[Politics] Brexit

[jimhigham]

I understood it perfectly thanks, by having remain on that ballot you split the leave vote v remain......lets no forget we have already decided NOT to remain, but if you insist on ignoring that aspect lets split the remain vote with those who are not massive fans of the EU but insist we should however stay in and reform it to suit what we like (quite a few on here) and those that think the EU is wonderful and we should fully embrace it.......lets have how should we remain as two options as well.
Alternatively lets just let parliament and the executive do what they are supposed to be doing and sort out delivering the decision to leave as they are supposed to do and trying to do, but having difficulty

OK. In the spirit of being nice, I am going to politely acknowledge that we disagree on this matter and leave it there. Good day to you and “up the Albion”.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

There are NO WTO rules that require a member government to secure their border.

I didn't say that.


https://www.channel4.com/news/factc...the-options-for-the-irish-border-after-brexit

 

[hans kraay fan club]

Well I never, here's one. The connection between fox hunting and No Deal? Love to hear this one.........

Good grief. Really? This really, really isn't hard.

1. dingodan goes on (and on and on and on and on) about how an Member of Parliament MUST act in line with the wishes of his constituents.
2. Thirty people explain that it doesn't work like that - that they have to make judgement calls of their own.
3. dan repeats himself fourteen more times (NOT moaning though - only stating facts) that they MUST follow their constituents wishes.
4. It is pointed out to him that MPs represent not just those that voted for them, but those that voted against them, and indeed those that never voted at all. MPs represent all of them, and need to act in the best interests of the whole.
5. Herr T asks dan, how, according to his narrow view, an MP can represent two constituents with opposite wishes.
6. Mellotron then uses the (deliberately ridiculous) EXAMPLE of fox hunting, to illustrate to dan, that his MP is not 'representing him' (and so its really, really unfair, and undemocratic, and worth a good CRY).

Any help?

 

[pb21]

So, in summary, Russia under 'no deal' can export fuel to Britain at zero import rate instead of the 4.7% they currently pay.

Any Fuel that Britain exports to the EU after 'no deal' will be subject to an import rate of 4.7% instead of the zero import rate we currently pay.

I can't see any issues with that, but apparently the British fuel industry thinks differently

тройной для всех

 

[pastafarian]

Yes those are the facts of a No Deal withdrawal on one industry.

I'm more curious as to your opinion on such a deal, specifically if there's a plus side to such an arrangement.
A plus side to an industry that directly employs 120.000 people and generates £8.7bn.

.

Well a plus side would be where previously imports were at 4.7% they would now be cheaper because the import rate would be 0%.
Would i trust these savings to passed on to the consumer, it would be nice to think they would wouldnt it. Would certainly be an extra tool in the armoury of those who lobby for the consumer to get a better deal.

 

[Lever]

OK. In the spirit of being nice, I am going to politely acknowledge that we disagree on this matter and leave it there. Good day to you and “up the Albion”.

You did your best.

 

[Stat Brother]

Well a plus side would be where previously imports were at 4.7% they would now be cheaper because the import rate would be 0%.
Would i trust these savings to passed on to the consumer, it would be nice to think they would wouldnt it. Would certainly be an extra tool in the armoury of those who lobby for the consumer to get a better deal.

Possible short term consumer gain v a currently stable profitable industry.

 

[Simster]

If you want to nod that Leave has already won Remain does not need to be included in a ballot at all. We have already voted NOT to remain.
You can skip straight to question two and ask how should we leave.

You've made your position on a referendum very clear, but I'm not arguing that am I. I'm simply correcting you by pointing out that Jim's solution does not split the leave vote. Are you incapable of just admitting you are wrong?





Of course you are. That's why you're still adamant a no deal Brexit was what people voted for.

 

[Is it PotG?]

Good grief. Really? This really, really isn't hard.

1. dingodan goes on (and on and on and on and on) about how an Member of Parliament MUST act in line with the wishes of his constituents.
2. Thirty people explain that it doesn't work like that - that they have to make judgement calls of their own.
3. dan repeats himself fourteen more times (NOT moaning though - only stating facts) that they MUST follow their constituents wishes.
4. It is pointed out to him that MPs represent not just those that voted for them, but those that voted against them, and indeed those that never voted at all. MPs represent all of them, and need to act in the best interests of the whole.
5. Herr T asks dan, how, according to his narrow view, an MP can represent two constituents with opposite wishes.
6. Mellotron then uses the (deliberately ridiculous) EXAMPLE of fox hunting, to illustrate to dan, that his MP is not 'representing him' (and so its really, really unfair, and undemocratic, and worth a good CRY).

Any help?

Brilliant. Thanks. There was I applying logic.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

I think we need to agree some kind of fair distribution of labour on this and organize a 'take turns to explain how democracy works to [MENTION=18559]dingodan[/MENTION]' system.

What you are all saying about "how democracy works", is infact how it doesn't work.

In every sense. The proof is in the pudding. Your way is the current way being effected.

It won't "work" this way, because trust is gone.

A no-deal Brexit may have had some negative consequences for this country.

A no-trust democracy will ultimately take us somewhere much worse when all is said and done.

[MENTION=33872]highflyer[/MENTION]. I’m in. Can you put me down for Wednesdays and Thursdays please. I will be on vacation late October though.

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

So, in summary, Russia under 'no deal' can export fuel to Britain at zero import rate instead of the 4.7% they currently pay.

Any Fuel that Britain exports to the EU after 'no deal' will be subject to an import rate of 4.7% instead of the zero import rate we currently pay.

I can't see any issues with that, but apparently the British fuel industry thinks differently

The British people have had enough of exports

 

[Dick Head]

Switzerland has a hard border with France though.

And with Austria, Italy and Germany?

Switzerland also has a border with Liechtenstein who they invaded in 2007.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/mar/02/markoliver

 

[pastafarian]

I didn't say that.


https://www.channel4.com/news/factc...the-options-for-the-irish-border-after-brexit

You said "WTO rules also means a hard border, as I understand it."
WTO rules does not always mean a hard border.There are NO WTO rules that require a member government to secure their border.

 

[BBassic]

Just checking in, everyone still losing their shit in here?

Yeah? Ok, cool.

 

[Dick Head]

Just checking in, everyone still losing their shit in here?

Yeah? Ok, cool.

I'm not losing my shit! Who do you think you are, you ****ing ****? Coming on here... *fume*

 

[hans kraay fan club]

The British people have had enough of exports

Under-rated post

 

[Seaber]

The government will use the FTPA again to try to get their early election, meaning they need two thirds of MP's to back it. They must reckon they can get Labour to back it over the weekend.

Not sure how it can be voted on again after I was rejected yesterday and Monday will count as the same session of parliament, but there you go.

 

[pastafarian]

You've made your position on a referendum very clear, but I'm not arguing that am I. I'm simply correcting you by pointing out that Jim's solution does not split the leave vote. Are you incapable of just admitting you are wrong?





Of course you are. That's why you're still adamant a no deal Brexit was what people voted for.

Where have i said the people( as a whole) voted for a no deal brexit,

 

[Notters]

You've made your position on a referendum very clear, but I'm not arguing that am I. I'm simply correcting you by pointing out that Jim's solution does not split the leave vote. Are you incapable of just admitting you are wrong?

It does, though I think it's massively over complicated.

I would have Leave/Remain as the first question

and an if we do leave, which of these options would you prefer: with a full customs union, no deal, and something in between as the options.

Of course as the remainers would have their say, I would expect the customs union to win. And I think most people from both sides would agree that a customs union would be worse than our current arrangement, as we'd have less say.

Which is why I think the government would be justified to revoke article 50 and remain.

 

[oneillco]

Under-rated post

Ha! You're right - very good. I hadn't seen that before; hat's off to Blue Valkyrie...