Brexit (Old)

[Gavin78]

Originally Posted by jfman

They aren’t trying hard at all. They’ve laid out a clear position we find unpalatable.

It takes 2 sides to make a deal work. The EU are just sitting back and letting the UK do all the leg work and everytime we come up with a deal they just say NO.

This latest one gives them a lot of control still hence getting voted down. The only thing they made clear was the mickey take out of the UK all the time and they call us racist.

[Mr K]

Originally Posted by Gavin78

It takes 2 sides to make a deal work. The EU are just sitting back and letting the UK do all the leg work and everytime we come up with a deal they just say NO.

This latest one gives them a lot of control still hence getting voted down. The only thing they made clear was the mickey take out of the UK all the time and they call us racist.

Why should they do anything? We're the ones that want to leave, up to us to find a solution. If want a deal we have to find one the EU agree to. Otherwise we leave with no deal. Our choice. Remember this is what you voted for (for some reason!), hope it was all explained to you beforehand....

[pip08456]

Originally Posted by Mr K

Why should they do anything? We're the ones that want to leave, up to us to find a solution. If want a deal we have to find one the EU agree to. Otherwise we leave with no deal. Our choice. Remember this is what you voted for (for some reason!), hope it was all explained to you beforehand....

No deal it is then.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by pip08456

No deal it is then.

Or Jezza's deal?
Jeremy Corbyn's Brexit plan 'promising', Donald Tusk tells Theresa May

[Mr K]

Originally Posted by pip08456

No deal it is then.

If that's what you want, we do seem to desperate to get one though. Do the Govt. know something we don't ? i.e that it would be chaos and the Govt. of the day will be the fall guys... Think this is how Corbyn is seeing it.

[nomadking]

Strange how all these issues of a lack of plan, backstop etc, didn't apply to the Scottish Independence vote.

[1andrew1]

Meanwhile, the US Congress puts more pressure on the UK to accept a backstop agreement by warning that a hard border could threaten a US-UK trade deal with the UK.

US officials are said to hold "palpable concerns" about the impact of Brexit on Ireland and the Good Friday Agreement, as Tánaiste Simon Coveney met with congressmen and foreign ministers in Washington.
Members of Congress warned last night that any return to a hard border in Ireland could threaten a post-Brexit trade deal between the US and the UK.
Mr Coveney attended a meeting of the Coalition Against Isis in the US yesterday with ministers from more than 70 countries. Brexit was one of the issues discussed by ministers and officials in the margins at the meeting.
The Tánaiste is said to have used it to enforce a message that Brexit will have negative consequences for Ireland and the North.

https://www.independent.ie/business/...-37791274.html

---------- Post added at 22:27 ---------- Previous post was at 22:25 ----------

Originally Posted by nomadking

Strange how all these issues of a lack of plan, backstop etc, didn't apply to the Scottish Independence vote.

Maybe that's because Leave didn't win that vote?

---------- Post added at 22:30 ---------- Previous post was at 22:27 ----------

Originally Posted by Mr K

If that's what you want, we do seem to desperate to get one though. Do the Govt. know something we don't ? i.e that it would be chaos and the Govt. of the day will be the fall guys... Think this is how Corbyn is seeing it.

I think you're right. I suspect May wouldn't hang around for too long under such circumstances though.

[Carth]

Originally Posted by pip08456

No deal it is then.

The way both sides are faffing about I'd guess we're good to go

[jonbxx]

Originally Posted by nomadking

Strange how all these issues of a lack of plan, backstop etc, didn't apply to the Scottish Independence vote.

Well there's an interesting point. The Scottish independence referendum 'Yes' campaign was very details focused on issues such as fiscal union with the UK, leaving NATO, staying in the EU, shutting down Faslane etc. This was published in the white paper 'Scotland's Future (link - https://www2.gov.scot/resource/0043/00439021.pdf) This let the critics in to tear apart these plans, showing many of them to be nonsense. There is a school of thought that if members of the 'Yes' campaign simply painted their faces blue and shouted FREEDOM a lot, the result may have been different as you can't dissect feelings like you can facts.

I think a lot was learned from this campaign when it came to the EU Referendum which was much lighter on solid promises of future states and more aspirational.

There is of course a fine line to be drawn here on relying too much on either feelings or facts when running a campaign. See the last General Election as an example where the Conservatives relied too much on simply not being Jeremy Corbyn with the thought this might be enough to win.

Political Sciences and psychology is fun!

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by jonbxx

Well there's an interesting point. The Scottish independence referendum 'Yes' campaign was very details focused on issues such as fiscal union with the UK, leaving NATO, staying in the EU, shutting down Faslane etc. This was published in the white paper 'Scotland's Future (link - https://www2.gov.scot/resource/0043/00439021.pdf) This let the critics in to tear apart these plans, showing many of them to be nonsense. There is a school of thought that if members of the 'Yes' campaign simply painted their faces blue and shouted FREEDOM a lot, the result may have been different as you can't dissect feelings like you can facts.

I think a lot was learned from this campaign when it came to the EU Referendum which was much lighter on solid promises of future states and more aspirational.

There is of course a fine line to be drawn here on relying too much on either feelings or facts when running a campaign. See the last General Election as an example where the Conservatives relied too much on simply not being Jeremy Corbyn with the thought this might be enough to win.

Political Sciences and psychology is fun!

Throughout the document it refers to negotiations being needed with the UK, EU etc. No finalised plans possible because of that. Scotland would never be able to join the EU until it had it's own separate currency, national bank, and got it's deficit down to less than 3%(it's around 8%, and that include oil). It lists FOUR currency options, not exactly an agreed all around and final plan. It's ALL based upon assumptions that they will be given everything they were asking for.



The EU never kicked up a fuss over there being a non-EU country(ie Scotland) having an open border with the EU via England.

[BenMcr]

Originally Posted by nomadking

The EU never kicked up a fuss over there being a non-EU country(ie Scotland) having an open border with the EU via England.

That's because the SNP as part of the vote was proposing to be a separate EU member at the same time as independence
https://www2.gov.scot/Publications/2013/11/9348/10

Following a vote for independence the Scottish Government will immediately seek discussions with the Westminster Government, with member states and with the institutions of the EU to agree the process whereby a smooth transition to independent EU membership can take place on the day Scotland becomes an independent country.

The discussions will be held during the period in which Scotland remains part of the UK and by extension, part of the EU. This will allow the transition to independent EU membership to proceed without disrupting the continuity of Scotland's current position inside the EU single market or the rights and interests of EU citizens and businesses in Scotland. The Scottish Government believes that ensuring a seamless transition to independent EU membership will be in the best interests of Scotland, all member states and the EU in general, as well as those individual EU citizens and businesses who would be affected by any alternative approach.

So they would continue to be in the Customs Union and Single Market - which are the two things that the UK government has ruled out and why the backstop is in the Withdrawal Agreement.

Talking of SNP - they got an absolute pasting on BBCQT last night.... By a Glaswegian in the Audience, reminded me of a certain Troll splatter....

[jonbxx]

Originally Posted by nomadking

Throughout the document it refers to negotiations being needed with the UK, EU etc. No finalised plans possible because of that. Scotland would never be able to join the EU until it had it's own separate currency, national bank, and got it's deficit down to less than 3%(it's around 8%, and that include oil). It lists FOUR currency options, not exactly an agreed all around and final plan. It's ALL based upon assumptions that they will be given everything they were asking for.

This is exactly my point - the proposed plans were published and subsequently rubbished by all and sundry. By being too clear in the campaign let the 'No' campaign in.

I think the EU Referendum Leave campaigners were deliberately more vague on future plans beyond 'freedom from the shackles of the EU' to avoid further scrutiny. It's smart and it worked

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by jonbxx

This is exactly my point - the proposed plans were published and subsequently rubbished by all and sundry. By being too clear in the campaign let the 'No' campaign in.

I think the EU Referendum Leave campaigners were deliberately more vague on future plans beyond 'freedom from the shackles of the EU' to avoid further scrutiny. It's smart and it worked

My point still stands that the SNP didn't have plan, they just had proposals and aspirations. It required agreements not yet reached, to achieve any of it. A lot of it's content doesn't have an equivalent in Brexit, because the UK has control of those issues and there won't be any changes there. Anything that is currency/financial system related won't be affected. There is not going to be a change in currency.

Originally Posted by nomadking

My point still stands that the SNP didn't have plan, they just had proposals and aspirations. It required agreements not yet reached, to achieve any of it. A lot of it's content doesn't have an equivalent in Brexit, because the UK has control of those issues and there won't be any changes there. Anything that is currency/financial system related won't be affected. There is not going to be a change in currency.

You’re right, they didn’t have a plan, they had a 600-page wish list dressed up as a White Paper - terminology deliberately chosen to imply detailed proposals only one step removed from a bill to be presented in parliament.

However they presented it as a plan, and it undid them. The wild promises of free money for all won them majorities in Glasgow and Dundee but thoroughly alienated everyone else. They failed to win Yes majorities even in districts where they had held parliamentary seats for decades (they have since lost several of those seats as well, mostly to Tories).

Vote Leave played a very canny game. They had aspirations and they presented them as such. They never once made a concrete claim of what would happen after the vote, though they did make many claims about what could happen. The £350 million NHS bus was one of those, and I think the fact that it wasn’t presented as a campaign promise is the reason why it has resisted all attempts to weaponise it, despite many furious attempts to do so by continuity remainers. They easily get themselves riled up over it, but it has never become the talisman of broken pledges that they have wanted it to be.

Of course this was not just canny campaigning by Vote Leave. It was never their remit to publish a manifesto because Vote Leave was never going to be in a position to implement anything.