Brexit Discussion Thread VI

trellheim

As for DD I am in no way a Brexiteer in fact I think it is horrendous.

He represents a very large constituency and blank dismissals of the premises are perhaps . From the brexiteer point of view - as I said - most of what is in that statement makes sense and it should be read in that light. Yes he's writing in the Torygraph and playing to many of the faithful but so what.

Zubeneschamali

Tell me how wrote: »

Yes, but in future, any country considering leaving will have the following.

The UK media loudly extolling the benefits of sovereignty and trying to influence their media.
Nigel Farage, Johnson, Rees-Mogg attending events as guest speakers either saying how well the UK is doing, or blaming the EU for not being reasonable (thus enforcing ideals as to how bad they are).

I think these things would make it less likely that Ireland or Poland or Italy or Denmark would actually leave, not more likely.


Rees-Mogg, seriously, could anyone be a better model for a stereotypical obnoxious British bad guy? It's as if he escaped from a Harry Potter movie.

Zubeneschamali

trellheim wrote: »

Yes he's writing in the Torygraph and playing to many of the faithful but so what.

So what he is saying is not true.

FrancieBrady

Tell me how wrote: »

Yes, but in future, any country considering leaving will have the following.

The UK media loudly extolling the benefits of sovereignty and trying to influence their media.
Nigel Farage, Johnson, Rees-Mogg attending events as guest speakers either saying how well the UK is doing, or blaming the EU for not being reasonable (thus enforcing ideals as to how bad they are).
The UK suggesting that should they leave, the UK market of 70M people will likely be willing to create trade deals.

All it needs to go down this dark path is a right wing government to promise a referendum on EU membership and then the dark forces will kick in. I hope I'm wrong but the hardest one to leave is the first one.

Farage has been doing the 'tour' (including to ireland) for years now. No effect really. There will always be anti EU sentiment, but I think seeing what just the process of leaving does, that common sense will win out for a good few years yet.
And ultimately, imo the EU will be a better place after this process. It's faults have been magnified and will be addressed I think. I also think it will consolidate it's position if the UK leaves with it's damaging opt-outs and vetos and sterling.

Tell me how

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Farage has been doing the 'tour' (including to ireland) for years now. No effect really. There will always be anti EU sentiment, but I think seeing what just the process of leaving does, that common sense will win out for a good few years yet.
And ultimately, imo the EU will be a better place after this process. It's faults have been magnified and will be addressed I think. I also think it will consolidate it's position if the UK leaves with it's damaging opt-outs and vetos and sterling.

The UK are leaving the EU.

FrancieBrady

Tell me how wrote: »

The UK are leaving the EU.

Maybe.

And Farage has not convinced anyone else to even start the process. And has less chance now.

Leroy42

trellheim wrote: »

As for DD I am in no way a Brexiteer in fact I think it is horrendous.

He represents a very large constituency and blank dismissals of the premises are perhaps . From the brexiteer point of view - as I said - most of what is in that statement makes sense and it should be read in that light. Yes he's writing in the Torygraph and playing to many of the faithful but so what.

I ask again, as you have restated it again.

What parts of the piece does DD get right, and does that have any impact on the overall opinion that the UK should reject the current deal offered by the EU on the basis of a, as yet unknown, final deal being offered.

Tell me how

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I think these things would make it less likely that Ireland or Poland or Italy or Denmark would actually leave, not more likely.


Rees-Mogg, seriously, could anyone be a better model for a stereotypical obnoxious British bad guy? It's as if he escaped from a Harry Potter movie.

But that is the central point in all this. A powerful core group with a targeted approach can sway the direction of a country.

You put Rees-Mogg in to a room speaking about the benefits of Brexit. The audience is full of right wingers (because that's who invited him) and they have been instructed to cheer loudly. That night the media covers it in a positive manner and speaks of rising interest.

The following day, the papers carry a similar tone. What the person on the stage actually has said is incidental to a large degree.

This is how Brexit evolved.

FrancieBrady

Tell me how wrote: »

But that is the central point in all this. A powerful core group with a targeted approach can sway the direction of a country.

You put Rees-Mogg in to a room speaking about the benefits of Brexit. The audience is full of right wingers (because that's who invited him) and they have been instructed to cheer loudly. That night the media covers it in a positive manner and speaks of rising interest.

The following day, the papers carry a similar tone. What the person on the stage actually has said is incidental to a large degree.

This is how Brexit evolved.

Problem for Rees Mogg, Farage etc is that leaving will no longer be an abstract proposition.

Essentially, people are not stupid, they can clearly see through the bull**** to the real effects.
I fail to see any upside for the UK so far in this Leave project.

Tell me how

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Problem for Rees Mogg, Farage etc is that leaving will no longer be an abstract proposition.

Essentially, people are not stupid, they can clearly see through the bull**** to the real effects.
I fail to see any upside for the UK so far in this Leave project.

Forgive me if I think you are too naive. JRM, Farage, Johnson want Brexit for their own interests. They are the ones with the financial security so as not to be affected as others are going to be.

I think that once they are out, their goals will have been met (apart from Johnson who picked the side hoping it would get him the role of PM).
From that point on, the blame will be put on everyone else.

• The sitting government
• The EU
• WTO
• China
• US and so on.

But, they won't really care what that blame is because they'll be out.

ambro25

Tell me how wrote: »

But that is the central point in all this. A powerful core group with a targeted approach can sway the direction of a country.

You put Rees-Mogg in to a room speaking about the benefits of Brexit. The audience is full of right wingers (because that's who invited him) and they have been instructed to cheer loudly. That night the media covers it in a positive manner and speaks of rising interest.

The following day, the papers carry a similar tone. What the person on the stage actually has said is incidental to a large degree.

This is how Brexit evolved.

What you may be overlooking however, is that everyone in the world, including politicians first and foremost, has been witnessing first-hand the slow and meticulous evisceration of UK plc by the EU27 over the past 2 years, fast and opportunistically capitalising on David Davis' "creative uncertainty", with FDI and tax base going and, for a good chunk of it, never coming back...

...all before Brexit, whatever form it may take; or not if it gets binned at the 11th hour.

At the current stage, it's well beyond a taste of Brexity things to come: it's the first few bites of the mongo Brexity 5hit sandwich already taken and swallowed. No need whatsoever for EU27 intelligence bods to pick and read the tea leaves either: it's all over the public space, for anyone with an ounce of objectivity to look at.

I'd argue that this is exactly the how and why of Italy's populist finance minister very recently waxing elogious about the € and pledging Italy's undying love for it, notwithstanding their earlier budgetary friction with the EU: unlike much of the Brit population, much of the EU27 populations know what the EU is, have an inkling of how it works, and a good grasp of what it's done and still does for them, for all its faults.

That Italian one is only recent, so fresh in everyone's mind, but there's many more across the EU27 since June 2016: French, Dutch, Polish GEs, to name 3 high-profile ones wherein the populists got a drubbing.

As attested by polls the length and breadth of the EU27 throughout 2018, they know which side their bread's buttered, they're not large farm volatiles about to vote for Christmas, and their politicians -for all their populist testiculations to land the top job- are hearing that message just fine; so they know when to stop.

Beyond that, Rees-Mogg, Johnson, Gove, Davis are all UK context-specific: they might scale a little in the US amongst Trumpsters, or in Oz. But not in the EU27. You take that Rees-Mogg out of the Westminster ERG bubble context, and plonk him in a roomfull of Pegida types or Front National types, and see how long he makes it, without even asking them to cheer him on. Now Farage, or that Loxley-whats-his-face guy, they might make it to beer time. Just.

Midlife

Tell me how wrote: »

Anyone who thinks David Davis is right, or that he would do a better job on this is either deliberately lying, or should admit that they do not know what they are talking about.

I'd say those impact assessments exist but they're terrible news for Britian.

In that they're terrible for working class British.

The tory hiearachy will take a slight drop in personal wealth on the chin for getting to rule the nation again though.

They're just not going to let the masses in on how bad the outlook is for them.

J Mysterio

Tell me how wrote: »

But that is the central point in all this. A powerful core group with a targeted approach can sway the direction of a country.

You put Rees-Mogg in to a room speaking about the benefits of Brexit. The audience is full of right wingers (because that's who invited him) and they have been instructed to cheer loudly. That night the media covers it in a positive manner and speaks of rising interest.

The following day, the papers carry a similar tone. What the person on the stage actually has said is incidental to a large degree.

This is how Brexit evolved.

That is a hugely simplistic analysis.

Brexit evolved in the main due to the particulars of Britain, its relationship to the EU and the national psyche there (former empire, 'winner' of WWII). There were numerous other factors such as lack of referendum commision, lack of information, decades of tabloid propoganda, dyfunctional 2 party system, 2 dysfunctional parties and fraudulent manipulation of the process.

Having Jacob Rees Mogg or any of the other lying swindlers go to Italy and speak in a room will not result in their suddenly deciding to leave.

The reality is that Brexit has proved why the EU is so valuable for member countries and why it is infinitely better to be within than without.

ambro25

Midlife wrote: »

I'd say those impact assessments exist but they're terrible news for Britian.

In that they're terrible for working class British.

The tory hiearachy will take a slight drop in personal wealth on the chin for getting to rule the nation again though.

They're just not going to let the masses in on how bad the outlook is for them.

I've always believed that they do exist: ever since I took part in an interview by the research/PR company tasked by HMG at the time. They did not hide the purpose of the interview.

It was definitely after the Ref, either late 2016 or early 2017, can't remember exactly (I posted about it in here at the time).

Strazdas

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I fail to see what is attractive about 'leaving' after the last few years. The process alone has severely damaged the country.

Any damage to Ireland or the rest of the EU is eminently repairable and recoverable. It doesn't show any signs of being the same for the UK. Brexit, if it happens is not going to cure their root issues.

Where Britain has messed up is going straight for the nuclear option as their first option. They could have been looking for reform of their relationship with the EU but instead decided to smash the relationship to pieces after 50 years in the ugliest and most acrimonious of divorces.

Nigel Farage must have some hold over the population. It was he who put "leaving the EU" (a most extreme outcome) on the table from day one.

J Mysterio

Brexit no-deal warnings to be issued to public as crunch vote on Theresa May's deal approaches

Whitehall departments will step up warnings to the public over the threat of a no-deal Brexit ahead of the crunch Commons vote on Theresa May's withdrawal agreement.

Brexit secretary Stephen Barclayannounced plans for a fresh publicity drive as he warned that a disorderly Brexit will be "far more likely" if MPs vote down the prime minister's deal in the upcoming meaningful vote in a fortnight's time.

With less than three months until exit day, the government will start publishing guidance on how the public can prepare for a no-deal scenario, using radio and social media broadcasts to spread the message.

____

Bit late for this type of nonsense, with about two months to go. Only increases the sense of disorder and panic. If only they had taken the care to inform the public before the vote.

There are countless examples of people having 'voter regret' the day after the vote. 'I didn't think enough about it', 'I didn't realise x would be lost' etc.

Water John

Now who's talking, Project Fear?

Leroy42

Water John wrote: »

Now who's talking, Project Fear?

And that is the problem.

Releasing this info now will be seen as little more than an attempt by TM to scare MP's into voting for her deal. They will be cast aside as propaganda. (whether they are or not).

It has been said before that the UK needed to play on the possibility of a No Deal to force the EU's hand, but it turns out that the EU are very much aware of the possible outcomes and have bluffed the UK back on the basis that they knew the UK government had done nothing to actually either prepare or prepare the public for such an eventuality.

At at the end, TM or any politician, does not want to be the person remembered for dragging the UK into massive negative issues. Self preservation will win out, even if common sense does not.

RobMc59

Peregrinus wrote: »

Relatively few of them are doing this. As is typical, the media in the UK focus on asylum seekers coming to the UK, but that doesn't mean that all, or even most, asylum seekers are coming to the UK. The ones that aren't are not noticed by the UK media, but they're there all the same.


No. Spreading the load would involve more asylum applications being handled by the UK, not less. The UK has 12.7% of the EU population, but only handles 4.8% of asylum applications made in the EU (as of 2017; the 2018 figures aren't out yet).

You could substitute UK media for any country as that`s what they all do,report on the situation in their own country-so that`s not unusual.
Your meticulous research is factually correct but perhaps is being massaged to support your personal opinion of the UK.I could say-"there were nearly as many successful asylum seeker requests in the UK as Holland and Spain combined in 2017" which implies that Holland and Spain did`nt do enough for asylum seekers.The presentation of facts in a certain way to promote a particular view can be perceived as a clever discussion tool or a method used by a zealot(which I`m not suggesting you are!) ,usually accepted by unconscious bias by some and only spotted by those with a different view of things.

ambro25

Water John wrote: »

Now who's talking, Project Fear?

It's come out through the wash earlier today, that Seabourne was awarded that £14m contract, because it was the only company bidding on the tender.

Now, that's a minute % of the RoRo capacity potentially lost on the Dover-Calais, short term. Under pizza parlour T&Cs. Gives you an idea of the level of due diligence exercised by fly-by-night operators looking to capitalise on panicking, out-of-time Whitehall types without political guidance.

"Project Fear" is a self-compounding, self-fulfilling prophecy, and the new Collins/Oxford definition of 'irony', if not for 2019, then definitely for 2020.

Zubeneschamali

Tell me how wrote: »

But that is the central point in all this. A powerful core group with a targeted approach can sway the direction of a country.

A country, yes. Exactly one country: England.


Put Rees-Mogg talking anywhere else and people will point and laugh. Or if they think he's serious, hiss and boo him off the stage.

Professor Moriarty

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

A country, yes. Exactly one country: England.


Put Rees-Mogg talking anywhere else and people will point and laugh. Or if they think he's serious, hiss and boo him off the stage.

An Old Etonian who is an enthusiastic advocate of zero contract hours. That is all you need to know about Jacob.

Sam Russell

ambro25 wrote: »

It's come out through the wash earlier today, that Seabourne was awarded that £14m contract, because it was the only company bidding on the tender.

Now it may be the only UK tender received, but it should have been rejected out of hand.

1. The company was formed as a £2 company in April 2017, just one week after Art 50 was lodged.

2. The company has no filed accounts.

3. It has no ships of its own nor any on charter.

4. The company has never operated a ship or a lorry.

5. The UK port of Ramsgate cannot handle RORO ferries currently. Dredging will be required, which has not happened.

6. There were reports in Kent newpapers citing some strange activity involving this company.

Smells a lot of fish.

Tell me how

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

A country, yes. Exactly one country: England.


Put Rees-Mogg talking anywhere else and people will point and laugh. Or if they think he's serious, hiss and boo him off the stage.

Same has been said about him Johnson and Farage for years. They still are very close to getting their Brexit.

I'm bemused that given what happened with Trump in the US and Brexit that people do not believe just how close some unlikely events are to being realised.

We are told the next recession (to whatever degree) is imminent. The last time we had one, countries were suggested leaving the EU. Should that happen again, it is likely the UK will be on the sideline giving them the 'come hither' eyes.

I hope none of this will happen because ultimately that path leads to acrimony and heaven forbid potentially conflict of some sort but a few years ago if someone told you that President Trump and PM Johnson were to meet to hold talks on a new trade deal they'd be laughed out of town. We're over half way there to such a scenario at this point.

prawnsambo

ambro25 wrote: »

It's come out through the wash earlier today, that Seabourne was awarded that £14m contract, because it was the only company bidding on the tender.

I think we need to be very careful here in naming this company. Seabourne are a very well established freight and logistics company.

Seaborne on the other hand appear to be gearing up for food deliveries. They are in no way connected that I can find, other than that their names are identical bar one extra vowel.

Tell me how

Sam Russell wrote: »

Now it may be the only UK tender received, but it should have been rejected out of hand.

1. The company was formed as a £2 company in April 2017, just one week after Art 50 was lodged.

2. The company has no filed accounts.

3. It has no ships of its own nor any on charter.

4. The company has never operated a ship or a lorry.

5. The UK port of Ramsgate cannot handle RORO ferries currently. Dredging will be required, which has not happened.

6. There were reports in Kent newpapers citing some strange activity involving this company.

Smells a lot of fish.

Grayling was interviewed on Ch4 and it was cringeworthy.
Is using it as an example of the government supporting new British business like its some sort of start up initiative. I suspect we are going to see very revealing investigations in to the company by the likes of Carole Cadwalladar.

https://twitter.com/Channel4News/status/1080521892308627457

FrancieBrady

Sam Russell wrote: »

Now it may be the only UK tender received, but it should have been rejected out of hand.

1. The company was formed as a £2 company in April 2017, just one week after Art 50 was lodged.

2. The company has no filed accounts.

3. It has no ships of its own nor any on charter.

4. The company has never operated a ship or a lorry.

5. The UK port of Ramsgate cannot handle RORO ferries currently. Dredging will be required, which has not happened.

6. There were reports in Kent newpapers citing some strange activity involving this company.

Smells a lot of fish.

And according to Matthew Parrish on Pat Kenny this AM, they get paid the moolah regardless of what happens.

prawnsambo

Tell me how wrote: »

We are told the next recession (to whatever degree) is imminent. The last time we had one, countries were suggested leaving the EU. Should that happen again, it is likely the UK will be on the sideline giving them the 'come hither' eyes.

Unless for some reason unknown to the rest of us, the UK is in any position other than the deepest of recessions, I cannot see what would attract other countries to join them. For decades to come, they will be the poster boys for hubristic failure.

mark206000

https://m.independent.ie/business/farming/news/farming-news/emergency-eu-aid-for-farmers-to-be-sought-for-brexit-fallout-37677649.html

"The Government will seek hundreds of millions of euro in special aid from Brussels if the UK crashes out of the EU without a deal."

Can't help thinking we've been pushed by the EU to create problems for the UK and are going to end up getting shafted both ends for it. The EU without the UK to restrain it for things usually in our interests also and the UK who are going to be a bit pissed at us and probably rightly so.

prawnsambo

mark206000 wrote: »

https://m.independent.ie/business/farming/news/farming-news/emergency-eu-aid-for-farmers-to-be-sought-for-brexit-fallout-37677649.html

"The Government will seek hundreds of millions of euro in special aid from Brussels if the UK crashes out of the EU without a deal."

Can't help thinking we've been pushed by the EU to create problems for the UK and are going to end up getting shafted both ends for it. The EU without the UK to restrain it for things usually in our interests also and the UK who are going to be a bit pissed at us and probably rightly so.

I think you need to re-evaluate your thought processes. Are you suggesting we stay quiet about the little international agreement we signed with the UK a couple of decades ago and not rock the boat in case we get our elders and betters a bit mad at us? Is that your approach?