nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Brexit Discussion Thread VI

johnnyskeleton

Hi folks, as Theresa May has won the vote of no confidence and we are heading into Brexit day early next year, I thought for the new thread people might give their summary of their views on Brexit to date before we get into the more day to day discussions.

So what do you think about what has happened so far? Who has come off well, who has come off badly?

Where do you think Brexit is going? What is going to be the likely impact on Ireland, Northern Ireland, the rest of the U.K. and the E.U. respectively?

Both this thread and the Mark V thread will remain open simultaneously for the next day or so and Mark V will be closed as it gets closer to the server busting 10,000 mark. Hopefully we can set down a solid foundation now for a top quality thread to come!

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Leroy42

Berserker wrote: »

People voted to leave the EU. Have you not seen the ballot paper? They made that decision and delivering on that decision was left up to the politicians. It was their responsibility to deliver it. The deal they have come back with is not acceptable, so exiting on a no-deal basis is the only way the UK can leave the EU now.

If you asked one hundred leave voters why they want to leave, how many would cite the above as the reason they voted to leave?

Right so on the one hand people voted and we need to respect that vote and do what they voted for.

On on the other everyone has a different view of what they voted for and thus it impossible to say what that is.

That's your position is it?

On one TM's deal, it did deliver on the vote. The ballot paper said leave or remain, nothing else. Her deal means that the UK would leave the EU. So it is very much in line with what the people voted for, according to your own standards.

Peregrinus

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

Has an order been put in for lots of military vehicles for our army to man the border, looking like no deal scenario is likely, not enough time for another referendum before March.

Military vehicles? Are you living in a video game?

It's not military vehicles we'll be needing; it's customs officers.

Professor Moriarty

Berserker wrote: »

People voted to leave the EU. Have you not seen the ballot paper? They made that decision and delivering on that decision was left up to the politicians. It was their responsibility to deliver it. The deal they have come back with is not acceptable, so exiting on a no-deal basis is the only way the UK can leave the EU now.

You haven't answered the question. In fact, you instead make my point for me. Those who voted leave didn't know what they were voting for because, as you say, the terms of that deal was left up to the "politicians". So now, the politicians must decide whether to have No Deal, A GE, a referendum, a harder Brexit, or a softer Brexit. Thus, the will of the people will be ratified by the politicians. Glad we agree.

Peregrinus

Berserker wrote: »

People voted to leave the EU. Have you not seen the ballot paper? They made that decision and delivering on that decision was left up to the politicians. It was their responsibility to deliver it. The deal they have come back with is not acceptable, so exiting on a no-deal basis is the only way the UK can leave the EU now.

Your analysis ignores the obvious problem; it's ture that May's deal is not acceptable to Parliament, but a no-deal Brexit is even less acceptable to Parliament. If "respecting" the referendum result requires delivering Brexit ten the way - the only way - that Parliament can respect the referendum result is by crafting a Brexit that can command the support of Parliament.

May has tried to do this by crafting a Brexit that can command the support of the Tory Party (and the DUP) but she has failed, and she has failed so spectacularly that no-one can imagine that, with a little more effort, she may yet succeed. It is now impossible to get majority support for a Brexit with attracting support from at least a significant chunk of the Labour party (and/or the SNP). So those who want the referendum result to be respected should now be demanding that she reach out to opposition parties and try to find common ground with them. That requires a significantly softer Brexit than May has so far targetted, obviously, but if that's what it takes to honour the referendum result then that's what it takes.

lawred2

Peregrinus wrote: »

Military vehicles? Are you living in a video game?

It's not military vehicles we'll be needing; it's customs officers.

that is until our resident criminal dissidents start shooting at said customs officers

Leroy42

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

You haven't answered the question. In fact, you instead make my point for me. Those who voted leave didn't know what they were voting for because, as you say, the terms of that deal was left up to the "politicians". So now, the politicians must decide whether to have No Deal, A GE, a referendum, a harder Brexit, or a softer Brexit. Thus, the will of the people will be ratified by the politicians. Glad we agree.

And therein lies that massive problem with all of this. The voters did indeed vote leave, on the basis that the HoC would then handle everything else.

But many in the HoC, such as JRM, have taken on themselves not only to have a position themselves, but to portray that position as the will of the people and thus demand that the entire house is held to that. This is of course nonsense.

And we now have people outside parliament telling the MPs that they must do this or that, failing completely to understand that that is not what they voted to do. They voted on a direction, not the details and are now demanding that their details are adhered to.

No matter what happens, it is clear that the UK is and will remain deeply divided of this and this is simply a taste of the problems the UK is opening itself up to.

Berserker

Water John wrote: »

Beserker basically you're saying there will be a Crash out Brexit and its Labour's fault!!!

There will be a no-deal Brexit. Crash out is a completely different thing altogether.

Imreoir2 wrote: »

They also voted for a "strong and stable government", you don't always get what you want.

Well, Brexit will have been achieved by March 30th, one thing the people wanted.

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

Has an order been put in for lots of military vehicles for our army to man the border, looking like no deal scenario is likely, not enough time for another referendum before March.

What military vehicles? You mean customs, I presume? Leo is the only one calling for that, so I'm guessing he has it all in hand.

MrMusician18 wrote: »

Probably very few tbh. You'd get answers like increasing funding for the NHS as the largest response, or increasing local services.

Strangely enough, leaving the EU will do nothing to solve this problem.

So we agree that it wasn't trade.

Tell me how

Berserker wrote: »

The majority voted for Brexit and a no-deal Brexit is the only viable option of the table at the moment. I'm hoping we can all agree that the deal on the table is dead now.

To leave the EU.

That's not what Brexit is about. The UK can do that, as a result of Brexit but that'd be well down the list of reasons why people voted for Brexit.

I think you forget that at the time of the referendum, the conversation was about £350M/Week for the NHS, 'the day after we leave, we will hold all the cards', our 'first call won't be to Brussels, it will be to Berlin to discuss a deal', 'they need us more than we need them'.

Not withstanding the above, there was also over-spending by the leave campaign, dubious online marketing spearheaded by Steve Bannon advised Cambridge Analytica and an abject remain campaign in which it was a fight between Jeremy Corbyn and Boris Johnson for who did the most damage through their focus on the PM seat in West Minister.

Circa 634k was the swing of voters who had they voted otherwise, the UK would not be leaving.
Can you honestly say, that you do not think that these voters (which made up 1.89% of the valid vote) did not solely vote that way because they believed the above would come true?

This narrative which is being portrayed at the moment that a No Deal if nothing else is what people voted for is a lie. Many are saying it and maybe they truly believe it which is a tragedy but those saying it and knowing it is a lie should be ignored.

LeinsterDub

They are talking about education and food banks in the HoC now! Jesus wept.

jimmycrackcorm

Leroy42 wrote:

That is exactly what Brexit is about. They want to move away from a dying Europe and open up the UK to the wider world, a world that is growing.

I don't think anyone sees the EU as dying. If anything the UK has been on a long death spell since the empire. How long brute the Scots will leave?

Leroy42 wrote:

They no longer want to live with the rules based system of the EU but rather the non rules based system of open trading, where anything goes as long as you get what you want.

I doubt if the British public truly support the idea of being able to buy chlorinated chicken, hormonal beef, or their NHS sold off to US corporations

farmchoice

LeinsterDub wrote: »

They are talking about education and food banks in the HoC now! Jesus wept.

i just came on to post that, its beyond belief, corbyn asked one question about brexit and then moved onto anything else.

Peregrinus

Berserker wrote: »

There will be a no-deal Brexit. Crash out is a completely different thing altogether.

What do you imagine the difference to be?

Berserker wrote: »

What military vehicles? You mean customs, I presume? Leo is the only one calling for that . . .

Seriously? Brexiters want to "take back control" and have in independent trade policy, but they don't propose actually to implement the policy? What kind of "control" is that?

Imreoir2

Berserker wrote: »

Well, Brexit will have been achieved by March 30th, one thing the people wanted.

Wana bet?

One of the least likely outcomes at this stage is that the UK actually leaves the EU on the 29th of March. It remains to be seen if it is first delayed and then cancelled, or just cancelled alltogether. One way or another though, it is almost certainly not going to happen by the 30th of March.

Leroy42

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

I don't think anyone sees the EU as dying. If anything the UK has been on a long death spell since the empire. How long brute the Scots will leave?

Just to clarify, neither do I. I was using this as it has been a talking point by the Brexiteers.

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

I doubt if the British public truly support the idea of being able to buy chlorinated chicken, hormonal beef, or their NHS sold off to US corporations

Not according to the likes of JRM, who continues to tell the public that this will mean lower food prices and more choice

Penn

Imreoir2 wrote: »

Wana bet?

One of the least likely outcomes at this stage is that the UK actually leaves the EU on the 29th of March. It remains to be seen if it is first delayed and then cancelled, or just cancelled alltogether. One way or another though, it is almost certainly not going to happen by the 30th of March.

Unless Parliament can actually vote on something though, that is what will happen, and it's hard to see them voting on anything (even asking to extend Article 50, or that being accepted by the EU). Many MPs are fine with leaving the EU on 29th March, and unless consensus can be found between everyone else on what the alternative to that should be, that's what will happen.

EdgeCase

I honestly don't buy this argument that the majority of the UK population ever have been in favour of ultra libertarian / cut all rules of trade policies.

If you analyse the UK at all, they've high expectations of protection and regulation. Look at something like food standards. Look at the reaction to the Grenfell disaster. Look at how they're permanently annoyed with the poor reliability and high cost of rail services etc.

They're also typically hugely proud of social systems like the NHS and historically they were very happy with things like the ability to go to university at very little cost.

The Tories and the tabloids have pushed all the fear buttons and sold them a package of ultra libertarian economic policies that have somehow been dressed up as protectionism and caused them, like many Americans, to vote for policies that undermine the own interests.

The reality of life on the high seas of global trade haven't been explained at all and some of the models bring proposed aren't even possible. Eg adopting the systems Singapore uses would require public expenditure to be cut to 15% of GDP which would end the NHS and welfare state and starve half the country.

Time and time again the Tories sell extremely right wing policies that seek to dismantle social structures and find and time again, it ends in disasters like the Poll Tax riots.

The reality of it as I see it is that the vast majority of the UK population is centrist and even centre left on many topics while an aspect of the Tories are stuck in a Victorian ideology laissez-faire ultra capitalism which they sell as jingoism, nationalism and patriotism.

Brexit to most of the people who voted for it isn't likely to have been what JRM or Boris Johnson or any of those hard-line types believe and they're really going to have a lot of explaining to do when they deliver something that the vast majority of the public were not expecting at all.

If the reality of Brexit causes the end of the Tories and a new centre to emerge, it would be a good thing. There's an aspect of the Tories that belongs in a Victorian museum along with workhouses, the empire and steam engines.

super_furry

Jaysus, how useless is Jeremy Corbyn? Still not a single clear or coherent thought or policy from him on Brexit and up against the most dysfunctional and inept Tory government in living memory, all he's able to do is sit back while support for Labour continues to fall away. They're 6% behind them in the latest polls and if there was an election tomorrow, all he'd be able to do is increase the Tory numbers.

Leroy42

Metroid diorteM wrote: »

It seems to me (please rapidly correct me if I’m way off), that if we the Irish were to agree that we would erect a “light border” in the north, this might serve to reduce the backstop issue and the UK could have a soft brexit instead of a complete crash out resulting in our need to put up a full border anyway.

The English say they don’t want a no deal but they’re heading for that iceberg and it could be too late to turn.

I know Varadkar wouldn’t be up for it but it’s honestly looking like a car crash from my perspective and a lot of our goods do still come through the UK.

On the other hand perhaps the UK is heading for a remain and loss of face and any further action on the Irish or EU side might steer them into a soft brexit instead of a remain?

I’m sure I’ll be corrected about the realities here but I just wanted to explore some hypotheticals.

The obvious first question is what does "light border" mean? How would this reduce the risk of non EU regulated good getting into Ireland and thus forcing the rest of the EU to place controls on imports from ROI?

MrMusician18

Berserker wrote: »

There will be a no-deal Brexit. Crash out is a completely different thing altogether.

Well, Brexit will have been achieved by March 30th, one thing the people wanted.

What military vehicles? You mean customs, I presume? Leo is the only one calling for that, so I'm guessing he has it all in hand.

So we agree that it wasn't trade.

I can think that many of us here can agree that much of the opposition to the EU in the UK is not actually founded on areas where it's EU policy that's the issue, but UK Government policy. "I want out of the EU because I want roaming charges to return" is a much more legitimate gripe with the EU than "I want out because the NHS is under funded".

I know you'll point to freedom of movement, but the UK was free to make that more restrictive if it wanted. It didn't.

Just expanding on the public's knowledge of what's going on and the world in which they live: Henry Taxidriver wouldn't have known what a free trade deal was until after the referendum in 2016, no more than Paddy Taxidriver knew what a sovereign bond yield was until after the budgetary crisis here. This stuff works in the background.

Yet we are all experts and know best now?

Tell me how

super_furry wrote: »

Jaysus, how useless is Jeremy Corbyn? Still not a single clear or coherent thought or policy from him on Brexit and up against the most dysfunctional and inept Tory government in living memory, all he's able to do is sit back while support for Labour continues to fall away. They're 6% behind them in the latest polls and if there was an election tomorrow, all he'd be able to do is increase the Tory numbers.

I posted here last night that I think they might look to remove him (or circumvent him) if they lose the confidence vote tonight.

'But wait' I hear you say, 'shouldn't they be focused on delivering a solution for Brexit!'
Yes, but they haven't been doing that so far so I don't expect them to start now.

demfad

Berserker wrote: »

People voted to leave the EU. Have you not seen the ballot paper? They made that decision and delivering on that decision was left up to the politicians. It was their responsibility to deliver it. The deal they have come back with is not acceptable, so exiting on a no-deal basis is the only way the UK can leave the EU now.

But not acceptable to whom?

The Politicians don't want the deal. And the politicians don't want no-deal.

Who are you to decide what the people want now?

We were told Brexit means Brexit. But does Brexit mean deal Brexit? or does Brexit mean no-deal Brexit?

We are now being told that ANY deal is better than no-deal. Is this the will of the British people?

farmchoice

obesity in the north east of England is now the topic of discussion.

farmchoice

ken clarke getting heckled by his own side, may confirms that she cant ask for art 50 extension without a plan without outlining what might that be.

labour follow this up with the next question ask for funding for housing master pan for Durham.

downcow

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

I don't think anyone sees the EU as dying. If anything the UK has been on a long death spell since the empire. How long brute the Scots will leave?

I doubt if the British public truly support the idea of being able to buy chlorinated chickens

We will be able to choose whichever chickens we want.
I think you’ll find that currently in the Eu we don’t have any choice but to drink chlorinated water

[Deleted User]

Hopefully if there is a second referendum the English middle classes and educated people will get off their backsides. Fair play to the Brexiters - many of whom probably haven't worked a day in their lives since the Tories introduced policies to increase immigration/labour competition and incentivise foreign production - but they got out and voted.

It's just a pity they are so ill-informed that they have blamed the EU for economic policies created by indigenous British parties, the most rightwing of which in the form of Thatcherism were ironically imported by the EU to the rest of the EU and thus undermined 'French exceptionalism' and much else/moved the EU economically to the right.

But, yes, while many people focus on the educated English like Johnson who intentionally and opportunistically scapegoat the EU for all British failings, the better sort of English people who have had the benefit of education and cultural enlightenment and still didn't vote have much to answer for here.

Chips Lovell

I didn't watch the debate last night because the outcome was a foregone conclusion.

What's been so frustratingly tedious about the entire process is just how predictable it is and yet, despite that, so much time is wasted in dissimulating about and temporarily postponing inevitable outcomes.

It's been obvious for over a year now that that this deal was the only kind of deal on offer, indeed the only kind of deal that could be offered. And yet the negotiations were dragged right out to the maximum length in order to maintain the fiction a little longer that some better alternative may be possible.

And it's been obvious for almost just as long that Parliament wouldn't vote through such a deal. Indeed, May almost certainly knew all along that it wouldn't, but still had to negotiate regardless, because there were no politically acceptable alternatives. Like Lear, she was bound upon a wheel of fire.

What follows is more predictability. Today will be taken up with a no-confidence motion we know the government will win. Then there'll be two more days for May to come up with a Plan B which, unless the red lines change (and it's unlikely they will in that time period) will be little more than window dressing of Plan A, with predictable results. It'll be next week before reality is confronted, unless they find another way of kicking the can down the road.

The reality at present is deal, hard Brexit, or no Brexit. If the British government changes its red lines, staying in the single market and customs union is a possibility, but they may as well stay in in that case.

Imreoir2

Penn wrote: »

Unless Parliament can actually vote on something though, that is what will happen, and it's hard to see them voting on anything (even asking to extend Article 50, or that being accepted by the EU). Many MPs are fine with leaving the EU on 29th March, and unless consensus can be found between everyone else on what the alternative to that should be, that's what will happen.

Very few MP's are fine with leaving with no deal. They can and will vote to apply for an A50 extension or to withdraw A50 if the only other alternative is no-deal.

RMAOK

Imreoir2 wrote: »

Very few MP's are fine with leaving with no deal. They can and will vote to apply for an A50 extension or to withdraw A50 if the only other alternative is no-deal.

Am I right in saying that the extension of the article 50 requires the approval of the other 27 EU members?

I know they can revoke their application without permission from the other 27

ancapailldorcha

RMAOK wrote: »

Am I right in saying that the extension of the article 50 requires the approval of the other 27 EU members?

I know they can revoke their application without permission from the other 27

It does, yes.

The UK’s readmission would require the consent of 27 countries, some led by populist anti-EU governments and coalitions.

Source:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/dec/04/can-the-uk-get-an-extension-on-brexit

robinph

Applying for an extension will be rejected unless they can agree in advance on why they want the extension. Running a referendum being about the only reason for it to be granted. Anything like needing time to renegotiate or run a general election, which is basically just to lead to more negotiations, will be rejected.

It could really do with someone from the EU explaining to them in simple terms what their options are, but that would then give ammo to the extreme brexiteers that the EU is trying to dictate to the UK and increase support for the crash out...so the EU have to keep quiet and hope the UK figures it out for themselves.