Brexit discussion

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Why don't you tell us what it is you don't understand?

We. Are. Leaving. The. EU.

It's what the majority of people voted for.

Everyone knows that. Den is rightly critical of the way that the UK government is conducting its negotiations. I know many Brexiters who believe this too.

[arcimedes]

Originally Posted by Gavin78

While they can rip off the little people that work under them like philip green and Mike Ashley. When we leave EU control these eyes will be all over little scrotes like these.

What makes you think that leaving the EU will make any difference? I call this clutching at straws.

[Gavin78]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Everyone knows that. Den is rightly critical of the way that the UK government is conducting its negotiations. I know many Brexiters who believe this too.

Because they are trying to please the rest of the moaning crowd who have tried to derail the whole process. Brexit is in the mess it is because of this and it's about time we stuck 2 fingers up to those who oppose this and trying to hold the country to ransom

---------- Post added at 15:16 ---------- Previous post was at 15:14 ----------

Originally Posted by arcimedes

What makes you think that leaving the EU will make any difference? I call this clutching at straws.

I don't, we've already seen companies using Brexit as an excuse for prices rises despite anything actually happening yet. We might have had the likes of philip green doing bad business before brexit but I reckon things will change once we don't have to answer to the EU when it comes to law despite the UK governing it's on sets of laws we'll have more freedom and the bad companies that are shouting now will have probably left the UK. Leaves room for those that want to support the UK to setup their own company which will be fully run under UK law

[jonbxx]

I am mega confused about this Northern Ireland thing. In December, the joint UK/EU report stated;

In the absence of agreed solutions, the United Kingdom will maintain full alignment with those rules of the Internal Market and the Customs Union which, now or in the future, support North-South cooperation, the all island economy and the protection of the 1998 Agreement.

(https://ec.europa.eu/commission/site...int_report.pdf paragraph 49)

Then the EU draft paper which is designed to formalise the agreement made in December says;

A common regulatory area comprising the Union and the United Kingdom in respect of Northern Ireland is hereby established. The common regulatory area shall constitute an area without internal borders in which the free movement of goods is ensured and North-South cooperation protected in accordance with this Chapter.

They seem to be saying more or less the same thing.

I think the government needs to set out what it means by 'regulatory alignment' to support an 'all Ireland economy'. I am looking forward to tomorrow when hopefully the Prime Minister will clarify this.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Everyone knows that. Den is rightly critical of the way that the UK government is conducting its negotiations. I know many Brexiters who believe this too.

The government is conducting negotiations in this way for a reason. The EU have finally put their paper forward, so we can see where they are coming from. This gives us the advantage, because we can hone in on those areas that are vague or unacceptable and put forward a better way.

A lot of people who argue that the negotiations are a mess would have wished us to put all our cards on the table from the beginning.

Take it from me, and I have a successful track record in difficult negotiations, but that really is not the way to negotiate. If the government had gone in that way, they would have suffered the same fate as Cameron did. He went in with all his cards on the table and they dismantled them one by one!

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

The government is conducting negotiations in this way for a reason. The EU have finally put their paper forward, so we can see where they are coming from. This gives us the advantage, because we can hone in on those areas that are vague or unacceptable and put forward a better way.

A lot of people who argue that the negotiations are a mess would have wished us to put all our cards on the table from the beginning.

Take it from me, and I have a successful track record in difficult negotiations, but that really is not the way to negotiate. If the government had gone in that way, they would have suffered the same fate as Cameron did. He went in with all his cards on the table and they dismantled them one by one!

The document to which you're referring is basically a summary of the first stage discussions in December in which the UK and the EU agreed there would be no hard border on the island of Ireland. To renege on this promise as BoJo seemed to suggest is not a good negotiating position.

---------- Post added at 19:36 ---------- Previous post was at 19:29 ----------

Originally Posted by jonbxx

I am mega confused about this Northern Ireland thing. In December, the joint UK/EU report stated;

(https://ec.europa.eu/commission/site...int_report.pdf paragraph 49)

Then the EU draft paper which is designed to formalise the agreement made in December says;

They seem to be saying more or less the same thing.

I think the government needs to set out what it means by 'regulatory alignment' to support an 'all Ireland economy'. I am looking forward to tomorrow when hopefully the Prime Minister will clarify this.

You're of course correct.

So far, the government has avoided coming clean about the trade-offs that Brexit makes inevitable. It has stuck to the cake-and-eat-it line whereby the UK can end free movement and negotiate its own trade deals while avoiding a hard border in Ireland and any economic damage from trade friction.
But there is no magic solution to the Northern Ireland border. As soon as the UK starts importing goods from outside the EU under its own trade agreements, there has to be a customs border with the Republic of Ireland. There is a straightforward decision to be made. Do we want the UK to have its own trade deals with other countries or do we want to maintain the current border arrangements in Ireland? We can't have both. If we choose the hard border option, the EU's current line is that it will refuse to discuss trade deals. How firmly it will stick to this is anybody's guess but it certainly increases the risk of the UK leaving the EU without any sort of trade deal.
So it's not difficult this. It's a straightforward trade-off. We can have some of what the Brexiters promised but not all of it.

https://flipchartfairytales.wordpres...at-it-bluster/

Some Brextremists in between dreaming of trade deals with Narnia, Atlantis and Jumanji may be licking their lips over a technological solution to the Irish border. None exists. Flip Chart Fairies again:

Government ministers have probably known for some time that there isn’t an easy solution to the Northern Ireland border question. If Boris Johnson really believed that it was no more complicated than administering the congestion charge between the London Boroughs of Camden and Westminster, he wouldn’t have been the slightest bit worried by the European Commission’s fallback protocol. His response would have been, “What a silly suggestion. Everybody knows it won’t come to that because we have the technology to avoid customs checks at the Irish border.” Instead, he got angry and blustered. Indeed, it is the same people who have been assuring us all along that technology would solve the border question (many of them quoting an EU report that said nothing of the sort) who have gone apoplectic at the EU’s protocol. Which was, I suspect, the whole point of it.

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

The document to which you're referring is basically a summary of the first stage discussions in December in which the UK and the EU agreed there would be no hard border on the island of Ireland. To renege on this promise as BoJo seemed to suggest is not a good negotiating position.

---------- Post added at 19:36 ---------- Previous post was at 19:29 ----------


You're of course correct.

So the sequence of events could be this:
1) UK's cake-and-eat-it trade request with the EU is rejected.
2) GB has a hard Brexit and NI remains in single market and customs union
3) DUP withdraws its support due to the hard border between GB and NI.
4) Corbyn wins election with promise to take all of UK back into EU.

And just ignore a Democratic result?

I think you are conveniently forgetting, a lot Labour heartlands are Brexiteers. You think they would vote for a party that would just ignore democracy like that?

I don’t think so, there will be riots and I would riot with them. When will you let it sink in, you cannot just hold a large democratic process and just ignore it?

Bottom line is, 3 and 4 are a stretch of your Remainer imagination, working on too much hope where there is none, as we are leaving.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Mick

And just ignore a Democratic result?

I think you are conveniently forgetting, a lot Labour heartlands are Brexiteers. You think they would vote for a party that would just ignore democracy like that?

I don’t think so, there will be riots and I would riot with them. When will you let it sink in, you cannot just hold a large democratic process and just ignore it?

Bottom line is, 3 and 4 are a stretch of your Remainer imagination, working on too much hope where there is none, as we are leaving.

Um, 2) said we're leaving! That's honouring the decision.
People can change their minds in an election if they made a bad decision. Ukip taught us that when they voted out their previous leader after he left his wife for an alleged racist. How people will feel about the whole situation when the government is more honest about the trade-offs will be interesting. Particularly if the EU could offer free trade without freedom of movement.

[Mr K]

Originally Posted by Mick

And just ignore a Democratic result?

The democratic result wasn't overwhelming. The vast majority of the population shouldn't be ignored.

Sigh. People ineligible to vote, couldn’t be arsed to vote don’t count in a % total.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Mr K

The democratic result wasn't overwhelming. The vast majority of the population shouldn't be ignored.

Why are you surprised? Over 50% tend not to vote at General Elections either.

In any case, if you are a don't know, there is no point in voting, is there?

It cannot also be classed as underwhelming, it was one of the largest democratic events in modern British History.

[1andrew1]

All this talk about a vote in 2016 is all well and good but it doesn't solve the Irish problem. Any suggestions from people that don't involve magic or breaching WTO rules?

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

All this talk about a vote in 2016 is all well and good but it doesn't solve the Irish problem. Any suggestions from people that don't involve magic or breaching WTO rules?

I believe it was your buddy who brought up the 2016 vote and summat about it being underwhelming, which it wasn't. I have already commented on the NI issue, it's not rocket science nor a big issue that some of the Remainers want to make it be.

[Dave42]

Originally Posted by Mick

I believe it was your buddy who brought up the 2016 vote and summat about it being underwhelming, which it wasn't. I have already commented on the NI issue, it's not rocket science nor a big issue that some of the Remainers want to make it be.

not a big issue your having a laugh tell that to the tories and dup the EU and Ireland and Northern Ireland if it not rocket science come on then tell us the answer