Re: Post-Brexit Thread
 

I've no time to answer this in full. I'm not shouting you down I'm pointing out that you are wrong and explaining why.

If you insist that you know best and all the lawyers, trade experts, etc, are wrong that's your prerogative, but it is absurd to suggest we could join EFTA without joining the EEA; the main point of EFTA is free trade with the EU without the political integration, and as already noted we won't be members of the WTO initially - it could be delayed for years as we need unanimous agreement from the other members.

Apart from yourself I have seen no-one suggest that we could join EFTA without joining the EEA. I would presume there's a good reason for that unless you're privvy to some finer details of the EFTA - EU relationship.

The EU do not need us to continue as before. We are 5% of their exports, they are ~44% of ours, and most of their exports to us are goods, not services. This is a lose:lose, there is no 'win' for the EU here, and there cannot be any 'win' for us either, else the entire thing comes crashing down.

We're the 5th largest trading nation in the world. They're the world's largest trading bloc. This is why we're gearing up to use people as leverage. Trade wise, we have very little.

---------- Post added at 11:24 ---------- Previous post was at 11:11 ----------

Wanting a particular outcome is perfectly legitimate. Campaigning for that outcome and indicating that others will be bad, based on evidence, is perfectly legitimate.

What you might call a failure I would call a success. I don't want the country to fail which is why I would prefer as close a relationship to the EU as possible, while appreciating that ignoring the result, regardless of the banality of the campaign, isn't feasible.

I believe 'hard Brexit' will be a failure in the short and medium terms at least. I'll continue to make the case for EEA membership regardless of how futile it seems. Doing this is not making the case for going in a different direction, it's choosing a different path going in the same direction.

The majority of people, according to Leave.EU, voted leave primarily because of immigration. One of the biggest cheerleaders for Brexit, Dan Hannan, indicates Brexit doesn't necessarily mean less immigration.

I would suggest that immigration isn't worth harming our economy over, and we'd be far better served dealing with the proven less productive immigration from South Asian states rather than scapegoating largely productive EU migration. With EEA membership we would be provided an emergency break similar to the one David Cameron negotiated which would allow us some time to fix our own infrastructure issues, build some houses, hospitals and schools, and invest in public services. We'd also have the opportunity to petition for the changes to free movement so that it emphasises free movement of labour per the treaties.

Of course I'd prefer remaining where we are, but we are where we are, and I'll continue to make the case for what I consider as the next best thing.

EDIT: It's quite a strange attitude that those who don't want a hard Brexit want the country to fail. If I wanted the country to fail I wouldn't care either way.

Re: Post-Brexit Thread
 

No sadly your reply hasn't come as a shock at all

Re: Post-Brexit Thread
 

These guys seem to disagree with you.They are constitutional specialists,lawyers,barristers ,judges ,all highly intelligent and experienced people ,just the sort of people who's opinions you have been using to form your opinions so it may be worth your while having a read .

http://www.lawyersforbritain.org/index.html

Have a read it may give you a more up beat outlook

Re: Post-Brexit Thread
 

They may be lawyers however there are very few of them, their opinions are very much at the extremes, and above all else they are a campaigning group.

Campaigning group for one side thinks all will be easy and wonderful. Their employers don't share their confidence.

http://www.cms-lawnow.com/Brexit

This is about as worthwhile as reading the opinions from lawyers hired by Vote Leave or Stronger In, or taking lessons in climate change from scientists hired by Shell or Greenpeace.

http://www.lawyersforbritain.org/aboutus.shtml

http://www.lawyersforbritain.org/brexit.shtml

Is laughably one-sided and much of it is straight from Vote Leave or Leave.EU. As would be expected from a campaign group, rather than a neutral observer.

Just a couple of comments without claiming legal knowledge:

Completely ignores that we're 5% of the EU's exports and they're over 40% of ours, the same argument made by Vote Leave and Leave.EU, so ridiculous to say it's more in their interests than ours just because in nominal terms our numbers are higher. That's like saying that the UK's deficit is higher than Scotland's as ours is tens of billions while theirs is a little over 10 billion and completely ignoring the percentages. Also ignores that the EU is about a lot more than just trade, which was I believe a big objection.

That they can't spell 'arrangements' speaks volumes for the quality of this content. Nothing says professional like an ugly and amateurish site that didn't have a spell checker run over it or be properly proof-read. It also, of course, completely ignores that we can't just unilaterally join these treaties, it's a negotiation which, in the case of the WTO involves nations that can't stand us.

If the other side of the argument can produce a site that doesn't look 20 years old surely these guys could've done better.

If you want sunshine blown up your backside and propaganda in the guise of 'legal expertise' that's definitely a good place to be, just as if you want to believe we're in no way responsible for climate change or that sugar is healthy you can find 'experts' who'll tell you that too.

I treat both sites with equal scepticism and will take guidance from neither, but thanks for the link.

---------- Post added at 11:54 ---------- Previous post was at 11:30 ----------

If you're interested in some unbiased, or at very least not self-admittedly biased legal campaigning have a look at these:

https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2016...pensable-role/

https://publiclawforeveryone.com/201...-to-legislate/

https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2016...tary-scrutiny/

Setting out cases both for and against royal prerogative triggering of Article 50 as just one point of law this all covers, alongside another route with the consensus being that it isn't that simple and lawyers stand to make a lot of money from the whole enterprise.

Re: Post-Brexit Thread
 

Of course they could be the wrong type of 'experts'... ;)

Re: Post-Brexit Thread
 

I knew as soon as i posted that you would disagree and say that their opinions and facts don't matter simply because they do not agree with your stance.There opinion is just as valid as your experts opinions because that's effectively what they are .What you don't understand is that we are in unchartered territory ,pretty much every single piece of information you post or i post or anyone posts from various experts is conjecture, opinion and pretty much guesswork because what we are doing has never been done before .

---------- Post added at 13:02 ---------- Previous post was at 13:00 ----------

:D:tu:

bloody wrong experts always putting up alternative opinions and facts

Re: Post-Brexit Thread
 

Like these 'experts' :D

Re: Post-Brexit Thread
 

There's clearly a lot of them about but you just can't trust 'experts' these days, especially those who think Brexit can be made to work perfectly well who are all myopic, biased, Europhobic idiots. :D

I suppose we could still play a game of 'my expert is bigger than your expert'... ;)

Re: Post-Brexit Thread
 

Straw man argument, as no one (except Brexiteers who are saying people are saying this) is saying this.

And as we haven't even begun Brexit yet, or the negotiations to begin Brexit, it may be a little early for anyone to be making sweeping statements...;)

Re: Post-Brexit Thread
 

I'd say that's a bit of a sweeping statement. ;)

Re: Post-Brexit Thread
 

Apologies - some Brexiteers...

Re: Post-Brexit Thread
 

Pretty weak responses to be honest. I have no interest in the responses of those pursuing a pro-EU agenda or those clearly pursuing a pro-Brexit agenda. Those 'experts' very clearly have an agenda so should be greeted with scepticism.

---------- Post added at 22:59 ---------- Previous post was at 22:58 ----------

Indeed we are in uncharted territory, which makes their apparent assurance that their opinion is absolutely authoritative all the more ridiculous. Thanks for making my point for me.

---------- Post added at 23:03 ---------- Previous post was at 22:59 ----------

Allister Heath, determined Brexiter. We have 2 years or more of this process to go. Let's pat ourselves on the back when we have some idea where we are. We've certainly seen third parties downgrade our economy's performance in 2017 by the largest amount in the OECD due to Brexit.

Obviously it's just a forecast. Let's keep our scepticism intact and see where we are in a few months.

---------- Post added at 23:08 ---------- Previous post was at 23:03 ----------

Ya. This is where you've clearly clicked the button and read posts, yet refuse to engage with them.

This doesn't speak well of you, just suggests you can't defend your position.

Re: Post-Brexit Thread
 

Nothing is set in stone yet and both sides are preparing their respective negotiating strategies and until formal negotiations start no one really knows how good or bad it will be. As for experts yeah we've got loads of them and they always predict this and that and people draw up battle lines based on it but most of these experts are that good they fail to see massive economic or political problems that happen seemingly more frequent and then they go quiet for a little while.

We had the vote, the outcome was for brexit and now it's up to the government to implement it and I've got no problem with people on the remain side wanting to keep the issue going I'd just like less of the doom and gloom and the talking down of the UK. Both sides have their share of smug gits and know it alls and they will keep going as long as they can best not to give them too much attention.

Re: Post-Brexit Thread
 

Too many people are like stoke brokers who make money regardless of the outcome. Lawyers are getting paid by both sides and have self interest to making things as complex and drawn out as they possibly can. And so whatever the outcome of the vote was they would win. Politicians more concerned with themselves than those they represent.

Common sense would say we exit the political union and become part of a free trade body. Sure there are a few niceties to sort out. But the lawyers have ensured that nothing can be that simple and there are loads of steps to take and limits and so forth. And who wins?

The reasons things get so complex is that the whole is trying to join together such varying entities that there are layers upon layers of rules and regulations to protect interests and sensibilities across a wide area with various exceptions and exceptions to the exceptions ad infinitum. And again who wins?

Re: Post-Brexit Thread
 

That's the definition of a truism. :tu:

Sooner or later one final piece of ill-conceived legislation will be put in place which causes the entire country to grind to a halt, locked in a circular problem to which there is no longer an answer/escape. The legal profession's equivalent of the Holy Grail... :D