Brexit, for once some facts.

Danidl

Esteemed Pedelecer
Sep 29, 2016
8,611
12,256
73
Ireland
But who does that job for NI? Non-EU inspectors or EU inspectors working in the UK. Either seems a questionable choice with possible difficulties.
Not the EU or certainly my concern. Non EU inspectors located in NI food processors , can help fast track foodstuff from NI to the rest of the UK. . My concern is only that food stuff originating in NI or RoI is to EU quality standards,..which at present it is,and we in the South can safely eat it and send it on to our EU colleagues. If NI producers succumb to the quick buck mentality and start using dubious raw material or feedstock then we call halt...and we are their biggest customer...at least in the processing not end customer phase.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: robdon

oyster

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 7, 2017
10,422
14,609
West West Wales
Not the EU or certainly my concern. Non EU inspectors located in NI food processors , can help fast track foodstuff from NI to the rest of the UK. . My concern is only that food stuff originating in NI or RoI is to EU quality standards,..which at present it is,and we in the South can safely eat it and send it on to our EU colleagues. If NI producers succumb to the quick buck mentality and start using dubious raw material or feedstock then we call halt...and we are their biggest customer...at least in the processing not end customer phase.
So would you trust non-EU inspectors doing the job in NI and exporting to and through RoI?
 
  • Agree
Reactions: robdon

Fingers

Esteemed Pedelecer
Feb 9, 2016
3,373
1,552
46
Read this
https://infacts.org/mythbusts/voters-werent-conned-1975-referendum/
and from Hansard
"
Mrs. Margaret Thatcher (Finchley)
Yesterday the Prime Minister opened the fourth major debate in 14 years on Britain's membership of the EEC. On each of the first three occasions the Prime Minister began the day as an enthusiastic advocate of the cause that his Government were proposing. This time the Prime Minister chose to open with a very low-key speech leaving out most of the broader issues or dwelling on them only briefly.

We are aware of the right hon. Gentleman's problems. If we were not aware of them yesterday, we have been made aware of them in Question Time today. At present he has to rely more on his political opponents than on his alleged political friends to secure the decision which he considers right for Britain.

It has been suggested in some quarters that my party might find it tempting to withdraw support in order to embarrass the Prime Minister. But we have voted consistently for Britain in Europe by a large majority and would not think of performing W-turns on this issue.

In 1961, when the right hon. Harold Macmillan first came to the House with the idea that we should make an application to the Common Market for membership, the Labour Party was lukewarm in the debate. Indeed, it did not vote upon the main question. On that occasion the Conservative and Liberal Parties voted 313 for the application. There were only five votes against, of which one was Conservative.

In 1967, when the Prime Minister made his application, 488 hon. Members voted for the application, and only 62 against, including 26 Conservatives.

1022In 1971, on the result of the application, 356 hon. Members voted for it and 244 against, which included some of ours.

Throughout, our record has been consistently that the vast majority of the Conservative Party have voted for the European idea in support of making applications, even when some of the right hon. Gentleman's party did not vote in support of the first application, and again we have supported the idea of Britain in the European Community.

The Prime Minister dealt mainly with the renegotiations and the Labour Party manifesto of 1974. I do not believe that this issue will be decided on those matters. The results set out in the White Paper are difficult to assess and very complicated. I believe that the matter will be decided on the broader issues associated with membership, and it is this argument which I propose to deploy today. I will deal, first, with the case for being in the Common Market, then the case for staying in, and finally the alternatives.

First, the case for being in the Common Market. I believe, with a number of hon. Members who spoke yesterday, that the paramount case for being in is the political case for peace and security. It is taken for granted now that Western Europe, which has been the centre of troubles within our lifetime, will not embark again upon its own destruction. I think that we should not too readily take that for granted but for the tremendous efforts and constructive purpose which have led to those nations working together in the Common Market.

One of the measures of the success of the Community that we now take for granted is essentially security. I think that security is a matter not only of defence but of working together in peacetime on economic issues which concern us and of working closely together on trade, work and other social matters which affect all our peoples. The more closely we work together in that way, the better our security will be from the viewpoint of the future of our children.

I believe that people today recognise two quite different needs. First, there is the need to be part of some smaller group to which we can belong and feel and know we belong. We see that daily in a certain amount of revulsion against 1023size. [Interruption] I hear sounds coming from a certain direction. The country with perhaps the greatest devolution of power—Germany—is one of the most active members of the Common Market. So there is this need which we must all recognise and take into account in our policies and in the institutions which we fashion.

The second need is the knowledge that it is only when we get and work together that we can achieve the larger objectives which we arc seeking to achieve. It seems to me that the prospect of the Common Market fulfils both those needs —the need to identify with one's own nation and country and the need to work together as a community and an alliance of nations for the well-being and betterment of mankind.

..........................................

Just a trading arrangement eh?

Nowhere does it state the intention is to become a state of the EU.

It is a very soft way of saying closer ties for better security. It does not suggest that law will ultimately be made in made Brussels and that we will not have the right to choose who we trade with.

This is why people felt duped and overwhelmingly changed their minds when finally asked again.
 

Woosh

Trade Member
May 19, 2012
20,387
16,884
Southend on Sea
wooshbikes.co.uk
This is why people felt duped and overwhelmingly changed their minds when finally asked again
could it be that those who voted for brexit thought that the USA is the real guarantor for peace and security rather than the EU?
 
  • Agree
Reactions: robdon

Fingers

Esteemed Pedelecer
Feb 9, 2016
3,373
1,552
46
could it be that those who voted for brexit thought that the USA is the real guarantor for peace and security rather than the EU?

I can't speak for them all but my understanding is the NATO Alliance is for the security from the world ~(Russia, Iran, China, Vietnam ) being a member of the EU was more to stop Europe squabbling amongst themselves.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: robdon

oyster

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 7, 2017
10,422
14,609
West West Wales
The ironies ripple round this "story"...

Jay Aston Colquhounis, a former member of Eurovision-winning group Bucks Fizz, has been selected as a parliamentary candidate for the Brexit Party.
 
  • :D
Reactions: flecc

Danidl

Esteemed Pedelecer
Sep 29, 2016
8,611
12,256
73
Ireland
Not
So would you trust non-EU inspectors doing the job in NI and exporting to and through RoI?
Not What I said. Provided the NI continue to remain in the same compliant regime as present, we would trust them to produce food which is acceptable to the RoI ,and we in the RoI would then be responsible for its onward transmission to the EU. Since NI is a generator of food rather than an importer, we would continue to trust them. It would be in their interest to deal straight,as they need RoI facilities to part process. Abattoirs located in NI would need to allow Irish and therefore EU inspectors in order to retain their EU exporting privileges. In this they would be little different than abattoirs located in the RoI which have quality audits done in order to retain their EU certificates.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: robdon

Woosh

Trade Member
May 19, 2012
20,387
16,884
Southend on Sea
wooshbikes.co.uk
I can't speak for them all but my understanding is the NATO Alliance is for the security from the world ~(Russia, Iran, China, Vietnam ) being a member of the EU was more to stop Europe squabbling amongst themselves.
back in the late 60s and even early 70s, we lived in fear of WW3 and the USSR.
Security was then a far bigger issue than now. I still remember bits of that time.
How time has changed. People are now more worried about Chloe's story in Holby City or how many women Prince Andrew had slept with.
 

oldgroaner

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 15, 2015
23,461
32,613
80
Nowhere does it state the intention is to become a state of the EU.

It is a very soft way of saying closer ties for better security. It does not suggest that law will ultimately be made in made Brussels and that we will not have the right to choose who we trade with.

This is why people felt duped and overwhelmingly changed their minds when finally asked again.
It has been common knowledge of the move towards more integration and Thatcher applauded that.
We have been making laws in Brussels for years, have you forgotten ?
And as a member we are a state of the EU
The fact is our government had an agreement rejecting ever closer union for the EU
so what is your problem? Do you think we are too weak to not be drawn in against our will?

The answer isn't that is it, what you fear is that the idea becomes popular among our public and they end up voting for it.
Fear is what is motivating your position, nothing more, nothing less.
The simple fact is that in the end we will be a part of the process, we simply have no viable alternative that won't work to undermine our future.
Too small to be viable.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: robdon and oyster

oyster

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 7, 2017
10,422
14,609
West West Wales
could it be that those who voted for brexit thought that the USA is the real guarantor for peace and security rather than the EU?

Not

Not What I said. Provided the NI continue to remain in the same compliant regime as present, we would trust them to produce food which is acceptable to the RoI ,and we in the RoI would then be responsible for its onward transmission to the EU. Since NI is a generator of food rather than an importer, we would continue to trust them. It would be in their interest to deal straight,as they need RoI facilities to part process. Abattoirs located in NI would need to allow Irish and therefore EU inspectors in order to retain their EU exporting privileges. In this they would be little different than abattoirs located in the RoI which have quality audits done in order to retain their EU certificates.
From your point of view, I can see that. I cannot see the UK government accepting inspection by EU inspectors. We (at least NI) would yet again remain under the control of the EU and surely they would be operating with the ultimate authority of the ECJ?
 
  • Agree
Reactions: robdon

oldgroaner

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 15, 2015
23,461
32,613
80

oyster

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 7, 2017
10,422
14,609
West West Wales
Just remind me, where in the referendum campaign did anyone mention leaving Euratom?

(Seems to have been forgotten in amongst all the rest.)
 

Woosh

Trade Member
May 19, 2012
20,387
16,884
Southend on Sea
wooshbikes.co.uk
Rather a concise description of our situation at moment, surprisingly in DM..
Dominic Sandbook:
"The plot, some of you might remember, involves a villain who proposes to introduce a hallucinogenic drug into Gotham City’s water supply.
The drug in question is a ‘fear gas’, which causes you to see what you most dread.
Once released, it will induce mass hysteria in Gotham’s population, plunging the city into anarchic violence. Thank goodness, then, that Batman is on hand to save the day!
Alas, not even the most dashing superhero can save Britain. For our own version of the hallucinogenic drug has been active for the past three years, driving some people completely mad. Its name, of course, is Brexit.
There are victims on all sides, but by far the saddest cases are those unreconstructed Remainers so inflamed by hysterical disappointment that they have completely lost touch with reality.
The issues were clearly and fully aired, both sides had considerable airtime, and in the end the British people had their say.
That should have been that. For my part, I voted Remain and am a democrat.
But more than three years after the vote, many supposedly intelligent people are still incapable of accepting it.
So here we are, weeks from leaving the EU, and still a rag-tag gang of disaffected MPs are scouring the parliamentary rulebooks, determined to find a way of extending the deadline — yet again."

---

I think that MPs follow the polls to a large extend, and polls say that those who can now vote but did not vote in 2016 would more likely to vote for remain.
The 'will of the people' seems to have shifted as brexit begins to crystalise, narrowing the options to just 3: WTO, TM's deal or remain. Soon, it will be narrowed again down to just 2, WTO or remain.
Only 26% of voters support WTO. Not a single constituency has WTO brexiters as majority.
What would you do if your job as an MP to make the call for all the people?
 
  • Like
Reactions: flecc

Danidl

Esteemed Pedelecer
Sep 29, 2016
8,611
12,256
73
Ireland
From your point of view, I can see that. I cannot see the UK government accepting inspection by EU inspectors. We (at least NI) would yet again remain under the control of the EU and surely they would be operating with the ultimate authority of the ECJ?
Can you see it has nothing to do with the UK Government?. A Dairy or Abattoir located in NI that wants to have the privilege of selling produce into the EU, signs up and accepts QA inspection by Irish inspectors. Its a private contract. Just as at present we have Halal inspectors visiting ,from God knows where,ensuring that mutton destined for Middle East markets slaughtered in Co. Mayo is processed in the "right way". The Irish State would have brokered and facilitated this arrangement,but have no responsibility for its execution. If the abattoir cheated, then standard fraud charges would be brought at the local court. If the EU changes its regulations, then a new contract is signed, if that company wants to retain its Privileges.

On the other hand, A biscuit factory in Craigavon ,NI who want to get their produce quickly onto the shelves in Manchester, have their produce sealed into containers by UK Customs ,people, at the factory to ensure that those pesky Irish are not sneaking in Dutch biscuits. Then when the container gets to the Belfast ferry port,it is fast tracked onto the Liverpool ferry. The biscuits from Dublin, when they arrive at the Ferry will be viewed as standard third world imports and whatever duty to be paid must be done.

What must be realised is that NI is a special case. All citizens there are ENTITLED under GFA to be recognised as Irish and therefore EU citizens, even if the territory is not in the EU. , So the EU can cut some slack, without it creating a precedent. It is already a special phyto sanitary zone linked to the RoI.
 

oldgroaner

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 15, 2015
23,461
32,613
80
Dominic Sandbook:
"The plot, some of you might remember, involves a villain who proposes to introduce a hallucinogenic drug into Gotham City’s water supply.
The drug in question is a ‘fear gas’, which causes you to see what you most dread.
Once released, it will induce mass hysteria in Gotham’s population, plunging the city into anarchic violence. Thank goodness, then, that Batman is on hand to save the day!
Alas, not even the most dashing superhero can save Britain. For our own version of the hallucinogenic drug has been active for the past three years, driving some people completely mad. Its name, of course, is Brexit.
There are victims on all sides, but by far the saddest cases are those unreconstructed Remainers so inflamed by hysterical disappointment that they have completely lost touch with reality.
The issues were clearly and fully aired, both sides had considerable airtime, and in the end the British people had their say.
That should have been that. For my part, I voted Remain and am a democrat.
But more than three years after the vote, many supposedly intelligent people are still incapable of accepting it.
So here we are, weeks from leaving the EU, and still a rag-tag gang of disaffected MPs are scouring the parliamentary rulebooks, determined to find a way of extending the deadline — yet again."

---

I think that MPs follow the polls to a large extend, and polls say that those who can now vote but did not vote in 2016 would more likely to vote for remain.
The 'will of the people' seems to have shifted as brexit begins to crystalise, narrowing the options to just 3: WTO, TM's deal or remain. Soon, it will be narrowed again down to just 2, WTO or remain.
Only 26% of voters support WTO. Not a single constituency has WTO brexiters as majority.
What would you do if your job as an MP to make the call for all the people?
Make the worst possible decision as usual? ;)
Seriously the question gets down to a choice of three

Short term problems is Brexit is cancelled
Long term ones if it isn't
Organising another referendum so the publc can take the blame away from Mp's, no matter what the decisions is.

If I was Boris (good grief imagine that) I would come up with Mays Deal by another name and put it to a referendum, relying on the stupidity of the voters to put me into power after this referendum in a General Election.

Avoid personal responsibility, easily the best answer for a coward like him
 
Last edited:

Woosh

Trade Member
May 19, 2012
20,387
16,884
Southend on Sea
wooshbikes.co.uk
Make the worst possible decision as usual? ;)
Seriously the question gets down to a choice of three

Short term problems is Brexit is cancelled
Long term ones if it isn't
Organising another referendum so the publc can take the blame away from Mp's, no matter what the decisions is.

If I was Boris (good grief imagine that) I would come up with Mays Deal by another name and put it to a referendum, relying on the stupidity of the voters to put me into power after this referendum in a General Election.

Avoid personal responsibility, easily the best answer for a coward like him
Bojo can't have TM's deal, he will face the same rejection by the ERG, they don't want a transition period.

It's no deal or no brexit, unless JC becomes PM.
 

Advertisers