Re: Brexit discussion
 

In the short term we will not be better off the prosperity from exiting the EU won't come for possibly a decade depending on what trade deals are currently being worked on. In terms of what out meant, to everyone i know who voted in the referendum out meant completely disengaged from the EU and only a trade deal connecting us to the EU. Right now both sides of the negotiating table are pretty lousy and both are approaching the negotiations with unreasonable ideas, the EU's side is trying hard to look as though there isn't an element of punishing the UK for leaving when the rhetoric of some eurocrats clearly shows that's an aspect for them and on the UK side we have a government that has to abide by the referendum but doesn't really want too leading to no clear direction or proper handling of important issues.

It's a mess but it's a mess created by both sides there is no one side being better then the other and right now the only thing this has done is further cemented the publics low opinion of politicians.

Re: Brexit discussion
 

... and when have I said that then eh? :rolleyes:

When has anyone seriously said that it's all bad in the EU and it'll be perfect without it?

If Cameron had got reasonable concessions the vote would have gone the other way. He didn't and the reason for that is purely the intransigence of the other side would would not compromise on their core values and objectives. That was known before we voted and that's the reason we got the outcome we did IMHO. By the way that's just an opinion - I can't produce facts to back it up any more than David Davis can produce facts which prove what life outside the EU will be like. Are you seriously suggesting that people didn't know that and need another chance just to be sure? If we'd voted to stay in what proof was there of how the EU would turn out, whether the Greece crisis wouldn't erupt, whether the Italian banks wouldn't implode and take us with them? You can't prove what the future holds but you can decide that you don't like the past and present sufficiently to decide to change course and that's what people did in 2016. In life that's all we have. Like it or lump it.

Everything isn't going to be alright but the belief of those who voted to leave clearly was that what they knew about being in the EU wasn't enough to stop them voting for an outcome that could never be clear in advance because it's never been done before. They accepted that fact and made their decision based on it.

In your world the truth is we'd never be able to leave the EU because in order to do so our government would have to be equipped with a crystal ball the output of which was cast iron proof of something which the majority feel would be better. How's that going to be done then? Even if it were done there'd be those for whom a better economy for example wouldn't make up for not being part of a singe state or vice versa, how would that ever be reconciled? Being better off isn't just about extra cash in your pocket, it's about things like the right to determine your own future, it's about being able to pick and choose who you allow to live/work in your country, it's about being able to say we don't want to be in a single European state governed by Brussels bureaucrats, it's about being able to deal with other countries as we see fit and on terms we decide.

We can go over this again and again but the result was to leave not to stay half in or half out. The electorate knew what that meant and voted accordingly. Time to move on and get on with it but if you want proof of anything I'm afraid not even Juncker can give you that.

The best outcome in my opinion would be for the UK to get out and run its own affairs with as much co-operation as possible with the EU. We cannot be isolated from them or they from us. That ought to be possible and the UK seems to be being quite reasonable in putting forward suggestions only to have the other side refuse to talk until... That for me sums up the EU sadly, it's being run by people whose own ideology clouds everything else they say and do and that's why the EU is seeing a rise in right wing extremism etc. Anyone who thinks that's gone away with the outcome of the French election by the way needs to think again. It's only going to get worse and that's yet another reason for us to get out.

Re: Brexit discussion
 

I really do not understand your confusion.

Yes, the question was indeed 'in or out'.

Given we voted out, we must leave the EU, the Common Market and the Customs Union in order that leaving the EU as set out can be achieved.

Therefore, the choice now is between a negotiated Brexit with a GB/EU deal, or a so-called hard Brexit with no deal. Which it will be will be determined through the negotiations, and Theresa May has pledged to get the best deal for Britain.

So where is the confusion, exactly? No-one can say more with any credibility, because we are in negotiations.

It seems to me the real confusion arises because so many people don't seem to know what a negotiation is. I'm sure that a lot of people think it is a 'demand' which must be accepted without question!

---------- Post added at 10:57 ---------- Previous post was at 10:51 ----------

It's not the mess you think it is. It's a negotiation. Being the first stage of the negotiation, it's posturing time. The serious bits come later.

There is no basis for your claim that it will take a decade before we achieve increased prosperity from leaving the EU, although it is good to see that you recognise that increased prosperity will result. But we will not lose at all if Theresa May succeeds in getting a trade deal with the EU, and this is what most Remainers don't seem to want to take into account.

Re: Brexit discussion
 

:tu:

I think most of them know full well but won't miss an opportunity to paint what is common to all serious negotiations as flawed UK strategy and use it to further their aim to overturn the referendum outcome. It's perfectly evident that they don't and never will accept the outcome so they'll carry on raising whatever objections they can simply in order to get what they want.

We all know that much of the UK's GDP growth has been based on large scale immigration which is unsustainable. This has come at great cost to ordinary working people who've seen their wages depressed, their services come under pressure and the neighbourhoods change out of all recognition. Leaving the EU isn't like taking another job in the same building/same hours/same commuting etc. but with a 20% increase in salary. Being better off isn't just about cash and any increase in prosperity might take time to happen but that's life and when we voted we all knew perfectly well what life in the EU meant.

Re: Brexit discussion
 

My confusion is that I really don't understand the UK Governments position and what they want - there is no clear message from the Government where the Chancellor, Trade Secretary, Foreign Secretary and Minister for DExEU all seem to be saying different things. It doesn't instill confidence to be honest.

Maybe there's a clear position behind the curtain in negotiations that is being kept from the public that we're not being told about. Who knows? The EU negotiating team don't seem to know either.

Whether we lose out with a deal with the EU or not surely depends on the deal. Without knowing what the result of the negotiations are, no one can say if we will be better or worse off for sure but the second you put friction in to international trade, you will increase costs

Re: Brexit discussion
 

PM's Florence speech done. EEA / Single Market / Customs Union excluded as options. Transition period where existing rules apply for 2 years, so leaving EU end of March 2019, remaining in EEA in all but name until 2021.

Nigel Farage and Aaron Banks are furious. Sky just interviewed a couple of people in Sunderland. One irate about the money, they expected it all to be coming back home, very strange given no-one believed 'that' bus, the other more pragmatic about it.

She's basically just kicked the can down the road. Still no clearer on what we actually want, just what we don't want. I'm not convinced this is going to settle the nerves of business at all, if anything it may give them more time to carry out contingency plans. Those hoping the UK would remain in the CU have had it made very clear to them that's not on the table.

EDIT: Incidentally, asking for an 'implementation period' when we still have no idea what we're implementing just makes it abundantly clear A50 was triggered prematurely for the wrong reasons.

Re: Brexit discussion
 

Spot on. In particular, your point about companies carrying out their contingency plans. They will be able to negotiate better relocation deals for offices as they won't be under such time pressures. Manufacturing can be relocated when model ranges etc come to a natural end. Given that we have been quite willing to see many top British companies sold overseas, they won't have too many qualms about relocating their businesses.

Re: Brexit discussion
 

A 2 year extension? During which time we pretend we're not in the EU but are in all but name. Sounds as though she really doesn't want to leave at all. Don't blame her, the more delay the more time for us to see sense.

Re: Brexit discussion
 

Definitely kicking the can down the road here. It’s getting close to the next election cycle though. I wouldn’t be surprised to see a further ‘kick’ to ask for a mandate to complete the Brexit process

Re: Brexit discussion
 

You're not going to get a clear indication of what HMG wants or expects to get in the middle of a negotiation with the EU any more than we're going to get the bottom line on what they want and would compromise on. That's not how anyone astute negotiates.

Re: Brexit discussion
 

I think we should let the EU have what they want or risk it all for what's in a mystery box.

https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/...2017/09/23.jpg

Re: Brexit discussion
 

lol

Like the EU 'brotherhood of nations' isn't a mystery box... ;)

Re: Brexit discussion
 

I thought you guys were arguing for a transition period rather than a 'hard Brexit'!

Theresa can't do anything right for some, it seems, even if she gives them exactly what they've asked for!

Given that we won't know the outcome of the negotiations until a deal is struck, it makes perfect sense to have a two year transitional period so we can put all the new arrangements in place.

Re: Brexit discussion
 

Correct for them it'll never be enough or right whatever she does. Therein lies the proof of the mentality of these people. I can see why they love the EU so much because they behave just like the blinkered, dogma obsessed Eurocrats who're responsible for so much of what's wrong in the EU and very little of what's right.

Many of these people want two things, to stay within the EU and to destroy May/the Tories and that accounts for why they can never give any credit when it's due.

Re: Brexit discussion
 

Osem can't read this of course, but this is more for the wider audience, fact checking the man is fun regardless.

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/brex...ted-kingdom_en