Brexit discussion thread XII (Please read OP before posting)

A Dub in Glasgo

brickster69 wrote: »

You are in denial. We will see what % Varadkar gets soon.:D

That is an irrelevance to the point you appear to be making

brickster69

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

That is an irrelevance to the point you appear to be making

Ok, what was the vote % of the referendum ?

A Dub in Glasgo

brickster69 wrote: »

Ok, what was the vote % of the referendum ?

The referendum result was 51.89% Leave, 48.11% remain made up of

Christy42

brickster69 wrote: »

You are in denial. We will see what % Varadkar gets soon.:D

I mean. If we take parties in favour of Varadkars approach on Brexit you should be adding FF, FG, SF, Labour, Greens and Social Democrats as a minimum. Unsure where PBP are on this. But hey if the Freedom party do well you might have a point there.

Hopefully the Brits will see things don't change. Decide this so great and just make the transition agreement permanent and they can be an EU state in all but name

CrabRevolution

It's a pretty bizarre notion from Brexiters that Varadkar will be punished for his Brexit stance in the election. They conveniently ignore the fact that the other Irish parties stopped calling for an election for the guts of 2 years, in order to let Varadkar continue his work on Brexit.

gooch2k9

CrabRevolution wrote: »

It's a pretty bizarre notion from Brexiters that Varadkar will be punished for his Brexit stance in the election. They conveniently ignore the fact that the other Irish parties stopped calling for an election for the guts of 2 years, in order to let Varadkar continue his work on Brexit.

It's just them thinking they are the centre of all things. Nothing changed from the last three years.

Andrew Neil got a good response earlier!

A Dub in Glasgo

Outside the Scottish Parliament last night

https://twitter.com/HeartScotNews/status/1223383371033739264

alentejo

At this stage, I hope the trade talks fail. I am aware that this will cost Ireland dearly. Ireland Inc might be stronger and less reliant on UK in the longer run.

Strazdas

Bit cynical wrote: »

Well certainly from the point of view of Cameron, it was a mistake and he paid for it with his career. His intention was for the UK's position in the EU to be secured for a long time through a strong vote to remain, but of course that did not happen.

He was totally playing with fire though : stoking up the English hard right and the populists / authoritarians.

Even if had 'won' the referendum 52-48, who knows what would have happened in the aftermath. It may have emboldened UKIP and Farage and the Daily Telegraph and made them more Europhobic than ever.

Tea Shock

Re trade talks. Hopping between BBC Sky and CNN last night.... The UK Media are STILL talking about how the EU will fold in the last days of the transition period. Because they have many times before.... Apparently

That wasn't surprising but what was surprising was the peo-Brexit and anti EU slant on CNNs coverage.

Strazdas

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Outside the Scottish Parliament last night

https://twitter.com/HeartScotNews/status/1223383371033739264

The way that Scotland has effectively been told to get stuffed by England on this issue and "We voted to leave as one country" is disgraceful. The Brexiteers are admitting they couldn't give a flying fig what Scotland thinks.

Leroy42

Strazdas wrote: »

The way that Scotland has effectively been told to get stuffed by England on this issue and "We voted to leave as one country" is disgraceful. The Brexiteers are admitting they couldn't give a flying fig what Scotland thinks.

It simple goes to show that England only want union when they are in charge. That is the nub of all of this.

All this talk about Turkey, EU army is all nonsense. It was amplified to create a narrative. Just like the blaming of the EU for not giving UK a better deal. No deal was ever going to be good enough, not until they had control.

They simply cannot accept that they should abide by anything other than their own views. Hence talk of the precious Union, only because they are in complete control of it.

Even know it talk of FTA, taking back the fish etc. No hint of compromise. They NEED us. They will have to give it to us otherwise we walk away.

And it is for that reason that I believe any deal, even the WA, is doomed to failure. Because no matter how we split it, and some point they are going have to agree to be part of something they are not in control of, and it will eventually collapse.

Strazdas

Leroy42 wrote: »

It simple goes to show that England only want union when they are in charge. That is the nub of all of this.

All this talk about Turkey, EU army is all nonsense. It was amplified to create a narrative. Just like the blaming of the EU for not giving UK a better deal. No deal was ever going to be good enough, not until they had control.

They simply cannot accept that they should abide by anything other than their own views. Hence talk of the precious Union, only because they are in complete control of it.

Even know it talk of FTA, taking back the fish etc. No hint of compromise. They NEED us. They will have to give it to us otherwise we walk away.

And it is for that reason that I believe any deal, even the WA, is doomed to failure. Because no matter how we split it, and some point they are going have to agree to be part of something they are not in control of, and it will eventually collapse.

The shocking thing about that referendum is that Scotland, Wales and NI had no power of veto over England, not unless the result was 50.3%-49.7% or something.....whatever England voted for was the result.

What's worse is that the English Brexiteers don't even care about this : no expressions of sadness or regret at the collateral damage of Brexit. As you say, just the desire to be in control and to dominate others. The idea of having to be equal partners is anathema to them.

Bit cynical

alentejo wrote: »

At this stage, I hope the trade talks fail. I am aware that this will cost Ireland dearly. Ireland Inc might be stronger and less reliant on UK in the longer run.

I think this sort of sentiment among the UK remainers partially explains their behavior after the referendum result: "we lost the referendum therefore lets have the hardest of hard brexits just to show how wrong, in our view, brexit is". A sort of death wish. The hardline ERG Brexiteers were able to use this to their advantage.

serfboard

briany wrote: »

it appears that Barnier will be 'overseeing' the FTA, while Hogan will be the actual one heading up negotiations.

Not to question Hogan's abilities as a negotiator, but I would have thought keeping on with the same personnel would have been wiser, especially since they've proven quite adept so far.

And who is the Senior Civil Servant in Hogan’s Department (or in Commission terms, the Director General)?

Sabine Weyand AKA Barnier’s no. 2 in the negotiations. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabine_Weyand.

Much as the present Irish Government likes to go on about how good Big Phil is, the Germans would never have conceded to him being appointed Trade Commissioner without a tough German actually running the show behind him.

And it actually also makes sense in a way to have an Irish Commissioner, because we will be so directly affected by Brexit.

Despite not having much faith myself in Hogan, I’d be fairly confident that between himself and Weyand, they’ll be a pretty good double act in preventing the English trying any funny stuff.

MrMusician18

Bit cynical wrote: »

I think this sort of sentiment among the UK remainers partially explains their behavior after the referendum result: "we lost the referendum therefore lets have the hardest of hard brexits just to show how wrong, in our view, brexit is". A sort of death wish. The hardline ERG Brexiteers were able to use this to their advantage.

I think the remainers tolerated the hard Brexit chatter as it gave a strong contrast to their proposal of a second referendum to cancel the chaos. They then thought that the population might baulk at this and force a rerun.

In the end though they couldn't organise themselves to deliver their wish. When the SNP saw that an election to deliver an unpopular Brexit in Scotland could be won (which in turn could deliver independence) they decided to jump - along with the hopeless Lib Dems. Remain failed to deliver the second referendum because the remain parties put their own interests ahead of EU membership for the UK.

Remember instead of today being post Brexit, we could've been looking at a referendum campaign right now, with caretaker PM Corbyn running the show. That's what was thrown away.

ThePanjandrum

gooch2k9 wrote: »

It's just them thinking they are the centre of all things. Nothing changed from the last three years.

Andrew Neil got a good response earlier!

This is page 417 of the twelfth version of the Brexit discussion thread. Doesn't that tell you something?

CelticRambler

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

This is page 417 of the twelfth version of the Brexit discussion thread. Doesn't that tell you something?

That Brexit is more of a stinking mess than that described on JohnnyFlash's "etiquette" thread? :pac:

ThePanjandrum

Strazdas wrote: »

The way that Scotland has effectively been told to get stuffed by England on this issue and "We voted to leave as one country" is disgraceful. The Brexiteers are admitting they couldn't give a flying fig what Scotland thinks.

The United Kingdom voted as one country, as it should have because it was a single member of the EU. If England had voted to leave but the overall result had been to remain, do you think the remainers would still be making this argument?

SantaCruz

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

The United Kingdom voted as one country, as it should have because it was a single member of the EU. If England had voted to leave but the overall result had been to remain, do you think the remainers would still be making this argument?

I think those pointing out the outright lie that the UK is a democratic union of nations would still be making it, yes.

beggars_bush

What can Scotland actually do though?

They are trapped by the previous independence referendum in a way, and have no way to force a new one

SantaCruz

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

This is page 417 of the twelfth version of the Brexit discussion thread. Doesn't that tell you something?

It tells me that it's tremendously interesting watching a neighbour self-destruct.

ThePanjandrum

Strazdas wrote: »

The shocking thing about that referendum is that Scotland, Wales and NI had no power of veto over England, not unless the result was 50.3%-49.7% or something.....whatever England voted for was the result.

What's worse is that the English Brexiteers don't even care about this : no expressions of sadness or regret at the collateral damage of Brexit. As you say, just the desire to be in control and to dominate others. The idea of having to be equal partners is anathema to them.

16% of the UK's population does not live in England, that could well have swayed the vote but the fact remains that there are a lot of leavers in Scotland and Northern Ireland. Anyway, the idea of England as a monolith means nothing in a vote like this, different areas voted differently but only the total vote was important

SantaCruz

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

only the total vote was important

...to England.

ThePanjandrum

SantaCruz wrote: »

I think those pointing out the outright lie that the UK is a democratic union of nations would still be making it, yes.

That would be a difficult point to make because the United Kingdom is a democratic union of nations.


In fact the biggest challenge to it being democratic is that Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are all over represented in Parliament.


The average constituency size in Wales is 56,000, in Scotland 67,200, in Norther Ireland 68,300, in England 72,200.


It happened in the EU too. The United Kingdom had fewer MEPs per constituent than any other nation.

fash

Bit cynical wrote: »

Well certainly from the point of view of Cameron, it was a mistake and he paid for it with his career. His intention was for the UK's position in the EU to be secured for a long time through a strong vote to remain, but of course that did not happen.

From the point of view of holding the conservative party together, while crushing the brexit party, shoring up conservative votes for the next few years and putting the other parties into disarray, brexit was a great success.

SantaCruz

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

That would be a difficult point to make because the United Kingdom is a democratic union of nations.


In fact the biggest challenge to it being democratic is that Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are all over represented in Parliament.


The average constituency size in Wales is 56,000, in Scotland 67,200, in Norther Ireland 68,300, in England 72,200.


It happened in the EU too. The United Kingdom had fewer MEPs per constituent than any other nation.

So if, hypothetically, 3 nations thought some major change was a complete disaster and 1 nation thought it would be good, the 3 nations could prevent the change?

fash

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

It happened in the EU too. The United Kingdom had fewer MEPs per constituent than any other nation.

Only because the UK is no longer an EU member does it have fewer MEPs, otherwise France has the fewest number - similar to the electoral college system in the US. Both systems are designed to ensure a disproportionate voice to the smallest states to compensate for their small size.

reslfj

brickster69 wrote: »

If a car has a margin of 4-6% and has a tariff of 10% then the sale price has to raise by about 15% to make the same profit.

Back to school and learning arithmetic.

UK car price in UK = 100% = 94-96% cost + 6-4% profit

UK car price in EU = 100%+10% = 110% - with existing profit

UK car price in EU = 94-96%+10% = 103.4 -105.6% - without any profit

UK car price in EU = 90.9%+10% = 100% - EU price unchanged, but at a loss.


Prices on almost all UK goods can't be higher on the large and competitive EU27 single market - and the market for cars within the SM is very, very competitive.

Why buy an Astra at a 10% higher price, when VW Golf, Peugeot 308 or Citroen C4 are available without the 10% higher price ?
Why produce an Astra in the UK, when the factory owner PSA has car assembly lines with spare capacity in many EU27 countries.

This is a fundamental difference between the UK post-Brexit market and the large EU27 SM. The UK buyers will simply have to pay the full tariffs for most imported goods, as EU27 and other exporters will all have to pay the UK tariffs and will see little competition on the UK market, while the EU market will not lose much of its competitive power after a the (partial) loss of UK exported products.

Most industrial product have low tariffs, but e.g. agri products, fish/fish products and finished cars have significant - devastating - WTO MFN tariffs into the EU27.

Lars

jimmycrackcorm

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

The United Kingdom voted as one country, as it should have because it was a single member of the EU. If England had voted to leave but the overall result had been to remain, do you think the remainers would still be making this argument?

If the UK is one country then why do the other to the Scottish that Scotland is a country.

Even the way the parliment treated the Scots by walking out when Scottish MPs begin to talk just shows that is an English parliment that rules all.

You can have your devolved pets but you're only just a big county council