union.


In fact, if looked at in reality, the UK has much to gain from leaving the EU, not just gaining our democratic right to return to being a self governing independent nation again without the burden of EU imposed laws. People wail that we will lose all the money the EU gives us in structural funds and grants. But whose money is it? There are two big net contributors to the EU's coffers, Germany being the largest followed by the UK, any money the EU gives us is nothing more than a little of our own money back with the EU keeping the rest for itself. Just think how much more we could have to invest in the UK, the NHS, education and pensions if we stopped handing £ billions of UK taxpayers money to the EU.


Then there is trade, as a free self governing nation once again we can return to global trade under World Trade Rules (WTO), as the majority of the free world does. In fact once the UK is free to remove EU imposed tariffs on none EU goods many things such as shoes from China and various foods will be reduced in price thus helping the lower paid. Without many EU directives businesses will be freed from time wasting bureaucracy and will prosper, which will create more jobs and opportunities.
Since the 17.4 million majority voted to leave the EU just over three years ago all the predictions of the gloom mongers have been proven wrong, the UK, unlike many of the nations in the EU, has been prospering. While Greece has seen much misery, bankruptcies and people being made homeless, while Italy has been skirting around the fringes of bankruptcy and there has been high numbers of youth unemployment in Spain, the UK economy has been flourishing.


All we need to do now is take that last step to walk away from the declining EU and walk towards great opportunities as a self confident and free nation once again - what is there not to like about leaving the EU which offers nothing but the loss of our nation and being subsumed into a federal European superstate with little democratic accountability?”

There is so much factually wrong with pretty much every sentence in that piece, but the bit in bold is the golden nugget of truth which makes Brexit worthwhile.

With a FTA like Switzerland, and EFTA membership ( Switzerland has EEA access ), then no EEA laws could be imposed on us by Qualified Majority Voting. They all have to agreed by genuine consent at the drafting stage. This is really the Holy Grail of deals we could get. Having our cake, and eating it. Cakeism at its purest.

If we are less clever and go for an FTA like Canada, well the economics won't be nearly as good, but again no laws will be imposed on us. So that is something at least.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

2. "Since the 17.4 million majority voted to leave the EU just over three years ago all the predictions of the gloom mongers have been proven wrong, the UK, unlike many of the nations in the EU, has been prospering." Please, please explain how we have been " Prospering " despite the ongoing cuts to public services, education, welfare and the starvation of funds to the NHS ?

I find it amusing and tragic that the Brexit gammon think that when we voted to leave we left there and then, and that when the sky did not fall in this was vindication.

We haven't left yet.

For the thickies, I will die at some point and my family will have to move on. But (and this will be a revelation to the gammon - hold on to your seats) I am still alive.

FFS

 

[Triggaaar]

And how do we think that vote would go?

Bite? Vite? Oh, vote

Well MPs would simply want to reject it to stop Brexit. However, as I said above, although that's what they'd want, they wouldn't really want to be seen to be telling the public - 'not only will we not vote through a Brexit deal, we also went let you, the stupid public, do it either'. My guess is that wouldn't be a great thing to say to your electorate, because Boris would then call an election and I'd imagine he'd do well due to those who refused to give the public another vote. If he then won a majority (and I think he'd be favourite), he'd be able to push his deal through (or even a No Deal) without a public vote. That would be a disaster for those MPs who refused the public a second vote.

So I think (could be wrong of course) that the MPs who want to stop Brexit would be better off letting Boris's deal go to the public, and taking their chances.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Bite? Vite? Oh, vote

Well MPs would simply want to reject it to stop Brexit. However, as I said above, although that's what they'd want, they wouldn't really want to be seen to be telling the public - 'not only will we not vote through a Brexit deal, we also went let you, the stupid public, do it either'. My guess is that wouldn't be a great thing to say to your electorate, so Boris would then call an election and I'd imagine he'd do well due to those who refused to give the public another vote. If he then won a majority (and I think he'd be favourite), he'd be able to push his deal through (or even a No Deal) without a public vote. That would be a disaster for those MPs who refused the public a second vote.

So I think (could be wrong of course) that the MPs who want to stop Brexit would be better off letting Boris's deal go to the public, and taking their chances.

Clever boy. As usual

 

[clapham_gull]

Boris sending two letters. One asking for a delay (which is just a photocopy of the one in the Benn Act which he won't sign) and another saying he doesn't want one which he will.



What a laughing stock this Prime Minister is.

Courts are gonna be busy next week.

 

[vegster]

The end result of this is of course as everyone knows now that is there will be a " people's vote " as parliament has abjectly failed for over 3 years to stop their petty inhouse fighting and they will just chuck it out to the public again to remove themselves from any responsibilty and actually delivering on a public vote. Would piss myself laughing though it if was leave again. Then what would they do ?

If it was " Leave " again I would happily accept it, I would have to lay up a lot of supplies and barbed wire though.

 

[Grombleton]

Nothings changed ,the vote to Leave still stands obviously its very frustrating for Democratic folk but as per usual the undemocratic loons still clinging on like shit to a Blanket , reap what you sow ,tick tock tick tock

Regards
DF

Pipe down old man. It's not your future anyway.

 

[Triggaaar]

Clever boy. As usual

Well, you can't lose 'em all.

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

Boris sending two letters. One asking for a delay (which is just a photocopy of the one in the Benn Act which he won't sign) and another saying he doesn't want one which he will.

[emoji38]ol:

What a laughing stock this Prime Minister is.

Courts are gonna be busy next week.

You never know, but it seems likely the court won't like him doing that.

He's probably just playing for time, and credit points from some voters.

And he's realised the court is better than the ditch.

 

[Mellotron]

And what happens if it’s 52% in favour of Boris’s deal?

Then we leave, with immediate effect.

 

[Wardy's twin]

Here is a CP from the Bruges Group and there version of the benefits of leaving.

“We often hear much wailing and doom and gloom from those who, for various personal and mostly self indulgent financial reasons, why we should remain in the EU. These people, who many have big fat EU pensions or receive grants and other hand outs from the EU seem to care little for the democratic will of the British people who, by a majority of 1.4 million, voted to leave the EU on the 23rd June 2016. In fact, from members of the CIB, banking and MPs they are actively doing everything to prevent the promise of honouring the vote to leave the EU - I see them as modern day barbarians hammering at the doors of democracy with the intent of destroying Parliament, our constitution and our very freedom to govern ourselves as a free democratic nation.

The irony of this paragraph is supreme - Nigel Farage is going to benefit from an EU pension and has contributed FA to improving it. But also Bruges Group is effectively a light weight/ older version ERG so no bias.

We often hear that leaving the EU will be a disaster, people will lose their jobs, food will be in short supply and much else. One thing we never hear though, is why? Those who predict disaster do not tell us why, what are they basing their depressing predictions on? I don't subscribe to it will all fall apart immediately debate. I also don't see how it will be tangibly better so why change and risk what we have. On saying that I have seen some negatives from us potentially leaving, EU education grants have been cut, some financial institutions have decided to relocate and whilst some of the car industry problems are the state of the market the owners would have done more were to have voted to stay. Why do I say that well for the same reason why they put those industries here in the first place.


In realty we have to ponder how the UK managed to survive without the EU and become a powerful global trading nation for the best part of a thousand years before we became embroiled in the European community? How did we ever manage to feed ourselves and fight against tyranny in Europe in two world wars, not to forget stopping Napoleon from forming his version of a European Union. Unbelievable comment we were bankrupt as a nation in the 60's and early 70's. the empire had long gone and we going to re-invade places?


In fact, if looked at in reality, the UK has much to gain from leaving the EU, not just gaining our democratic right to return to being a self governing independent nation again without the burden of EU imposed laws. People wail that we will lose all the money the EU gives us in structural funds and grants. But whose money is it? There are two big net contributors to the EU's coffers, Germany being the largest followed by the UK, any money the EU gives us is nothing more than a little of our own money back with the EU keeping the rest for itself. Just think how much more we could have to invest in the UK, the NHS, education and pensions if we stopped handing £ billions of UK taxpayers money to the EU.

What EU laws have we not voted for? Which ones are a burden. There certainly have been some better Employment laws put in place. How much does the EU give us back? More than a little. How much do we earn as part of the EU, a lot especially as Europes banker

Then there is trade, as a free self governing nation once again we can return to global trade under World Trade Rules (WTO), as the majority of the free world does. that has just surpassed your previous statement the list of countries that rely solely on WTO rules is tiny and not a place you want to be. In fact once the UK is free to remove EU imposed tariffs on none EU goods many things such as shoes from China and various foods will be reduced in price thus helping the lower paid. Without many EU directives businesses will be freed from time wasting bureaucracy and will prosper, which will create more jobs and opportunities.
Since the 17.4 million majority voted to leave the EU just over three years ago all the predictions of the gloom mongers have been proven wrong, the UK, unlike many of the nations in the EU, has been prospering. While Greece has seen much misery, bankruptcies and people being made homeless, while Italy has been skirting around the fringes of bankruptcy and there has been high numbers of youth unemployment in Spain, the UK economy has been flourishing. don't understand the argument you are making we have a good economy so how can you say the EU is bad for us



All we need to do now is take that last step to walk away from the declining EU and walk towards great opportunities as a self confident and free nation once again - what is there not to like about leaving the EU which offers nothing but the loss of our nation and being subsumed into a federal European superstate with little democratic accountability?”

People talk about opportunities that is not tangible gain it is down to luck , by your logical because i have a lottery ticket I will be a millionaire to night because I have the opportunity. it doesn't work that way. its a gamble and in this case its a gamble that I can't see is worth it.

 

[Eeyore]

Boris sending two letters. One asking for a delay (which is just a photocopy of the one in the Benn Act which he won't sign) and another saying he doesn't want one which he will.



What a laughing stock this Prime Minister is.

Courts are gonna be busy next week.

I'm finding it hard to believe that those letters comply with the law.

The first, being unsigned, has no authority. The second undermined parliament.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

I'm finding it hard to believe that those letters comply with the law.

The first, being unsigned, has no authority. The second undermined parliament.

David Allen Green has said the second & third letters have been discarded & the official letter doesn't need a signature. He is a legal eagle in political matters.

 

[Seaber]

I'm finding it hard to believe that those letters comply with the law.

The first, being unsigned, has no authority. The second undermined parliament.

I don't think the signature is necessary to make it legal, either way it doesn't matter. Tusk has the letter and extention discussions with the EU27 are beginning.

Even though the will of Parliament hasn't been frustrated, the (possible/probable) intent was there, which may be enough to get it in the courts on Monday.

At worst this move will land Johnson in court, at best he has acted disgracefully in office.

 

[lawros left foot]

Here is a CP from the Bruges Group and there version of the benefits of leaving.

“We often hear much wailing and doom and gloom from those who, for various personal and mostly self indulgent financial reasons, why we should remain in the EU. These people, who many have big fat EU pensions or receive grants and other hand outs from the EU seem to care little for the democratic will of the British people who, by a majority of 1.4 million, voted to leave the EU on the 23rd June 2016. In fact, from members of the CIB, banking and MPs they are actively doing everything to prevent the promise of honouring the vote to leave the EU - I see them as modern day barbarians hammering at the doors of democracy with the intent of destroying Parliament, our constitution and our very freedom to govern ourselves as a free democratic nation.



We often hear that leaving the EU will be a disaster, people will lose their jobs, food will be in short supply and much else. One thing we never hear though, is why? Those who predict disaster do not tell us why, what are they basing their depressing predictions on?


In realty we have to ponder how the UK managed to survive without the EU and become a powerful global trading nation for the best part of a thousand years before we became embroiled in the European community? How did we ever manage to feed ourselves and fight against tyranny in Europe in two world wars, not to forget stopping Napoleon from forming his version of a European Union.


In fact, if looked at in reality, the UK has much to gain from leaving the EU, not just gaining our democratic right to return to being a self governing independent nation again without the burden of EU imposed laws. People wail that we will lose all the money the EU gives us in structural funds and grants. But whose money is it? There are two big net contributors to the EU's coffers, Germany being the largest followed by the UK, any money the EU gives us is nothing more than a little of our own money back with the EU keeping the rest for itself. Just think how much more we could have to invest in the UK, the NHS, education and pensions if we stopped handing £ billions of UK taxpayers money to the EU.


Then there is trade, as a free self governing nation once again we can return to global trade under World Trade Rules (WTO), as the majority of the free world does. In fact once the UK is free to remove EU imposed tariffs on none EU goods many things such as shoes from China and various foods will be reduced in price thus helping the lower paid. Without many EU directives businesses will be freed from time wasting bureaucracy and will prosper, which will create more jobs and opportunities.
Since the 17.4 million majority voted to leave the EU just over three years ago all the predictions of the gloom mongers have been proven wrong, the UK, unlike many of the nations in the EU, has been prospering. While Greece has seen much misery, bankruptcies and people being made homeless, while Italy has been skirting around the fringes of bankruptcy and there has been high numbers of youth unemployment in Spain, the UK economy has been flourishing.


All we need to do now is take that last step to walk away from the declining EU and walk towards great opportunities as a self confident and free nation once again - what is there not to like about leaving the EU which offers nothing but the loss of our nation and being subsumed into a federal European superstate with little democratic accountability?”

This really is hogwash, isn’t it.

The first paragraph, more or less every critic of leaving, is in some way, in the pay of the EU. A lot of the most critical people of the referendum, and it’s result have nothing to gain, except the benefits we have now.

Paragraph 2, people are already losing their jobs , with more to come, and we haven’t left yet. Foodstuffs will become more expensive and imported foods, more difficult to come by. Operation Yellowhammer confirms this.

Paragraph 3, well, where do you start with this one. For the thousand years prior to the last century, imported food was only available to the very, very rich, ordinary people lived on bread, beer, and vegetables, with the occasional meaty treat. Mutton was very popular, personally, I’d rather go without. We also had a much smaller population, less people to feed, and an agrarian based economy, that could in no way be compared to today’s complex economy. Secondly, we had an Empire, which we plundered as much as we could carry off. It may not be a popular view, but, the fact is we stole a lot of our wealth from other countries. The two World War comment is, unfortunately a common one amongst the more radical leaver community, personally, I don’t want to live with rationing and food shortages that the country was forced to introduce because of an armed conflict, and not as an apparently informed choice.
Paragraph 4, The UK has only voted against EU law, 57 times since 1999. This equates to 2% of EU laws. As for money, after the ‘official rebates etc,’ this country pays the EU, just under a billion a month, but, and it’s a big but,this does not include the funds given to private business and grants to Universities etc. And does anybody believe that the Conservative and Union party would really spend all that money on social problems and not tax cuts for their mates?

Paragraph 5,
If we relied on WTO terms exclusively, we would be one of only two countries in the World who have no free trade agreements with any other nations. We could not choose to give favoured nations tariff free trade and charge others, that’s not allowed under WTO rules, an unelected committee in Switzerland decides the rules, if a country breaks them it is brought before a court of international judges. At the moment, the USA is in dispute with the hierarchy of the WTO , and due to intransigence on both sides it could grind to a halt in December. So, rather than be part of the Worlds largest trading block, we would be at the mercy of unelected foreigners.
We are prospering atm, because of the EU , not in spite of it. Since 2016 growth has fallen and even leave advocates admit we will not be as prosperous if we leave.
In conclusion, the article from the Bruge group is nonsense.

 

[Weststander]

David Allen Green has said the second & third letters have been discarded & the official letter doesn't need a signature. He is a legal eagle in political matters.

Loved Dave Allen. Legend.

 

[dingodan]

I'm finding it hard to believe that those letters comply with the law.

The first, being unsigned, has no authority. The second undermined parliament.

I'm not sure, the law required the letter to be sent. It was.

I'm not sure about how you can require someone to sign something, given the nature of a signature. A signature is an expression of consent and will, I would imagine that a signature must be given voluntarily, without any form of coercion and under no form of duress. You can't be forced to consent to something, you can't be forced to make something your will.

They can technically force the PM to request an extension by way of requiring him to send a letter, but they can't force him to want an extension.

Regardless, the letters have been sent now. I'm not convinced that a court could reasonably find that his letters violate the law, but even if that were to happen (who knows these days), you can't "unsend" the letter, you can't tell the EU to pretend they never recieved or read it, so while the PM might recieve a "telling off" from the courts (which I'm not convinced would happen anyway for all the reasons above), it won't matter.

I've been cautious about Boris Johnson as PM, and his commitment to seeing Brexit through, but I must admit he is a more impressive PM than I imagined that he could be. This along with everything else in the last week can only add to his already impressive lead in the polls. Bring on a GE if that's what it takes, there are a lot of MPs who need sacking in the eyes of many.

 

[dingodan]

David Allen Green has said the second & third letters have been discarded & the official letter doesn't need a signature. He is a legal eagle in political matters.

The letter certainly doesn't need signing to have effect, no question about that.

But the optics matter. The EU are clearly in the eyes of everyone watching, negotiating an extension (if they do) with a parliament and not with a President or Prime Minister. They generally don't like to operate that way, and it's not a precident they will enjoy setting. They seem to have enjoyed good negotiations with the PM in good faith, and to agree to this would also mean going around him, and doing the very thing the person they have been negotiating with has expressly said he doesn't want them to do.

He is also likely to be the leader of a Commons majority after a GE, and will be much more in control of what happens re:Brexit after an election.

It doesn't mean they won't accept an extension, but it makes it as hard and uncomfortable as possible.

 

[dingodan]

Good letter IMO.

[tweet]1185666939869388800[/tweet]

 

[wellquickwoody]

Didn't you say you are a 'passionate remainer' though? What bit of 'Remain' are you passionate about then?

I voted remain, and I still believe it was the right choice. I also think that those who voted to leave were ill informed and/or slightly xenophobic. But the vote was what it was.

The UK is locked in an impasse, unable to move forward until the issue is resolved. The referendum did not mention ‘leave with a deal’, it just said ‘leave’. It is parliaments job to carry out the will of the people, not enforce their will above that of the people. The country is fractured no matter what. It will take time to heal, but I believe it will come together sooner if the referendum result is respected than if it is overridden.

I would never justify violence against politicians, but Jesus they are pushing the limits. Leave and leave now, and then begin to address the inevitable problems. Remain, and the wounds will not heal for generations.