Brexit

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by denphone

Yes Brexit is a highly divisive and emotive topic of that there is no doubt but being civil is very easy at the end of the day as its a bit like disagreements in ones family as family members might disagree on a good many things in life but generally always remain civil to each other despite their disagreements.

One person’s “not civil” is another person’s assertiveness. I would regard non-civility as being nearer to “you are talking bollocks” - while though true in some cases where used.



---------- Post added at 13:32 ---------- Previous post was at 13:28 ----------

Originally Posted by jfman

Yes they are. A customs union and single market alignment are exactly the kind of discussions around making Brexit work that you describe.

I don’t see how what you say would make Brexit work. We would be better off remaining and peeing on them inside the tent than being peed on as rule takers from outside the tent. The export maths doesn’t stack up.

Brexit works if we make a clean break.


---------- Post added at 13:35 ---------- Previous post was at 13:32 ----------

Originally Posted by jfman

Indeed.

Those in favour are missing a trick though. It’s Brexit without the risk. The conversation moves on and we have left the EU legally. Remaining is no longer in the conversation.

A customs union could apply to goods (which is ideal really) but not services. This would allow the UK to strike deals with the rest of the world on the supply of services.

If, down the line, we wanted to renegotiate or leave a customs union we could. Freedom of movement would have long since been dead. It becomes a conversation about trade only. We can all agree we want more trade that benefits us?

Remainers are fighting for the “whole package”. Eliminate some of it and reduce it to a trade discussion in five years time and far fewer numbers will be interested in the debate at all.

But what about the backstop that Brussels would insist upon? We can’t allow ourselves to be perpetually locked in, at Macron’s mercy for fishing in our waters against release from the backstop.

[Carth]

There are a few people in these threads that post things that raise my hackles . . unintentionally I presume . . but I've always had a different 'mind set' attitude anyway

Many of those posters have however received positive 'likes' for stuff that has made me chuckle etc.

Brexit is a very difficult topic not to get 'wound up' about, especially when it's all text based communication on a forum. Those same people that sometimes wind me up would be bought a drink if we met in a pub, we're just folk with different views, ideas and goals.

99% of politicians would get that drink poured over their head

[jfman]

Baby steps works because it removes the cliff edge which is at present galvanising the opponents of Brexit. Get a deal and end freedom of movement now.

A future Government will be better placed to renegotiate trade agreements than this one which is tied to the whims of the ERG/DUP.

The backstop is why we need a proper customs union with exit rights. Move the Northen Ireland problem to when we have a Government that’s not relying on NI votes.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by jfman

Baby steps works because it removes the cliff edge which is at present galvanising the opponents of Brexit. Get a deal and end freedom of movement now.

A future Government will be better placed to renegotiate trade agreements than this one which is tied to the whims of the ERG/DUP.

The backstop is why we need a proper customs union with exit rights. Move the Northen Ireland problem to when we have a Government that’s not relying on NI votes.

BIG problems with a "baby steps" approach.
1) It would be one step forward to Brexit and 2 steps forwards firmly to Remain in the future. Brexit must not be allowed to be reversed as easily as it would be.
2) Still no mechanism for ending whatever arrangement.

3) Wouldn't solve the delays at Customs. Doesn't currently solve it for the EU-Turkey Customs union.
4) Everything would be set by the EU, with us having no say whatsoever. Not that we have much of a say as it is.


With the backstop we have NO exit rights. Only what the EU allows us to have, and that would inevitably be remaining in a Customs Union against our will. Why shouldn't the DUP object to NI being treated differently.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by nomadking

BIG problems with a "baby steps" approach.
1) It would be one step forward to Brexit and 2 steps forwards firmly to Remain in the future. Brexit must not be allowed to be reversed as easily as it would be.
2) Still no mechanism for ending whatever arrangement.
3) Wouldn't solve the delays at Customs. Doesn't currently solve it for the EU-Turkey Customs union.
4) Everything would be set by the EU, with us having no say whatsoever. Not that we have much of a say as it is.

With the backstop we have NO exit rights. Only what the EU allows us to have, and that would inevitably be remaining in a Customs Union against our will. Why shouldn't the DUP object to NI being treated differently.

On point 1: Once legally out, ending freedom of movement, there’s no way back in without rejoining. Rebate gone. Euro. The full bhuna. We are never going to vote for that in a referendum or a party advocating that at a general election. Remainers preferred outcome ceases to exist at this moment.

On point 2 a genuine customs union would have exit arrangements for Great Britain (but not Northern Ireland). A small price to pay, but that’s why we are where we are. Unless you want to deliver a united Ireland this is how Brexit has to work.

On point 3 would depend how closely our arrangements matched Turkey’s.

On point 4 not “everything” would be set by the EU. We can strike separate trade deals on services, which is more lucrative anyway, and common standards facilitates our trade in goods with the EU countries (which account for most of our trade in goods) anyway.

You appear to simply dislike things because they are European. A more pragmatic approach can deliver Britain the Brexit it wants in a phased approach. There’s no need for an “all or nothing” now approach, indeed an approach that is putting Brexit at risk from remainers.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by jfman

On point 1: Once legally out, ending freedom of movement, there’s no way back in without rejoining. Rebate gone. Euro. The full bhuna. We are never going to vote for that in a referendum or a party advocating that at a general election.

On point 2 a genuine customs union would have exit arrangements for Great Britain (but not Northern Ireland). A small price to pay, but that’s why we are where we are. Unless you want to deliver a united Ireland this is how Brexit has to work.

On point 3 would depend how closely our arrangements matched Turkey’s.

On point 4 not “everything” would be set by the EU. We can strike separate trade deals on services, which is more lucrative anyway, and common standards facilitates our trade in goods with the EU countries (which account for most of our trade) anyway.

You appear to simply dislike things because they are European. A more pragmatic approach can deliver Britain the Brexit it wants in a phased approach. There’s no need for an “all or nothing” now approach, indeed an approach that is putting Brexit at risk from remainers.

Basically I dislike being told what to do by Europe, when we don't really have a say. Nothing wrong with adopting the same or similar rules as the EU if we agree with them, but at the same time we should be able to have differences in standards which might mean refusing certain EU products/produce.


We voted for Leave in the referendum, but have we got it or are we even remotely going to get it? Therefore moving away from Brexit is NOT a foregone conclusion in the future even with having a say on it. Just look at what a potential Labour government wants. If in the mythical world we got a vote, it would be ignored if it went the "wrong" way, as it is now.


The backstop IS a customs union until the EU decides upon an alternative agreement. Why would they agree bother to agree to anything less than that, when they aren't prepared to agree to it now?


The proposals that would remove customs delays have been TURNED DOWN by the EU. Not coincidentally that would also have removed the need for a backstop, which is why the EU objected to it.


The EU is just going to get bigger and bigger in many ways. In the countries it includes and areas that it controls. Once locked into any agreement with the EU, locks you into whatever the EU becomes. An obvious example of that is joining the EEC and what it has now become. The EU is in full control of what you are locked into.


No way would any arrangement be allowed to be more restrictive in nature. A general customs union wouldn't be able to be more selective/restrictive. It only works if you agree to ADD something, not take something away.

[jfman]

You aren’t going to get the Brexit you want if it’s framed exclusively in ideology. Unicorn Brexit doesn’t exist. Small countries get told what to do by big ones. That’s what globalisation and free trade does.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by jfman

You aren’t going to get the Brexit you want if it’s framed exclusively in ideology. Unicorn Brexit doesn’t exist. Small countries get told what to do by big ones. That’s what globalisation and free trade does.

All the more reason for a clean break.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

All the more reason for a clean break.

We can then build UP from that.

---------- Post added at 17:32 ---------- Previous post was at 17:32 ----------

Originally Posted by jfman

You aren’t going to get the Brexit you want if it’s framed exclusively in ideology. Unicorn Brexit doesn’t exist. Small countries get told what to do by big ones. That’s what globalisation and free trade does.

So your argument goes that we are forced to do whatever Germany tells us to?

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

All the more reason for a clean break.

If we are going cap in hand for free trade deals with anyone and everyone we will be more exposed to their demands, not less.

A customs union, in effect a free trade deal, with the EU on goods allows us to maintain no tariffs with out closest neighbours on goods while being able to negotiate with the rest of the world on services. It actually strengthens our hand, not weakens it.

---------- Post added at 17:53 ---------- Previous post was at 17:50 ----------

Originally Posted by nomadking

We can then build UP from that.

---------- Post added at 17:32 ---------- Previous post was at 17:32 ----------


So your argument goes that we are forced to do whatever Germany tells us to?

We will do whatever anyone negotiating with us (that has the upper hand) tells us to. USA, China, Japan, Germany, India, France. You know, all the big players. That’s why it’s called capitalism. He who pays the piper cells the tune.

[Carth]

Originally Posted by jfman

A customs union, in effect a free trade deal, with the EU on goods allows us to maintain no tariffs with our closest neighbours on goods while being able to negotiate with the rest of the world on services.

That sounds all fine & dandy . . . what's it gonna cost us in other things?

[jfman]

Couple of hundred million of fish?

[Carth]

Originally Posted by jfman

Couple of hundred million of fish?

Let them eat Lobster

Originally Posted by Carth

Let them eat Lobster

Scallops!

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jfman

You aren’t going to get the Brexit you want if it’s framed exclusively in ideology. Unicorn Brexit doesn’t exist. Small countries get told what to do by big ones. That’s what globalisation and free trade does.

We may be a small country, but a more relevant fact is that we are the fifth largest economy.

Russia is a huge country, but its economy is pants.

Size matters, certainly, but you are measuring the wrong thing.