Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien
Was it though? Few advocates of Brexit at the time were saying we would have no arrangement with the EU. Vote Leave's official site said:
To me (Iceland to Russian border) is ETFA. The same people who backed the above campaign are now saying that's a betrayal of Brexit but it was their campaign arguing for it.
|
Now now ... you’re not trying to redefine “hard Brexit” I hope?
During the referendum campaign, the leave side generally advocated leaving the customs union and the single market. The remain side generally warned that leaving the EU would entail leaving the customs union and the single market.
Throughout the campaign, everyone generally agreed that if we left the EU, we would leave the customs union and the single market.
After the result, the continuity remain campaign re-branded this position “hard Brexit”, claimed that nobody voted for it, and began to agitate for “soft Brexit”, which would in essence be continuing membership of the entire EU with the exception of its decision making processes (a very obviously dumb move - too dumb even for Theresa May).
However, nowhere, until now, have I heard anyone arguing that “hard Brexit” is the same thing as “no deal” brexit. The serious likelihood of us leaving without a deal doesn’t seem to have occurred to the usual remain suspects. Sure they’ve waved it round like a witch doctor’s stick trying to scare the natives but I really don’t think they thought it would happen - I always believed they were simply trying to push the government into the safest, quickest deal possible (I.e, on e again, basically status quo, leaving the EU on paper only).