Brexit discussion thread III

Really Interested

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good morning!

This would be fair if there were any "facts" presented as to Brexit leading to the apocalypse.

There hasn't been a single one.

Speculative analysis after speculative analysis but nothing more. Quite a few of the speculative pieces of short term analysis before the referendum simply haven't happened.

On looking to the pros and cons of each option. I've concluded that maximising as much freedom as can be gained whilst retaining as much trade with the EU is the best long term option.

It is manifestly untrue however to say that there are facts to support the idea that Brexit is bound to lead to the apocalypse.

This is precisely the type of empty doomsday prophecy that the Government shouldn't buckle to.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

No one can say the the exit of the UK will lead to mayhem, as even the UK is not agreed as the what that exit will be. But we can all agree that a no deal exit will be very harmful for both the UK and the EU.

History has told us that the longer the period of not knowing is the greater the chance of problems.

But I for one think because the tories can’t even agree, we are heading to problems, and the very stupid thing is the Media and people of the UK will blame the EU for any negative issues.

ancapailldorcha

solodeogloria wrote: »

This would be fair if there were any "facts" presented as to Brexit leading to the apocalypse.

There hasn't been a single one.

Speculative analysis after speculative analysis but nothing more. Quite a few of the speculative pieces of short term analysis before the referendum simply haven't happened.

On looking to the pros and cons of each option. I've concluded that maximising as much freedom as can be gained whilst retaining as much trade with the EU is the best long term option.

It is manifestly untrue however to say that there are facts to support the idea that Brexit is bound to lead to the apocalypse.

This is precisely the type of empty doomsday prophecy that the Government shouldn't buckle to.

Several facts and scientific analyses have been presented but you continue to put your fingers in your ears and moan about an apocalypse only you keep bringing up.

Have you a single piece of scientific evidence to support any of your points whatsoever or is it all just soundbytes?

Zubeneschamali

solodeogloria wrote: »

It is manifestly untrue however to say that there are facts to support the idea that Brexit is bound to lead to the apocalypse.

You appear to be suggesting that anything less than the apocalypse is fine.

10% of GDP by 2030 is not the apocalypse, but it is a very heavy price to pay for the illusion of control.

Personally, I am looking forward to the new paradigm in world trade that the UK is ready to present to us all.

The benefits of the Single Market with none of the administrative time, effort or cost.

Surely it will be available to all, instantly
We will see a fundamentally more prosperous world once these new ways of doing business come to light. The money we will all be making will have us laughing at our old selves, unable to see the wood for the trees for so long. Once 'The New Way' is shown to be so successful we will really all feel like prize plums.

Unless, of course, the Emperor is shown to not be wearing anything at all. But that isn't at all likely is it? Is it?

solodeogloria

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Several facts and scientific analyses have been presented but you continue to put your fingers in your ears and moan about an apocalypse only you keep bringing up.

Have you a single piece of scientific evidence to support any of your points whatsoever or is it all just soundbytes?

Good morning!

There's only been speculation. I've not seen any "facts" on this thread at all that suggests that Brexit is a terrible thing.

I've come to my position by looking at the pros and the cons. The pros of Brexit outweigh the cons for me. A result that leads to more control to make more decisions in Westminster and to trade more widely on better terms with the wider world is much better than restricting the UK's control in these matters by chaining British trade policy to the EU.

Concerns that were raised in the referendum cannot be adequately dealt with whilst remaining in the EU. I respect the considered decision of the British people and just want to get Brexit done and dusted so it can be put to bed.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

Here is a fact.

By setting out that the UK is leaving the Single Market Theresa May put a border on the Island of Ireland.

Is that a good fact?

solodeogloria

Deleted User wrote: »

Here is a fact.

By setting out that the UK is leaving the Single Market Theresa May put a border on the Island of Ireland.

Is that a good fact?

Good morning!

It isn't a "fact". It is a matter to be conclusively dealt with in phase 2.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

Really Interested

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good morning!

There's only been speculation. I've not seen any "facts" on this thread at all that suggests that Brexit is a terrible thing.

I've come to my position by looking at the pros and the cons. The pros of Brexit outweigh the cons for me. A result that leads to more control to make more decisions in Westminster and to trade more widely on better terms with the wider world is much better than restricting the UK's control in these matters by chaining British trade policy to the EU.

Concerns that were raised in the referendum cannot be adequately dealt with whilst remaining in the EU. I respect the considered decision of the British people and just want to get Brexit done and dusted so it can be put to bed.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

So you are sure what the relationship of the UK and the EU, will look like? As to make a claim that there will be no serious issue you must be the only person who knows what the deal will be.

I too want the deal done so the remaining countries who have got even closer can get on with things. I wish the UK well but until we all know the agreements no one can say what will happen.

Can you point at one area of trade that the UK has been held back by the EU. I would like to research such a lost trade opportunity.

Christy42

solodeogloria wrote: »

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Several facts and scientific analyses have been presented but you continue to put your fingers in your ears and moan about an apocalypse only you keep bringing up.

Have you a single piece of scientific evidence to support any of your points whatsoever or is it all just soundbytes?

Good morning!

There's only been speculation. I've not seen any "facts" on this thread at all that suggests that Brexit is a terrible thing.

I've come to my position by looking at the pros and the cons. The pros of Brexit outweigh the cons for me. A result that leads to more control to make more decisions in Westminster and to trade more widely on better terms with the wider world is much better than restricting the UK's control in these matters by chaining British trade policy to the EU.

Concerns that were raised in the referendum cannot be adequately dealt with whilst remaining in the EU. I respect the considered decision of the British people and just want to get Brexit done and dusted so it can be put to bed.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

Should you not also provide evidence that the UK will be able to "trade more widely on better terms".?

FreudianSlippers

solodeogloria wrote: »

This would be fair if there were any "facts" presented as to Brexit leading to the apocalypse.

There hasn't been a single one.

Ah! A lovely modal fallacy there: "because there are no facts to prove Brexit is bad, therefore it is a fact that it is good."

Speculative analysis after speculative analysis but nothing more. Quite a few of the speculative pieces of short term analysis before the referendum simply haven't happened.

...because Brexit hasn't happened yet perhaps?

On looking to the pros and cons of each option. I've concluded that maximising as much freedom as can be gained whilst retaining as much trade with the EU is the best long term option.

On looking to the pros and cons of each option. I've concluded that maximising my ice cream intake whilst retaining a slender figure but not working out is the best long term option.

It is manifestly untrue however to say that there are facts to support the idea that Brexit is bound to lead to the apocalypse.

See above re modal fallacy.

solodeogloria

solodeogloria wrote: »

Deleted User wrote: »

Here is a fact.

By setting out that the UK is leaving the Single Market Theresa May put a border on the Island of Ireland.

Is that a good fact?

Good morning!

It isn't a "fact". It is a matter to be conclusively dealt with in phase 2.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

It is a fact.

No inverted commas required.

Leroy42

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good morning!

There's only been speculation. I've not seen any "facts" on this thread at all that suggests that Brexit is a terrible thing.

I've come to my position by looking at the pros and the cons. The pros of Brexit outweigh the cons for me. A result that leads to more control to make more decisions in Westminster and to trade more widely on better terms with the wider world is much better than restricting the UK's control in these matters by chaining British trade policy to the EU.

Concerns that were raised in the referendum cannot be adequately dealt with whilst remaining in the EU. I respect the considered decision of the British people and just want to get Brexit done and dusted so it can be put to bed.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

GDP growth has slowed markedly since the vote. Fact
£700m has already been spent to date on brexit. Fact
£3bn has been set aside for additional costs. Fact
UK will continue to have to pay for its obligations for the next few years, so the claimed £350m pw is not available for many years. Fact
Now, you can say that these are worth it, but you cannot claim that there are no facts against Brexit.

On top of these facts are facts based extrapolations which point to continued loss of growth over the next few years. Since these are future looking they cannot be counted as facts, but nor should they be completly ignored as to do so would need to point to something significant changing to change to assumptions.

What we do have is a complete lack of any facts from the Brexit side. You seem to be happy to accept proposals, hopes and desires from your side of the argument but dismiss the other side if any of their ideas turn out to be wrong.

FreudianSlippers

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good morning!

There's only been speculation. I've not seen any "facts" on this thread at all that suggests that Brexit is a terrible thing.

I've come to my position by looking at the pros and the cons. The pros of Brexit outweigh the cons for me. A result that leads to more control to make more decisions in Westminster and to trade more widely on better terms with the wider world is much better than restricting the UK's control in these matters by chaining British trade policy to the EU.

Concerns that were raised in the referendum cannot be adequately dealt with whilst remaining in the EU. I respect the considered decision of the British people and just want to get Brexit done and dusted so it can be put to bed.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

Given the negotiation we saw taking place in Phase 1, I would suggest that it's slightly more than optimistic to believe that the UK will be able to negotiate the entire destruction of the fundamental nature of the EU in Phase 2 by convincing the EU to give the UK a deal which fundamentally undermines the entire concept of the EU (i.e. free trade without free movement of workers)

Enzokk

solodeogloria wrote: »

There's only been speculation. I've not seen any "facts" on this thread at all that suggests that Brexit is a terrible thing.

I've come to my position by looking at the pros and the cons. The pros of Brexit outweigh the cons for me. A result that leads to more control to make more decisions in Westminster and to trade more widely on better terms with the wider world is much better than restricting the UK's control in these matters by chaining British trade policy to the EU.

Concerns that were raised in the referendum cannot be adequately dealt with whilst remaining in the EU. I respect the considered decision of the British people and just want to get Brexit done and dusted so it can be put to bed.

Ok, so how is this then,

The real price of Brexit begins to emerge

Economists for Brexit, a forecasting group, predicted that after a leave vote growth in GDP would expand 2.7 per cent in 2017. The Treasury expected a mild recession. Neither proved correct. The 2017 growth rate appears likely to slow to 1.5 per cent at a time when the global economy is strengthening.

According to economists such as Robert Chote, chairman of the independent Office for Budget Responsibility, which produces the official government forecasts, a more pressing question is to assess the impact compared with what would have happened had the vote gone the other way. “Many PhDs are going to be written on the impact of Brexit over the years to come,” he says.

This work has started, and includes a range of estimates calculated by the Financial Times suggesting that the value of Britain’s output is now around 0.9 per cent lower than was possible if the country had voted to stay in the EU. That equates to almost exactly £350m a week lost to the British economy — an irony that will not be lost on those who may have backed Leave because of the claim made on the side of the bus.

So we have a loss of 0.9% of GDP which equates to £350m per week. The article also mentions that due to Brexit inflation has risen due to Brexit. This is due to the fall in value of the GBP. So people are worse off.

But these are experts saying these things, they cannot be trusted.

Also, I see The Sun sold the removal of workers rights as freedom from working hour restrictions. Yes, working too long is a positive, you don't need rest and should work as long as you possibly can.

https://twitter.com/SunPolitics/status/942167511553970176

Professor Moriarty

Enzokk wrote: »

Ok, so how is this then,

The real price of Brexit begins to emerge



So we have a loss of 0.9% of GDP which equates to £350m per week. The article also mentions that due to Brexit inflation has risen due to Brexit. This is due to the fall in value of the GBP. So people are worse off.

But these are experts saying these things, they cannot be trusted.

Also, I see The Sun sold the removal of workers rights as freedom from working hour restrictions. Yes, working too long is a positive, you don't need rest and should work as long as you possibly can.

https://twitter.com/SunPolitics/status/942167511553970176

All those unemployed Leave voters in Sunderland, Newcastle, Leeds etc. will be delighted. Once Johnny Foreigner goes away, they can start picking mushrooms for longer. Yay.

The medicines & Banking authorities lost...

No fact is costly enough for the Puritans though.

ancapailldorcha

solodeogloria wrote: »

There's only been speculation. I've not seen any "facts" on this thread at all that suggests that Brexit is a terrible thing.

Of course not because they're all apocalyptic doom-mongering from experts who, as well all know are worthless. Tell me, when was the last time a wave of anti-intellectualism like this led anywhere good? Losing jobs, wealth and investment is a bad thing. That you think otherwise is indicative of some sort of fanaticism based in emotion, not logic.

solodeogloria wrote: »

I've come to my position by looking at the pros and the cons. The pros of Brexit outweigh the cons for me. A result that leads to more control to make more decisions in Westminster and to trade more widely on better terms with the wider world is much better than restricting the UK's control in these matters by chaining British trade policy to the EU.

More soundbytes...

solodeogloria wrote: »

Concerns that were raised in the referendum cannot be adequately dealt with whilst remaining in the EU. I respect the considered decision of the British people and just want to get Brexit done and dusted so it can be put to bed.

And they're being met now? A large cash handout to Brussels, permanent residence for all those awful foreigners, no regulatory divergence, continued ECJ oversight for the next few years and God knows what in Northern Ireland. You've strange notions of control it would seem.

Blowfish

solodeogloria wrote: »

There's only been speculation. I've not seen any "facts" on this thread at all that suggests that Brexit is a terrible thing.

Ok, lets get you some facts then from actual research papers.

Let's start with the LSE series on Brexit. Of particular interest will be:

Consequences of Brexit for Trade and Living Standards - decline of 6.3% to 9.5% of household income long term.
Impact on FDI - Decrease of around 22%.
Analysis of the Treasuries Assessment - The Treasury was reasonably accurate with forecasting a 6.2% drop in GDP, but it's a little on the conservative side.

That's just a start with LSE, if you look around at the other top tier Uni's etc. it'll all be similar. I've yet to see a research paper that shows any sort of positive benefit to Brexit, be it short or long term and even taking into account any possible future trade deals.

solodeogloria

solodeogloria wrote: »

I respect the considered decision of the British people......

Must say I always have a laugh when I read statements like this. No doubt some did genuinely weigh up the pro and cons and voted accordingly. But then you read stuff like the following and realise that allowing people to decide critical matters of state by the blunt instrument that is a referendum is a really bad idea....

The paradox is summed up by two women I interviewed recently. Both were single mothers living on benefits they denounced as far too low. Both had voted for Brexit. Both believed there were too many foreigners here. And both were scandalized when I asked whether they would take vacant jobs in cafes or shops. “They’re immigrants’ jobs,” one said.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/28/opinion/dunkirk-christopher-nolan-brexit.html

The same is true of each and every referendum ever of course.

Possibly why referenda are poor options to make multi faceted decisions with far reaching implications.

Which we can pin directly on Cameron unfortunately.

J Mysterio

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good morning!

There's another way of looking at it. I support the most liberal trading relationship that one can get whilst also regaining control over key areas such as trade policy and immigration.

That can't happen. You know that. Why do you keep saying this?

solodeogloria wrote: »

I want to ensure that the UK still holds a significant amount of trade with the EU as that is in the obvious interests of both parties. Let's see Phase 2.

Are you in the negotiating team? I dont think you will be in a position to ensure anything. Also, its not in the interest of the EU to maintain the status quo in terms of trading while offering other benefits to the UK, this will invalidate other EU agreements with other nations/ bodies and force a whole heap of renegotiations, never mind other future arrangements.

solodeogloria wrote: »

I have a feeling that 2018 will be a year even more full of shrill doomsday prophecy. The noise needs to be ignored.

Ignoring it doesnt make it go away. Rather I would say accept the reality and face it.

solodeogloria wrote: »

The Government needs to complete the work it has started and get the best Brexit possible. Which in my mind must involve a substantial amount of control being regained by parliament. Staying calm and sticking the course is the right thing to do.

What course is that. The UK still has not set out their stall and the UK cabinet continue to contradict themselves.

solodeogloria wrote: »

Brexit has been hugely significant in increasing mass participation in democracy. This needs to continue post-Brexit in much the same way as it has in the lead up to Brexit and in the negotiating process. This is a good outcome from what has happened.

Brexit has been a perversion of democracy with lies and false propoganda aplenty. It's been a shambles and a disgrace and has ruined the British reputation.

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

The same is true of each and every referendum ever of course.

Possibly why referenda are poor options to make multi faceted decisions with far reaching implications.

Which we can pin directly on Cameron unfortunately.

I'm afraid so. I think he will be judged very harshly by future historians over this. It was a complete abdication of his responsibilities as a PM and the connected role of engaging in statesmanship in an attempt mend internal rifts in the Tory party. Biggest error since Suez in 1956 I reckon, if not actually bigger. Suez hastened the end of empire, this will contribute to the sidelining of the UK in terms of the world economy IMO.

flaneur

I just see no real progress at all here beyond the Brexiteers rephrasing "I'll have my cake and eat it!" over and over.

What I'm not seeing them understand is that market access to 27 countries is a privilege, not a right. If you don't want to use agreed rules, you aren't going to get frictionless access. It's as simple as that.

The customs union and the EU market and regulatory harmonisation and the ECJ was built up over decades to facilitate that.

The UK proposals seem to be that they want to stop using the wheel (“damn nonsense invented by foreigners”) and replace it with the new British ‘rotational device’, which may use flat sides instead of round ones and is only compatible with British axels.

Thargor

Deleted User wrote: »

Must say I always have a laugh when I read statements like this. No doubt some did genuinely weigh up the pro and cons and voted accordingly. But then you read stuff like the following and realise that allowing people to decide critical matters of state by the blunt instrument that is a referendum is a really bad idea....




https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/28/opinion/dunkirk-christopher-nolan-brexit.html

The paradox is summed up by two women I interviewed recently. Both were single mothers living on benefits they denounced as far too low. Both had voted for Brexit. Both believed there were too many foreigners here. And both were scandalized when I asked whether they would take vacant jobs in cafes or shops. “They’re immigrants’ jobs,” one said.

I would put money on that journalist making up that quote and that conversation never happening, it sounds too fake, like something an American would imagine being said over here, I mean how convenient a conversation could you have with 2 random women in the street after setting out to write an article like that?

steddyeddy

Barnier says there's no way there will be a bespoke trade deal for the UK. They will only be able to choose off the shelf deals ala Canada or Norway. No.10 Downing street still seems to be in denial mode because their reaction to this has been to dismiss it. Sure what would Barnier know about the EU's position?

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2017/dec/18/theresa-may-brexit-statement-commons-eu-summit-way-barnier-says-uk-will-not-be-allowed-bespoke-brexit-trade-deal-politics-live

No 10 rejects Barnier's claim that bespoke Brexit trade deal impossible

I’m just back from the Number 10 lobby briefing. It was short and relatively perfunctory. Here are the main points, as far as they went.

Downing Street dismissed Michel Barnier’s claim that a bespoke trade deal with the EU would not be available to the UK. (See 9.16am.) Asked about Barnier’s comments in the Prospect interview, the prime minister’s spokesman implied that what he was saying might just be an opening negotiating gambit. The spokesman said:
We believe that we can secure an ambitious deal with the EU that works for the UK and for the European Union and that we come at this from a unique perspective, in that we already have a strong relationship with the European Union from which to build upon...

We are at the beginning of the second phase of the negotiation. That’s a fact. We continue to believe that we can get the ambitious future relationship the prime minister has spoken about in Florence and elsewhere.

Infini

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm afraid so. I think he will be judged very harshly by future historians over this. It was a complete abdication of his responsibilities as a PM and the connected role of engaging in statesmanship in an attempt mend internal rifts in the Tory party. Biggest error since Suez in 1956 I reckon, if not actually bigger. Suez hastened the end of empire, this will contribute to the sidelining of the UK in terms of the world economy IMO.

While Cameron is bad for being foolish enough to entertain this whole thing and ran the MOMENT the result was announced instead of following through on his word the conservative party as an entity is to blame for this as well. Their stupidity has led them to this farce of a situation thats showed them up as incompetent idiots with no coherent view or plan to proceed.

Why do they not come clean on the real effects of Brexit? because they know they fecked up big time and everything shows Britain losing and gaining nothing of value from this whole debacle.

Infini

steddyeddy wrote: »

Barnier says there's no way there will be a bespoke trade deal for the UK. They will only be able to choose off the shelf deals ala Canada or Norway. No.10 Downing street still seems to be in denial mode because their reaction to this has been to dismiss it. Sure what would Barnier know about the EU's position?

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2017/dec/18/theresa-may-brexit-statement-commons-eu-summit-way-barnier-says-uk-will-not-be-allowed-bespoke-brexit-trade-deal-politics-live

All Barnier needs to do is stick to the cold hard facts. Stay above the petty idiot brexiteers, refuse to entertain and engage them and simply destroy every one of their delusional arguments with facts and only facts.

Ultimately I can see a rerun of this referendum eventually because each day that passes shows the Brexiteers as incompetent, incoherent and completely devoid of reality.

An Ciarraioch

Our NI posters may be interested to note that Theresa May will answer questions posed by readers of the Irish News on Tuesday. Of course, technically, anyone can submit a question, but with the paper seeking a contact number for verification, it may be most practical for Six County thread regulars:

https://mobile.twitter.com/arlenemcd27/status/942696408137728002/photo/1

Tell me how

Thargor wrote:

I would put money on that journalist making up that quote and that conversation never happening, it sounds too fake, like something an American would imagine being said over here, I mean how convenient a conversation could you have with 2 random women in the street after setting out to write an article like that?

Check out Henry Mckeans voxpops on newstalk.

Two unionists in Belfast
Wife: "We're part of England"

Thargor

Thargor wrote: »

I would put money on that journalist making up that quote and that conversation never happening, it sounds too fake, like something an American would imagine being said over here, I mean how convenient a conversation could you have with 2 random women in the street after setting out to write an article like that?

Why do you think the journalist is faking their story? Some people DO think that they are 'too good' to do certain jobs. Heres another article about the shortages of labour in the UK agricultural sector where one employer comments:

“It’s disappointing that you can’t recruit U.K. nationals,” said Mr. Hardman of Hops, the agency that recruits seasonal laborers. “It’s not attractive for them. They find it beneath them.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/16/world/europe/britain-european-union-farming-immigration-labor-shortage.html

fash

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good morning!

You need to qualify that statement. No trading arrangement offers the breath and depth that the EU offers within the European Union.

There is a big world outside of the EU and the UK needs powers to expand that after Brexit by liberalising trade terms.

Is there? Where is this big world? I understand that the EU already has the largest number of FTAs in the world of any entity. Given the overall size and clout of the EU, these are likely to be some of the best FTAs possible to negotiate. How is the UK ever even going to match that- let alone beat it? How much control will the UK have to cede to achieve these FTAs? You say that more can be achieved "by liberalising trade terms" - surely you mean "by ceding control over British regulations so that they match those of the relevant other party to the proposed FTA so as to make trade financially possible by reducing regulatory burden"?


What will the social impacts of this free trade be? Good news for British rural citizens? Good news for British manufacturing?

Nody

steddyeddy wrote: »

Barnier says there's no way there will be a bespoke trade deal for the UK. They will only be able to choose off the shelf deals ala Canada or Norway. No.10 Downing street still seems to be in denial mode because their reaction to this has been to dismiss it. Sure what would Barnier know about the EU's position?

It's a rerun of the whole phase 1 fiasco; UK politicians come out telling us how EU will shift position etc. and the end deal looks exactly as EU stated it would be and UK's red lines are smudged on the ground. The only difference this time is that they got even less time in a more difficult negotiation to come to the same conclusion.

flaneur

Basically they can't negotiate anything as they have no position and when they do have a position it's undermined within days.

Really without a stable UK government this process is pointless.

ambro25

Thargor wrote: »

I would put money on that journalist making up that quote and that conversation never happening, it sounds too fake, like something an American would imagine being said over here, I mean how convenient a conversation could you have with 2 random women in the street after setting out to write an article like that?

Well, your problem with that claim (and your notional wager loss ) is that Wales and Grimsby (and others) all asked for exemptions to Brexit, after voting massively in favour of it

That's all the evidence you need, independently of that NYT article, of the fact that at least a portion of 52% of 33.6 millions referendum voters in 2016 (inclusive of the two ladies quoted by the NYT journalist) are demonstrably thick as two short planks.

That's not a state of affairs which will come as a surprise to any UK resident, who's lived here since before the referendum, through it and since. Particularly not up'ere in t'North of England. I'm certain you have the same specimens in the Republic, I saw at least some when I lived in Dublin not so many years ago.

It gives me no particular pleasure to point out the glaringly obvious, btw.

Although the quote did get a chuckle out of me. It's not nice to mock the afflicted, I know. But I'm not particularly nice to begin with. Least of all to thick Leavers :pac:

Jim2007

An interesting comment here from Michel Barnier:

The British had the idea they could mingle everything: the price for past commitments, the financial issue and the future. We said: first we settle the past, like in any separation, then we start talking about the future. So parallel talks will start probably next March. The actual negotiations on the future relationship will only begin once the UK leaves the EU.

They have to realise there won’t be any cherry picking. We won’t mix up the various scenarios to create a specific one and accommodate their wishes, mixing, for instance, the advantages of the Norwegian model, member of the single market, with the simple requirements of the Canadian one. No way. They have to face the consequences of their own decision.

Source

This would appear to be a very different perspective that what the UK have. And certainly no possibility of the UK parliament voting on the final deal before they leave.

Professor Moriarty

ambro25 wrote: »

Well, your problem with that claim (and your notional wager loss ) is that Wales and Grimsby (and others) all asking for exemptions to Brexit, after voting massively in favour of it, are all the evidence which you need (independently of that article indeed) of the fact that at least a portion of 52% of 33.6 millions referendum voters in 2016 -such as the two ladies quoted by the NYT journalist- are demonstrably thick as two short planks.

Not a state of affairs which will come as a surprise to any UK resident, who's lived here since before the referendum, through it and since. Particularly not up'ere in t'North (South Yorkshire).

It gives me no particular pleasure to point out the glaringly obvious, btw.

Although the quote did get a chuckle out of me. It's not nice to mock the afflicted, I know. But I'm not particularly nice to begin with. Least of all to thick Leavers :pac:

Even The Express (shock horror!) is publishing this data from this recent poll:

"The survey conducted by BMG Research revealed a shift in people’s opinion towards Brexit after 51 per cent said they now want to Remain in the European Union, with only 41 per cent of Brits still wanting Brexit"

flaneur

I’d say that quote is likely accurate. The journalist had engaged them in a conversation about Brexit and immigration so their guard was down.

You’d be surprised sometimes at the stuff people will come out with and the attitudes that sit just below the surface.

flaneur

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Even The Express (shock horror!) is publishing this data from this recent poll:

"The survey conducted by BMG Research revealed a shift in people’s opinion towards Brexit after 51 per cent said they now want to Remain in the European Union, with only 41 per cent of Brits still wanting Brexit"

The irony of the UK complaining about feeling like a colony is clearly lost on him!

Vronsky

Interesting commentary out of Westminster today, with the PM refusing to confirm that the working time directive wasn't up for the chop. This follows reports at the weekend that scrapping it would be considered as "enhancing workers rights".

Now who could have seen that coming?

solodeogloria

Vronsky wrote: »

Interesting commentary out of Westminster today, with the PM refusing to confirm that the working time directive wasn't up for the chop. This follows reports at the weekend that scrapping it would be considered as "enhancing workers rights".

Now who could have seen that coming?

Good evening!

Not accurate. She said that all EU labour law would become UK law and after the law is repatriated.

Under the EU withdrawal bill we are bringing these rights into UK law. I have said that we will maintain workers’ rights, and indeed enhance workers’ rights.

It's disingenuous to say that she wants to revoke the working time directive. Moreover even if she did want to it would have to be voted on in parliament.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

Water John

Back to the 'chlorinated chicken'. Its four chemicals not one, that is used to cleanse food and veg in the US, which is produced in a much lower hygiene environment, compensated for by the washing.
And this is from the Sun.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5163793/brits-will-be-forced-to-eat-chlorine-washed-turkey-for-christmas-if-we-relax-food-standards-after-brexit-report-warns/

Great that PM would have to ask Parliament to change Employment Law. Democracy is over rated.

Enzokk

solodeogloria wrote: »

Not accurate. She said that all EU labour law would become UK law and after the law is repatriated.



It's disingenuous to say that she wants to revoke the working time directive even if she said such a thing. Moreover even if she did want to it would have to be voted on in parliament.

Its disingenuous to say that because they will write EU law into UK law that it will not be changed. You are correct that they will just transfer the EU law in to UK law, but Brexit allows them to change the law. You know, they now have the control to do that. Its what you have been posting about that is so important. The UK can change those EU laws. Can you guarantee that they will not do it?

J Mysterio

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good evening!

Not accurate. She said that all EU labour law would become UK law and after the law is repatriated.



It's disingenuous to say that she wants to revoke the working time directive even if she said such a thing. Moreover even if she did want to it would have to be voted on in parliament.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

To be fair, I dont think youre in a position to say anything is disingenuous.

solodeogloria

J Mysterio wrote: »

To be fair, I dont think youre in a position to say anything is disingenuous.

Good evening!

I can post as I wish - as can you.

If you've got an issue feel free to report my post to a moderator.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

Enzokk

solodeogloria wrote: »

I can post as I wish - as can you.

If you've got an issue feel free to report my post to a moderator.

I am not sure if you saw the multiple links after your post this morning. Here is the link for you from Blowfish. Or do you consider this as part of project fear?

How do you feel that inflation has gone up due to the fall of GBP as a result of the Brexit vote? Or does it not concern you personally yet so you couldn't be worried about it?

Thargor

Wow I never knew this, this whole mess is just amazing to witness:

https://twitter.com/GuitarMoog/status/942213433696706561?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2Fall%2F

Jayop

Or maybe she saw his work and thought I don't want that against me.

Enzokk

Thargor wrote: »

Wow I never knew this, this whole mess is just amazing to witness:

https://twitter.com/GuitarMoog/status/942213433696706561?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2Fall%2F

Not really surprising when she has dinner with the editor of the said newspaper. This in tune with David Davis leaving the first day of EU negotiations early and then having dinner that evening with the same editor, Paul Dacre.

That is why I am hesitant to think she will go for anything but a hard Brexit. Both she and her Brexit minister has had dinners with the editor of the Daily Mail.

ancapailldorcha

J Mysterio wrote: »

To be fair, I dont think youre in a position to say anything is disingenuous.

Don't have a go at other posters please.

Consonata

It's hard to see how this will be a brexit at all now, since phase 1 papers have been released.

Either they have a soft border and stay within the customs union and single market. Or break the agreement and do whatever they like.

Brexiteers saying the border issue has been sorted, must have had a much needed change of heart with regards migrants and the power that the EU institutions have over the UK :pac: