Brexit (Old)

Originally Posted by nomadking

What deal is that? Everybody keeps going on about a "deal" when no such thing is on offer in any shape or form. it is just supposed to be an interim agreement in place until the actual "deal" is agreed. That interim agreement not only treats NI differently from the rest of the UK, but continues freedom of movement and having to follow and obey the EU.

I don't think the interim agreement does allow freedom of movement?

Also it treats NI differently only if we have no deal at the end of the interim period. It's 'the backstop' to ensure no border is required if we haven't come to some other arrangement.

Originally Posted by nomadking

People also keep going about the "sovereignty of Parliament", but the interim agreement tramples all over that because the setting of rules and regulations are meant to have been brought back to the UK by the Brexit bill, The interim agreement overturns that Parliamentary vote.

This is always going to be the case with any other arrangement including a prospective trade deal with the US. Part of these agreements including converging regulation to make trade easier. Parliament's say in that is when they vote for the overall package.

[jfman]

The enemies of this country are the right wing nationalists and hard Brexit wing of the Conservative party pushing their ideology above the national interest. Years and hundreds of millions of pounds have been wasted for an unrealisable dream.

Time, money and effort that could have been used to solve the real problems affecting the day to day lives of the people of the United Kingdom. People aren’t poor because of immigration. It’s just the scapegoat dog whistle that has worked throughout history across the world to get poor people to vote against their own interests.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by Damien

I don't think the interim agreement does allow freedom of movement?

Also it treats NI differently only if we have no deal at the end of the interim period. It's 'the backstop' to ensure no border is required if we haven't come to some other arrangement.



This is always going to be the case with any other arrangement including a prospective trade deal with the US. Part of these agreements including converging regulation to make trade easier. Parliament's say in that is when they vote for the overall package.

But a large section of the draft agreement - Part Two - is dedicated to the rights of EU citizens to live in the UK, and UK citizens to live in the EU. The UK will "take back control" of migration from the EU, but it will happen slowly.

The following 2 stances are incompatible with each other.

The bottom line of both parties is included early on.
Anything that is negotiated must be consistent with the EU's four freedoms - the free movement of goods, services, capital and people.
And nothing will be agreed that threatens the sovereignty of the United Kingdom.

Originally Posted by nomadking

The following 2 stances are incompatible with each other.

So the original part is referring to the continued right of those who are already here.

The next part is saying you can't pick and choose. I.E We won't get free movement of goods if we don't take free movement of people. It's not saying we've signed up to that but the integrity of the four freedoms will be upheld in any future talks.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by jfman

The enemies of this country are the right wing nationalists and hard Brexit wing of the Conservative party pushing their ideology above the national interest. Years and hundreds of millions of pounds have been wasted for an unrealisable dream.

Time, money and effort that could have been used to solve the real problems affecting the day to day lives of the people of the United Kingdom. People aren’t poor because of immigration. It’s just the scapegoat dog whistle that has worked throughout history across the world to get poor people to vote against their own interests.

There is no point getting 'holier than thou' and going off on a tangent that is not relevant to this topic.

The Referendum result was LEAVE. That has to be implemented. If it isn't, those who have defeated this piece of democracy are the real enemies of this country, especially Corbyn whose naked aim to turn this country into a Marxist state is obvious to all.

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

There is no point getting 'holier than thou' and going off on a tangent that is not relevant to this topic.

The Referendum result was LEAVE. That has to be implemented. If it isn't, those who have defeated this piece of democracy are the real enemies of this country, especially Corbyn whose naked aim to turn this country into a Marxist state is obvious to all.

You're racking up quite a lot of people in the enemy category

[daveeb]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

There is no point getting 'holier than thou' and going off on a tangent that is not relevant to this topic.

The Referendum result was LEAVE. That has to be implemented. If it isn't, those who have defeated this piece of democracy are the real enemies of this country, especially Corbyn whose naked aim to turn this country into a Marxist state is obvious to all.

Theresa May was voted PM 3 weeks after the Brexit referendum, and we've just had a rerun of TM's verdict due to changing opinion.

[denphone]

Originally Posted by Damien

You're racking up quite a lot of people in the enemy category

Nothing like generalising sadly.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by Damien

So the original part is referring to the continued right of those who are already here.

The next part is saying you can't pick and choose. I.E We won't get free movement of goods if we don't take free movement of people. It's not saying we've signed up to that but the integrity of the four freedoms will be upheld in any future talks.

And can continue to come here until at least 2020 and possibly beyond. Their families will be able to come over after that date and visa-free travel is freedom of movement by another name. As the the BBC article said continued freedom of movement is a "large section of the draft agreement".


Turkey has been in a customs union with the EU for more than 20 years, all without(at the moment) freedom of movement.

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

This is a totally useless avenue of discussion. We need to be considering how to move forward from here.

Agreed and it better not happen again.

Under no circumstances should any member be discussing or suggesting people should be shot, even if it is meant to be a joke.

Members are reminded of the following terms of use: Members must not:

4) Post, transmit, upload, email or otherwise make available any content that is illegal, abusive, harassing, defamatory, confidential, harmful, threatening, vulgar, libellous, invasive of another’s privacy, or ethnically, racially or otherwise objectionable.

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

There is no point getting 'holier than thou' and going off on a tangent that is not relevant to this topic.

The Referendum result was LEAVE. That has to be implemented. If it isn't, those who have defeated this piece of democracy are the real enemies of this country, especially Corbyn whose naked aim to turn this country into a Marxist state is obvious to all.

He isn't being 'holier than thou', just stating an uncomfortable truth.

Your perception of democracy just happen to be just that: a perception. If Parliament decide, as is their right, that the Brexit options available represent a clear & present danger to the prosperity of the country then it is right and proper that they seek a mandate from the people.

It is dogma that got us into to position in the first place and it pragmatism that will get us out of it.

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

Macron: (loosely quoted): "Ze ink is not yet drry on ze wizdrawal agreement; mais May should be in non doubt zat ze Beckstop will be perrmanant unless ve rretain nos fishing rights in UK vaterrs". = ENEMY.

VARADKAR: (reading between the lines): "Oive got a brilliant oidea. Let's use de Backstop to protect our economy, keep the perfidious UK in the Customs Union, wreck Brexit and bring unification close" = ENEMY.

Author's licence on my part maybe, but that's pretty much what happened and if you are in denial on this and you are defended by the other Remainers in this thread then your disconnect with reality is deplorable.



---------- Post added at 08:32 ---------- Previous post was at 08:22 ----------



This is a totally useless avenue of discussion. We need to be considering how to move forward from here.

Labour are playing high stake political games; the Lib Dems are hoping to get into coalition with Labour; the DUP are afraid of Labour; the Tories missed their road to Damascus (as in they didn't see the light).

The situation is impossible to resolve in Parliament unless the Tory Remain rebels have a Damascus moment, which they won't.

A 2nd Referendum is a logical step provided that the question is right (i.e. Deal or No Deal). It would be traitorious to reverse the 2016 Referendum and it is not an honourable political option given the history of repeated referenda in other countries till the EU got the answer it wanted.

May goes to the EU today. Let's say she gets some concession from the EU - I'd eat my hat if it was what we need, which is a unilateral or dated exit point from the Backstop. What will then happen in Parliament?

Clusterfluff doesn't cover it.

So if I and (and others) don’t agree with your imaginative interpretation of events, you resort to personal ad hominem attacks - nice...

You even admit you are making stuff up with the phrase “Author’s licence of my part", as the definition of Author’s/Artistic Licence is

a colloquial term, sometimes a euphemism, used to denote the distortion of fact

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by ianch99

He isn't being 'holier than thou', just stating an uncomfortable truth.

Your perception of democracy just happen to be just that: a perception. If Parliament decide, as is their right, that the Brexit options available represent a clear & present danger to the prosperity of the country then it is right and proper that they seek a mandate from the people.

It is dogma that got us into to position in the first place and it pragmatism that will get us out of it.

The legitimacy of Parliament derives from Democracy. It might be claimed that a future Labour government represents a clear & present danger and therefore according to you, Parliament could legitimately prevent that.

Originally Posted by nomadking

And can continue to come here until at least 2020 and possibly beyond. Their families will be able to come over after that date and visa-free travel is freedom of movement by another name. As the the BBC article said continued freedom of movement is a "large section of the draft agreement".


Turkey has been in a customs union with the EU for more than 20 years, all without(at the moment) freedom of movement.

Ah ok. I think there is some confusion on my part here. You meant things will continue as normal during the transition period, I thought you meant we had committed to free movement as part of the basis for the future deal.

I would say that 'visa-free' travel isn't the same as free movement. Travelling, i.e you going to France, without a visa is not the same as having the right to live and work in France. In the EU free movement is considered to mean the latter although you also have 'visa-free' travel too.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by nomadking

The legitimacy of Parliament derives from Democracy. It might be claimed that a future Labour government represents a clear & present danger and therefore according to you, Parliament could legitimately prevent that.

Not in the United Kingdom it doesn't. Plenty of countries have constutitions that state their legislature is given authority from the people- but not ours.


A claim that an entire Government platform elected would be a danger compared to a single bad policy would certainly be a bold one.