EU referendum/Brexit discussion - Part 2

[@Lee]

For years the EU bent over backwards to please Britain. Now you ask for 'flexibility'?

This article was originally publish on The Telegraph

Writing in the Telegraph this week, former Conservative leader William Hague accused the EU of giving David Davis and his team the “runaround” and showing entrenched inflexibility with regards to British membership of the EU, David Cameron’s renegotiation and the current Brexit talks. In Brussels this week, Mr Davis doubled down on these calls for more flexibility. But the facts do not support this mantra.

Since the UK joined the EU, it has enjoyed a bespoke form of membership that is unique. An opt-out from the euro, but banker to the Eurozone. An opt-out from Schengen, but access to the security databases linked to it. A blanket opt-out from Justice and Home Affairs, with the possibility to opt back into the most effective crime-fighting measures. The list goes on.

Lord Hague implied that the EU forced the UK out by refusing to agree to every one of Mr Cameron’s renegotiation requests. But I was in the room at the time of the renegotiation and substantial additional exceptions were offered – a new special status of EU membership, with an opt-out from the core principle of “ever closer union” and an emergency brake on benefits for EU workers. I even offered to work with the UK to develop a new form of associate EU membership, but UK ministers rejected it, as they argued that it would mean losing the UK’s seat at the top table. If this is not showing flexibility, I do not know what is.

After the referendum, we return full circle, only this time UK ministers seem to want to devise a new customs union and seek to recreate all of the EU’s structures, in order to continue to benefit from the best elements of the EU, without it being called the EU. This is not serious, fair or even possible given the negotiating time remaining – now significantly limited by the UK’s own decision to call a general election after the triggering of Article 50. The UK has informed us it is leaving, which we regret – but all we have ever asked for is that this disruptive decision is implemented in an orderly fashion and that we first agree to the divorce before planning a new future together.

Lord Hague quoted Yanis Varoufakis – an unlikely guru – and used the example of Greece to suggest EU institutions are treating the UK in a comparable manner. The British Government was adamant that no UK money be used to help Greece and I do not recall the UK challenging the position of EU finance ministers towards Mr Varoufakis at that time .

It’s time for UK politicians to be more honest about the complexities Brexit creates and for them to recognise that other governments also have obligations to their own taxpayers. The EU can be bureaucratic but, from day one, the EU-27, the European Commission and the Parliament have been fully transparent about their negotiating positions and mandates. It is as if we are now told we are too efficient. It is in the interests of the EU for us to secure a close relationship, but we must first agree a methodology for the settling of accounts, secure the rights of EU citizens in the UK, and have a frank discussion about the Irish border. This is not a ploy to derail talks, but an inevitable consequence of the Brexit decision. It’s time for UK politicians to be more honest about the complexities Brexit creates and for them to recognise that other governments also have obligations to their own taxpayers.

The discussion papers rolled out by the UK over the summer are helpful and welcome, but only a more serious engagement with the financial consequences of Brexit and the other divorce issues will unlock discussions about the future relationship, which I hope will be a close one. Given the current pace of talks there is a real danger that sufficient progress will not be made by October. It would be a very risky strategy to burn negotiating time now in the hope that individual EU leaders will ride to the rescue; it was EU governments who defined Michel Barnier’s negotiating mandate.

As the costs of Brexit become clearer, I have no doubt the hardliners who promised the British people utopia will once again seek to blame Brussels for a lack of progress in the talks. But is a further poisoning of the atmosphere really in Britain’s interest? Our continued relationship is too important for our citizens and our firms to be jeopardised by dramatic political gestures. A divorce is never easy, but a strong future partnership is in the best interest of us all.

[moley]

What we clearly need in the UK is A Left wing Corbyn Union controlled Government to sort the country out.  That would make the current government look quite good.

[@Lee]

4 minutes ago, moley said:

What we clearly need in the UK is A Left wing Corbyn Union controlled Government to sort the country out.  That would make the current government look quite good.

And how well are the tories doing? The world sees this country as a joke, a pathetic has-been. Right now you could put The Three Stooges, Laurel and Hardy and The Marx(ist?) Brothers in charge and they'd still do a better job.
The country's going down the swanny, up **** creek without a paddle and for what? 
Still waiting for someone to give me some positives of Brexit...............................

[moley]

7 minutes ago, Lee01 said:

 The world sees this country as a joke, a pathetic has-been. 

Makes you wonder why anyone wants to come here.

[@Lee]

2 minutes ago, moley said:

Makes you wonder why anyone wants to come here.

I'm not so sure that many do now that 52% of the country have shown their true colours.

[moley]

22 minutes ago, Lee01 said:

I'm not so sure that many do now that 52% of the country   of those who could be bothered to get off of their lazy ar$e to vote have shown their true colours.

Corrected that for you.

[gadgetman]

I find it interesting how so many anti brexit MPs are now changing tact. 

 

Immigration good, single market good etc etc. 

 

Quite different to 15+ months ago. 

 

It's almost as if they're laying out their stalls knowing that what the public were promised and are expecting isn't going to materialise 

[@Lee]

3 hours ago, gadgetman said:

I find it interesting how so many anti brexit MPs are now changing tact. 

 

Immigration good, single market good etc etc. 

 

Quite different to 15+ months ago. 

 

It's almost as if they're laying out their stalls knowing that what the public were promised and are expecting isn't going to materialise 

Do you mean PRO Brexit MP's?

[gadgetman]

7 hours ago, Lee01 said:

Do you mean PRO Brexit MP's?

Yup

[lol-lol]

14 hours ago, moley said:

What we clearly need in the UK is A Left wing Corbyn Union controlled Government to sort the country out.  That would make the current government look quite good.

 

As a team ie Davis, Fox, Johnson and May, it is clear to anyone who knows of their background, education and level of empathy and knowledge than Corbyn,  Gardiner, Starmer and Thornbury are far more clued up based on their output.

 

Having read the various position papers I am aghast how undeveloped they are after 15 month after the BREXIT vote result and it bodes very badly for the UK finances with the attitude and direction they are following.  As some one who has to implement BREXIT ie add in all the customs controls of the billions of pounds of trade the UK does, and being involved in the French and other EU country side as well, we operate in customs clearance and logistics in 24 European countries, the less clarity there is more expensive the admin is likely to be when the customs formalities are resumed in March 2019.    

 

 

[moley]

7 hours ago, lol-lol said:

 

 it is clear to anyone who knows of their background, education and level of empathy and knowledge than Corbyn,  Gardiner, Starmer and Thornbury are far more clued up based on their output.

 

If elected what would be their Brexit strategy? Bearing in mind that large swathes of traditional Labour areas voted leave.

[Ootohere]

PMSL @ Corbyn,Gardiner, Starmer, Thornbury being in touch with anything that 'hard working families' are worried about or that are going to have to endure into the future.

They are all in it together right up to their every day where their every need is kept on record so that expenses can be claimed and subsidies provided for their food, drink, accommodation and travel.

 

One thought is a man that can not find a seat on a train with seats available and another is a lady from a normal kind of upbringing that sneers at Union Flags and white van man or woman. (EDIT< Sorry Flags of St George)

Then there is the Legal Eagle that works for the Law Firms that are taking what ever stance their customers want on fighting BREXIT at the expense of Tax Payers and those that voted in the majority for BREXIT.

Revealed_ How much your London MP claimed in expenses 2015-16 - Politics - Hampstead Highgate Express.mhtml

 

Then Barry Gardiner MP, 

Does he work for Barry Gardiner MP & Family / Friends, or The People of the UK, or The Peoples Republic of China, or just all of them?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barry_Gardiner 

Edited 3 September, 2017 by Awayoffski

[gadgetman]

1 hour ago, moley said:

If elected what would be their Brexit strategy? Bearing in mind that large swathes of traditional Labour areas voted leave.

And this was the point of my earlier post. 

 

However even the most hardened leaver must be wondering what they will actually get packed up as brexit. 

 

Because besides David Davis, everyone else is frantically back peddling on where these red lines are. 

 

I'm sure Davis would burn the country to the ground if it sealed leaving the EU on our terms. 

[lol-lol]

4 hours ago, moley said:

If elected what would be their Brexit strategy? Bearing in mind that large swathes of traditional Labour areas voted leave.

 

As I understand it many Leave voters wanted to drastically reduce immigration which the Cons had failed to do with their "tens of thousands" actually corresponding to a third of a million a year in their 7 years in power since 2010.  The immigration issues is substantially changing as tens of thousands are now leaving the UK for better paid job in mainland Europe as the UK currency is worth a lot less since the BREXIT vote.  Also there are nursing and other shortages now due to less EU workers wanting to come to the EU.    Currently Remainers are 3% ahead  http://whatukthinks.org/eu/questions/if-there-was-a-referendum-on-britains-membership-of-the-eu-how-would-you-vote-2/  

 

Labour policy is to remain part of the Single Market for the 2 to 3 year transition period whilst we engineer as much of the post BREXIT paradigm.

 

It is going to be interesting in 3,4,5 years time as voters better understand the affect on job, inflation, holiday prices and whether immigration has "sorted itself out", it is already less than quarter of a million now and looks to be falling fast as UK has become a much less desirable location for foreign workers.

If the proportion of the voters who want to leave continues to diminish, and so much time since the June 2016 vote has transpired, it would be undemocratic not to have another vote based on the reality of what leaving the EU actually means rather than immigration and a mere 10 billion a year membership cost compared to what we then know is the real cost of leaving ie customs costs, some partial membership costs.

 

Along with the continued economic turmoil and immigration "solving" itself it will be interesting to see how voter sentiment continues to move.      

 

Edited 3 September, 2017 by lol-lol

[Ootohere]

Undemocratic is if the UK does not leave the EU in March 2019.

Polls are pith, 3% of not remainers, but of those polled and responded, which is about as unscientific as the referendum result and those that voted, 

but then that result stands.

[lol-lol]

 

About half a million people die in the UK every year, most of them voter ie over 18s.

 

Considering the narrowness of the Leave margin of victory and the indications that younger voters are much more likely to vote remain it would be undemocratic, for the living, not to have another vote in a year or two/three.    

 

[Ootohere]

Voters were not only 'in the UK', and how many were not and die.

& die when there are general elections 5 years apart, and others become 18 year old over a 5 year period?

 

The Scottish Referendum and the Parliament elections allow 16 & 17 year olds a vote, and there will have been many deaths since 2014 of those that voted in 2014, sad for families and friends, but the 2014 Referendum Result stands.

[gadgetman]

20 minutes ago, Awayoffski said:

Voters were not only 'in the UK', and how many were not and die.

& die when there are general elections 5 years apart, and others become 18 year old over a 5 year period?

 

The Scottish Referendum and the Parliament elections allow 16 & 17 year olds a vote, and there will have been many deaths since 2014 of those that voted in 2014, sad for families and friends, but the 2014 Referendum Result stands.

If 16 & 17 year olds had been able to vote, remain would have won. 

 

It was the vocal Leavers who held Cameron to task that existing voting age applied, and only UK nationals could vote. 

[Ootohere]

What UK Nationals resident in Gibraltar, Malta or Cyprus and elsewhere and nationals that might not have been in the UK in 14 years and might never be back?

Commonwealth Citizens are not necessarily UK Nationals are they? Maybe UK Residents at times!

http://fullfact.org/europe/who-can-vote-eu-referendum 

Edited 3 September, 2017 by Awayoffski

[lol-lol]

6 hours ago, Awayoffski said:

What UK Nationals resident in Gibraltar, Malta or Cyprus and elsewhere and nationals that might not have been in the UK in 14 years and might never be back?

Commonwealth Citizens are not necessarily UK Nationals are they? Maybe UK Residents at times!

http://fullfact.org/europe/who-can-vote-eu-referendum 

 

 

The affect of Gibraltar, Brits in Cyprus and Malta, just as Ulster, Scotland and Wales, were virtual insignificant to the weigh of vote of England ie which is almost 85% of the total compared to 8% for Scotland, 5% for Wales and 3% for Ulster hence when they voted Scotland and Ulster voted Remain by a considerable margin it had a fraction of a percentage influence on the UK vote.

 

If/when the UK does leave the EU then I certainly wish for the Scots to leave the UK, for their own better future and to see how they fair, as well as for Ireland to be a special territory so the EU border is effectively moved between the UK and Ireland rather than the North/South Irish land border.

 

Both Ireland and Scotland could flourish and we in England, which was the core that voted Leave, barring London which was solidly Remain, can do our own thing with Wales choosing whether it wants to be like the other Celtic countries or move with England.  Suspect they might want to do as Ireland and Scotland but it would be an interesting vote to see which way they want to go.  As South East England is the only region that "pays its way" it would be a considerable saving to cut loose both the EU and the net receivers of money generated in England.  Shame to loose some good Scottish talent but we could consider them for immigration on a points based system along with others if they wanted to come to England.   Good for the goose and gander extending the getting rid of the net costing elements of UK national connections.       

 

 

 

Edited 4 September, 2017 by lol-lol

[Ootohere]

More than 1 in 4 seems to have not bothered to give an opinion, or chose not to, and that is just of those registered to vote and eligible, more will not have been registered, or not able to due to their jail sentences or mental conditions, 

so we just need to go with the results as they were in the end, the official results not some 'Pollsters' statistics.

http://bbc.co.uk/news/politics/eu_referendum/results 

 

What does the South East of England do to pay its own way other than cream off the top from the RoUK to pay for infrastructure and major projects?

Time the South East got on with producing enough energy and drinking water that is required and get on with some fracking etc rather than being reliant on others that subsidise the region, strange that a place producing little energy has the lowest tariffs in the UK .

8 million plus in London and not much in the way of natural resources and the reliance on Service Industries is a real issue after Brexit, 

Imports needed in huge amounts from outside the M25 & not much in the way of exports other than pollution that the RoUK needs to be paying for.

Edited 4 September, 2017 by Awayoffski

[S00perb]

11 hours ago, lol-lol said:

 

As I understand it many Leave voters wanted to drastically reduce immigration ...........

Nope:

"Should the UK remain a member of the EU or leave the EU?" End of.

So did ‘Leave’ mean, stopping ‘free movement’? No, where does it mention that? Read the question.

And getting out of the single market (which is separate to EU membership)? No. Read the question.

But, surely it means the UK stops paying a contribution to trade with the EU? No. Read the question.

But surely it means we stop all those silly and expensive regulations? No, where does it say that on the ballot paper? Read the question.

Does it mean leaving The European Court of Human Rights? No. Read the question.

Does it mean leaving the European Court of Justice? No. Read the question.

The Vote Leave campaign’s ‘manifesto’ may jave promised all the above: stopping free movement, getting out of the single market, reducing all payments to zero, and stopping all European and international regulation. If you were so minded, you would also point out that if we vote to leave, Britain would then be better off by £350m a week and also, apparently, save the NHS into the bargain.

None of these things, even if they were all true (which, frankly, they aren’t), were on the ballot paper. To be utterly clear about this, the question was not: “Do you wish the United Kingdom to remain a party to EU/EEA free movement or to leave EU/EEA free movement?”

The question was solely about giving up (or not) membership of the European Union. However many times people try to read things into the results of the vote, the question was one very specific thing. No one can magically add to what people meant when they voted the way they did.

The vote was also just an 'opinion' of 72% of those that were eligible to vote on the day - then. So just 37/36% of the voting polulation want to take the rights and citizenship away from every person in the UK? It's not happening, it is actually genuinely impossible, we can't even organise the simplest of computer projects and the proposed madness would involve replacing lots and lots of very complicated computer systems that the EU now lets us use. The gov are even saying "lets take on all the laws from the EU and use them for a bit and then change them over time" - ummmm - this means replicating ALL the computer systems that manage those rules and then scrap them after a while!!

When the penny drops the gov will backtrack so fast, it will be hilarious to watch. And when that happens the majority of people will be relieved.

 

 

Edited 4 September, 2017 by S00perb

[S00perb]

16 hours ago, Awayoffski said:

......... a man that can not find a seat on a train with seats available ...........

An old inaccurate story

 

 

[Bignij]

10 hours ago, gadgetman said:

If 16 & 17 year olds had been able to vote, remain would have won. 

 

 

Yep. And if my auntie had balls she'd be my uncle.

I wish everyone would stop moaning and let the politicians **** it up in the way they see fit. They are our elected representatives, for better or worse.

[old newbie2]

30 minutes ago, S00perb said:

Nope:

"Should the UK remain a member of the EU or leave the EU?" End of.

So did ‘Leave’ mean, stopping ‘free movement’? No, where does it mention that? Read the question.

And getting out of the single market (which is separate to EU membership)? No. Read the question.

But, surely it means the UK stops paying a contribution to trade with the EU? No. Read the question.

But surely it means we stop all those silly and expensive regulations? No, where does it say that on the ballot paper? Read the question.

Does it mean leaving The European Court of Human Rights? No. Read the question.

Does it mean leaving the European Court of Justice? No. Read the question.

The Vote Leave campaign’s ‘manifesto’ may jave promised all the above: stopping free movement, getting out of the single market, reducing all payments to zero, and stopping all European and international regulation. If you were so minded, you would also point out that if we vote to leave, Britain would then be better off by £350m a week and also, apparently, save the NHS into the bargain.

None of these things, even if they were all true (which, frankly, they aren’t), were on the ballot paper. To be utterly clear about this, the question was not: “Do you wish the United Kingdom to remain a party to EU/EEA free movement or to leave EU/EEA free movement?”

The question was solely about giving up (or not) membership of the European Union. However many times people try to read things into the results of the vote, the question was one very specific thing. No one can magically add to what people meant when they voted the way they did.

The vote was also just an 'opinion' of 72% of those that were eligible to vote on the day - then. So just 37/36% of the voting polulation want to take the rights and citizenship away from every person in the UK? It's not happening, it is actually genuinely impossible, we can't even organise the simplest of computer projects and the proposed madness would involve replacing lots and lots of very complicated computer systems that the EU now lets us use. The gov are even saying "lets take on all the laws from the EU and use them for a bit and then change them over time" - ummmm - this means replicating ALL the computer systems that manage those rules and then scrap them after a while!!

When the penny drops the gov will backtrack so fast, it will be hilarious to watch. And when that happens the majority of people will be relieved.

 

 

I hope that your predicted outcome is correct, but if not.............

 

DC