Re: Brexit discussion
 

Spot on Den. I would welcome something more on the Irish border issue that doesn't paraphrase some of "we won, get over it, it will sort itself out by magic let's ignore WTO rules as we're British and used to own 25% of the World"

Re: Brexit discussion
 

Happy to oblige, Andrew.

Brexit is Brexit. :D

Re: Brexit discussion
 

I am afraid that this Empire nostalgia does colour a lot of the Leavers' thinking. I also sense that the hard core Leavers are showing degrees of panic and worry.

Here's an article in the Express, that most rabid of Leaver news sources:

Don’t cut off our supply of farm workers

You have to laugh at the irony of the article but it does show that for even the most blind of the Hope & Faith brigade, reality does intrude now and again.

Re: Brexit discussion
 

It's no longer a debate it's just whinging about losing and not accepting the results of democracy .

Re: Brexit discussion
 

What a load of tosh, ianch! I don't know any leavers who prattle on about empire or even how good it used to be. It's all about the nation we want to be - enterprising, making our own laws and trade deals, and free of the shackles of the undemocratic and bureaucratic EU.

As for agricultural workers, I don't see how that needs to be affected by Brexit at all. It will be up to us how many and of what type we allow into this country. Targeted immigration is what we want, not uncontrolled hordes of people who all want a piece of us.

Re: Brexit discussion
 

Yes, but only to the extent that I voted to remain and think that it was a better option to remain. I am not bitter about it (though I disagree with the decision entirely and think it is hilarious that they think that it will fix anything in regards to immigration) and bear no ill will to those voted to leave ; so long as they can respect the rules / order of the EU. If the EU says "no" to some max fac Customs idea then the UK has to accept that. What really pissed me off was some months ago (right at the start of the withdrawal) when Davis said that the "EU needed to be more imaginative..."

He had a total disrespect for where they drew the line, a total lack of respect of their four principles and would whine and bitch whenever the EU returned suit. If M Barnier turned around told him "Brexit means imagination" every time May said she had red lines, Davis would have had red lines on his face to the extent his smiles would have splattered by the blood vessels that burst in her neck.

People want friction-less trade? Stay a member of the CU. Want access to the single market and free movement of capital? You will have to accept free movement of people. Simple as that. Fine, Britain voted to leave. I didn't agree with it but the EU does not have to cowtow to the demands of the British and it is about time that we as a nation learned to accept that.

---------- Post added at 18:50 ---------- Previous post was at 18:43 ----------

Exactly, and so long as the same principles apply to every other body of the EU that the UK wishes to be a part of, then so be it.

Want to be a part of the CU? You can either be in, or be out. No half ass measures.

Want access to the single market? Stick to the 4 principles. Not this "we can have a Canada / Norwegian / tech based / bespoke cake that we will have, and eat it, too!" (And then claim that the cake is so wonderful the obesity issues of the UK are gone and that we don't know what to do with the 350 billion as times are so good and the NHS is saved etc!)

Seriously, though I don't think that me and you disagree on this much. We both want the respective sides to just stick to the agreement and principles there of. If we are out, then we are out and have to accept what comes with that. Like you said, we voted to leave, right? If that means entirely, then so be it. (Though I am not sure the British people will ever all sync on that one). It also means though if that the UK wishes to leave all those EU entities then it loses things, like access to the SM and friction less trade. Sound fair?

Re: Brexit discussion
 

But it does, Andrew. The Brexit vote was to leave the EU. To have any meaning at all, this means leaving the Common Market and Customs Union as well (or we can't trade with the rest of the world as we want to do).

The Customs Union has been seized on by the remainers as they see this as confusing the issue and alarming people into thinking that this is a deal breaker and there is no solution. But as Rees Mogg said very eloquently on the Andrew Marr programme last week, the Irish border question (which is being used as a battering ram by remainers to greatly exaggerate the 'problems of leaving the Customs Union') really is not the problem that many people think it is.

Arrangements based on the UK’s proposals for an expanded trusted trader scheme and exemptions for small traders is perfectly adequate to operate a border without infrastructure.

The key point is that modern technology means that physical customs posts, or even cameras, are no longer essential at borders. The use of mobile phone and GPS technology to track HGVs, together with the computer-based customs clearing which is the norm across much of the world is pretty well all that is required. Most of the goods traffic will be by companies with trusted trader status and with a no-tariffs deal, smuggling will not be profitable anyhow.

Although not yet in place, arrangements without physical infrastructure have been successfully trialled on the Norway-Sweden border. The only reason that they have not been adopted for general use on this border is that the existing border arrangements are satisfactory and hence the cost of new electronic systems is not justified.

This is not the serious problem it has been made out to be. It is a political ruse, nothing more, to detract from our determination to achieve a smooth but complete Brexit. Nothing less will satisfy the public, let alone the Brexiteers.

Re: Brexit discussion
 

We are not the ones whining though - you are the ones saying "no, we're leaving everything but still want the perks". Don't want the perks? Then fine, nobody has any issue here. If you have never asked for access to the SM, friction-less trade + an open Irish border (which will never happen without CU membership) then I apologize. And without that as a request there is no issue.

---------- Post added at 18:55 ---------- Previous post was at 18:53 ----------

Meh I am okay - I don't mind being labelled a remainer / remoaner etc - I have been called far worse. I appreciate your defense though. :)

I am someone who favors the EU, I am someone who voted remain and would again. I am fairly open about that and am not ashamed of it all.

Re: Brexit discussion
 

I notice though, Chloé, that you don't mention Barnier's intransigence and inflammatory language, to which Davis was responding.

It is in the interests of both sides to have frictionless trade and it is entirely possible to achieve this, but we do not intend and will not accept free movement of people.

Incidentally, I agree that the objective of reducing immigration to the hundreds of thousands should be dropped. A ridiculous ploy by David Cameron, in my book.

It should be reduced to whatever is required by industry and our public services, and that should be the objective behind controlling immigration.

Re: Brexit discussion
 

Tosh .. not!

An inconvenient truth?

Free movement isn't free: the truth about EU immigration

Care to comment?

Re: Brexit discussion
 

The ones whining at the moment are those who voted to leave the EU and are somewhat annoyed that this actually means having to leave the EU! So they think it's unfair that they can't enter to be a future European City of Culture or can't stay in the Galileo programme. They are accompanied in their whingeing by the legally-naive who don't get that if you sign a multi-year contract, you have to honour that contract and pay up what you've signed up to pay!
Everyone else - regardless of how they voted - is looking on wondering how on earth everything is going to play out!

Re: Brexit discussion
 

Yes those Brexiters do moan a lot, even though they supposedly 'won it'. Maybe they've just realised what they've won and what it's going to mean for them and their families.......

Re: Brexit discussion
 

Okay I need to explain this comment. In no way did I mean to make fun of diabetics but shortly before May became PM, Boris apparently struck a deal with her that he would take over in 2019. (I can't remember the exact details but the story was published in the Telegraph).

In post 2731, you wrote:

I should permlink that. The reason that Bojo was indeed aghast is because the public listened, and voted to leave! He never had any plans to fix this mess because 1, he never wanted to leave in the first place and 2, he never thought that the public would buy it.

Think about it this way - when does a politician ever try win votes in this day and age - when campaigning for or against something? It was a lot easier for Boris to say "look at those EU bureaucrats" to go win votes with the British public to go get elected than say "see I won!". Then he would be accredited for the current disastrous state of affairs. Think that the next Tory will go to the voters and say "vote for me for look at the brilliant and magnificent job TM is doing?" Of course not. They will talk about what the pitfalls of a Jeremy Corbyn led administration (propped up by the SNP with John McDonnel as Chancellor and Dianne Abbot as HS) to such an extent that it will do for Cameron what Ed Miliband was in 2015. In my link above I categorically said that the SNP's failure in the North are what allowed May to form a minority government in the first place. The Tories are right not to ram that home though, so they can use Strugeon as a punch bag for the next race! No way (in this day and ago) can someone run on their own merits - you have to constantly belittle and undermine the other side. Ergo, negative attack ads and campaigning work.

Look at what happened with Obama in the US - for so long Republicans felt like they had to carry water for Wall street at the end of 2008 (an unpopular war etc) but when Obama came in my God they found their feet - governing is not so easy but being in opposition all they have to do is talk about their dissatisfaction with the other side. (Like with the Iraq war, the Democrats never had a plan so for all their Bitching about Bush / Cheney / Rumseld they never had a plan of their own). Look at the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt - 80 years in exile / the Wilderness etc. Hosni Mubarrak finally goes and what happens - Morsi comes in and is thrown out and imprisoned within a couple years. Burma / Myanmar. All good and well when you are winning Nobel peace prizes while under home confinement but when you are leader of the country and have to deal with the slaughter of Muslims by the hundreds of thousands, it is not so easy, is it?

(I could go on, but back to that comment I made).

So let's take a look at some of the most prominent voices on the leave side:

Farage...no longer has a job nor purpose, quit UKIP and has to resort to working for LBC.

John Redwood...lost his marriage and still not worthy to lick John Major's boots.

Michael Gove...we all know what happened to him.

(I could go on but this post is getting rather long winded).

Gove and Johnson looked aghast as they realized that they might have to clean up this mess. Think things are going well? May was the perfect woman to put in to take the heat for all this. Because now Boris can say "May is screwing all this up, which is why your life is dreadful"...where as before the vote he could blame it all on the EU.

That is why he had to think fast, and he did by getting the one job in government that spelled out his reality. "Britain will have wonderful times ahead...I am going to show my patriotism to it by going off to warmer and sunnier climes and wow am I going to enjoy it! Go Britain!". Nobody will ever know whether he did what he did intentionally or Gove really did knife him in the back but either way Gove will forever take the blame and Boris doesn't have to deal with any of this - he found his stooge in May to take the blame for all that goes wrong. He can live his life up a bit, in the mean time.

The joke that goes round is that he could have cake but a diabetic could not - so he put the diabetic in as PM so he could have his cake, and eat it - while she suffered so mercilessly. I don't like Boris at all (don't agree with him, his personal behavior is repulsive etc) but on this one issue I am glad that he does what he does to May - she deserves it. She is the most two faced lecherous PM this country has ever had the misfortune of having and she deserves to be tormented the way that she is. It is not fair for other diabetics to be tarred by her, so even whenever I hear the phrase I will try to rebuff it and my apologies to anyone who took offense to my words - they are not my own but just the running gag I hear going around. I thought that it was funny at first but there is no good reason to tar anyone with May - diabetic or not. (Feel for me - I am the same gender as her!!!)

Re: Brexit discussion
 

Think you may have ruffled a few 'right wing CF feathers' here Chloe, you're a left wing version of Trump ! 'They don't like it up them' as Corporal Jones said :)

Re: Brexit discussion
 

It's not a political ruse Old Boy. I appreciate that you may not be as pro-business as I am but I think you should try and make the effort to listen to what manufacturing businesses have to say on the subject of such borders and not turn an ear deafer than Corbyn's.

http://www.cityam.com/286524/manufac...s-proposal-non

https://uk.reuters.com/article/us-br...-idUKKCN1IT25I