Brexit, for once some facts.

Woosh

Trade Member
May 19, 2012
20,350
16,865
Southend on Sea
wooshbikes.co.uk
Or, to look at it another way: Why should that 40% be allowed to spend my taxes on something I don't want?
it's not the 40% who decided to spend the money on brexit, it's our government, supported by our parliament. Our government could have decided to build a consensus or announced Chequers plan before triggering A50. You could lament as much as you like on the fact that the brexit agenda is driven by just 20 hard brexiter conservative MPs led by IDS.
Until Parliament asks us to vote again, the last vote is the legal result.
 

oyster

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 7, 2017
10,422
14,609
West West Wales
it's not the 40% who decided to spend the money on brexit, it's our government, supported by our parliament.
Until Parliament asks us to vote again, the last vote is the legal result.
If tomorrow there were convincing opinion polls that showed, say, 90% against brexit, would it still be right or the government to go ahead with it just because the last referendum was (just) in favour?

The government must take into account the number who are against brexit.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: oldtom

Woosh

Trade Member
May 19, 2012
20,350
16,865
Southend on Sea
wooshbikes.co.uk
If tomorrow there were convincing opinion polls that showed, say, 90% against brexit, would it still be right or the government to go ahead with it just because the last referendum was (just) in favour?
that's the problem, polls are polls, not a replacement for legal votes. The only vote that really counts is the GE, DC made sure that the tory government control when it happens. That vote is now controlled by the brexiters in the conservative party.
As you would say, you ordered the food, now you have to eat it,
 

anotherkiwi

Esteemed Pedelecer
Jan 26, 2015
7,845
5,786
The European Union
Was there anything interesting on page 1750? Unreadable for me...

I wasn't very good in math but "90% would vote the same" means 10% wouldn't. And a 10% shift in opinion on a vote that was carried by a 2% majority is huge. Whatever way that shift of opinion goes.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: flecc

Woosh

Trade Member
May 19, 2012
20,350
16,865
Southend on Sea
wooshbikes.co.uk
More a Doggie Poop Bag!:eek:
you may want to give it to your dog, you still have to pay the bill but better losing some money than ingesting dodgy food.
 

Woosh

Trade Member
May 19, 2012
20,350
16,865
Southend on Sea
wooshbikes.co.uk
Was there anything interesting on page 1750? Unreadable for me...

I wasn't very good in math but "90% would vote the same" means 10% wouldn't. And a 10% shift in opinion on a vote that was carried by a 2% majority is huge. Whatever way that shift of opinion goes.
the difference is that the electorate has been given sufficient time (4 years) to think. If fewer than one in 20 decides for the other 19 then it's still unfinished business as Mr Farage said.
 

oyster

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 7, 2017
10,422
14,609
West West Wales
that's the problem, polls are polls, not a replacement for legal votes. The only vote that really counts is the GE, DC made sure that the tory government control when it happens. That vote is now controlled by the brexiters in the conservative party.
As you would say, you ordered the food, now you have to eat it,
Which is precisely why another referendum seems the obvious thing to do!

Governments have bowed to perceived pressure on all sorts of issues - quite frequently with a relatively low percentage of voters really caring.

I offer the decision NOT to scrap copper coins because of the impression it would have on some voters. Regardless that many other voters would have been perfectly happy, or delighted, by their scrapping.

To know that the PM has read headlines reporting a clear majority against brexit but who ploughs on regardless, takes us into very dangerous territory. It isn't as if she is doing it in the way a leader sometimes has to take unpopular decisions. She would be basing that decision to continue on a mis-perception of the desire of the electorate.
 

oldtom

Esteemed Pedelecer
The government must take into account the number who are against brexit.
In the interest of democracy, given the change of economic circumstances and the enormity of the undertaking involved in leaving the EU, plus the likelihood of foreign businesses with bases in the UK leaving the country with all the ramifications therein, I believe you are right. It is easy to make a case for an extraordinary second referendum to seek a final definitive mandate from the electorate.

Tom
 
  • Agree
Reactions: oyster and flecc

flecc

Member
Oct 25, 2006
53,168
30,586
Saw this elsewhere but as yet, I haven't heard or read any convincing answers:
In reply:

1) Probably by moving facilities and staff into the EU.

2) Similarly, by setting up a representative manufacturing base within the EU, items listing that as source.

3) Mmmmmm, Pork Chops*.

4) We will never be able to.

* With apologies to Homer Simpson.
.
 
  • :D
Reactions: oldtom

oyster

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 7, 2017
10,422
14,609
West West Wales
My pet subject - medicines:

Britain loses medicines contracts as EU body anticipates Brexit

European Medicines Agency ends pharma evaluations work and moves contracts to bloc


Lisa O'Carroll and Hannah Devlin


Sun 2 Sep 2018 15.44 BST Last modified on Sun 2 Sep 2018 15.57 BST


Britain’s leading role in evaluating new medicines for sale to patients across the EU has collapsed with no more work coming from Europe because of Brexit, it has emerged.


The decision by the European Medicines Agency to cut Britain out of its contracts seven months ahead of Brexit is a devastating blow to British pharmaceutical companies already reeling from the loss of the EMA’s HQ in London and with it 900 jobs.


All drugs sold in Europe have to go through a lengthy EMA authorisation process before use by health services, and the Medicines & Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) in Britain has built up a leading role in this work, with 20-30% of all assessments in the EU.


Rest of article here:

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/sep/02/britain-loses-medicines-contracts-as-eu-body-anticipates-brexit

But we knew what we were voting for in the referendum and we are sick of experts.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: flecc

oldtom

Esteemed Pedelecer
But we knew what we were voting for in the referendum and we are sick of experts.
That's why I refer to the pillocks who think Nigel Farage is intelligent and has the interests of the man in the street at heart, 'Brexidiots'.

This whole 'Brexit' fiasco is every bit as racist as the Nazi 'final solution' and equally, the Israeli crimes against humanity being perpetrated against the Palestinian Arabs.

It is most certainly not about economics nor is it about social and strategic bonding with other nations sharing a mutually beneficial marketplace and common aims.

Tom
 
  • Offensive Language
  • Agree
Reactions: daveboy and oyster

oldgroaner

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 15, 2015
23,461
32,613
80
That's why I refer to the pillocks who think Nigel Farage is intelligent and has the interests of the man in the street at heart, 'Brexidiots'.

This whole 'Brexit' fiasco is every bit as racist as the Nazi 'final solution' and equally, the Israeli crimes against humanity being perpetrated against the Palestinian Arabs.

It is most certainly not about economics nor is it about social and strategic bonding with other nations sharing a mutually beneficial marketplace and common aims.

Tom
The real question is, did the Leave Campaign actually believe any of the claims they made before the referendum?
Can it be remotely possible that they were not simply commiting a Political coup d'etat?
Boris for instance evidently expected to use it as a means of gaining the PM position, and looked terrified when the result came out, as he was hoping simply to gain popularity among the disenchanted Public
Gove was clearly singing from the same Hymn sheet.
Farage was being employed as a Scrap yard dog.

None of them have the intellect to be the Mind directing Brexit, admittedly we have had the odd "nut job" offered as scapegoat, rather unconvincibly I might add

Since then we have seen "Wannabee" Champions like the ERG creep into the limelight, trying to score a few "Brownie points" but the real movers and shakers remain in the background.
Murdoch's words "If promises are not kept there will be trouble" on hearing the referendum result makes you ponder

Who promised what
For what reward was the promise made?
And to whom was the promise made.
What does he mean by "breaking it"
And finally what does he mean by "Trouble?

I have always felt that this isn't simply a local plot by the usual halfwit Tory's
There's a heck of a lot more to it than that.

And some very dodgy Foreign Lobby groups much too close the Westminster politicians for the safety of public interests.
Lobby groups need to be investigated and their influence drastically reduced as undemocratic.
"Taking back control" should start with curbing them.
 
Last edited:

oyster

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 7, 2017
10,422
14,609
West West Wales
I'm lost - who funds this think tank?

No-deal Brexit: study warns of severe short-term impact on UK
Economic effect would be ‘chaotic’ with jobs at risk and trade disrupted, say experts

The short-term impact of a no-deal Brexit on Britain’s economy would be “chaotic and severe”, jeopardising jobs and disrupting trade links, warn experts from the thinktank UK in a Changing Europe.

The Brexit secretary, Dominic Raab, has said he believes 80% of the work on completing an exit deal with the EU27 is already done, as negotiations enter their final phase.

But his cabinet colleague Liam Fox recently suggested a no-deal scenario – which would occur if negotiations broke down, or both sides agreed to disagree – was the most likely outcome.

In a 30-page updated assessment of the impact of no deal, the thinktank said on Monday it would mean “the disappearance without replacement of many of the rules underpinning the UK’s economic and regulatory structure”.

Its analysis claimed that in the short term:

  • Food supplies could be temporarily disrupted – the beef trade could collapse, for example, as Britain is heavily reliant on EU imports, and would be forced to apply tariffs, in accordance with World Trade Organisation (WTO) rules.
  • European health insurance cards, which allow British tourists free healthcare in the EU, would be invalid from Brexit day.
  • There would almost certainly have to be a “hardening of the border” between Northern Ireland and the Irish Republic, including some “physical manifestation”.
  • The status of legal contracts and commercial arrangements with EU companies would be unclear, as the UK would become a “third country” overnight.
  • Increased and uncertain processing times for goods at the border would be “nearly certain”, risking queues at Dover and forcing firms to rethink their supply chains.
In the longer term, UK in a Changing Europe’s experts say, the UK would have time to normalise its trading status, and agreements could be struck with the EU27 to tackle many other practical challenges.

“It should not be assumed that the damage, while real, will necessarily be long-lasting,” the report says.

The study plays down the risk of a full-blown financial crisis, saying that while sterling would be likely to decline sharply, and the UK could see its credit rating downgraded, recent experience suggests that would not necessarily prevent the government from borrowing cheaply.

But in the short term, and particularly if talks broke down acrimoniously, making it politically difficult to negotiate measures to mitigate the risks, the disruption would be significant.

Brexiters often suggest the UK could quickly revert to trading under WTO rules, but the report says formalising that status would take time, and meanwhile disruption would be significant.

“The focus on the WTO as a backstop for our ultimate trading arrangements tells us little or nothing about the short-term disruption, both economic and social, from a chaotic no deal,” it says.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/sep/02/no-deal-brexit-study-warns-of-severe-short-term-impact-on-uk
 

Woosh

Trade Member
May 19, 2012
20,350
16,865
Southend on Sea
wooshbikes.co.uk
  • Informative
Reactions: oldgroaner

oldgroaner

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 15, 2015
23,461
32,613
80
HMG.
their website gives a clue.
http://ukandeu.ac.uk
.ac.uk - innit?
UK in a Changing Europe.is funded by the ESRC.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_and_Social_Research_Council
Nah Guv,it only "More Bloody experts and we've 'ad enuf orv 'em ai'nt we?
Weres me Brexit?

Back to reality; when you note how many of these exotic think tanks have been spawned over the years, it's remarkable that none of them managed to come up with any plans for the situation Brexit faced the Government with.

The most useful of which would have been how to get away with talking the public out of it!

Talk about a total waste of money
Jobs for the Boys and Girls, regardless of value for money.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: oyster

Woosh

Trade Member
May 19, 2012
20,350
16,865
Southend on Sea
wooshbikes.co.uk
Back to reality; when you note how many of these exotic think tanks have been spawned over the years, it's remarkable that none of them managed to come up with any plans for the situation Brexit faced the Government with.
brexit is brexit. That's the plan.
what other plan are you talking about? we don't need any other plan.
Neither the EU nor the UK government want a plan. Both sides set up enough road blocks to stop negotiation and the ROI is complicit in this.
 

Advertisers