Brexit (Old)

[jonbxx]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

It's certainly not Brexit that is collapsing - only the Withdrawal Agreement!

---------- Post added at 11:01 ---------- Previous post was at 10:37 ----------



I think some are seizing on these forecasts as being proof of their unshakable belief that Brexit will be a disaster. It won't be, of course, just as the world didn't come to an end immediately after the vote to leave was announced.

The remainers like to describe the whole process as a shambles, and don't they like to go on, and on, and on about this and their predicted implosion of the world as we know it?

Despite everything the 'remoaners' are saying, and I use that term to distinguish normal remainers from those who just won't accept the democratic result of the referendum, we now have the best withdrawal agreement that can be negotiated with the EU. Remoaners said we would end up paying the EU hundreds of billions of pounds to leave, we settled at £39bn. They said TM would never get to Phase Ii of the negotiating process. Then they said we would never get a deal. They have been wrong on all counts to date and yet they still, with gallons of false confidence, proclaim this as a disaster and the post Brexit world as a catastrophe for 'little' Britain. It's all tosh.

We are now at a situation where we have three pretty good choices. We accept the imperfect Withdrawal Agreement on the basis that this is the bridge we cross to get out of the EU, preserving frictionless trade with no tariffs in the meantime. Or we can take the Norway route as that bridge instead of the Withdrawal Agreement, but which would mean that free movement of people would have to continue during that period. Or we can just make a clean break and negotiate our trade deal when we are out.

All this emotion and nonsense about Brexit is just hot air. The economic forecasts are all based on the downsides, the worst case scenarios quoted out of context and practically no attention is being paid to the upsides of better deals and cheaper goods from the rest of the world.

Those watching all this in bewilderment should be reassured that we will get through this despite the prophets of doom, and if there is some disruption, it will be minor and short lived. A small price to pay to realise our dreams for a brighter future.

And just a final word to the remoaners. We are not 'little' Britain. We are Great Britain, and if you want proof, check your atlas.

So I guess you are happy with how the government has performed since 2016 in this respect?

When almost all of the forecasts indicate a downturn in performance of the UK economy even with trade deals. For example, the recent government study takes in to account that we will have comprehensive trade deals according to government policy with United States, Australia, New Zealand, Malaysia, Brunei, China, India, Mercosur (Brazil, Argentina, Paraguay and Uruguay) and the Gulf-Cooperation Council (UAE, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Qatar, Kuwait and Bahrain)

The question is, if almost all forecasts indicate a downturn in the economy then we need to talk about how much rather than whether it will happen. See climate change studies as a similar example.. If the methodology is flawed, then where are the 'correcting' studies by other groups or is the entire science of economics flawed?

I hope you are right and the negative impacts are low but we need to be ready in case this is not the case. Personally, in my situation, we can absorb a fair level of financial shock (Brexit proofing our mortgage with a really long term fixed rate for example) and most of my work comes from the EU rather than the UK. I am worried this will not be the case for everyone though.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Mick

Nope - we leave on WTO terms.

Democracy must ALWAYS prevail - no stupid second referendums to over turn the first because YOU lost your preference!!!

Exactly and as I have said for the 3rd time which jfman is being obtuse on, the treasury routinely gets it's annual forcasts wrong, so how the feck can they predict the next 15 years - it's just pure fiction by pathetic Remainers in government with a corrupted ambition to stay in the corrupted union!

Democracy as enshrined in our constitution always prevails if the will of Parliament prevails.

Do you not think that the purpose of this amendment (and others) is to derail Brexit? The point in bringing forward the meaningful vote is to allow time to legislate for the amendment of the EU Withdrawal Act?

Without having an argument over leave/remain or the value of economic forecasts (again) does everyone in the thread agree with me that is what MPs are trying to do?

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jfman

The EU don’t have to accept further negotiations (of course, they could change their minds if there’s an extension, or a unilateral withdrawal of Article 50) to force a 2nd referendum on the basis of deal/remain.

We are heading for a constitutional crisis, ironically due to Parliamentary sovereignty.

This crisis is required to force the conditions to remain.

In your head.

The EU will not change their minds. TM made that clear and so has the EU. This is a big decision, but it's not a constitutional crisis.

Incidentally, the choice is now clearly between the withdrawal agreement as it stands or no deal. TM has just ruled out the Norway option.

So it's a binary choice. That makes it a lot less complicated.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

In your head.

The EU will not change their minds. TM made that clear and so has the EU. This is a big decision, but it's not a constitutional crisis.

Incidentally, the choice is now clearly between the withdrawal agreement as it stands or no deal. TM has just ruled out the Norway option.

So it's a binary choice. That makes it a lot less complicated.

The EU have no need to be involved if we remain (subject to the ECJ advice to the Court of Session). Brexit being framed as an inevitability ignores what Ministers have said, including the PM, about the possibility of no Brexit at all.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jonbxx

So I guess you are happy with how the government has performed since 2016 in this respect?

When almost all of the forecasts indicate a downturn in performance of the UK economy even with trade deals. For example, the recent government study takes in to account that we will have comprehensive trade deals according to government policy with United States, Australia, New Zealand, Malaysia, Brunei, China, India, Mercosur (Brazil, Argentina, Paraguay and Uruguay) and the Gulf-Cooperation Council (UAE, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Qatar, Kuwait and Bahrain)

The question is, if almost all forecasts indicate a downturn in the economy then we need to talk about how much rather than whether it will happen. See climate change studies as a similar example.. If the methodology is flawed, then where are the 'correcting' studies by other groups or is the entire science of economics flawed?

I hope you are right and the negative impacts are low but we need to be ready in case this is not the case. Personally, in my situation, we can absorb a fair level of financial shock (Brexit proofing our mortgage with a really long term fixed rate for example) and most of my work comes from the EU rather than the UK. I am worried this will not be the case for everyone though.

Well, given that TM has achieved a withdrawal agreement that none of our remainer friends ever thought possible, yes I am pleased with the government's performance on this issue.

It is now clear how far the EU is prepared to go in giving us a deal, and now we have to decide on whether to go with that or go without a deal, which I think is what most Brexiteers thought would be the choice all along.

We have said enough about those economic forecasts. Take them with a pinch of salt.

---------- Post added at 12:28 ---------- Previous post was at 12:27 ----------

Originally Posted by jfman

The EU have no need to be involved if we remain (subject to the ECJ advice to the Court of Session). Brexit being framed as an inevitability ignores what Ministers have said, including the PM, about the possibility of no Brexit at all.

Except that we are not remaining.

[jfman]

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/poli...-a4004961.html

Donald Tusk outlines three possible options.

[Gavin78]

Well I want a no deal, plain and simple let the experts in thier fields deal with all the stuff that comes after it's well out of my expertise.

The only issue I have is that TM has her own agenda not the Publics agenda

[Mr K]

Originally Posted by Gavin78

Well I want a no deal, plain and simple let the experts in thier fields deal with all the stuff that comes after it's well out of my expertise.

Why do you want no deal? It isn't plain and simple.

Hyperinflation, job losses, empty supermarket shelves, no health cover abroad. Either people genuinely don't realise or its a form of masochism.... The 'experts' can't do the impossible and make a crap situation good. Thankfully most MPs realise it, from all sides.

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by Mr K

Why do you want no deal? It isn't plain and simple.

Hyperinflation, job losses, empty supermarket shelves, no health cover abroad. Either people genuinely don't realise or its a form of masochism.... The 'experts' can't do the impossible and make a crap situation good. Thankfully most MPs realise it, from all sides.

You just keep shoveling on the bull but it's not working.

[denphone]

Originally Posted by papa smurf

You just keep shoveling on the bull but it's not working.

Plenty of bull on both sides from where l am looking but alas we have had that for two years plus now so nothing changes...

[jfman]

Nobody has been able to quantify any alternative future scenario. Jacob Rees-Mogg says it could be 50 years before we reap economic benefits.

Some 25 years after the technological singularity occurs apparently.

[djfunkdup]

Originally Posted by Mr K

Why do you want no deal? It isn't plain and simple.

Hyperinflation, job losses, empty supermarket shelves, no health cover abroad. Either people genuinely don't realise or its a form of masochism.... The 'experts' can't do the impossible and make a crap situation good. Thankfully most MPs realise it, from all sides.

Empty supermarket shelves ?

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Gavin78

Well I want a no deal, plain and simple let the experts in thier fields deal with all the stuff that comes after it's well out of my expertise.

The only issue I have is that TM has her own agenda not the Publics agenda

I don't think that is fair, Gavin. When Theresa May looked at the way ahead, she knew that she would be the fall guy if Brexit was not a success. So she worked out a way to both protect business and take some of the advantages of Brexit (such as an end to free movement) by way of a transitional arrangement to bridge the gap between our leaving the EU and the date by which we get a trade deal with the EU.

It has been widely acknowledged on both sides of the argument how resilient she has been, and nothing has side-tracked her despite all the noises-off both in Parliament and even from within her own party, against all the hostility she has taken from the EU. By the end of her tour of the nations, she will then have a debate in the Commons lasting days to discuss what happens next.

What she will be able to claim is:

- She would have done her absolute best to put in place a transition period that would assist business on both sides of the Channel to come to terms with the Brexit arrangements.

- She will have ensured that the country did not take an economic hit during the gap between Brexiting and securing an EU trade deal.

- She will have made sure that everyone understood, as far as it was possible for them to understand, the nature of the Withdrawal Agreement, so that nobody could say afterwards, at least with credibility, that the government did not do enough to explain the intention of that Agreement.

- Her tour of the nations and her plea to the public to make their wishes known to their MPs would have ensured that people could not say (again with credibility) that they had no opportunity to put their views forward.

So after the long debate in the Commons, MPs will vote on the Withdrawal Agreement. Everyone will understand by then what it means. If they vote it down, the Prime Minister will announce that in the absence of an agreement, Article 50 will be activated on 29 March and we wiil be out of the EU, ready to negotiate a trade deal, which will probably take up to two years in all likelihood. She will then announce the measures that will be in place to secure the speediest possible movement of goods and the arrangements in place for businesses to ensure that trade with the EU can continue relatively unimpeded, squashing yet another remoaner argument that no preparations have been done for Brexit without a deal.

Despite what others are saying about Theresa May's future prospects, I think it will be a case of game, set and match to Theresa May and a pure Brexit achieved.

Not bad for a couple of years hard grind against all the odds. Who else could have achieved this outcome?

---------- Post added at 13:56 ---------- Previous post was at 13:54 ----------

Originally Posted by Mr K

Why do you want no deal? It isn't plain and simple.

Hyperinflation, job losses, empty supermarket shelves, no health cover abroad. Either people genuinely don't realise or its a form of masochism.... The 'experts' can't do the impossible and make a crap situation good. Thankfully most MPs realise it, from all sides.

You are so funny, Mr K! You were trying to be funny, weren't you? This post of yours was hilarious!

---------- Post added at 13:56 ---------- Previous post was at 13:56 ----------

Originally Posted by jfman

Nobody has been able to quantify any alternative future scenario. Jacob Rees-Mogg says it could be 50 years before we reap economic benefits.

Some 25 years after the technological singularity occurs apparently.

Another misunderstanding. Deliberate, I think.

---------- Post added at 13:59 ---------- Previous post was at 13:56 ----------

Originally Posted by djfunkdup

Empty supermarket shelves ?

You obviously think all trade with the EU will cease if we come out of the EU with no deal. Well, that's completely wrong, and I think you know that, although I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. We will simply be trading on WTO terms until we get the trade agreement we are seeking. It is as simple as that. No need to panic, Mr Mainwaring.

[jfman]

What measures can the UK put in place to secure the speediest possible movement of goods from the EU while adhering to our WTO obligations?

---------- Post added at 14:04 ---------- Previous post was at 14:01 ----------

Originally Posted by djfunkdup

Empty supermarket shelves ?

The stockpiling of food as a contingency indicates that people are spending money now to mitigate against that likelihood. I fail to see how it warrants the dunce cap when preparations are being made.

[Carth]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

So it's a binary choice. That makes it a lot less complicated.

Hang on a minute . . isn't that what started all this?