Brexit, for once some facts.

[Danidl]

So, when the people, in a Referendum, with a clear question, for which the majority, say jump to the Politicians. They don't jump. Instead they then say how high - really? Reminds me of the cup of tea sketch, With sugar, without sugar, white or black, milk before or milk after, with a biscuit and on it goes... until someone has had enough.

Peter had the will of the people been clearly expressed, it is likely that the amount of angst would have been less. Likewise had the responses by the government been more measured, or indeed even measured , a similar response might have ensued. But it was neither. The majority for leave was at the system noise level, and the cumulative responses from the government was chaotic. A 2% margin really means 1% more of people voted leave than stay. So for anyone to make claims of the will of the people for either side is utterly ridiculous and dishonest.
For something as fundamental as ones relationship with all of Europe, would you not have thought that a more definitive and decisive separation would have been needed?
That having been said, this is not a topic where one should be a good sport and move along. What is at stake is the future of a population of some 60 millions. The arguements advanced in favour of leaving lack economic credibility, they are likely to damage British subjects fundamental rights which are currently guaranteed by the ECJ under a variety of eu regulations and protocols and in the short term at least, cause disruption to travel, finance, science, engineering, energy markets, food supplies etc . . We know this because a number of key players have said so, and a number of your financial companies are advancing plans to move operations to within European community.
Even worse, your government is at sixes and sevens since after the election. There cannot be a coherent EU response when there are incoherent UK proposals.
The news from Brussels today about limited progress is symptomatic. The EU got its ducks in a row, it had 27 ducks so having got them aligned, and having told the UK how it was going to proceed, surprise surprise, they kept to that gameplan. The UK strategy, if it could be called that, was to try and divide and separate. But as the UK is a single entity it could have had more flexibility,,when you have 27 entities the flexibility is limited.
Zatlan asked what do the remainers want and the answer simply is the status quo ante. A nicely worded letter from your government, a decision to repeal the great repeal act might just about do it...

 

[Woosh]

A 2% margin really means 1% more of people voted leave than stay. So for anyone to make claims of the will of the people for either side is utterly ridiculous and dishonest.

however small the winning margin was, it was subjected to parliament's interpretation. As our parliament is still dominated by the conservative party which favours brexit, so the brexiters won the referendum.
what is dishonest is the whip system in parliament.

 

[oldtom]

That summation of the progress, or lack thereof, from 'Danidl' in post #21522 is spot-on in my opinion.

If we continue with this charade and ultimately crash out of the EU, we will survive because we are British and we'll make the best of things. However, no-one should be under any illusion that we will somehow forge, short-term or long-term, any new relationships on trade, or indeed any matters of relevance such as security, military allegiance, the ability to attract staff for our essential needs and all the other things that provide the lifeblood of a successful nation.

Between now and 2019, this whole project needs to be re-thought and unless things change dramatically for the better in the Brussels talks, our major politicians should show some courage and move to rescind the A50 provisions.

Tom

 

[shemozzle999]

That summation of the progress, or lack thereof, from 'Danidl' in post #21522 is spot-on in my opinion.
Tom

Looks like the ducks are starting to paddle furiously

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-41604675

 

[flecc]

Looks like the ducks are starting to paddle furiously

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-41604675

To me that reads like no change, they'll talk trade if we agree more payment and concede on the citizen's rights issue.
.

 

[PeterL]

The thought of rescinding A50 would be an even bigger act of folly.

Whilst I can understand the reasons for people wanting the comfort of knowing where they are and essentially maintaining the status quo, that’s not for everyone. In fact, we already know from this thread that it’s not for the liberals either who are constantly reminding us about the nasty tories and the privileged elite.

Some might say they don’t want change but it’s in the nature of us all, or at least those of us that want to improve our lot. Just about every successful business was started by an entrepreneur and if ever there was a case of faith in one’s own ability to succeed, going into business on your own probably tops the lot. Not all succeed but those that do end up shaping our country and some go even further and shape our world.

The EU project is counter to this. It is completely top-down and wants to control just about every aspect of our life.

Not for the majority of our country and not for me I’m afraid, maybe when I’m in my dotage I will want to be mollycoddled but not when I can still think for myself. I want the entrepreneurs of my country to be let loose, trade with the world, with the freedoms that requires. The EU is protectionist by nature and does little, if anything, to improve the lot of, say, Africa. Meanwhile China is moving in big-time and arguably asset stripping the bits that we missed, but in return will probably turn it into the place producing the food that they need.

Meanwhile the EU just gets bigger and more controlling and eventually it will implode as the people simply won’t want any more of it. We already have such signs with Greece, Italy, Portugal and Spain deeply in debt and high unemployment.

That said, I totally agree that when it comes to the big-ticket items in life, such as Defence; Science; Medicines and Counter-terrorism then cooperation is the key. Cooperation not controls.

I think we were warned at the very start, that negotiations would be noisy. Certainly, in public, very noisy and that has always been the way with the EU as I remember. In this case we have the added issue of the EU not wishing others to follow our lead so even if we ended up with the EU paying us to go I’m fairly sure it wouldn’t read that way in Sorrento.

 

[PeterL]

however small the winning margin was, it was subjected to parliament's interpretation. As our parliament is still dominated by the conservative party which favours brexit, so the brexiters won the referendum.
what is dishonest is the whip system in parliament.

As I recall the two main parties were as one at the time, in that BREXIT meant BREXIT.

 

[KTM Bike Industries UK]

As I recall the two main parties were as one at the time, in that BREXIT meant BREXIT.

lol, and both also equally clear that neither of them have a clue what Brexit actually means.

 

[PeterL]

lol, and both also equally clear that neither of them have a clue what Brexit actually means.

but you did? Better still, do you?

 

[KTM Bike Industries UK]

but you did? Better still, do you?

nope... I don't have a clue. Which is why I voted against it. It seemed like everyone who was for it had a different idea of what it was, and I didn't think any of them were particularly realistic or positive.

if "leave" can't agree what they want, how can they possible even unite the 52% to get what they want?

All Labour have to do is let the Conservates destroy themselves with this mess, split the leave vote back between Conservative / UKIP / Labour and they'll be in power. But do they have a better solution? Not that I can see.

 

[PeterL]

nope... I don't have a clue. Which is why I voted against it. It seemed like everyone who was for it had a different idea of what it was, and I didn't think any of them were particularly realistic or positive.

if "leave" can't agree what they want, how can they possible even unite the 52% to get what they want?

All Labour have to do is let the Conservates destroy themselves with this mess, split the leave vote back between Conservative / UKIP / Labour and they'll be in power. But do they have a better solution? Not that I can see.

Very good, hopefully not the outcome any more than a so-called consensus government would be the answer. Going off piste there but OG will know what I mean.

if "leave" can't agree what they want, how can they possible even unite the 52% to get what they want?.

Remember this is a negotiation with continual public comment and by its very nature you will get differing stories - stops people concentrating on the 'real' thing going on behind closed doors.

I look forward to reading the book.

 

[Kudoscycles]

The argument between Bombardier and Boeing gives us a foresight of trade life for the UK and the rest of the world,post Brexit.
Trump has put on a 300% tariff onto Bombardier sales into the US,we are told that Boeing is concerned about Bombardiers new C class plane taking a big market share.
It would be logical that the UK should put a similar tariff on Boeing products into the UK but we don't have any power,our purchases are relatively small,we don't want to upset the US and Boeing employ 17,000 people in the UK. But as part of the EU we would have a lot more clout against the US/Boeing.....Ryanair buys 7 new 737-800 Boeing planes every month,that is their biggest contract and Boeing couldn't afford to lose it,especially when the new cheap Chinese built plane,by Comac, is a direct competitor to the 737-800. As an aside I wonder whether the EU will put anti dumping tariffs on Comac if it looks like that plane hurts Airbus sales.
So much for May's wish to have a free trade world.
KudosDave

 

[Kudoscycles]

The Guardian is suggesting that May is a Remainers champion and is closer to Hammond than rhetoric would suggest.
She didn't slap Hammond down when he said he wasn't going to spend money to prepare for a 'no deal' scenario.
She has been forced to delay her repeal bill because 7 amendments are likely to be voted in,including votes by Tory rebels. In particular Euratom may be voted OK to stay,which means May having to accept control by the ECJ.
Junker is so shallow,Barnier talks about 'progress not being sufficient'....Junker just wants our money.
KudosDave

 

[PeterL]

The argument between Bombardier and Boeing gives us a foresight of trade life for the UK and the rest of the world,post Brexit.
Trump has put on a 300% tariff onto Bombardier sales into the US,we are told that Boeing is concerned about Bombardiers new C class plane taking a big market share.
It would be logical that the UK should put a similar tariff on Boeing products into the UK but we don't have any power,our purchases are relatively small,we don't want to upset the US and Boeing employ 17,000 people in the UK. But as part of the EU we would have a lot more clout against the US/Boeing.....Ryanair buys 7 new 737-800 Boeing planes every month,that is their biggest contract and Boeing couldn't afford to lose it,especially when the new cheap Chinese built plane,by Comac, is a direct competitor to the 737-800. As an aside I wonder whether the EU will put anti dumping tariffs on Comac if it looks like that plane hurts Airbus sales.
So much for May's wish to have a free trade world.
KudosDave

Surely, this needs to be allowed to pan out? There is a lot at stake and certainly, on the surface, there does appear to be a case of 'unfair' financial support for Bombardier. Boeing/USA and Airbus are far from innocents here and it might be a good thing all round to get this whole thing out in the open, if possible. As you point out Boeing employ 17,000 workers in the country. As for the EU clout bit, what use would a trade war be, certainly not to UKplc.

 

[Danidl]

The thought of rescinding A50 would be an even bigger act of folly.

Whilst I can understand the reasons for people wanting the comfort of knowing where they are and essentially maintaining the status quo, that’s not for everyone. In fact, we already know from this thread that it’s not for the liberals either who are constantly reminding us about the nasty tories and the privileged elite.

Some might say they don’t want change but it’s in the nature of us all, or at least those of us that want to improve our lot. Just about every successful business was started by an entrepreneur and if ever there was a case of faith in one’s own ability to succeed, going into business on your own probably tops the lot. Not all succeed but those that do end up shaping our country and some go even further and shape our world.

The EU project is counter to this. It is completely top-down and wants to control just about every aspect of our life.

Not for the majority of our country and not for me I’m afraid, maybe when I’m in my dotage I will want to be mollycoddled but not when I can still think for myself. I want the entrepreneurs of my country to be let loose, trade with the world, with the freedoms that requires. The EU is protectionist by nature and does little, if anything, to improve the lot of, say, Africa. Meanwhile China is moving in big-time and arguably asset stripping the bits that we missed, but in return will probably turn it into the place producing the food that they need.

Meanwhile the EU just gets bigger and more controlling and eventually it will implode as the people simply won’t want any more of it. We already have such signs with Greece, Italy, Portugal and Spain deeply in debt and high unemployment.

That said, I totally agree that when it comes to the big-ticket items in life, such as Defence; Science; Medicines and Counter-terrorism then cooperation is the key. Cooperation not controls.

I think we were warned at the very start, that negotiations would be noisy. Certainly, in public, very noisy and that has always been the way with the EU as I remember. In this case we have the added issue of the EU not wishing others to follow our lead so even if we ended up with the EU paying us to go I’m fairly sure it wouldn’t read that way in Sorrento.

Oh dear here we go again.
Recinding article 50 an act of folly?. Or trying to climb out of a hole instead of digging deeper. There was a lovely phrase in that brilliant drama just ended on BBC Broken..". Guilt is when you know you have done wrong. Shame is when others know. You can live with shame."
Is it the shame of admitting the act of folly that would prevent you and others from recinding it. ?Or is it truly your belief that Brexit was an act of bravery?
I also want change and I also want progress as well. What actions undertaken by the UK government subsequent to the poll of eighteen months ago indicate progress?
You assert that the EU is top down.... Implying a democratic deficit. Quite the contrary. Your government appointed your Commissioner, which is the equivalent of a minister. Just like your parliament was supposed to elect your prime minister. Your prime minister then selected your ministers... So in that regard the EU was at least as democratic. Your population elected your MEPs, by direct elections, just as the population of Ireland and Denmark elected theirs. Of course since the UK is bigger than Ireland, it gets to elect more. MEPs
The MEPs then select the President of the Commission, who in turn assigns portfolios to the Commissioners. , Just as any prime minister does. So where is the deficit?. There is an undercurrent in your posting of an unelected elite dictating. The fact is they are not unelected, just not all elected by British people.
The EU is protectionist by nature? Of course it is. The most fundamental reason for people, towns,cities, countries and now federations of states to make alliances, is mutual protection. Without it you get piracy, pillage etc. With it you have the potential for peace and growth. What is absolutely unique about the EU is that it has succeeded in growing without conquest, or having a standing army , by mutually beneficial social and economic ties between its members.
Contrast the current responses by the EU to those named countries, in difficulty, and that being flagged for Porto Rico.
After all the so called negotiations between the EU and the UK, can you identify any agreed position?.

 

[flecc]

there does appear to be a case of 'unfair' financial support for Bombardier. Boeing/USA and Airbus are far from innocents

Of the three I can say with confidence that Bombardier are by far the least guilty.

That is quite simply because the other two supply "defence" aircraft, and the export sale of those has long been facilitated by corrupt inducements.
.

 

[PeterL]

Oh dear here we go again.
Recinding article 50 an act of folly?. Or trying to climb out of a hole instead of digging deeper. There was a lovely phrase in that brilliant drama just ended on BBC Broken..". Guilt is when you know you have done wrong. Shame is when others know. You can live with shame."
Is it the shame of admitting the act of folly that would prevent you and others from recinding it. ?Or is it truly your belief that Brexit was an act of bravery?
I also want change and I also want progress as well. What actions undertaken by the UK government subsequent to the poll of eighteen months ago indicate progress?
You assert that the EU is top down.... Implying a democratic deficit. Quite the contrary. Your government appointed your Commissioner, which is the equivalent of a minister. Just like your parliament was supposed to elect your prime minister. Your prime minister then selected your ministers... So in that regard the EU was at least as democratic. Your population elected your MEPs, by direct elections, just as the population of Ireland and Denmark elected theirs. Of course since the UK is bigger than Ireland, it gets to elect more. MEPs
The MEPs then select the President of the Commission, who in turn assigns portfolios to the Commissioners. , Just as any prime minister does. So where is the deficit?. There is an undercurrent in your posting of an unelected elite dictating. The fact is they are not unelected, just not all elected by British people.
The EU is protectionist by nature? Of course it is. The most fundamental reason for people, towns,cities, countries and now federations of states to make alliances, is mutual protection. Without it you get piracy, pillage etc. With it you have the potential for peace and growth. What is absolutely unique about the EU is that it has succeeded in growing without conquest, or having a standing army , by mutually beneficial social and economic ties between its members.
Contrast the current responses by the EU to those named countries, in difficulty, and that being flagged for Porto Rico.
After all the so called negotiations between the EU and the UK, can you identify any agreed position?.

Good response, reasonably balanced and polite. Not for me of course and whilst I don't take issue with your view of 'protectionist' - I agree totally, but, that was not what I meant - I was talking trade protectionist. I am all for NATO for a start albeit even that has a mixed history, with the French in particular behaving much as we have done, with the EU.

 

[Woosh]

The fact is they are not unelected, just not all elected by British people.

that's the problem in a nutshell. They are not all elected by British people, and yet, they decide on so many aspects of our lives. The brexiters usually charge the EU administration with the word 'corrupt'. Albeit unjustified when applied to the whole, but is difficult to dismiss in examples.

 

[flecc]

that's the problem in a nutshell. They are not all elected by British people, and yet, they decide on so many aspects of our lives.

Just as so many MPs are not elected by Londoners, but they decide so many aspects of our lives. What level do we go down to with this objection, Parish Council?

America manages to accept representatives from a huge range of ethnic backgrounds, and areas from Alaska to Hawai, so we should be able to accept the range of Continental representatives.
.

 

[PeterL]

Just as so many MPs are not elected by Londoners, but they decide so many aspects of our lives. What level do we go down to with this objection, Parish Council?

America manages to accept representatives from a huge range of ethnic backgrounds, and areas from Alaska to Hawai, so we should be able to accept the range of Continental representatives.
.

Again, not a bad response, but there is a limit to what can prove acceptable to a majority of people. I spend a lot of time in the US, my wife is a US citizen. There is no comparison, the gap between the have's and the have-not's is huge! Gated communities are everywhere. Europe is totally different to the US and the UK even more so. Albeit should the USE ever come into being things might well change. We can be to the EU, as Canada is to the US perhaps?