[Politics] Brexit

[Pavilionaire]

Oh come on, Soft Brexit is just the Remain camps preferred model which is actually not really leaving it whilst the term Hard Brexit is again Remainers pointing and sneering at those voters that had the audacity to vote to leave.

We are out of it, get over it ..........................

And there was me thinking Soft Brexit was a term used by both sides and the media to describe a Norway or Switzerland-type relationship with the EU...

 

[beorhthelm]

And there was me thinking Soft Brexit was a term used by both sides and the media to describe a Norway or Switzerland-type relationship with the EU...

thats what BigGully said...

 

[Chief Wiggum]

Hansard: 9 Jun 2015 : Column 1056 - EU referendum bill - 2nd reading

Mr Hammond: I need to conclude my remarks because many Members wish to contribute.

Few subjects ignite as much passion in the House or indeed in the country as our membership of the European Union. The debate in the run-up to the referendum will be hard fought on both sides of the argument. But whether we favour Britain being in or out, we surely should all be able to agree on the simple principle that the decision about our membership should be taken by the British people, not by Whitehall bureaucrats, certainly not by Brussels Eurocrats; not even by Government Ministers or parliamentarians in this Chamber. The decision must be for the common sense of the British people. That is what we pledged, and that is what we have a mandate to deliver. For too long, the people of Britain have been denied their say. For too long, powers have been handed to Brussels over their heads. For too long, their voice on Europe has not beenheard. This Bill puts that right. It delivers the simple in/out referendum that we promised, and I commend it to the House.

Hilary Benn in response:
My view is that the question is perfectly clear and very simple. I do
not think that anyone who goes into the polling station on the day,
whenever it is, will not understand the consequence of voting either
way.

 

[pastafarian]

Are you saying that everyone who voted LEAVE was crystal clear that meant exiting the Single Market completely, so REMAIN invented a term to describe a group that doesn't exist?

those who voted Leave knew a vote to leave meant giving up membership of the single market. It was widely mentioned we should go forth and seek trade markets by ourselves.......you cant do that whilst a member of the single market as you have to rely on the EU to arrange trade deals.
The remain side were very clear they considered this a bad idea and criticised the actual ability to pull off our own trade deals once we give up membership of it.

so yes the positions were crystal clear, both sides knew a vote to leave was a vote to give up membership of the single market
i dont know why some people have gone into denial about this

 

[W.C.]

And there was me thinking Soft Brexit was a term used by both sides and the media to describe a Norway or Switzerland-type relationship with the EU...

Hats off to you, I don't know how you can stay with this thread. Just had a quick look at this last page. One 'remoaners' and another 'get over it'. Children I swear. (Ooh look I'm 'sneering'!)

 

[BigGully]

And there was me thinking Soft Brexit was a term used by both sides and the media to describe a Norway or Switzerland-type relationship with the EU...

and would you care to offer up a description of the future EU model, did you ever expect that pre 2004 that Slovakia, Lithuainia and Slovenia for example would become part of the EU and how about the Greek debacle, the unsustainable youth unemployment, historically high immigration numbers, the stagant economy or Merkels shout out to refugees of course you didnt, you wouldnt have an idea what Remain would of meant if we voted Remain whenever the referendum was held, its pie in the sky stuff ..................

 

[Thunder Bolt]

those who voted Leave knew a vote to leave meant giving up membership of the single market. It was widely mentioned we should go forth and seek trade markets by ourselves.......you cant do that whilst a member of the single market as you have to rely on the EU to arrange trade deals.
The remain side were very clear they considered this a bad idea and criticised the actual ability to pull off our own trade deals once we give up membership of it.

so yes the positions were crystal clear, both sides knew a vote to leave was a vote to give up membership of the single market
i dont know why some people have gone into denial about this

That isn't Norway & Switzerland's position, but they have an agreement in place. There was nothing crystal clear about the arrangements on either side.

 

[Gwylan]

The remain camp was very very clear before the vote
they believed voting to leave with the consequences of ending free movement, ending membership of the single market and removing ourselves from the ECJ was a bad bad idea
leavers thought otherwise.

what cant you grasp about this.

You persist in this delusion that because that's what you believe, everyone who voted leave believed the same thing - that's very, very far from the truth and during the parliamentary debate we're going to see some MPs very vocal about different interpretations about what Brexit means

 

[pastafarian]

And there was me thinking Soft Brexit was a term used by both sides and the media to describe a Norway or Switzerland-type relationship with the EU...

some people had hard brexit as triggering article 50 straight away and soft brexit as taking a slow approach
its completely subjective and pointless terminology

 

[Pavilionaire]

Hansard: 9 Jun 2015 : Column 1056 - EU referendum bill - 2nd reading

Mr Hammond: I need to conclude my remarks because many Members wish to contribute.

Few subjects ignite as much passion in the House or indeed in the country as our membership of the European Union. The debate in the run-up to the referendum will be hard fought on both sides of the argument. But whether we favour Britain being in or out, we surely should all be able to agree on the simple principle that the decision about our membership should be taken by the British people, not by Whitehall bureaucrats, certainly not by Brussels Eurocrats; not even by Government Ministers or parliamentarians in this Chamber. The decision must be for the common sense of the British people. That is what we pledged, and that is what we have a mandate to deliver. For too long, the people of Britain have been denied their say. For too long, powers have been handed to Brussels over their heads. For too long, their voice on Europe has not beenheard. This Bill puts that right. It delivers the simple in/out referendum that we promised, and I commend it to the House.

Hilary Benn in response:
My view is that the question is perfectly clear and very simple. I do
not think that anyone who goes into the polling station on the day,
whenever it is, will not understand the consequence of voting either
way.

The problem is when you get LEAVE politicians telling the electorate we can have all the benefits of the Single Market AND control our immigration. At that point the goalposts shift.

 

[Papa Lazarou]

The problem is when you get LEAVE politicians telling the electorate we can have all the benefits of the Single Market AND control our immigration. At that point the goalposts shift.

Because that's pretty much impossible

 

[Pavilionaire]

and would you care to offer up a description of the future EU model, did you ever expect that pre 2004 that Slovakia, Lithuainia and Slovenia for example would become part of the EU and how about the Greek debacle, the unsustainable youth unemployment, historically high immigration numbers, the stagant economy or Merkels shout out to refugees of course you didnt, you wouldnt have an idea what Remain would of meant if we voted Remain whenever the referendum was held, its pie in the sky stuff ..................

Since you ask whether - pre-2004 - I expected Slovakia, Lithuania and Slovenia to join the EU the answer is a resounding YES. In fact, I discussed the issue of "Deepening and Widening" with EU Commissioner Bruce Millan in 1990, at which time the EU were setting out their plans to integrate those former Iron Curtain countries within an enlargened EU Community.

 

[BigGully]

Since you ask whether - pre-2004 - I expected Slovakia, Lithuania and Slovenia to join the EU the answer is a resounding YES. In fact, I discussed the issue of "Deepening and Widening" with EU Commissioner Bruce Millan in 1990, at which time the EU were setting out their plans to integrate those former Iron Curtain countries within an enlargened EU Community.

Good for you, but one out five aint cutting it .......................

 

[pastafarian]

You persist in this delusion that because that's what you believe, everyone who voted leave believed the same thing - that's very, very far from the truth and during the parliamentary debate we're going to see some MPs very vocal about different interpretations about what Brexit means

no, thats not what im saying at all
read again what i have written
everyone had different opinions on all the topics whether you were on the remain side or the leave side. But people knew the clear defined positions and knew the consequences of their vote. This is what you had to weigh up before putting your cross in the box.

it was not a mix and match referendum

if you wanted to end primacy of the ECJ but keep free movement you had to decide whether leaving the ECJ was so important to you that it warranted a vote to leave as it entailed ending free movement as well .......Remain and leave were crystal clear on the options
it was down to us to wrestle with the decision

 

[Pavilionaire]

Good for you, but one out five aint cutting it .......................

Thank Big Gully, I'm glad I got the chance to talk to Bruce Millan about Regional Policy 24 years ago but nothing beats talking to a real expert on EU matters like you.

 

[pb21]

those who voted Leave knew a vote to leave meant giving up membership of the single market.

Eh, no it didn't!?

It meant we might give up membership of the single market.
It meant we might we might be able to go forth and seek trade markets by ourselves.

"...the positions were crystal clear..."

Have you been living in some kind of alternate reality or something?! The Brexit position has never been crystal clear, it still isn't four months on!

 

[East Preston Gull]

Are you saying that everyone who voted LEAVE was crystal clear that meant exiting the Single Market completely, so REMAIN invented a term to describe a group that doesn't exist?

I voted to leave the EU. The rules for membership of the EU is a single market, free movement of people, goods and capital.

I presumed and hoped my decision meant we would leave the EU and it's regulation handcuffs in its entirety.



Sent from my E6653 using Tapatalk

 

[Captain Sensible]

no, thats not what im saying at all
read again what i have written
everyone had different opinions on all the topics whether you were on the remain side or the leave side. But people knew the clear defined positions and knew the consequences of their vote. This is what you had to weigh up before putting your cross in the box.

it was not a mix and match referendum

if you wanted to end primacy of the ECJ but keep free movement you had to decide whether leaving the ECJ was so important to you that it warranted a vote to leave as it entailed ending free movement as well .......Remain and leave were crystal clear on the options
it was down to us to wrestle with the decision

Was a clear defined position of vote leave written on the side of the bus?

 

[BigGully]

Thank Big Gully, I'm glad I got the chance to talk to Bruce Millan about Regional Policy 24 years ago but nothing beats talking to a real expert on EU matters like you.

I really do not mean this with any disrespect, but I cannot get as excited as perhaps you can talking to a guy 24 years ago who is totally irrelevant to todays position, it neither validates your own view or invalidates mine.

Similarly I can then take it he personally failed to forsee problems with Greece, youth unemployent and the migrant crisis and all of its associated consequenses within the EU region.

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

The things that irritate me now about Brexit :

1) The terms Hard and Soft Brexit. In the spectrum of a negotiated exit they are totally meaningless.

2) The insistance that the vote was a binary choice between Single Market Membership + Ending of Free Movement and the opposite. Again the outcome will be negotiated, maybe a hybrid.

3) That now we are leaving the EU the concept of retaining Free Movement as is, is actually sensible. We don't offer it to the US, Chinese citizens won't up sticks and move here on a wim, and we'll be doing deals with those 2 countries.

4) It'll be one-size-fits-all. It won't. We could easily end up with a negotiated outcome that allowed free movement of goods, services, and labour within the banking sector ( example ), but not generally in other sectors.

So, we need a damn good negotiation. Pragmatic and Practical. And to not think so NARROWLY.