Brexit discussion thread IV

Sam Russell

Water John wrote: »

Mentioning Spain, I think they'll hang really tough on the Gibraltar issue and will be difficult to shift.

Could not Gibraltar not be a 'special zone' and be kept in the EU as some fudge part of Spain?

The UK Gov are not that invested in Gibraltar and could agree to a fudge.

ancapailldorcha

listermint wrote: »

I think you are confused.

See when you exit the EU you get your own local government and you as a citizen get enhanced democratic powers. So when you dislike a government decision you just post on twitter about how angry you are and the are out the following day thats how simple it all is. Sure it's direct power when the EU isn't involved no lead times in elections it's the power and will of the people

While I think you are being sarcastic, you are touching on an important point. Most of the UK's problems are of its own making. Some problems are part and parcel of globalisation while others are a trend among wealthy, Western nations such as aging populations, economic stagnation, etc...

Anyway, I think these two images will hopefully make my point clear:





The northern and western parts of the mainland have been allowed to rot economically. Ditto for Northern Ireland. Meanwhile, Brexiteers preach about democracy while being perfectly at ease about an unrepresentative voting system, thwarting House of Lords reform and redrawing boundaries for political advantage:



The UK takes about half a trillion a year in tax take and spends, what 2-3% on membership dues to the EU much of which comes back in the form of the rebate, subsidies and investment:



Apologies for the images but I feel like they clarify things better than my proclivity for verbosity.

Rhineshark

The UK takes about half a trillion a year in tax take and spends, what 2-3% on membership dues to the EU much of which comes back in the form of the rebate, subsidies and investment:

It annoys the heck out of me the arguments that "we contribute more than we take out"/point at rebates with indignation, while it is completely ignored just how much the UK (or other members) get from just being in the CU/SM, which the money is, at base, going to. Part of which is strengthening weaker regions (hence rebates and money from the EU pot going to poorer areas) to strengthen the arrangement as a whole and try prevent the drastic wealth inequality that leads to social unrest.

It's like they are buying a tv and ranting that they spent far too much on packaging. Yis are getting a tv out of it too, you know.

Bit of an aside and following on from your comment rather than having a go at you or anything. Just a thing as what bugs me. It's all a bit "waah, this co-operative arrangement does not benefit me more than everyone else, in fact, it doesn't benefit me *exclusively* therefore I am taking my ball and going home!"

And thanks for those images, not seen the second one before. They do rather shoot some of the arguments out of the water!

Strazdas

There was an opinion poll last year which showed that a large number of British people thought about 10% of the national budget went on the EU. It gives you an indication of how they are almost being brainwashed by the right wing press.

breatheme

ancapailldorcha, that was a beautiful post. I wish there was an option to save posts one likes. (Regardless, I took the link to the single post and bookmarked it.)

Some other interesting stuff. This one's from buzzfeed, so take it with a grain of salt, but apparently 84 papers with studies the government has conducted on no deal will start coming in the following weeks: https://www.buzzfeed.com/alexspence/a-new-leak-reveals-84-areas-of-british-life-the-uk?utm_term=.qf5JBXwpW#.imd5vXGMo

There's also this thread regarding lorry drivers, and what would happen in the event of a no-deal Brexit. As well as Grayling's ineptitude regarding the issue: https://twitter.com/JamesERothwell/status/1029797909146087430

flutered

badtoro wrote: »

Scores stopped him in the streets, how many hundreds told him to f off?

I'm glad he's back, perhaps he'll get a harder time this go around.

outside of ken clarke, farrage has the honour of the the person who has appeared on bbc politics shows this century, so he has never dissapeared, btw he is loosing his spot on lbc radio

BonnieSituation

It's sickening that someone of Clarke's calibre is equatable that way to someone like Farage.

Rhineshark

flutered wrote: »

outside of ken clarke, farrage has the honour of the the person who has appeared on bbc politics shows this century, so he has never dissapeared, btw he is loosing his spot on lbc radio

Yeah, that probably has something to do with his return too.

He was quick enough coming back to this side of the pond when Bannon fell from grace.

How is he still getting paid as an MEP - or what is the situation for the British MEPs? Farage's been globetrotting and doesn't seem to ever do any work (although not sure he ever did).

Jim2007

Leroy42 wrote: »

On the timing, I think it will, again, be pushed back. If my reading is right, then I suspect that TM has agreed to a large extent with the EU that a deal will be done, but it needs time and political manoeuvring to get across the line in the UK. So they will allow TM that time, pushing thinks back as far as possible. TM will then do the usual union negotiation thing whereby there is a last minute, working through the night, to secure a last gasp deal which everyone will accept as the alternative is simply too horrendous to contemplate. Leaving it so late will also have the effect of the markets starting to panic and thus falling, concentrating everyones mind on the reality.

It does not work like that. The EU is a rule based organisation and mainland European politicians will stick to the rules. Furthermore this is an agreement with a third country not an agreement between member states, that means that 38 regional and national parliaments must accept it, this can't be done in a late night shift at the end. This has been pointed out again and again to the UK, but they have chosen to ignore it.

If this comes down to the wire then, the only option on the table for the UK will be a standard Canadian style deal.

Strazdas

Jim2007 wrote: »

It does not work like that. The EU is a rule based organisation and mainland European politicians will stick to the rules. Furthermore this is an agreement with a third country not an agreement between member states, that means that 38 regional and national parliaments must accept it, this can't be done in a late night shift at the end. This has been pointed out again and again to the UK, but they have chosen to ignore it.

If this comes down to the wire then, the only option on the table for the UK will be a standard Canadian style deal.

Those late night summits where deals were thrashed out always involved fellow EU members. What is happening here is that Britain has set itself up as a hostile entity and is soon to depart the union. The chances of some form of last minute breakthrough if it reaches the five to midnight stage must be very slim.

Sam Russell

Strazdas wrote: »

Those late night summits where deals were thrashed out always involved fellow EU members. What is happening here is that Britain has set itself up as a hostile entity and is soon to depart the union. The chances of some form of last minute breakthrough if it reaches the five to midnight stage must be very slim.

Well, if it is necessary to get a deal, then it will be Norway or Canada. If not, then it is either stay or they go to hell WTO.

Imreoir2

Strazdas wrote: »

Those late night summits where deals were thrashed out always involved fellow EU members. What is happening here is that Britain has set itself up as a hostile entity and is soon to depart the union. The chances of some form of last minute breakthrough if it reaches the five to midnight stage must be very slim.

There are plenty of examples of the EU allowing talks with third countries fall apart if they do not suit the EU. There is a long list of failed or stalled trade deals, accession negioations etc. The EU does not compromise itself to secure deals with third countries. It does not need to.

It's true that the EU does deals at the eleventh hour, with compromises and fudging to get a deal done, but that is internally between members. Thats what the UK knows of the EU because it has been inside the tent for 40 years. When was the last time the EU made huge concessions at the eleventh hour to secure a deal with a third country? Has it ever?

First Up

Imreoir2 wrote: »

Strazdas wrote: »

Those late night summits where deals were thrashed out always involved fellow EU members. What is happening here is that Britain has set itself up as a hostile entity and is soon to depart the union. The chances of some form of last minute breakthrough if it reaches the five to midnight stage must be very slim.

There are plenty of examples of the EU allowing talks with third countries fall apart if they do not suit the EU. There is a long list of failed or stalled trade deals, accession negioations etc. The EU does not compromise itself to secure deals with third countries. It does not need to.

It's true that the EU does deals at the eleventh hour, with compromises and fudging to get a deal done, but that is internally between members. Thats what the UK knows of the EU because it has been inside the tent for 40 years. When was the last time the EU made huge concessions at the eleventh hour to secure a deal with a third country? Has it ever?

Absolutely right but this is the first time the negotiations are with a departing member. The sheer scale of the technical detail to be unravelled and the re-imposition of physical infrastructure could be reasons for a "phased" departure. That does not mean they get preferential treatment - just a bit more time to pack and tidy up after them.

farmerval

The London editor of the Irish Times gave a talk in Kilkenny Tonight about Brexit.
His take was that a no deal was much more likely than it was a couple of months ago, solely because nothing has to happen for a no deal, whereas there doesn't appear to be a deal that would garner the required numbers in the British Parliament.
For Theresa May to make enough concessions to woo significant labour votes she would lose too mant Tories. The ERG will not support chequers, which with or without the ERG amendments will not be accepted in Brussells.
Labour have the largest remain support but an awful lot of their MP's represent Leave areas.
Interestingly he said that the swng to the remain side now was from labour voters Tory support for Brexit hasn't really changed. One other interesting thing he noted was Tory support has become much more right wing, a lot of UKIP voters returned to the Tories after the last election.

Capt'n Midnight

Imreoir2 wrote: »

When was the last time the EU made huge concessions at the eleventh hour to secure a deal with a third country? Has it ever?

when was the last time the EU abandoned principles for a few quid ?

Folkstonian

farmerval wrote: »

The London editor of the Irish Times gave a talk in Kilkenny Tonight about Brexit.
His take was that a no deal was much more likely than it was a couple of months ago, solely because nothing has to happen for a no deal, whereas there doesn't appear to be a deal that would garner the required numbers in the British Parliament.
For Theresa May to make enough concessions to woo significant labour votes she would lose too mant Tories. The ERG will not support chequers, which with or without the ERG amendments will not be accepted in Brussells.
Labour have the largest remain support but an awful lot of their MP's represent Leave areas.
Interestingly he said that the swng to the remain side now was from labour voters Tory support for Brexit hasn't really changed. One other interesting thing he noted was Tory support has become much more right wing, a lot of UKIP voters returned to the Tories after the last election.

I’d say that his last observation there is fundamentally flawed. UKIP voters are not defecting to the Tories; Tory voters are defecting to UKIP.

It’s a huge issue for May.

To one section of the electorate she isthe PM pushing through a disastrous Brexit despite all the warnings.

To a different section of the electorate, in contrast, she is seen as the PM who is trying to sabotage Brexit and keep Britain far more closely aligned to the EU than they believe the people voted for.

That first group comprises people who, on the whole, wouldn’t have voted for May and the conservatives anyway.

The second group however includes a lot of people who hover between the conservatives and the U.K. Independence Party.

A ‘weak’ or ‘sell out’ Brexit will see them leap in their millions away from the conservatives to UKIP (who could easily end up with 4.5 million votes and no seats in parliament again) while labour cruise to a general election win even with the despicable and inept Mr Corbyn still at the helm, probably without picking up many, if any, extra voters.

It’s the main reason why Theresa is ploughing ahead with the whole Brexit thing, despite probably every one of her better instincts screaming at her to slam on the brakes.

Strazdas

farmerval wrote: »

The London editor of the Irish Times gave a talk in Kilkenny Tonight about Brexit.
His take was that a no deal was much more likely than it was a couple of months ago, solely because nothing has to happen for a no deal, whereas there doesn't appear to be a deal that would garner the required numbers in the British Parliament.
For Theresa May to make enough concessions to woo significant labour votes she would lose too mant Tories. The ERG will not support chequers, which with or without the ERG amendments will not be accepted in Brussells.
Labour have the largest remain support but an awful lot of their MP's represent Leave areas.
Interestingly he said that the swng to the remain side now was from labour voters Tory support for Brexit hasn't really changed. One other interesting thing he noted was Tory support has become much more right wing, a lot of UKIP voters returned to the Tories after the last election.

It's fascinating that everything is being seen through the prism of party politics and protecting the party at all costs - nothing about doing anything in the national interest.

Even the talk of Labour MPs in Leave voting areas, the exact same thing.....they're far more interested in protecting their seats.

It gives an indication of just how tribal the British political scene is. May seems more concerned with ensuring that the Tory Party survives than whether her country goes over the edge of a cliff.

McGiver

Sam Russell wrote:

Could not Gibraltar not be a 'special zone' and be kept in the EU as some fudge part of Spain?

Don't think the EU are keen on creating another tax-haven and also a British one.

flatty

Folkstonian wrote: »

farmerval wrote: »

The London editor of the Irish Times gave a talk in Kilkenny Tonight about Brexit.
His take was that a no deal was much more likely than it was a couple of months ago, solely because nothing has to happen for a no deal, whereas there doesn't appear to be a deal that would garner the required numbers in the British Parliament.
For Theresa May to make enough concessions to woo significant labour votes she would lose too mant Tories. The ERG will not support chequers, which with or without the ERG amendments will not be accepted in Brussells.
Labour have the largest remain support but an awful lot of their MP's represent Leave areas.
Interestingly he said that the swng to the remain side now was from labour voters Tory support for Brexit hasn't really changed. One other interesting thing he noted was Tory support has become much more right wing, a lot of UKIP voters returned to the Tories after the last election.

I’d say that his last observation there is fundamentally flawed. UKIP voters are not defecting to the Tories; Tory voters are defecting to UKIP.

It’s a huge issue for May.

To one section of the electorate she isthe PM pushing through a disastrous Brexit despite all the warnings.

To a different section of the electorate, in contrast, she is seen as the PM who is trying to sabotage Brexit and keep Britain far more closely aligned to the EU than they believe the people voted for.

That first group comprises people who, on the whole, wouldn’t have voted for May and the conservatives anyway.

The second group however includes a lot of people who hover between the conservatives and the U.K. Independence Party.

A ‘weak’ or ‘sell out’ Brexit will see them leap in their millions away from the conservatives to UKIP (who could easily end up with 4.5 million votes and no seats in parliament again) while labour cruise to a general election win even with the despicable and inept Mr Corbyn still at the helm, probably without picking up many, if any, extra voters.

It’s the main reason why Theresa is ploughing ahead with the whole Brexit thing, despite probably every one of her better instincts screaming at her to slam on the brakes.

Naked self interest then.

flatty

Folkstonian wrote: »

farmerval wrote: »

The London editor of the Irish Times gave a talk in Kilkenny Tonight about Brexit.
His take was that a no deal was much more likely than it was a couple of months ago, solely because nothing has to happen for a no deal, whereas there doesn't appear to be a deal that would garner the required numbers in the British Parliament.
For Theresa May to make enough concessions to woo significant labour votes she would lose too mant Tories. The ERG will not support chequers, which with or without the ERG amendments will not be accepted in Brussells.
Labour have the largest remain support but an awful lot of their MP's represent Leave areas.
Interestingly he said that the swng to the remain side now was from labour voters Tory support for Brexit hasn't really changed. One other interesting thing he noted was Tory support has become much more right wing, a lot of UKIP voters returned to the Tories after the last election.

I’d say that his last observation there is fundamentally flawed. UKIP voters are not defecting to the Tories; Tory voters are defecting to UKIP.

It’s a huge issue for May.

To one section of the electorate she isthe PM pushing through a disastrous Brexit despite all the warnings.

To a different section of the electorate, in contrast, she is seen as the PM who is trying to sabotage Brexit and keep Britain far more closely aligned to the EU than they believe the people voted for.

That first group comprises people who, on the whole, wouldn’t have voted for May and the conservatives anyway.

The second group however includes a lot of people who hover between the conservatives and the U.K. Independence Party.

A ‘weak’ or ‘sell out’ Brexit will see them leap in their millions away from the conservatives to UKIP (who could easily end up with 4.5 million votes and no seats in parliament again) while labour cruise to a general election win even with the despicable and inept Mr Corbyn still at the helm, probably without picking up many, if any, extra voters.

It’s the main reason why Theresa is ploughing ahead with the whole Brexit thing, despite probably every one of her better instincts screaming at her to slam on the brakes.

Naked self interest then. There is nothing in asking for an a50 extension, or running a second referendum, as long as this was was phrased and presented with a modicum of wit, which would make her position any more tenuous. May is first and foremost a cult of May worshipper, and second, a brexiteer at heart. She will suffer none of the consequences and cares not a jot for those who will.

lawred2

She campaigned for remain prior to the referendum.

Impossible to know what she is at heart beyond a shameless careerist

Leroy42

Express editorial with the headline

Give us the real Brexit we voted for, Mrs May

Short and lacking any detail but the line that interested me was:

We still believe that the UK will be better off outside the European Union, that we will be in a far stronger place when we can truly govern ourselves after March 29, 2019.

On basis can they have that belief? All the indicators say that things will be far worse at least in the short term and the best you can get from most commentators or even the likes of IDS etc is that they will not be worse off. We had a discussion here over the last few days about any possible positives to Brexit and there was very few. The only 'one', was a possible change in the democratic workings on the UK, but we have seen nothing to indicate that is part of the plans and certainly the Express is not pushing it

On a different point, saw this tweet yesterday showing a call on LBC with Farage in regards to immigration.

https://twitter.com/OFOCBrexit/status/1030699343962165248

farmerval

One other brief comment last night in Kilkenny was about Sinn Fein's abstentionist policy. Denis Staunton's view was that their votes were much less important than serving on committees etc in maintaining a balanced view on Northern Ireland issues.

One other thing was his view that Theresa May and Leo have no relationship whatsoever, and generally that the Irish /British intergovernmental links were at an all time low.

Strazdas

farmerval wrote: »

One other brief comment last night in Kilkenny was about Sinn Fein's abstentionist policy. Denis Staunton's view was that their votes were much less important than serving on committees etc in maintaining a balanced view on Northern Ireland issues.

One other thing was his view that Theresa May and Leo have no relationship whatsoever, and generally that the Irish /British intergovernmental links were at an all time low.

May doesn't seem to have a relationship with anyone outside the Tories. I don't know much about her but she doesn't seem the warmest or most engaging of people, very much the stern schoolmistress type - I don't think she is particularly suited to the role of PM, she lacks the people skills.

Beechwoodspark

Channel 4 are leading on the possibility of a vote on the deal.

They did some vox pops -leavers are astonishingly ignorant of the facts it seems

Gavin esler formerly of newsnight is one of the leaders of the campaign for a second vote

Dymo

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

Channel 4 are leading on the possibility of a vote on the deal.

They did some vox pops -leavers are astonishingly ignorant of the facts it seems

Gavin esler formerly of newsnight is one of the leaders of the campaign for a second vote

I find it hard to believe there is going to be a new vote, The UK Government has already struck down a Final Referendum vote.

The main point being, in last year’s General Election, over 80% of people then voted for parties committing to respecting the result of the referendum. It was the stated policy of both major parties that the decision of the people would be respected.

The Government is clear that it is now its duty to implement the will of the electorate.

As the Prime Minister has said: “This is about more than the decision to leave the EU; it is about whether the public can trust their politicians to put in place the decision they took.”

The British people can trust this Government to honour the referendum result and get the best deal possible.

Rhineshark

Dymo wrote: »

I find it hard to believe there is going to be a new vote, The UK Government has already struck down a Final Referendum vote.

The main point being, in last year’s General Election, over 80% of people then voted for parties committing to respecting the result of the referendum. It was the stated policy of both major parties that the decision of the people would be respected.

In an essentially two-party system where both parties agreed on something, that is not an "important" thing, it is the "blindingly obvious" thing and really doesn't mean much.

Capt'n Midnight

Health Warning - Red Top use of statistics.


Half of Brits want to leave EU on March 29, with or without a Brexit deal
Half means "nearly half".
As in less than the % that voted remain. :rolleyes:





25% don't know if they've changed their mind on Brexit

More importantly nearly two thirds are standing by their previous vote. In politics that's a sea change.



Shock - one of the comments contained a book reference ,
TLDR version, the plan is that when the state is undermined, rich and powerful individuals can pick up the pieces.

Maybe you should read the book Ree-Mogg's late father co-authored in 1997. It's the bible of the hard Brexit leaders (most of whom are not even British). William Rees-Mogg is the guru of the global financial elite. People like Peter Thiel worship William Rees-Mogg:


"The Sovereignty Individual, How to Survive and Thrive During the Collapse of the Welfare State"

Harika

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Health Warning - Red Top use of statistics.


Half of Brits want to leave EU on March 29, with or without a Brexit deal
Half means "nearly half".
As in less than the % that voted remain. :rolleyes:

.

Someone on twitter checked those and the statistics institute quoted never asked any of those questions with the exception of the corbyn one. The raw files are on their home page

lawred2

Harika wrote: »

Someone on twitter checked those and the statistics institute quoted never asked any of those questions with the exception of the corbyn one. The raw files are on their home page

Lucky for the red top that it's only headlines and pictures that are consumed by the readership..

Verification of the source data isn't something likely to be on the Todo list...