Brexit discussion thread XIV (Please read OP before posting)

Leroy42

Quickstep back. Gove's letter gave the EU until the end of the week to sort things out. They held a meeting and the outcome was that they were going to have another meeting next week.

Sounds eerily similar to the many multiple threats given by Davies, May, Johnson etc where they demanded something something and the EU slowly dealt with it in a responsible manner,

So round 1 to the EU already. Gove has had to give in on the very first demand he made!

If they UK triggers Art 16, it means a hard border in Ireland. They have been at pains to say they never want this, the people in NI don't want it, the EU the US. So UK are put basically thrown in their entire pot on this one hand. If the EU calls their bluff, are they really going to go down this route when they are looking to get a trade deal with the US and actively looking to join CTPPT?

looksee

Finally, after 5 years I finally found and read the official UK government Brexit referendum leaflet, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/515068/why-the-government-believes-that-voting-to-remain-in-the-european-union-is-the-best-decision-for-the-uk.pdf. The one titled 'The Government believes that voting to remain in the European Union is the best decision for the UK'. Which then goes on to give all the Remain arguments.

They even published an 'easy read' version https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/525022/20160523_Leaflet_EASY_READ_FINAL_VERSION.pdf

A UK research institute published a paper http://speri.dept.shef.ac.uk/2018/01/26/how-the-governments-pro-remain-leaflet-shaped-the-eu-referendum/ saying that the government publication successfully encouraged remain votes.

Which all goes to suggest that there was a very powerful Brexit lobby who managed, in the face of the above government official information, to be more persuasive than the remain lobby. So what was the government at, with the above leaflet? I didn't hear much day to day pushing of the angle published. Was it actually delivered? Was there a cynical sense that enough speeches by a Conservative government would, along with the popular press, would override the leaflets? Were politicians ever challenged 'you said this in your leaflet, why are you saying the opposite here?' I had not fully realised how totally perverse the Leave vote was.

I had come to all the conclusions listed without benefit of the leaflet, they seemed obvious to me, which was why I have been vocally against Brexit since the start. I could not then, and cannot now see any advantages. And I still await any coherent arguments from the pro-Brexit posters as to how it is any sort of an advantage to the UK to be out. They respond reactively to posts here, with lots of whataboutery, but are not offering clear statements of what the advantages are, or even, will be.

ujjjjjjjjj

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

they got fined for billions for bringing in Chinese tat from what I remember

And if believe there isn't a load of tat coming into the EU or that the CE mark means anything at all well fine..............Many Chinese manafacturers don't understand or care about a standard, copyright, intellectual property etc etc, they will make and tell you anything and stamp anything you want on a product and even give you a piece of paper telling you it's CE if you want. They copy, they find ways to make things cheaper and then tell you it's as good as you want it to be.

It's laughable to worry about 'sub standard' tat coming in from the UK or any third country considering the same tat is brought into the EU with 'CE certification' day in day out...........and if it isn't been sold on the high street it's coming in parcels from a myriad of online shopping sites every day anyway. Buyer beware.............

Hurrache

Leroy42 wrote: »

So round 1 to the EU already. Gove has had to give in on the very first demand he made!

Seems like he had no choice as unsurprisingly that amongst all their demands there wasn't a sniff of how to resolve it.
https://twitter.com/ShonaMurray_/status/1357266860534878210
https://twitter.com/ShonaMurray_/status/1357266864817242112

FrancieBrady

ujjjjjjjjj wrote: »

And if believe there isn't a load of tat coming into the EU or that the CE mark means anything at all well fine..............Many Chinese manafacturers don't understand or care about a standard, copyright, intellectual property etc etc, they will make and tell you anything and stamp anything you want on a product and even give you a piece of paper telling you it's CE if you want. They copy, they find ways to make things cheaper and then tell you it's as good as you want it to be.

It's laughable to worry about 'sub standard' tat coming in from the UK or any third country considering the same tat is brought into the EU with 'CE certification' day in day out...........and if it isn't been sold on the high street it's coming in parcels from a myriad of online shopping sites every day anyway. Buyer beware.............

Any examples/data of the extent of this problem or is this info of 'a man told me in the pub' variety.

ujjjjjjjjj

ujjjjjjjjj wrote: »

And if believe there isn't a load of tat coming into the EU or that the CE mark means anything at all well fine..............Many Chinese manafacturers don't understand or care about a standard, ......

The Chinese have created a CE mark called "Chinese Export", the difference is the spacing between the letters, the Chinese CE is in a different font to the EU CE mark and the letters appear closer together.

ujjjjjjjjj

looksee wrote: »

Finally, after 5 years I finally found and read the official UK government Brexit referendum leaflet, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/515068/why-the-government-believes-that-voting-to-remain-in-the-european-union-is-the-best-decision-for-the-uk.pdf. The one titled 'The Government believes that voting to remain in the European Union is the best decision for the UK'. Which then goes on to give all the Remain arguments.

They even published an 'easy read' version https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/525022/20160523_Leaflet_EASY_READ_FINAL_VERSION.pdf

A UK research institute published a paper http://speri.dept.shef.ac.uk/2018/01/26/how-the-governments-pro-remain-leaflet-shaped-the-eu-referendum/ saying that the government publication successfully encouraged remain votes.

Which all goes to suggest that there was a very powerful Brexit lobby who managed, in the face of the above government official information, to be more persuasive than the remain lobby. So what was the government at, with the above leaflet? I didn't hear much day to day pushing of the angle published. Was it actually delivered? Was there a cynical sense that enough speeches by a Conservative government would, along with the popular press, would override the leaflets? Were politicians ever challenged 'you said this in your leaflet, why are you saying the opposite here?' I had not fully realised how totally perverse the Leave vote was.

I had come to all the conclusions listed without benefit of the leaflet, they seemed obvious to me, which was why I have been vocally against Brexit since the start. I could not then, and cannot now see any advantages. And I still await any coherent arguments from the pro-Brexit posters as to how it is any sort of an advantage to the UK to be out. They respond reactively to posts here, with lots of whataboutery, but are not offering clear statements of what the advantages are, or even, will be.

We can endlessly debate Brexit but the big question which everyone in the EU needs to talk about is ultimately Federalism and where you draw the line. Britain has always been luke warm on the EU and it's an outlier and an advance warning party as to the big question. There is plenty of anti-EU sentiment across Europe and big issues like the endless problems with the single currency, tedious beaucracy, power imbalances and sluggishness such as this botched vaccine roleout in Europe will to continue to raise issues. In Ireland we seem to now have become entirely and fully pro EU (no matter what) just because of the behavior of the Brits. I still would like the Irish people to question ultimately what they want the EU to become. If they like the 'mission creep' from a trading block of friends to a federal state fine but let's not fall into this if people don't actually want it.

For me a European Union which exists as a free trade area make absolute sense, pushing it onto where we are now where huge sections of governmental decisions sit now in Brussels I am less comfortable with. It also causes huge issues in our current environment where national governments such as the Irish government can wash their hands of issues saying that their hands are tied with European Regulations etc etc. Personally I don't want a United States of Europe and we are moving closer and closer to this. Some people may be entirely happy with a United States of Europe but can we actually have a frank and open discussion on this rather than allowing it to creep in the back door. I am not a conspiracy theorist but there are undoubtedly forces in the EU which are entirely comfortable with the concept of a federal super state and all I am looking for is people to be asked the question rather than letting it creep in the back door.

Brexit is a warning shot about a European super state. I may be wrong and the rest of Europe might happily slip into federal state in time (de facto or actual, some argue already that it is close to de facto now) but I don't think it will go particularly smoothly and we may in time have further dissenters.

Sam Russell

ujjjjjjjjj wrote: »

And if believe there isn't a load of tat coming into the EU or that the CE mark means anything at all well fine..............Many Chinese manafacturers don't understand or care about a standard, copyright, intellectual property etc etc, they will make and tell you anything and stamp anything you want on a product and even give you a piece of paper telling you it's CE if you want. They copy, they find ways to make things cheaper and then tell you it's as good as you want it to be.

It's laughable to worry about 'sub standard' tat coming in from the UK or any third country considering the same tat is brought into the EU with 'CE certification' day in day out...........and if it isn't been sold on the high street it's coming in parcels from a myriad of online shopping sites every day anyway. Buyer beware.............

This is countered by the EU using market surveillance where they sample the offerings in the market and react where they find problems. This is done in the UK (by the Trading Standards Offices throughout the UK), and throughout the EU.

Each EU state has the equivalent, as the Irish Food Standards office discovered horse meat being used in low cost burgers being produced in Ireland using doubtful meat from sources of disguised origin that originated in Eastern Europe. It was horse meat - which although not harmful to humans, it was not what it was presented to be on the label. That is how the SM works - constant vigilance.

The UK have not guaranteed to continue such surveillance to EU standards which is why there are border checks at UK/EU borders - in the case of the island of Ireland those checks occur on entry to NI and Ireland.

The multi billion euro fine imposed on the UK was as the result of huge valuation fraud of Chinese jeans imported in the UK and valued at significantly below the cost of raw cotton. It was not related to CE mark or standards of product.

ujjjjjjjjj

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Any examples/data of the extent of this problem or is this info of 'a man told me in the pub' variety.

Have a quick google..............endless articles about the rather dodgy use of the CE mark.....I have worked with procurement people in retail and in many product lines CE is treated as a bit of a joke and box ticking exercise There are plenty of manufacturers around the world that don't treat it as a joke and honour it and there are plenty who don't.....

peter kern

ujjjjjjjjj wrote: »

And if believe there isn't a load of tat coming into the EU or that the CE mark means anything at all well fine..............Many Chinese manafacturers don't understand or care about a standard, copyright, intellectual property etc etc, they will make and tell you anything and stamp anything you want on a product and even give you a piece of paper telling you it's CE if you want. They copy, they find ways to make things cheaper and then tell you it's as good as you want it to be.

It's laughable to worry about 'sub standard' tat coming in from the UK or any third country considering the same tat is brought into the EU with 'CE certification' day in day out...........and if it isn't been sold on the high street it's coming in parcels from a myriad of online shopping sites every day anyway. Buyer beware.............

so does brexit mean brexit,or not ?
i agree with you the eu needs to control Chinese imports more

VinLieger

ujjjjjjjjj wrote: »

Brexit is a warning shot about a European super state. I may be wrong and the rest of Europe might happily slip into federal state in time (de facto or actual, some argue already that it is close to de facto now) but I don't think it will go particularly smoothly and we may in time have further dissenters.

What in your opinion is the answer to the future for Europe with an increasingly aggressive China and Russia and an increasingly undependable United States, yes we may have Biden for now but what about in 4 years? or 8? etc etc?

Russia and China see us as the enemy, politically, economically and culturally, also so do the US depending on whose in the white house, and they will keep trying to fracture us so what outside of federalisation is the answer in your opinion?

I don't necessarily agree with federalisation or welcome it with open arms but i also am a realist and i've yet to hear one convincing alternative to combat the external threats Europe is facing and will continue to face for the foreseeable future.

ujjjjjjjjj

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

UK is a third country from EUs point of view, if they want to import /transship tat into EU they have to abide by EU laws (which UK shaped while a member)

Alternatively they can trade elsewhere their tat, or if you would listen to uk government advice setup branches for their tat business in EU

At end of day it’s all about sovereignty right? Well maybe UK should respect the sovereignty of EU states

Finally UK was given a wide range of options for trade with EU (the infamous barnier staircase) THEY chose the most red tape filled option, no one forced them. They had a wide range of options from remaining a member to eea to customs Union to this and to no deal, they chose this despite best advise. Actions have consequences, that’s sovereignty 101

Don't disagree with any of the realities, positives or negatives of Brexit. We all know what it means but seriously to be worried about the UK becoming some chop shop exporter of utter tat and crap is just silly. Both sides be it the EU or Britain have to honour each other and that is really all this is about. Let's not start spreading silly ideas about Britain becoming some sub standard tat spreader. I would imagine in 5 years from now if you look under the bonnet you will find product and health and safety standard in the UK and Europe will be largely similar.

Seth Brundle

ujjjjjjjjj wrote: »

We can endlessly debate Brexit but the big question which everyone in the EU needs to talk about is ultimately Federalism and where you draw the line.

Can you describe to us how Ireland would be forced into a federal EU?

ujjjjjjjjj wrote: »

Britain has always been luke warm on the EU and it's an outlier and an advance warning party as to the big question.

To many, the biggest problem that britain had with the EU was that it was not in charge.

ujjjjjjjjj wrote: »

There is plenty of anti-EU sentiment across Europe and big issues like the endless problems with the single currency, tedious beaucracy, power imbalances and sluggishness such as this botched vaccine roleout in Europe will to continue to raise issues.

Similarly there is an increasing anti-UK sentiment across Europe. So what?
As for the vaccine, the UK purchased vaccines on it's own while it was still under EU rules. We all could have done so. We chose to wait until they were tested first!

ujjjjjjjjj wrote: »

In Ireland we seem to now have become entirely and fully pro EU (no matter what) just because of the behavior of the Brits.

I think your understanding of the relationship between Ireland and the EU and how our membership has helped shape this country is seriously lacking!

ujjjjjjjjj wrote: »

I still would like the Irish people to question ultimately what they want the EU to become. If they like the 'mission creep' from a trading block of friends to a federal state fine but let's not fall into this if people don't actually want it.

In fairness, Irish people are more astute in terms of our EU membership when compared to say, the UK citizens!

ujjjjjjjjj wrote: »

Brexit is a warning shot about a European super state. I may be wrong and the rest of Europe might happily slip into federal state in time (de facto or actual, some argue already that it is close to de facto now) but I don't think it will go particularly smoothly and we may in time have further dissenters.

Brexit was about local issues within the UK.
The vote was stupidly provided by Cameron in order to help keep the Tory party together when under pressure from UKIP.
The vote itself gave the people a binary choice with no substance behind what would happen if they left. Everyone voted for something different.
Nonetheless, the toxic media within the UK generally touted a leave vote, principally because it favoured the owners of these media outlets.
If you asked the ordinary Joe about a Super state of Europe, he wouldn't know what you're talking about!

FrancieBrady

ujjjjjjjjj wrote: »

Have a quick google..............endless articles about the rather dodgy use of the CE mark.....I have worked with procurement people in retail and in many product lines CE is treated as a bit of a joke and box ticking exercise There are plenty of manufacturers around the world that don't treat it as a joke and honour it and there are plenty who don't.....

So any data on it?

And why would that have any bearing here? Are you suggesting we just open the floodgates?

Leroy42

ujjjjjjjjj wrote: »

Don't disagree with any of the realities, positives or negatives of Brexit. We all know what it means but seriously to be worried about the UK becoming some chop shop exporter of utter tat and crap is just silly. Both sides be it the EU or Britain have to honour each other and that is really all this is about. Let's not start spreading silly ideas about Britain becoming some sub standard tat spreader. I would imagine in 5 years from now if you look under the bonnet you will find product and health and safety standard in the UK and Europe will be largely similar.

Then Brexit would have been a complete and total waste of time. The UK have stated that they plan to be a direct competitor to the EU. Since they already have the same standards and were being held back, it must mean that they plan to target the standards.

But even if they don't, even if what you think does happen, then the UK has gone from being a voting member of this soon to be superstate, to a non-member that follows all the rules but has no say in the soon to be superstate.

How is that better?

ujjjjjjjjj

ujjjjjjjjj wrote: »

Don't disagree with any of the realities, positives or negatives of Brexit. We all know what it means but seriously to be worried about the UK becoming some chop shop exporter of utter tat and crap is just silly. Both sides be it the EU or Britain have to honour each other and that is really all this is about. Let's not start spreading silly ideas about Britain becoming some sub standard tat spreader. I would imagine in 5 years from now if you look under the bonnet you will find product and health and safety standard in the UK and Europe will be largely similar.

The reality is that tat will have to be of a minimum standard to be legally exported to the EU in the first place, then would anyone want to buy it!
What the UK needs to do is rebuild the manufacturing base and produce goods of a quality that importers would happily sell on the home market, this is after replacing imports with locally produced goods.

Home market first then export.

Leroy42

Leroy42 wrote: »

Then Brexit would have been a complete and total waste of time. The UK have stated that they plan to be a direct competitor to the EU. Since they already have the same standards and were being held back, it must mean that they plan to target the standards.

But even if they don't, even if what you think does happen, then the UK has gone from being a voting member of this soon to be superstate, to a non-member that follows all the rules but has no say in the soon to be superstate.

How is that better?

The "soon to be superstate" is one of the reasons Brexit happened in the first place, some in the UK didn't want the external control that the superstate would have over the nation

ujjjjjjjjj

peter kern wrote: »

so does brexit mean brexit,or not ?
i agree with you the eu needs to control Chinese imports more

Brexit is Brexit and the UK will have to trade with the EU and accept EU standards etc of course. I am not worried about British standards in anyway (we have much bigger worries) so in time I hope the EU and Britain simply become good trading partners who trust each other. This can only be good for Ireland. The EU in return needs to accept Britain is now an independent state and it can change things as it sees fit and both sides to that party must accept that it may cause issues but the emotion and silliness needs to be taken out of the equation. Lots of emotion flying about ATM.

Look simple facile example - should the EU have any concerns about any exports from British Farmers now - absolutely not, food standards as good as Europe so just get on with trade as normal. Does the EU need to keep an eye on things, yeah sure. If for example tomorrow Boris has a brainfart and says Chlorinated Chicken is a go and they start producing chlorinated chicken - sure go 'sorry lads your chicken is a no go'.............but I just can't see it being a problem. The Brits may have their issues but I can't see the British public accepting huge reductions in standards.

schmoo2k

ujjjjjjjjj wrote: »

Don't disagree with any of the realities, positives or negatives of Brexit. We all know what it means but seriously to be worried about the UK becoming some chop shop exporter of utter tat and crap is just silly. Both sides be it the EU or Britain have to honour each other and that is really all this is about. Let's not start spreading silly ideas about Britain becoming some sub standard tat spreader. I would imagine in 5 years from now if you look under the bonnet you will find product and health and safety standard in the UK and Europe will be largely similar.

Maybe - but being part of the EU I know that the EU standards are only getting better. What GB does isn't really a concern, if their products are up to snuff, they can be imported into the EU like all other third party entities.

ujjjjjjjjj

VinLieger wrote: »

What in your opinion is the answer to the future for Europe with an increasingly aggressive China and Russia and an increasingly undependable United States, yes we may have Biden for now but what about in 4 years? or 8? etc etc?

Russia and China see us as the enemy, politically, economically and culturally, also so do the US depending on whose in the white house, and they will keep trying to fracture us so what outside of federalisation is the answer in your opinion?

I don't necessarily agree with federalisation or welcome it with open arms but i also am a realist and i've yet to hear one convincing alternative to combat the external threats Europe is facing and will continue to face for the foreseeable future.

Entirely valid question and for me it's quite simple. The Russian and Chinese threats are largely similar to the cold war - that was dealt with by a united front through NATO. Independent countries can strategically and militarily unite to protect against common threats. I don't want a European Federal Super State but I'd happily see NATO come to the fore again. Ireland can remain neutral of course and remain under the wing of the USA, UK and Europe...

Countries can have a common foreign policy without this commonality becoming involved in day to day life.

VinLieger

ujjjjjjjjj wrote: »

Entirely valid question and for me it's quite simple. The Russian and Chinese threats are largely similar to the cold war - that was dealt with by a united front through NATO. Independent countries can strategically and militarily unite to protect against common threats. I don't want a European Federal Super State but I'd happily see NATO come to the fore again. Ireland can remain neutral of course and remain under the wing of the USA, UK and Europe...

Countries can have a common foreign policy without this commonality becoming involved in day to day life.

NATO doesn't work if we cannot count on the US though and i don't believe we can beyond a 4 year term anymore.

Leroy42

Deleted User wrote: »

The "soon to be superstate" is one of the reasons Brexit happened in the first place, some in the UK didn't want the external control that the superstate would have over the nation

The soon to be a superstate is not credible. Brexiteers love calling out 'experts' for getting projections wrong, yet everyone is supposed to believe that their view that a Superstate is inevitable is correct?

But, even if we go along with the EU superstate n the future, how does UK pulling out now do it any good? When it becomes inevitable, when the treaty is put forward, then the UK would be perfectly correct to pull out.

What they have done is to pull out on the vague notion that at some time in the future, there might be some moves towards a superstate!

But my post was in response to the post that said that standards would remain largely the same. So the UK will have moved from a rule-maker to a rule-taker on the basis on something that may or may not happen but that they themselves had the power to stop!

Leroy42

ujjjjjjjjj wrote: »

Entirely valid question and for me it's quite simple. The Russian and Chinese threats are largely similar to the cold war - that was dealt with by a united front through NATO. Independent countries can strategically and militarily unite to protect against common threats. I don't want a European Federal Super State but I'd happily see NATO come to the fore again. Ireland can remain neutral of course and remain under the wing of the USA, UK and Europe...

Countries can have a common foreign policy without this commonality becoming involved in day to day life.

But they will maintain standards?

Detritus70

ujjjjjjjjj wrote: »

And if believe there isn't a load of tat coming into the EU or that the CE mark means anything at all well fine..............Many Chinese manafacturers don't understand or care about a standard, copyright, intellectual property etc etc, they will make and tell you anything and stamp anything you want on a product and even give you a piece of paper telling you it's CE if you want. They copy, they find ways to make things cheaper and then tell you it's as good as you want it to be.

It's laughable to worry about 'sub standard' tat coming in from the UK or any third country considering the same tat is brought into the EU with 'CE certification' day in day out...........and if it isn't been sold on the high street it's coming in parcels from a myriad of online shopping sites every day anyway. Buyer beware.............

Well, there is a long and difficult word to describe that.
It's called Counterfeiting.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counterfeit

Believe it or not, but you are not the first person to have had that idea and you might be astonished to learn that this is not encouraged and can even land you in jail!
Imagine, those clever people at the EU already anticipating your brilliant scheme.

ujjjjjjjjj

FrancieBrady wrote: »

So any data on it?

And why would that have any bearing here? Are you suggesting we just open the floodgates?

Yes under my desk here I have a huge survey which I have just finished..........

Please.

Not suggesting we open or reduce standards but just well aware that the current system is a box ticking exercise. Does it help in many cases of course it does, is it perfect far from it. Am I worried about UK standards, no and I hope the UK and the EU trade away in time with a minimum of issues. It can only benefit Ireland for a zillion reasons.

looksee

ujjjjjjjjj wrote: »

We can endlessly debate Brexit but the big question which everyone in the EU needs to talk about is ultimately Federalism and where you draw the line. ...

Precisely, you have proved the point. This is a thread about Brexit, not about EU federalism - which I don't believe is an aim, but if it were I would not be too upset about it, though I prefer the status quo - and again you have side-slipped from the question.

The Government 'officially' was against Brexit, going by the negatives in the document. I don't see any clearly spelled out positives. But still 'the government' and the Brexit movement spoke and argued in favour of Brexit and dismissed any possible negatives. This is so contradictory there had to be more going on. The real disadvantages to the country were skipped over, even though they had been specifically set out. How does that work? And why has no-one (media, Opposition) said to Johnson - you listed all the down-sides, why have you fought to push it through?

ujjjjjjjjj

Detritus70 wrote: »

Well, there is a long and difficult word to describe that.
It's called Counterfeiting.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counterfeit

Believe it or not, but you are not the first person to have had that idea and you might be astonished to learn that this is not encouraged and can even land you in jail!
Imagine, those clever people at the EU already anticipating your brilliant scheme.

Yup it's immoral and illegal and so it should be but with the volume of stuff coming in from all over the world there is always going to be a balance between enforcing it (as we can't check every box of every widget manafactured to exhaustive standards) so a layer of acceptance is inevitable that some stuff coming in which is supposedly safe isn't has to be there. I just don't think that we have to be worried about this becoming some massive problem with UK stuff, the authorities in the UK too will have concerns and police illegal and fake goods too......and so they should.

FrancieBrady

ujjjjjjjjj wrote: »

Yes under my desk here I have a huge survey which I have just finished..........

Please.

Not suggesting we open or reduce standards but just well aware that the current system is a box ticking exercise. Does it help in many cases of course it does, is it perfect far from it. Am I worried about UK standards, no and I hope the UK and the EU trade away in time with a minimum of issues. It can only benefit Ireland for a zillion reasons.

Again, you made a claim, and you don't seem to have any back up for it, or even an official link to it being of considerable issue.


And you are suggesting we just turn a blind eye to allow us out of making difficult decisions forced on us by a so far disastrous Brexit.

correct horse battery staple

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

I seen your posts on environmental matters, do you want Eu rules and controls there? How do you feel about shipping goods from other side of world instead of European countries next door, that can’t be good for environment right?

Trade with neighbours is preferable to trade with someone the other side of the planet, internal trade is best!

ujjjjjjjjj

looksee wrote: »

Precisely, you have proved the point. This is a thread about Brexit, not about EU federalism - which I don't believe is an aim, but if it were I would not be too upset about it, though I prefer the status quo - and again you have side-slipped from the question.

The Government 'officially' was against Brexit, going by the negatives in the document. I don't see any clearly spelled out positives. But still 'the government' and the Brexit movement spoke and argued in favour of Brexit and dismissed any possible negatives. This is so contradictory there had to be more going on. The real disadvantages to the country were skipped over, even though they had been specifically set out. How does that work? And why has no-one (media, Opposition) said to Johnson - you listed all the down-sides, why have you fought to push it through?

Absolutely fine - if you don't have any concerns about a side slip into European federalism that is fine. I personally do and worried that Brexit has been an unfortunate side show that might mask issues in the EU as we spend so much time looking at Brexit issues. Is Brexit a good idea ? Right now I don't know and only time will tell whether in 20 years time was it good or bad for the UK. Do I want Brexit to be a bad thing for the UK, absolutely not as Ireland will suffer.

I think like many things in life when things become black and white - i.e Brexit = bad EU = good it becomes problematic. Life is grey and always has been. All I want is for Ireland to look out for itself and do what is right for Ireland at all times. Entirely comfortable right now that staying in the EU is the right and correct thing for Ireland just please keep our eyes open though and let's not underestimate the importance of having a good relationship with Britain. 60 million people on our door step who are happy to buy our stuff......economic realties. Let's not bite off our nose etc.