UKC

Theresa May's Powers of Persuasion...

New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
 Rob Exile Ward 20 Sep 2018

… Are not great, it seems.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45586010

We're going to be in the sh*t and no, the EU isn't.

6
pasbury 20 Sep 2018
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:

Well it's a hard job trying to sell a big steamy turd....

In reply to Rob Exile Ward:

Oh well.

I think I've been through the grief model over the last two years concerning Brexit (see below) and am now simply determined to enjoy the last few months of living in a country that sort of works (for a few months, at least)

SHOCK & DENIAL

PAIN & GUILT

ANGER & BARGAINING

"DEPRESSION", REFLECTION, LONELINESS

THE UPWARD TURN

RECONSTRUCTION & WORKING THROUGH

ACCEPTANCE & HOPE

1
 Andy Say 20 Sep 2018
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:

'Theresa May's Powers of Persuasion...'       

 

That's a big like 'David Davis's Powers of Intellect'. 

1
In reply to Andy Say:

Or like Boris Johnsons' modesty? Rees-Moggs humility? Farage's sense of responsibility? 

2
 wercat 20 Sep 2018
In reply to Phantom Disliker:

we just need to wait for those stages of the Farage Rees-Mogg project,  Disillusionment, Rewards for the uninvolved. Hunt for the Guilty and Punishment of the Innocent.

1
 wercat 20 Sep 2018
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:

we're gonna havta stickit to those gents

1
In reply to Phantom Disliker:

> Oh well.

> I think I've been through the grief model over the last two years concerning Brexit (see below) and am now simply determined to enjoy the last few months of living in a country that sort of works (for a few months, at least)

There's no need for acceptance.    It would be better for Remainers and pro-EU companies to get angry and make absolutely sure it fails.    

When you look beyond the fake-certainty bullsh*t that Theresa May spouts the writing is already on the wall:

1.  The EU 27 have just rejected the Chequers plan.  To become an actual option acceptable to the EU it would need to look a lot more like the EEA.

2. Her own MPs are saying they would block it in Parliament.

3. A Tory minister has broken ranks and said there could be a second referendum if we were heading for no deal.   Several EU leaders have said they would favour a second referendum.   An aid to a German MEP had notes from a meeting with UK government ministers photographed as they came out and there was stuff about a second referendum.  For all Theresa May goes on about no second referendum behind the scenes even the Tories are thinking about it.

This is going to end in a crisis or crises and one or more Tory leadership changes, general elections and/or referendums.   The Greeks didn't get their debt crisis sorted with just one change of government.

Post edited at 17:34
3
baron 20 Sep 2018
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:

The EU’s reluctance to compromise on its four freedoms is understandable.

As is the UK’s reluctance to partition Northern Ireland from the rest of the UK.

At this moment in time any agreement that meets the needs of both parties looks looks impossible.

As to the EU not suffering, what do you make of the ‘secret’ letter warning of problems at European airports if there’s no deal?

1
In reply to baron:

I didn't say there would be no cost to the EU members, just that those costs would be shared between 27 members...

1
baron 20 Sep 2018
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:

> I didn't say there would be no cost to the EU members, just that those costs would be shared between 27 members...

I was just interested as to what you made of the airport story.

We haven’t heard much detail of how no deal Brexit will affect less obvious areas of the EU economy.

Is the release of this story just a scoop for Sky news or is there a more devious reason for its release?

Post edited at 17:46
1
 wercat 20 Sep 2018
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:

we'd better just hope for Peace in our Time

2
Removed User 20 Sep 2018
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:

Did anyone, for one minute, think that the EU would accept our proposals?

We can expect plenty of intransigence and mealy mouthed whinging from Brussels in the coming weeks. The reality being that an organisation of 27 countries is incapable of negotiating.

20
In reply to baron:

> As to the EU not suffering, what do you make of the ‘secret’ letter warning of problems at European airports if there’s no deal?

My guess is the EU are looking at previous experience with Greece and the opinions of their experts and concluded that 'No Deal' means maybe 6 months of complete chaos in the UK followed by a new government begging to come back in the EU or the EEA.  Politically a failed no-deal Brexit would leave the Brexiteers and anti-EU forces in other countries completely chastened.   It would be painful at the time but potentially positive in the long term.

If the EU are not that worried about the 'no deal' outcome Theresa May using it as a threat in the negotiations is stupid and pointless.

 

3
baron 20 Sep 2018
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:

Much has been written about how bad a no deal would be for the UK.

I was referring to a leaked letter that was an analysis of the damage that a no deal would bring to one sector of the EU.

I'm presuming that other sectors of the EU might also be affected.

While Mrs May's negotiating skills might be limited could it be that internal pressures could affect the EU negotiating position?

 Yanis Nayu 20 Sep 2018
In reply to Removed User:

> Did anyone, for one minute, think that the EU would accept our proposals?

> We can expect plenty of intransigence and mealy mouthed whinging from Brussels in the coming weeks. The reality being that an organisation of 27 countries is incapable of negotiating.

That’s hilarious. They’ve been completely united, dignified and reasonable for months, while the UK Tory party descended into civil war. 

1
 Dave Garnett 20 Sep 2018
In reply to Removed User:

> We can expect plenty of intransigence and mealy mouthed whinging from Brussels in the coming weeks. The reality being that an organisation of 27 countries is incapable of negotiating.

Is this the first phase of Brexiteer grief when the blindingly obvious finally dawns?

1
 Tyler 20 Sep 2018
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:

> 3. A Tory minister has broken ranks and said there could be a second referendum if we were heading for no deal

This is meaningless, there is no time for a second referendum even now.

2
 Tyler 20 Sep 2018
In reply to baron:

> I was referring to a leaked letter that was an analysis of the damage that a no deal would bring to one sector of the EU.

> I'm presuming that other sectors of the EU might also be affected.

Make no mistake it will be a disaster for the EU and that's the tragedy of this, it's not zero sum game, no one will win (bar a few hedge funds and similar). The EU want a deal but have calculated the cost to the EU of compromising the four freedoms and decided no deal is more costly in the long run (or are better at bluffing than the uk). 

 

Post edited at 19:02
Lusk 20 Sep 2018
In reply to Tyler:

> > 3. A Tory minister has broken ranks and said there could be a second referendum if we were heading for no deal

> This is meaningless, there is no time for a second referendum even now.


Nonsense, the first one, we had four months of intellectual debate, from when Cameron announcing it.
We've got OVER SIX months before March 29th!

 jkarran 20 Sep 2018
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:

What a surprise.

Jk

3
Removed User 20 Sep 2018
In reply to Dave Garnett:

> Is this the first phase of Brexiteer grief when the blindingly obvious finally dawns?

No, I voted Remain and want to have a second referendum so we don't have to leave. 

Did you honestly expect they'd accept our proposals? Really?

 

Post edited at 19:12
 balmybaldwin 20 Sep 2018
In reply to baron:

The EU has been issuing "preparedness" notices (or something similarly named) for the last few weeks, they are wide ranging and on all sorts of subjects including the air traffic issues. I'm not sure how these could be seen as "Secret" though - they've been an awful lot more forth coming than the UK Government.

I think it's more that the UK press (which has been heavily pro brexit) has read & reported on them with the point of view of the UK rather than Europe....  E.g. Air Transport - https://ec.europa.eu/transport/sites/transport/files/legislation/brexit-not...

These notices are fairly neutral and approach the issues from both sides, and of course there are downsides on both sides from no deal.

In the Case of European Air Carriers, their licenses will no longer apply to the territory of the United Kingdom. For UK Carriers their licenses will no longer apply to the territory of the EU27. (And presumably will all need to be reissued by the UK/EU authorities).

On a positive note we might not need that extra runway at Heathrow for a few more years

 

In reply to Tyler:

> > 3. A Tory minister has broken ranks and said there could be a second referendum if we were heading for no deal

> This is meaningless, there is no time for a second referendum even now.

Several EU leaders have already said they would like there to be a second referendum.  If the UK asked for more time on the Article 50 schedule to hold one why wouldn't it get it?

 

 

1
 kevin stephens 20 Sep 2018
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:

Its not down to powers of persuasion but basic logic

Choose one of these 3 options

1. Common customs between UK and eU

2. hard border between NI and Ireland

3. Customs border between NI and GB

No amount of hard negotiation can defeat this logical position

So what will happen?  Maybe: No deal Brexit, customs points on Irish side of the border, resurgence of nationalist violence, riots or even bombs, DUP and Tory rift leading to an early election (less likely), chaos until next scheduled general election until enough Brexiters realise their mistake and allow Labour to FINALLY support a second referendum and wins.  EU welcomes UK back  with open arms but in the meantime loads of lost UK manufacturing jobs may not come back

 Dave Garnett 20 Sep 2018
In reply to Removed User:

> No, I voted Remain and want to have a second referendum so we don't have to leave. 

> Did you honestly expect they'd accept our proposals? Really?

No, I didn’t think they’d accept, what we’re asking for is illogical and unreasonable. And I’d like a second referendum too.

I was just puzzled by the whinging and mealy mouthed bit.  I think the EU’s position has been much more consistent and united than ours, despite the challenge of keeping 27 on side.

 HansStuttgart 20 Sep 2018
In reply to kevin stephens:

> Choose one of these 3 options

> 1. Common customs between UK and eU

> 2. hard border between NI and Ireland

> 3. Customs border between NI and GB

The process can only continue when the UK accepts that it has to choose between 1 and 3 at a certain point. This has to be accepted ASAP but the choice itself can be postponed to the transition.

Choosing 1 will probably lead to continued EU membership in the long run.

 kevin stephens 20 Sep 2018
In reply to HansStuttgart:

But the default position of a no deal brexit would be 2. Ireland benefits a great deal from the EU, mainly being allowed to get away with an unfairly low rate of corporation tax, on which it relies to attract so many multinational businesses.  I think Ireland would agree to set up EU customs points on its side of the border.  The current government would not agree to Option 1 or 3

 summo 20 Sep 2018
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:

> Several EU leaders have already said they would like there to be a second referendum.  

Because would that mean if the vote went the other way, Brexiteers would entitled to a 3rd referendum, or every time anything changed or was agreed in Brussels. There would be referendums all the time. 

Ps. They were probably over stepping their mark. Can you imagine the UK telling Switzerland they need to hold one of their many votes again... or what about the Catalan elections..  maybe Hungary... or the US election just because we don't like the result? 

Post edited at 22:11
11
 Neil Williams 20 Sep 2018
In reply to summo:

They're entitled to an opinion, but we don't have to take any action as a result of it.

 summo 20 Sep 2018
In reply to Neil Williams:

> They're entitled to an opinion, but we don't have to take any action as a result of it.

Exactly. The eu party line. Keep having referendums until you get the answer you want. 

10
In reply to summo:

'Exactly. The eu party line. Keep having referendums until you get the answer you want. '

Isn't that how democracy works?

2
 kevin stephens 20 Sep 2018
In reply to summo:

Now that people know what they are voting for (unlike the first referendum) you Brexiteers should relish the opportunity to justify your arguments - you should be saying "Bring it on" rather than running way scared.

The biggest change in peoples understanding is the realisation that lots of manufacturing jobs will be lost as now confirmed by Aerospace and car manufacturers AND the trade unions.  The Brexiteer response seems to be either "my blue passport and the Poles being sent home is more important than your job" or "major employers' and trade unions' statements are less well informed than my own beliefs which I dreamt up on my couch"  Then of course your hero Boris did say "F*** Business" in his unguarded moment, so he clearly comes into the first category.

Post edited at 22:29
2
 elsewhere 20 Sep 2018
In reply to Removed User:

> Did anyone, for one minute, think that the EU would accept our proposals?

> We can expect plenty of intransigence and mealy mouthed whinging from Brussels in the coming weeks. The reality being that an organisation of 27 countries is incapable of negotiating.

They have a track record of negotiated trade deals for the eu 28 (including us) with most of the world so far from incapable.

baron 20 Sep 2018
In reply to kevin stephens:

Can’t you debate this without resorting to insulting those who have a different opinion to you?

7
 summo 21 Sep 2018
In reply to kevin stephens:

I think the reality is this negotiation shows the eu in it true colours and it's true agenda. It is way more than just a trade deal and wishes to control every aspect of life of everybody in Europe. I don't personally think another referendum would produce a vastly different result.

There is no reason why leaving a trading partnership should be damaging to either party, unless, one side wants to make it so and avoid anyone else doing the same. The eu leaders calling for another referendum are no doubt concerned about their annual contribution increasing and know they will find it harder and harder to sell the eu dream to their own population. 

But another vote would completely devalue any future referendums and people's votes in general. I imagine voting attendance would decline as faith in the process would be lost. 

Ps. See I managed a reply without insulting people who think different to me.  

Post edited at 05:55
9
 Andy Hardy 21 Sep 2018
In reply to summo:

Maybe every member state should hold a referendum on continued membership every 10 years or so. If the populace don't want to accept the EU's "true agenda" they can halt it.

1
 kevin stephens 21 Sep 2018
In reply to summo: The “true colours” are simply the impracticabilities of trying to have an open border with different customs levies either side of it

 

 summo 21 Sep 2018
In reply to kevin stephens:

> The “true colours” are simply the impracticabilities of trying to have an open border with different customs levies either side of it

Open borders.. so the eu wants more than just a trading partnership?

It is a worn argument that I can't repeat, but there are open borders with differing trade agreements already in the eu. 

Post edited at 07:21
3
 summo 21 Sep 2018
In reply to Andy Hardy:

> Maybe every member state should hold a referendum on continued membership every 10 years or so. If the populace don't want to accept the EU's "true agenda" they can halt it.

Or the pro eu realise that if their answer to everything is faster closer all encompassing integration, they are more likely to cause the very cracks in Europe they hope to avoid. It's like they haven't learnt the lesson of one country opting out and are happy to repeat. 

 HansStuttgart 21 Sep 2018
In reply to kevin stephens:

> The current government would not agree to Option 1 or 3

Then the government has to fall.

 HansStuttgart 21 Sep 2018
In reply to summo:

> Or the pro eu realise that if their answer to everything is faster closer all encompassing integration, they are more likely to cause the very cracks in Europe they hope to avoid. It's like they haven't learnt the lesson of one country opting out and are happy to repeat. 


The lesson was learned. The process of brexit clearly shows the advantages of being in the EU. Support for EU is up in most member states.

2
 Ian W 21 Sep 2018
In reply to summo:

> Open borders.. so the eu wants more than just a trading partnership?

> It is a worn argument that I can't repeat, but there are open borders with differing trade agreements already in the eu. 

Are there? No need to repeat the argument - but just name one; I'll then do some research myself.

 Ian W 21 Sep 2018
In reply to HansStuttgart:

> Then the government has to fall.

Looking ever more likely. According to the Beeb this morning, the government feels that TM was ambushed by the EU in Salzburg, by not accepting the Chequers proposal. However, David Davis also said that there are now up to 40 Tory MP's who intend to vote against it in the UK parliament......

Unfortunately, none of them appear to have any alternative proposal to make. This is the best opportunity for labour in decades, but their proposal on brexit (which they support, being the will of the people) is what?

And whilst I'm at it, why do parliament need a vote anyway? We have a conservative government voted in with a mandate to take us out of the EU. Why does there need to be a vote in parliament, but not a public vote on the final "deal"? 

 Bob Hughes 21 Sep 2018
In reply to summo:

> Open borders.. so the eu wants more than just a trading partnership?

You often bring this up like it’s an argument-winning coup de grace. But isn’t it self-evident? A single market is more than just a trading partnership. So is a customs union. So is intelligence sharing and police cooperation. Etc etc

 john arran 21 Sep 2018
In reply to summo:

A number of tired arguments there. Every one of them look to me to be opinion (aka prejudice) masquerading as fact.

It's true that in some cases simply repeating such things is enough for some people to start thinking they must be true, but in this case it comes across as an argument that no longer has substance.

1
 summo 21 Sep 2018
In reply to Bob Hughes:

> You often bring this up like it’s an argument-winning coup de grace. But isn’t it self-evident? A single market is more than just a trading partnership. So is a customs union. So is intelligence sharing and police cooperation. Etc etc

These are only add ons because the eu says they have to be. 

Google 'five eyes', the UK already has intelligence sharing at a much higher level without any need for a trade deal etc to be tagged into it. 

Why do we need to have shared fisheries and CAP for police forces to share data?

You've bought into the eu propoganda programme. 

7
 summo 21 Sep 2018
In reply to Ian W:

Norway and Switzerland. Complex trade agreement, different tax and currency structures,  but no hard borders, watch towers etc etc.. 

 summo 21 Sep 2018
In reply to HansStuttgart:

>  . Support for EU is up in most member states.

Poland, Italy, Austria, sweden, Hungary, Netherlands, Germany.. etc.. yeah those anti eu parties have all but disappeared. There loving the eu.

4
 wercat 21 Sep 2018
In reply to summo:

> Exactly. The eu party line. Keep having referendums until you get the answer you want. 


Is that not the Farage/UKIP line, exactly?

1
 elsewhere 21 Sep 2018
In reply to summo:

> Norway and Switzerland. Complex trade agreement, different tax and currency structures,  but no hard borders, watch towers etc etc.. 

That's right. The customs officers on the NI border would not need watch towers, army and police to protect them from terrorists because you think killing isn't justified.

Are you crossing your fingers crossed that the Continuity IRA share your thinking that killing isn't justified?

Hint - they don't.

Post edited at 08:43
3
 blurty 21 Sep 2018
In reply to elsewhere:

It's a point often lost/ forgotten, but the only party that will put up a hard border between Ireland and the north is Ireland/ EU

4
 Ian W 21 Sep 2018
In reply to summo:

> Norway and Switzerland. Complex trade agreement, different tax and currency structures,  but no hard borders, watch towers etc etc.. 

Norway and Switzerland aren't members of the EU though? 

1
 Bob Hughes 21 Sep 2018
In reply to summo:

> These are only add ons because the eu says they have to be. 

> Google 'five eyes', the UK already has intelligence sharing at a much higher level without any need for a trade deal etc to be tagged into it. 

> Why do we need to have shared fisheries and CAP for police forces to share data?

> You've bought into the eu propoganda programme. 

I'm not arguing that they are good or bad things (although most of them are good things in my opinion), or that they have to come altogether in a single package - just that your point above, that the EU is looking for more than a trading partnership, is self-evident. Of course the EU is looking for more than just a trading partnership - so is the UK. 

 summo 21 Sep 2018
In reply to elsewhere:

> That's right. The customs officers on the NI border would not need watch towers, army and police to protect them from terrorists because you think killing isn't justified.

> Are you crossing your fingers crossed that the Continuity IRA share your thinking that killing isn't justified?

So the trade agreement of the UK should be entirely driven by a bunch of terrorists who are just looking for an excuse? Perhaps they should never have been released from prison? 

7
 Ian W 21 Sep 2018
In reply to blurty:

> It's a point often lost/ forgotten, but the only party that will put up a hard border between Ireland and the north is Ireland/ EU

So why is the EU proposal to have an open border between Ireland / NI, and have customs checks etc elsewhere?

2
 summo 21 Sep 2018
In reply to Ian W:

> Norway and Switzerland aren't members of the EU though? 

Well spotted. And neither will the UK be.

 Bob Hughes 21 Sep 2018
In reply to summo:

> Norway and Switzerland. Complex trade agreement, different tax and currency structures,  but no hard borders, watch towers etc etc.. 

Both members of Schengen.

Would you be happy with the Norway model? And there is a border infrastructure between Norway and Sweden and between Switzerland and the rest of the EU. 

 Ian W 21 Sep 2018
In reply to summo:

> Well spotted. And neither will the UK be.

If you knew that they weren't EU members, why did you say "there are open borders with differing trade agreements already in the eu."  when there aren't.

 jkarran 21 Sep 2018
In reply to summo:

> I think the reality is this negotiation shows the eu in it true colours and it's true agenda. It is way more than just a trade deal and wishes to control every aspect of life of everybody in Europe. I don't personally think another referendum would produce a vastly different result.

So what are you afraid of?

If you think the public want this chaotic damaging process to come to its now almost inevitably chaotic damaging conclusion you should be embracing a ratification referendum to confer legitimacy and unite the people of Britain, selling the benefits, selling the investment plans surely in place to mitigate the inevitable harms. If you don't believe we as a populace want brexit then as a self-professed democrat you should be shouting from the rooftops in horror that we deserve a final say on the matter. You say you think leave would win, you should be celebrating but instead you're bellyaching and running scared of the people who actually have to live with the consequences of brexit making a properly informed choice, branding that choice an undemocratic imposition. The conclusion is ugly.

> There is no reason why leaving a trading partnership should be damaging to either party, unless, one side wants to make it so and avoid anyone else doing the same.

Christ on a bike. There is if that deal was beneficial, if a whole complex economy was built up around it over decades then you tear it up pretty much overnight. You're still on the benefits without responsibilities delusion that has just received a very firm 'no', something which should have surprised nobody two years ago let alone two days ago.

> The eu leaders calling for another referendum are no doubt concerned about their annual contribution increasing and know they will find it harder and harder to sell the eu dream to their own population. 

A ratification referendum is the only political process that can conclude this mess properly without defaulting to worse than necessary terms because we still two years in can't decide among ourselves (who would have thought!) what the hell brexit is and does. Parliament won't, can't really, stop brexit and it can't deliver a brexit that does not harm the country and the people. It has a responsibility and one option.

> But another vote would completely devalue any future referendums and people's votes in general. I imagine voting attendance would decline as faith in the process would be lost. 

Another in-out one, yes (and no) but that isn't politically deliverable, desirable or meaningful. An informed choice to accept known terms (not 1001 and one glorious bullshit futures built on lies) or reject them for other known terms is not another in-out choice.

jk

 

Post edited at 09:48
2
 Dave Garnett 21 Sep 2018
In reply to summo:

> I think the reality is this negotiation shows the eu in it true colours and it's true agenda. It is way more than just a trade deal and wishes to control every aspect of life of everybody in Europe. I don't personally think another referendum would produce a vastly different result.

It's beyond obvious that the EU is more than just a trade organisation and anyone who really thinks this hasn't been paying attention since at least Maastricht.  It's also a long way short of being a single federal entity (although anyone who equates even this with homogeneity hasn't noticed how different and independent the US states, or even the German L?nder are, let alone how different, say France, Italy, and Germany are despite their close EU relationship). 

Anyway, my take on yesterday's events based on my experience of negotiating with European institutions like the Commission and the European Patent Office (which is, get this, a supra-EU organisation) is that May mistook empathy and cordiality for a willingness to negotiate away a carefully constructed system of rules which only make sense if everyone sticks to them.

Maybe it's because most European law is based on a codified, Roman model rather than being based on pragmatic judge-made law, or maybe it's because European laws have to be somewhat rigid attempts to achieve consistency and impartiality sometimes at the cost of some fairness and flexibility since they need to be understood and enforced whatever the local nuances might otherwise suggest.

In any event, although it's true that there is much political horse-trading during the negotiation of new policies, once the relevant Regulations and Directives are in place they are non-negotiable.  It can't really be otherwise, or member states would constantly be arguing for exceptions because of their special circumstances.

We signed up for this because there are many, many advantages but if we really didn't understand that the EU can't possibly concede its basic principles, even for us, then we really haven't learned anything from our 40 years of membership.  When an irresistible force like that meets the immovable object like the Irish Question, it's never going to end well.  Add to that two politically parties paralysed by fundamental division and you have the complete bloody mess we are now in.   

Post edited at 09:45
 Glug 21 Sep 2018
In reply to Bob Hughes:

There are Border infrastructure between Austria and Germany too.

 elsewhere 21 Sep 2018
In reply to summo:

> So the trade agreement of the UK should be entirely driven by a bunch of terrorists who are just looking for an excuse?

No but you should be informed enough to include that in your planning.

> Perhaps they should never have been released from prison? 

Great idea. Let's rip up the Good Friday Agreement. Another Brexit dividend.

In reality I expect it's moving to a younger generation who have never been in prison. 

 

 summo 21 Sep 2018
In reply to Bob Hughes:

> Both members of Schengen.

> Would you be happy with the Norway model? And there is a border infrastructure between Norway and Sweden and between Switzerland and the rest of the EU. 

Why not, it works. No CAP, Strasbourg, fisheries etc. Norway's eu contribution goes directly to the eu development fund at their stipulation, as they didn't want to be bankrolling all the other Brussels projects. 

The border infrastructure is only on the routes that freight crosses, there are plenty roads over where if you removed a couple of road signs you wouldn't know anything had changed. 

 

Post edited at 10:05
 wercat 21 Sep 2018
In reply to elsewhere:

 

> Great idea. Let's rip up the Good Friday Agreement. Another Brexit dividend

Our Sovereignty in this matter is already limited by the fact that the Good Friday Agreement is included as an annex to a binding International Treaty registered at the UN so Brexiters are limited to complying with that treaty whatever they would like

Actually I'm minded to say Vogons

Post edited at 10:10
In reply to Dave Garnett:

That's pretty much a spot on assessment as far as I can see.

The only think I would add is that the EU HAS to be about more than just tariff free trade - if it wants to deliver a better life for its' inhabitants (and frankly, that's its only raison d'etre, wtf do Brexiters THINK it's about?), then there have to be other processes in place to ensure that member states don't start competing with one another by skimping on social, environmental or safety grounds and start a race to the bottom. Otherwise it would end up like the US - great wealth, but great poverty too and a wrecked environment.

 Tyler 21 Sep 2018
In reply to summo:

> Norway and Switzerland. Complex trade agreement, different tax and currency structures,  but no hard borders, watch towers etc etc.. 

....and free movement of people. FFS is it just that you Brexiters have still failed to grasp the basics or are you willfully lieing? If you want to join the EEA then propose that. It was offered at the start of this process when the EU said what the options were, they have not deviated, there has been no ambush they have been constantly from day one. The UK govt chose to ignore this, chose an adverserial approach expecting the EU to bend to its will. I'll repeat, the EU has been consistent in what it's said from day 1 and before, as the UK would want it to be were it another member leaving and us staying. 

Edit: I've just noticed further up that you have come out in favour of Norway deal, including free movement of people, unfortunately very few on either side in the UK seem to want that. 

Post edited at 10:37
1
 Bob Hughes 21 Sep 2018
In reply to summo:

> Why not, it works. No CAP, Strasbourg, fisheries etc. Norway's eu contribution goes directly to the eu development fund at their stipulation, as they didn't want to be bankrolling all the other Brussels projects. 

I happen to agree with you. I ask because there is a range of view from those supporting Brexit and many hate the Norway model as it implies free movement, accepting EU rules and ECJ jurisdiction.  

 

 Ian W 21 Sep 2018
In reply to Glug:

Are there? AFAIK there are patrols by German immigration types searching / checking for illegal immigrants in the border area of Bavaria. Nothing else though, unless you know differently........

 wintertree 21 Sep 2018
In reply to Ian W:

> Nothing else though, unless you know differently........

Different border but I’m not sure I believe the recent claims by the Swiss to have removed their explosive charges from all the bridges along the Swiss- German border.

Blowing all their bridges would be less catastrophic than what seems to be happening with the UK...

1
 GrahamD 21 Sep 2018
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:

I seem to remember that BMW would be coming g to our rescue because they want to sell us cars - or has that one gone away with the bus ?

Removed User 21 Sep 2018
In reply to Dave Garnett:

> No, I didn’t think they’d accept, what we’re asking for is illogical and unreasonable. And I’d like a second referendum too.

> I was just puzzled by the whinging and mealy mouthed bit.  I think the EU’s position has been much more consistent and united than ours, despite the challenge of keeping 27 on side.

My take is that the EU position is "that's what we want, take it or leave it". When presented with s sensible alternative they resort to excuses, mainly because it's impossible to negotiate as a block of 27 different entities.

My jaundiced view of the EU is long held but recently reinforced by reading Yannis Varafoukis' book Adults in the Room where the EU wouldn't even look at his plans to reschedule Greece's debt and not once offered an alternative solution, relying on brute force to impose a flawed and damaging solution rather than engaga in rational argument to reach an agreement that benefitted both sides.

Post edited at 12:06
3
 kevin stephens 21 Sep 2018
In reply to Removed User: sorry I must have missed the sensible alternative to the Irish border problem; please could you remind me?

 

baron 21 Sep 2018
In reply to kevin stephens:

> sorry I must have missed the sensible alternative to the Irish border problem; please could you remind me?

The sensible thing would have been not to make the border a main part of the exit negotiations.

Since Irish independence the border issue has been a series of fudges and special arrangements designed to make an impossible situation acceptable to both the republic and the UK.

How the EU thought that the border issue could be ‘sorted’ amazes me.

2
 wercat 21 Sep 2018
In reply to baron:

> How the EU thought that the border issue could be ‘sorted’ amazes me.

I suspect that they never did but  heard the Brexiteers saying it all could be done quite easily but they ( EU ) realized that the only way forward was to let them find out the hard way which demonstrated the falseness of all the arguments to all of us

Post edited at 12:21
1
 deepsoup 21 Sep 2018
In reply to baron:

> The sensible thing would have been not to make the border a main part of the exit negotiations.

How the f*ck could it not be?  Is *anything* more immediately relevant to the relationship between the UK and the (rest of the) EU than what happens at the border between us?  

 Tyler 21 Sep 2018
In reply to Removed User:

> My take is that the EU position is "that's what we want, take it or leave it". When presented with s sensible alternative they resort to excuses, mainly because it's impossible to negotiate as a block of 27 different entities.

It's not an excuse to stick to rules that have been formulated over decades (which the UK had a large part in writing), which were communicated at the outset. 

If you get turned away from a nightclub for wearing trainers that's not an excuse, that's a rule, just because it doesn't suit you or you don't think it makes sense doesn't matter. You have the option to walk away shouting "I didn't want to come into your shitty club anyway" and go and find somewhere else that has better music, cheaper drinks and better looking potential future life partners (or it's a one horse town so you are forced to go home with a kebab and have a wank).

baron 21 Sep 2018
In reply to wercat:

Major mistake by the present government to let the EU include the border in their exit plan and even bigger mistake to declare so early in the negotiations that there wouldn’t be a hard border.

That’s come back to bite them in the bum - if that’s the right description of something that could scupper the whole Brexit process.

2
 kevin stephens 21 Sep 2018
In reply to baron:it’s nothing to do with negotiation. Just practicality. I ask again what is your sensible alternative, other than Ireland and EU allowing / turning a blind eye to unregulated or taxed goods into the EU? Especially  when UK will be free to make its own and different regulations for manufacture of these goods?

 

Post edited at 12:30
 Ian W 21 Sep 2018
In reply to Removed User:

> My take is that the EU position is "that's what we want, take it or leave it". When presented with s sensible alternative they resort to excuses, mainly because it's impossible to negotiate as a block of 27 different entities.

Its not really "thats what we want" but "thats the way it is". What the EU27 want is for the UK to remain part of the EU28. The alternative presented may seem sensible to the one proposing it, but not necessarily so to the remaining 27 who would have to set aside all he internal rules etc (the glue that holds the EU together) in order to facilitate the wishes of the one leaving. Its back to the "I dont want to be a member but I want some membership benefits, and i want to choose them".

 

Post edited at 12:29
 deepsoup 21 Sep 2018
In reply to wercat:

I don't think it's even that.  They've been saying consistently that it would be a major problem to be overcome, just as they've been pretty consistent about everything else. 

It's just that our media have largely been ignoring it, but the approaching deadline is beginning to focus minds and it's becoming ever clearer that the similarly consistent line taken by the prominent brexiters since before the referendum of "La la la, I'm not listening, this is just 'project fear' and it will all be fine" simply isn't going to cut it.

baron 21 Sep 2018
In reply to deepsoup:

Throwing an unsolvable problem into a negotiation is never a good idea.

Unless you want the negotiations to fail.

The border issue has been an issue for a long time.

To make solving it a criteria for an exit deal is either naive or mischievous.

2
 deepsoup 21 Sep 2018
In reply to baron:

> Major mistake by the present government to let the EU include the border in their exit plan and even bigger mistake to declare so early in the negotiations that there wouldn’t be a hard border.

Again, how the f*ck could that border *not* be an important part of the EU's planning.  You know Ireland is a member, right?

Also, what on earth makes you think it's up to the UK government to decide what to "let the EU" include in their planning?  And what else could the brexiters do having spent the entire campaign leading up to the referendum, when they bothered to mention NI at all, dismissing talk of a hard border as just another part of 'Project Fear' and something that would never happen?

baron 21 Sep 2018
In reply to kevin stephens:

> it’s nothing to do with negotiation. Just practicality. I ask again what is your sensible alternative, other than Ireland and EU allowing / turning a blind eye to unregulated or taxed goods into the EU? Especially  when UK will be free to make its own and different regulations for manufacture of these goods?

So the EU requires a hard border to defend itself which is perfectly understandable.

For the UK to then say that there won’t be a hard border was a huge mistake.

There is no answer to the hard border that doesn’t include the EU dropping its requirement for such a border, the Uk allowing NI to stay in the customs union or the UK remaining in the customs union.

None of which are acceptable to the negotiating parties.

 deepsoup 21 Sep 2018
In reply to baron:

> Throwing an unsolvable problem into a negotiation is never a good idea.

No one has 'thrown' that problem into the negotiation, it was always there at the heart of the process, how could it not be? 

Do you think you can get divorced without talking about what's going to happen to the house?

 deepsoup 21 Sep 2018
In reply to baron:

> For the UK to then say that there won’t be a hard border was a huge mistake.

It's a hangover from the 'leave' campaign saying there would definitely not be a hard border, and that suggestions that that might happen were just another part of "Project Fear". 

A 'huge mistake' might be one way to describe that, just another blatant bare-faced lie is another.

 kevin stephens 21 Sep 2018
In reply to baron: both options would wreck the Good Friday Agreement and the real risk of a return to bloody civil war in NI. 

 

Clauso 21 Sep 2018
In reply to baron:

> There is no answer to the hard border that doesn’t include the EU dropping its requirement for such a border, the Uk allowing NI to stay in the customs union or the UK remaining in the customs union.

Not quite, no answer... The ace up our sleeve is obviously to declare war on the EU?

We've already had the Lancaster House, and Chequers proposals. Perhaps we can title the next one as the Bulldog Spirit?

I expect an announcement imminently… Watch this space.

 

 Ian W 21 Sep 2018
In reply to baron:

> So the EU requires a hard border to defend itself which is perfectly understandable.

> For the UK to then say that there won’t be a hard border was a huge mistake.

> There is no answer to the hard border that doesn’t include the EU dropping its requirement for such a border, the Uk allowing NI to stay in the customs union or the UK remaining in the customs union.

> None of which are acceptable to the negotiating parties.

And don't forget that the EU proposal of a "customs border" in the Irish sea is unacceptable to the DUP, without whose support the Tories would lose their commons majority, and could lose a vote of no confidence at any time......... 

baron 21 Sep 2018
In reply to deepsoup:

I didn’t say that the border wasn’t important.

The EU set out it’s negotiating agenda and the UK simply rolled over and accepted the agenda.

To say there wouldn’t be a hard border was a huge mistake by the UK government.

They should have fought to not have the border as a major part of the negotiations and let the EU propose a workable solution.

 

1
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:

I just read a rumour on Twitter that the PM will be resigning today at 13:45.

 Ian W 21 Sep 2018
In reply to baron:

See my answer above (whilst you were writing this....!!)

The EU have proposed a workable solution which is unacceptable to one of the parties on "our" side.

1
baron 21 Sep 2018
In reply to Ian W:

Sorry, my typing is really slow so you can probably post 5 times while I’m still trying to reply

No government can allow NI to be treated differently than the rest of the UK.

There could be a referendum in Ireland to decide if NI wants to remain in the UK and if the republic wants a united Ireland.

Voting for a united Ireland would solve the border issue.

Given that the majority of voters in NI voted to remain I’m surprised that this idea hasn’t been proposed.

 jkarran 21 Sep 2018
In reply to baron:

> Major mistake by the present government to let the EU include the border in their exit plan and even bigger mistake to declare so early in the negotiations that there wouldn’t be a hard border.

You gave them no choice.

This utterly inevitable mess is what you were warned you would get, it is what you voted for anyway. If you want it to stop you have the power.

jk

Post edited at 13:07
1
baron 21 Sep 2018
In reply to kevin stephens:

There’s no mention of the border in the Good Friday agreement.

> both options would wreck the Good Friday Agreement and the real risk of a return to bloody civil war in NI. 

 

baron 21 Sep 2018
In reply to jkarran:

> You gave them no choice.

> jk

Sorry, why was that?

 jkarran 21 Sep 2018
In reply to baron:

Because what you voted for was and remains undeliverable. These issues were foreseen and forewarned.

jk

1
baron 21 Sep 2018
In reply to jkarran:

I voted for Brexit.

Which, unless you know differently, is still going to happen.

While no deal isn't my preference it seems all that is available.

 Ramblin dave 21 Sep 2018
In reply to baron:

> While no deal isn't my preference it seems all that is available.

Many things are available, it's just that the Government have ruled out almost all of them based on the large number of "red lines" that they've made up.

 jkarran 21 Sep 2018
In reply to baron:

> Which, unless you know differently, is still going to happen.

I know no more than you but it is in my opinion still no more likely than 50:50, the close vote and the lack of deliverable unifying objectives cast that back in 2016, nothing has changed for the better since.

> While no deal isn't my preference it seems all that is available.

Who will pay your pension? I won't.

jk

1
 deepsoup 21 Sep 2018
In reply to baron:

> Voting for a united Ireland would solve the border issue.

> Given that the majority of voters in NI voted to remain I’m surprised that this idea hasn’t been proposed.

Er...  you do know the current UK government is dependant on the DUP to prop it up right?

Post edited at 13:27
In reply to baron:

'I voted for Brexit. Which, unless you know differently, is still going to happen.'

I know different. Worst case we *may* formally leave/be thrown out of the EU and so cease to be a member. But we're still going to be part of Europe - after all we share a border, and the rest of the EU begins just 20 miles away. Geography, trade, shared values, shared culture, common interests such as defence, environment, migration and development, all mean that we will continue to be part of Europe. You can't wish that away, even if you wanted to. 

Once we have been impoverished by the coming catastrophe then we will spend the next 30 - 50 years once again leaving the forest and creeping closer to the comforting campfire until we are once more part of the circle. Perhaps this is why the idiot JRM said it would take 50 years to gain the benefits of Brexit...

1
 Bob Hughes 21 Sep 2018
In reply to Phantom Disliker:

She's making a statement but not sure if it is resignation. Honestly, I doubt it but let's see. Hopefully not another general election.....

 Sir Chasm 21 Sep 2018
In reply to baron:

So your solution to the Ireland/UK border is a united Ireland? Excellent, I'm sure there will be no problem in sorting that out in 6 months. All hail Baron, Baron for brexit minister.

1
 deepsoup 21 Sep 2018
In reply to Sir Chasm:

>  I'm sure there will be no problem in sorting that out in 6 months.

It just needs a clear mandate to come out of a hugely divisive referendum, what could possibly go wrong with that?

 

1
 neilh 21 Sep 2018
In reply to baron:

Voting for a united Ireland... cloud cuckoo land.

Not going to happen. Too many people in NI want to remain part of the UK.

Good on them. Why on earth should they be sacrificed for a Brexit deal. They want to be British citizens.

Have you no understanding of the political situation there?

 summo 21 Sep 2018
In reply to neilh:

Strange the eu were against Catalan / Spain redrawing it's national border, but are all for it with Ireland. I just don't understand how the eu thinks it can meddle in this kind of thing, this is how wars and conflicts start, especially over the ni/Ireland border.

I think 50% of yesterday was eu leaders posturing to their own populations and nothing to do the UK. Even the eu big guns like Macron and Merkel aren't exactly topping their own polls at the moment. 

6
 Ian W 21 Sep 2018
In reply to baron:

> Sorry, my typing is really slow so you can probably post 5 times while I’m still trying to reply

> No government can allow NI to be treated differently than the rest of the UK.

> There could be a referendum in Ireland to decide if NI wants to remain in the UK and if the republic wants a united Ireland.

> Voting for a united Ireland would solve the border issue.

> Given that the majority of voters in NI voted to remain I’m surprised that this idea hasn’t been proposed.

You go to NI and suggest that to the DUP - let me know how it goes!!

Not that it isnt a logical or even sensible option,but NI politics haven't often been logical or sensible........

1
 Ian W 21 Sep 2018
In reply to summo:

Not sure Ireland and Catalonia is a good comparison. Catalonia and Scotland maybe, but neither Scotland nor Catalonia have had their version of "the troubles", which still seem to be simmering just under the surface........and in the case of Catalonia, Spain and the EU were absolutely on the same page; not something you can say about the UK and EU......

In any case, they are not proposing redrawing the border, just having a customs border between NI and GB.

And of course an element of the EU stance is posturing to their home audiences; but you could also argue that a lot of May's rhetoric is playing to her own gallery. Although admittedly she has rather a lot more riding on this than any of the others.

Post edited at 14:02
 girlymonkey 21 Sep 2018
In reply to baron:

> No government can allow NI to be treated differently than the rest of the UK.

NI has ALWAYS been treated differently to the rest of the UK. Power sharing doesn't happen anywhere else (although, it doesn't happen in NI at the moment either!), everywhere else allows women to have safe and legal abortions, none of the rest of the UK have an automatic right to an Irish passport. These are just a few differences that pop to mind, I'm sure there are many more. 

NI is different, whether we like it or not, and does need special treatment. 

baron 21 Sep 2018
In reply to deepsoup:

But under the terms of the Good Friday agreement an independence vote isn't in the hands of the UK government.

 

baron 21 Sep 2018
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:

I don't have a problem with being part of europe.

baron 21 Sep 2018
In reply to Ramblin dave:

> Many things are available, it's just that the Government have ruled out almost all of them based on the large number of "red lines" that they've made up.

The EU has its own red lines which it won't budge on.

Hence, no deal.

 skog 21 Sep 2018
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:

https://news.sky.com/story/live-theresa-may-to-deliver-brexit-statement-in-...

Well, that speech cleared it all up.

There are only two issues left to resolve - the economic relationship, and Northern Ireland. Great, nearly there then?

She's been totally reasonable in every way (and it's all the other side's fault).

The EU are completely unreasonable for sticking to what they've said right from the beginning about single market access being available, but conditional on free movement.

Accepting this "Norway style" deal would "make a mockery of the referendum" despite it not contradicting it at all and having actively been advocated by some during the referendum.

Creating a hard border in Ireland is unacceptable, we'd rather have no deal (so creating a hard border).

"Neither side should demand the unacceptable of the other", but the EU should go ahead and give in on freedom of movement and single market access.

"We cannot accept anything that does not respect the result of the referendum, just as they cannot accept anything that is not in the interest of their citizens" - it appears that we're fine with accepting things that aren't in the interest of -our- citizens.

So, no deal then..?

Post edited at 14:45
1
baron 21 Sep 2018
In reply to Sir Chasm:

> So your solution to the Ireland/UK border is a united Ireland? Excellent, I'm sure there will be no problem in sorting that out in 6 months. All hail Baron, Baron for brexit minister.

Actually my solution is to let the EU sort it out and if it doesn't meet our (the UK) approval then there won't be a deal.

The unified Ireland solution is perfectly workable if that's what the majority inIreland want.

The EU will surely extend the talks if that's what it takes.

See, I managed to post that reply without resorting to sarcasm.

2
baron 21 Sep 2018
In reply to neilh:

Why don't you simply post your reply without the last sentence?

Or did you feel better for the insult?

I was suggesting that if the majority of people in NI voted to remain then they could, if they wished, hold a referendum to see if they wanted to leave the UK and hence remain in the EU.

It's their choice, nobody is being sacrificed.

 

 girlymonkey 21 Sep 2018
In reply to baron:

> The unified Ireland solution is perfectly workable if that's what the majority inIreland want.

Have you ever spoken to someone from NI? Can you imagine growing up being worried about bombs every day? I had a housemate at uni from NI, and what she describes is pretty scary. 

Just because a majority (a small majority) want a unified Ireland, that does not make it prefectly workable, due to the historical troubles of the area. The unionists are not just going to shrug their shoulders and say "Oh well, I guess it's the will of the people"!

Also, how long would you expect Scotland to stay in the UK if NI get to leave?? Would you be in favour of Scottish independence too?

baron 21 Sep 2018
In reply to Ian W:

> You go to NI and suggest that to the DUP - let me know how it goes!!

> Not that it isnt a logical or even sensible option,but NI politics haven't often been logical or sensible........

The DUP, while propping up the conservative government, won't be the only ones to have a say in the calling of an independence referendum.

In fact, until the NI assembly is functioning again, nobody will have a say.

Could there be a worse time for the assembly to be non functioning?

baron 21 Sep 2018
In reply to Sir Chasm:

You've seen through my plan.

 Ian W 21 Sep 2018
In reply to baron:

> The DUP, while propping up the conservative government, won't be the only ones to have a say in the calling of an independence referendum.

> In fact, until the NI assembly is functioning again, nobody will have a say.

> Could there be a worse time for the assembly to be non functioning?

Not really!

There also couldn't be a worse time to have a disfunctional minority government.

There also couldn't be a worse time to have a disfunctional opposition party.

We have all three........

baron 21 Sep 2018
In reply to girlymonkey:

The people of NI have been let down by politicians for decades.

There exists, at present, a period of relative peace but terrorism still occurs.

The NI police are armed and British troops are still staioned in NI.

If the people of NI are to be used as pawns in the Brexit negotiations then the least that they should expect is to have a say.

As their assembly isn't functioning who is representing them?

It can't be their MPs because Sinn Fein don't take their seats in Westminster.

If the people of Scotland or Wales want independence then they should have it.

 

baron 21 Sep 2018
In reply to Ian W:

> Not really!

> There also couldn't be a worse time to have a disfunctional minority government.

> There also couldn't be a worse time to have a disfunctional opposition party.

> We have all three........

We do indeed!

Worrying times.

In reply to skog:

She has never made much sense, but I've tended to give her the benefit of the doubt.

No longer - I think the gibberish she is spouting is an accurate reflection of the total confusion she (and her 'selected' advisers) are in. They haven't a clue what is going on. 

1
 girlymonkey 21 Sep 2018
In reply to baron:

So if you understand that they have a complicated situation, which is very different to the rest of the UK, how would you envisage them joining the republic of Ireland working? You accept that there is still terrorism, which has been greatly reduced by careful management and negotiations, but yet you think that if 55% percent of people want to join the ROI then that will solve the issue?!

In practical terms, I can't even see a peaceful referendum taking place on such a divisive issue. I would not be in the least surprised at polling stations being bombed etc, which would mean some people wouldn't vote out of fear.

If vote could be conducted in safety, I would expect roughly a similar distribution of the vote as the Brexit vote had, so marginally over half of the population wanting to join ROI. How would you propose that the country could convince the unionists to accept this?

Interesting that you would be in favour of a complete dissolution of the UK. It seems like a crazy idea to me, but due to the amount that wasteminster are screwing us over, I now support Scottish independence. I was a No voter in 2014. I now see the folly in that. 

Bellie 21 Sep 2018
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:

Is it me or have the EU been saying all along we can't have the penny and the bun, come up with an alternative.  Then she has come along at this late stage and said "we want the penny and the bun."

Then complained that it isn't fair that - at this late stage they have said we can't have the penny and the bun.

When if she knew we couldn't get the penny and the bun - why ask for it in the first place - knowing what the answer was?

 

 

 

1
baron 21 Sep 2018
In reply to girlymonkey:

You shouldn't allow the terrorists to win.

Although some might argue that it what the Good Friday agreement did.

The situation in Northern Ireland is a delicate one which is why the Good Friday agreement was worded the way it was.

If the majority of people in NI hadn't voted to remain in the EU then I wouldn't have brought up the subject of unification.

But they did.

I don't know what percentage of people need to vote to leave for the result to stand.

The people of the republic would also need to give their approval for reunification.

It is up to the people of NI to decide if they want to leave the UK and similar for Scotland and Wales.

If the UK breaks up it won't be because I want it to but because that is what the majority

of voters in those countries want.

My point was that most people understand how delicate and complicated the border issue is and that it was wrong for the EU to include it in their Brexit agenda and for the UK not to oppose this inclusion.

3
 Tyler 21 Sep 2018
In reply to Bellie:

> Is it me or have the EU been saying all along we can't have the penny and the bun, come up with an alternative.  Then she has come along at this late stage and said "we want the penny and the bun."

> Then complained that it isn't fair that - at this late stage they have said we can't have the penny and the bun.

> When if she knew we couldn't get the penny and the bun - why ask for it in the first place - knowing what the answer was?

She must think we are stupid, the problem is a lot of us are. People will be believe her lies about how the EU shouldn't reject our proposals without proposing an alternative when a version of this was produced on day one of the negotiations. 

https://static.undercurrentnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Mr-Barnier-b...

The alternatives are also codified in laws we helped write yet May et al are blaming the EU for their own intacigence and ignorance 

1
 Sir Chasm 21 Sep 2018
In reply to baron:

> My point was that most people understand how delicate and complicated the border issue is and that it was wrong for the EU to include it in their Brexit agenda and for the UK not to oppose this inclusion.

And it's still a moronic point. Ooh, I don't know how to solve the border problem, so we won't discuss it. Ooh, I don't know what to do about a customs union, so we won't discuss it. Ooh, I don't know what to do about a free trade deal, let's no discuss it. You voted for this and when it gets difficult all you have to offer is that you don't think difficult issues should be discussed. Pathetic.

1
 skog 21 Sep 2018
In reply to baron:

> You shouldn't allow the terrorists to win.

> Although some might argue that it what the Good Friday agreement did.

There were and are terrorists on both sides, you'd have to go right out of your way to make sure none of them won. In the real world, you often do have to take account of what the dangerous, violent people want if you want to reduce the danger and violence.

 

> My point was that most people understand how delicate and complicated the border issue is and that it was wrong for the EU to include it in their Brexit agenda and for the UK not to oppose this inclusion.

You're talking about the EU as if it didn't include Ireland - a sovereign nation with a huge stake in this matter, which is a full member of the EU and will continue to be so after Brexit.

baron 21 Sep 2018
In reply to Sir Chasm:

It would seem that there is no real discussion to be had except on forums like this one.

Certainly not between the negotiating parties.

The EU has its redlines and the UK has theirs.

The NI issue is a perfect example of this.

The government didn't help itself by declaring no hard border when it didn't have to.

We, as in many members of this forum, have spent hours discussing all aspects of Brexit, so where you get the idea that anybody is dodging any issue I don't know.

 

3
baron 21 Sep 2018
In reply to skog:

I don't think I've under valued the role of the republic in all of this.

But as part of the EU they have to toe the party line.

If it was simply an issue between the Republic of Ireland and the UK then it wouldn't really be an issue. 

3
 skog 21 Sep 2018
In reply to baron:

> I don't think I've under valued the role of the republic in all of this.

> But as part of the EU they have to toe the party line.

They've helped define it!

> If it was simply an issue between the Republic of Ireland and the UK then it wouldn't really be an issue. 

Yeah it would - if the UK is determined that it doesn't want free movement in from the EU, anyway.

baron 21 Sep 2018
In reply to skog:

> They've helped define it!

> Yeah it would - if the UK is determined that it doesn't want free movement in from the EU, anyway.

The UK and ROI sorted the movement of people issue between the two countries, pre EU,  by use of the common travel arrangement.

It was a sensible, pragmatic compromise that both countries could live with.

The current situation is, due to both parties intractable redlines, not so easily sorted.

1
 skog 21 Sep 2018
In reply to baron:

> The UK and ROI sorted the movement of people issue between the two countries, pre EU,  by use of the common travel arrangement.

> It was a sensible, pragmatic compromise that both countries could live with.

Yes, that was before Ireland was a member of a union from which the UK didn't want free movement to be allowed. It's irrelevant here.

baron 21 Sep 2018
In reply to skog:

> Yes, that was before Ireland was a member of a union from which the UK didn't want free movement to be allowed. It's irrelevant here.

My point was that when two countries want to solve a problem that suits both of them it's possible.

As you said that's not what's happening now - we have two entrenched sides who can't be seen to give way.

 

2
 jkarran 21 Sep 2018
In reply to baron:

> If the people of NI are to be used as pawns in the Brexit negotiations then the least that they should expect is to have a say.

They had their say, they voted resoundingly to remain.

> As their assembly isn't functioning who is representing them?

Their MPs (bribed, suspended and non-attending) in Westminster and the unelected civil service at home is running things day to day on a restricted budget. Was that a rhetorical question?

> If the people of Scotland or Wales want independence then they should have it.

What if they don't want your brexit?

jk

 skog 21 Sep 2018
In reply to baron:

> My point was that when two countries want to solve a problem that suits both of them it's possible.

If it was that simple, there wouldn't be any troubles in Ireland.

john yates55 21 Sep 2018
In reply to john arran:

Agree for once. Hence no point joining in. Remainers repeat their lies often enough they believe them. But funny how little opinion has moved. EU approach will only harden divisions. A second referendum - often now advocated by those who said such a thing would be detrimental - would likely resolve nothing. And no doubt in my mind that, had the Remain side won by the same margin, we would not be having this debate. Pathetic really. It was probably never a good idea to have a Remainer Cabinet negotiate a Leave agenda. Like making a pyromaniac your chief fire officer. I leave you guys to stew in your own bile.

9
 jkarran 21 Sep 2018
In reply to john yates55:

> ...Pathetic really. It was probably never a good idea to have a Remainer Cabinet negotiate a Leave agenda. Like making a pyromaniac your chief fire officer. I leave you guys to stew in your own bile.

We didn't, we don't. The high profile quitters held all the plum brexit jobs until they quit and were replaced by more quitters. Your brexit isn't being delivered not because the government are a useless bunch of self serving pricks fighting like cats in a sack (though they are) but because it is an undeliverable mass of contradictions and hopes built on bullshit.

jk

1
baron 21 Sep 2018
In reply to jkarran:

> They had their say, they voted resoundingly to remain.

Then they can do so by leaving the UK.

> Their MPs (bribed, suspended and non-attending) in Westminster and the unelected civil service at home is running things day to day on a restricted budget. Was that a rhetorical question?

For a country which is integral to Brexit we're not hearing much from their representatives.

> What if they don't want your brexit?

Then, like the rest of the people in the UK who voted to remain, they can live with it or do what you do and fight their cause with a passion.

> jk

 

1
baron 21 Sep 2018
In reply to skog:

> If it was that simple, there wouldn't be any troubles in Ireland.

There will always be problems in a country.

The ones in NI aren't the result of disagreement between two different countries but the illegal actions of a number of people.

3
 Tyler 21 Sep 2018
In reply to john yates55:

> Like making a pyromaniac your chief fire officer

We had a remainer doing the negotiation until he gave up. What realistically could a Leave PM have done that would have lead to a different outcome? The EU outlined the options and never deviated, so do you think someone like Boris and JRM would have been able to charm the EU into concessions they've never ever hinted at giving. 

 jkarran 21 Sep 2018
In reply to baron:

> For a country which is integral to Brexit we're not hearing much from their representatives.

Oh, I wonder why. Perhaps because half of them cannot represent their voters' views and attend parliament so they fail to represent both their voters and thier constituents. Likewise for the other half, the toxic combination of FPTP and sectarianism returns MP's who's political views are distinct from those of the vast majority of the people they are supposed to represent.

> Then, like the rest of the people in the UK who voted to remain, they can live with it or do what you do and fight their cause with a passion.

Do you honestly still think brexit will deliver anything good?

jk

 Sir Chasm 21 Sep 2018
In reply to john yates55:

Who did you think was going to negotiate brexit?

 skog 21 Sep 2018
In reply to baron:

> There will always be problems in a country.

So when you said "My point was that when two countries want to solve a problem that suits both of them it's possible", you didn't actually mean the problem we were talking about at the time?

baron 21 Sep 2018
In reply to jkarran:

 

> Do you honestly still think brexit will deliver anything good?

Yes, otherwise I wouldn't continue to support it.

Do I Think that the negotiations have been bungled, yes.

Do I think a deal will be reached, yes, but only because the prospect of a no deal is too negative to think about for both sides.

Do I think that a no deal is possible, yes, due to the reluctance of both sides to actually negotiate/compromise.

> jk

 

4
baron 21 Sep 2018
In reply to skog:

> So when you said "My point was that when two countries want to solve a problem that suits both of them it's possible", you didn't actually mean the problem we were talking about at the time?

I thought we were talking about the border issue/migration/terrorism?

Sorry, now I'm confused!

2
 skog 21 Sep 2018
In reply to baron:

Yep, the border issue and the potential consequences with regards to the Troubles.

You had proposed Irish reunification as a solution; others were pointing out that wasn't the clean solution you seemed to think.

It's a difficult enough problem that the two countries involved have not been able to completely solve it even before the UK decided it wanted a hard border between itself and the union Ireland is part of.

baron 21 Sep 2018
In reply to skog:

Thanks for the clarification.

My fault for trying to contribute to more than one thread at the same time.

 

My 'solution' for the border issue was an attempt to break what appears to be an impasse in current negotiations.

Its hard to see a solution, even maintaing the status quo,  that doesn't leave many people feeling unhappy.

 skog 21 Sep 2018
In reply to baron:

> My fault for trying to contribute to more than one thread at the same time.

Yep, hard to do. Plus to be fair you're talking to several people at once on this thread.

> Its hard to see a solution, even maintaing the status quo,  that doesn't leave many people feeling unhappy.

There isn't one - large numbers of people want things which totally contradict what large numbers of others want.

It seems to me that the least awful solution, if the UK is not to remain in the EEA, is a weak border between NI and ROI and a harder one between NI and the UK - but Theresa May (and the DUP) are still ruling that out. If the UK insists on stopping free movement from the EEA, it simply has to establish a hard border somewhere; it's just a matter of where.

The UK staying in the EEA or something very like it seems the real best remaining answer - not a good solution in itself, but it would honour the referendum decision (which was simply to leave the EU, whatever Theresa might want to pretend was also in the question), without messing up trade, Ireland, and residency issues.

Post edited at 16:55
 wercat 21 Sep 2018
In reply to Tyler:

And why should the nearly 50% of voters who wanted to stay have what they value thrown away by negotiators who have no regard for what those voters value?  His post is stupid and adds nothing but bad feeling to the thread.  Guess he's sitting there rubbing Putin's parts

 MG 21 Sep 2018
In reply to skog:

> The UK staying in the EEA or something very like it seems the real best remaining answer - not a good solution in itself, but it would honour the referendum decision (which was simply to leave the EU, whatever Theresa might want to pretend was also in the question), without messing up trade, Ireland, and residency issues.

This ^^^ about a million times.  A mature Labour party and leader would put aside partisan differences and support May to achieve this.  Unfortunately we have Corbyn...  Will the SNP offer enough support if it comes to the crunch to face down the ERG loons??

pasbury 21 Sep 2018
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaargh!!!!!.!??????????

john yates55 21 Sep 2018
In reply to Sir Chasm:

John Arran and Rom the Bear

 

john yates55 21 Sep 2018
In reply to jkarran:

Pricks, cats and bullshit, you say. And it was the leavers who voted based on emotion and remainers based on reason. No evidence of that on here. 

9
john yates55 21 Sep 2018
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:

Thanks as ever for sharing pearls. 

 jkarran 21 Sep 2018
In reply to john yates55:

On the contrary, I have plenty of reason to be angry about the government of our country. Emotion and reason are not exclusive. Good try though 

Jk

john yates55 21 Sep 2018
In reply to jkarran:

Davis and Fox were just window dressing. May, Hammond et al running the talks, if you can call it that. Imagine had remainers narrowly won and Farage and Johnson had been put in charge. Happiness all round. Rarely have I come across such a hate filled bunch as you lot. Liberal Britain? Fascist more like. But then climbers in UK are usually a pretty miserable bunch. And think they are superior. 

14
 jkarran 21 Sep 2018
In reply to john yates55:

Lol. Beer or wine?

Jk

1
john yates55 21 Sep 2018
In reply to jkarran:

In your case sneer and whine

13
 Dave Garnett 21 Sep 2018
In reply to john yates55:

> But then climbers in UK are usually a pretty miserable bunch. And think they are superior. 

Nonsense.  That’s not why I think I’m superior.

Clauso 21 Sep 2018
In reply to Dave Garnett:

> Nonsense.  That’s not why I think I’m superior.

Quite... I always feel that one doesn't need to think about being superior: one just knows? 

Lusk 22 Sep 2018
In reply to jkarran:

> Do you honestly still think brexit will deliver anything good?

Hopefully, it'll put an end to whinging little Euros like you.

18
Jim C 22 Sep 2018
In reply to Yanis Nayu:

> That’s hilarious. They’ve been completely united, dignified and reasonable for months, while the UK Tory party descended into civil war. 

Did Tusk not just tweet a photo of him offering May a piece of cake ( with no cherries)

That tweet does not sound like how someone should  act  in such a senior position.

Boris maybe, The Donald Trump definitely , but they would both be criticised , and so too should Tusk. That tweet was not , in his position, dignified nor reasonable. 

 

 Sir Chasm 22 Sep 2018
In reply to Jim C:

You poor, delicate snowflake. You think the negotiations are going so well that we're going to be having our cake with cherries on top and eating it. Deluded.

4
 neilh 22 Sep 2018
In reply to Jim C:

Have to totally agree with you there( even as a remainer).

pathetic tweet by tusk. I expect better for a serious issue .

john yates55 22 Sep 2018
In reply to Dave Garnett:

Odd response. I didn’t say why climbers feel themselves to be superior. I merely observed that they tend to behave in that manner. So your response is nonsensical.  Perhaps I should qualify in light of this  — climbers  exhibit unjustified feelings of superiority. 

5
 john arran 22 Sep 2018
In reply to john yates55:

 You're a climber, right?

In reply to neilh:

TBH I think it was a good effort at a joke and communicating the reality of the negotiations to a wider and younger audience. The ERG keep on referring to the EU practically as Nazis and blow me, they have a significantly better sense of humour than JRM. And after all, the EU have been utterly consistent and rational since the start of this process, and have got nowhere, just TM's continued fantasy that if she asks for the impossible often enough it will magically happen. I would have displayed my frustration at the UK's incompetence and irrationality in significantly ruder terms.

2
baron 22 Sep 2018
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:

It wasn’t necessary.

It wasn’t funny.

Unless your a remain supporter?

It did harden the resolve of many leave supporters.

Hope it was worth it.

2
 RomTheBear 22 Sep 2018
In reply to john yates55:

> Davis and Fox were just window dressing. May, Hammond et al running the talks, if you can call it that. Imagine had remainers narrowly won and Farage and Johnson had been put in charge. Happiness all round. Rarely have I come across such a hate filled bunch as you lot. Liberal Britain? Fascist more like.

Well the brexiteers ran away, resigned, or did f*ck all. None of them want to actually negotiate or lead. They could easily replace May with a brexiteer if they wanted. They don't.

> But then climbers in UK are usually a pretty miserable bunch. And think they are superior. 

Ouch. Someone has an unresolved inferiority complex.

 

1
In reply to baron:

Donald Tusk having a pulse is a source of angst to Brexiters; him having a personality and a sense of humour has driven you all mad. You're all totally and utterly bonkers. Exiting Europe is committing us to a nihilistic future where the only thing that matters is money. I deeply resent the future you are committing my children and grandchildren to. In 100 years time I firmly believe that historians will be looking back and saying 'Brexit - wtf was that all about? Why did they expend so much energy destroying things that were basically working?'

Post edited at 13:16
1
baron 22 Sep 2018
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:

Should the word ‘remainer’ in your post be ‘leaver’?

You can feel as upset as you want but a high ranking official making fun of a country’s prime minister immediately after a rather humiliating meeting and at a time when negotiations needed to be restarted is childish, ill mannered and counter productive.

2
In reply to baron:

It does now! And yes, maybe the tweet was an error of judgement; get over it. 

2
baron 22 Sep 2018
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:

The tweet was just one part of an ill thought out response from the EU to an ill thought out plan from the prime minister.

While it is perfectly reasonable for the EU to reject the Chequers plan it needed to be done more diplomatically.

Now we have the leavers in a more entrenched position and a prime minister even more isolated and all at a time when we are supposed to be moving forward.

 

4
Pan Ron 22 Sep 2018
In reply to baron:

I think the tweet somewhat pales into insignificance compared to the ludicrous behaviour of Brexiteer Britain. That it's even an issue points towards the insularity and lack of awareness that got us in to this mess.

1
 Doug 22 Sep 2018
In reply to baron:

"While it is perfectly reasonable for the EU to reject the Chequers plan it needed to be done more diplomatically."

The EU had been saying diplomatically that her plan was flawed for a while, then the day before the Salzburg meeting May published an undiplomatic article in a German newspaper. Are you surprised at the reaction ?

1
baron 22 Sep 2018
In reply to Pan Ron:

It shouldn’t matter if Brexit is a ludicrous plan or not.

It’s never a good thing to humiliate another human being and never a sensible one when that person is a prime minister and leader of a negotiating team.

The EU has underestimated how many people view what happened as a slight not just towards Mrs May but also towards the UK.

While you throw out accusations of insularity it is the EU’s arrogance that will lead to a no deal.

4
 Andy Hardy 22 Sep 2018
In reply to baron:

> While you throw out accusations of insularity it is the EU’s arrogance that will lead to a no deal

It's TM's "red lines" that make a no deal likely. Even if they remain she was stupid to declare them before negotiations had begun. She painted herself into a corner, and can't blame the EU for that

1
Lusk 22 Sep 2018
In reply to baron:

There never has, and never will, be/en a blue Tory sub atomic particle in my body, but I doff my cap to May.  I've rarely seen someone so pissed off in my life.  She was steaming!

EU - go f*ck yourselves.  Scared bully boys throwing your weight about, because one of your major players has the audacity to leave your little club.  They've revealed themselves as what I've always thought.

14
Pan Ron 22 Sep 2018
In reply to baron:

> It shouldn’t matter if Brexit is a ludicrous plan or not.

Errr, shouldn't it?

> It’s never a good thing to humiliate another human being and never a sensible one when that person is a prime minister and leader of a negotiating team.

She's more than capable of humiliating herself by adopting ridiculous negotiating positions and posturing.  Thought it was a pretty amusing post from Tusk actually. 

If "plucky little Britain" is going to throw tantrums over such minor things I'm not sure we're really in a position to extract concessions from the remaining EU member states - let alone go negotiating trade deals with the rest of the world.

> The EU has underestimated how many people view what happened as a slight not just towards Mrs May but also towards the UK.

No doubt some will have thought that.  Its that same insular mentality all over again.

Have you stopped to consider how us, issuing demands, looks to the rest of Europe?  A slight perhaps?

> While you throw out accusations of insularity it is the EU’s arrogance that will lead to a no deal.

Those of us who voted remain have been saying that no deal will be likely from the outset. The UK has been expecting to pick and choose what it wants, that any EU non-negotiable will become negotiable, and that the myriad wishes of all the member states will be put aside to suit the wishes of this ex-member state.

Funnily enough, we also predicted that when this all happened the Brexiteers would blame everyone else.

1
 neilh 22 Sep 2018
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:

I think it was appalling. And you know I am a remainer. It hands needless publicity to the Brexit fans. 

Stupid and crass tweet from Tusk 

Post edited at 16:58
 neilh 22 Sep 2018
In reply to Pan Ron:

There is a good write up on May in the Economist this week. Actually it compliments her rather surprisingly. 

 jkarran 22 Sep 2018
In reply to Lusk:

> Hopefully, it'll put an end to whinging little Euros like you.

Charming.

Jk

1
 jkarran 22 Sep 2018
In reply to baron:

> It did harden the resolve of many leave supporters.

A picture of a man with cake hardens your resolve but two years of informed debate highlighting the many unresolved serious problems brexit poses for us hasn't made the slightest dent. The whole ludicrous project in a nutshell.

Jk

 

1
baron 22 Sep 2018
In reply to Pan Ron:

Do you actually think that humiliating leaders of countries during negotiations is a good or necessary  thing?

You obviously want to remain but I’d suggest to you that after the shenanigans at Salzburg that’s far less likely.

This is one instance where the EU has to shoulder some of the blame.

At least Mrs May can console herself that domestically she’s more popular than Mr Macron.

 

 jkarran 22 Sep 2018
In reply to baron:

May humiliated herself, she knows that, you can see it in her anger.

Jk

1
 Yanis Nayu 22 Sep 2018
In reply to baron:

> It shouldn’t matter if Brexit is a ludicrous plan or not.

> It’s never a good thing to humiliate another human being and never a sensible one when that person is a prime minister and leader of a negotiating team.

> The EU has underestimated how many people view what happened as a slight not just towards Mrs May but also towards the UK.

> While you throw out accusations of insularity it is the EU’s arrogance that will lead to a no deal.

Which will hurt us a great deal more than it will hurt them. Despite what the Brexit shysters said, it was patently obvious that the EU would hold all the cards. They have a duty to the remaining 27 countries and not to us. We’ve spent years belittling, moaning about and scapegoating them and now we’re trying to throw our weight around. We must look such a bunch of deluded, self-important pompous tw*ts. 

1
baron 22 Sep 2018
In reply to jkarran:

> May humiliated herself, she knows that, you can see it in her anger.

> Jk

She certainly didn’t help herself with her unworkable plan.

There’s been a major breakdown in backstage communications between the EU and the UK in allowing such a situation to arise.

Or Mrs May has been ill advised by her own team.

Or she ignored her team’s advice.

Or the EU had a point to make.

Gosh only knows what’s really going on.

1
baron 22 Sep 2018
In reply to Andy Hardy:

The EU redlines are as much of an issue as the UK’s in preventing a sensible deal.

 

4
baron 22 Sep 2018
In reply to Yanis Nayu:

The EU is famous for its last minute deals.

Maybe that’s what’s happening here. Or maybe not. A rabbit might get pulled out of the hat and there’ll be a deal. Or maybe not. Then we’ll leave with no deal.

Whatever happens the actions of the EU were unnecessary.

You’re allowed to be emotional about a situation that you feel will affect you and to use language reflecting the depth of those emotions but politicians involved in delicate negotiations are supposed to have respect and be diplomatic.

Or should they all take the Boris approach?

5
 Andy Hardy 22 Sep 2018
In reply to baron:

The negotiation is asymmetric, despite what the leavers think, the club is bigger than one player, however many goals he scores in season.

To start off saying we're going, and we won't accept X, Y or Z is simply to invite the response "there's the door, here's your tab, have a nice day". I've said all along that no deal is what the Tories seem to want, whatever the cost to ordinary Britons

1
In reply to baron:

They're not red lines, they are fundamental principles that underpin the entire enterprise.

Which, in turn, has delivered unparalleled prosperity, peace, political stability, social justice, development and environmental protection for over 40 years.

But you know that.

1
 Martin W 22 Sep 2018
In reply to jkarran:

> May humiliated herself, she knows that, you can see it in her anger.

Or mardy tantrum, depending on how you want to view it.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/sep/21/theresa-may-demands-respec...

"Youse don't gimme no respec' bruvva."

Beyond a fundamental level of politeness, respect is earned.

As for Tusk's tweet of the cake, surely he was simply reiterating the point that the EU has made over and over: no cherrypicking.

1
baron 22 Sep 2018
In reply to Andy Hardy:

The ‘we’re going and won’t accept.....’ is a result of the referendum result to leave the EU and an acknowledgment that it’s not possible to be in either the customs union or single market without also accepting freedom of movement, etc. 

Every time I write that I’m accused of blaming the EU for the current situation.

Which I’m not, it’s a statement of fact.

The UK government has attempted the impossible which is to negotiate a deal which would cause the EU to abandon its four freedoms.

Something that the EU refers to as cherry picking and something that they have always said that they won’t do.

It would appear that there won’t be a deal and we should put all our efforts into preparing for that scenario.

One problem that confuses the issue is the EU’s record of doing a deal at the last minute.

This allows people to hope that something positive will happen but like every one else not directly involved I’m just speculating.

1
 jkarran 22 Sep 2018
In reply to baron

> It would appear that there won’t be a deal and we should put all our efforts into preparing for that scenario.

Or we could accept such a scenario delivers none of what we were offered devestates our economy, hands our treasured public services to vulture capitalists and f*cks over our children. Such an acceptance would cause a reasonable person to revaluate what they received in exchange.

Still, can't wait for my blue passport. I'll use it to move somewhere less stupid, pay their taxes, their pensions.

> One problem that confuses the issue is the EU’s record of doing a deal at the last minute.

> This allows people to hope

It won't, you really are being mugged.

Jk

2
Lusk 22 Sep 2018
In reply to jkarran:

> Still, can't wait for my blue passport.

 

The same old worn out tired cliches.

Is that the best you can do?

4
In reply to Lusk:

All we ask is one single benefit that you sincerely believe we will receive as a result of brexit

Just one will do.

Other than a blue passport number of course, (which we could have had anyway.)

Post edited at 20:17
2
 MG 22 Sep 2018
In reply to Lusk:

> The same old worn out tired cliches.

> Is that the best you can do?

It was pretty much the first stated "benefit" made by brexiteers after the vote. If you think it stupid, perhaps  reconsider who you're supporting

1
 Andy Hardy 22 Sep 2018
In reply to baron:

"We're going"  is the outcome of the referendum. The "and we won't accept" part is entirely separate.

1
baron 22 Sep 2018
In reply to Andy Hardy:

> "We're going"  is the outcome of the referendum. The "and we won't accept" part is entirely separate.

We won't accept includes

no ECJ, unless it applies to trade only, e.g safety standards, etc.

no paying money to the EU for trade, would need to pay to be part of european projects if needed.

no free movement of people, but controlled migration needed.

These alone make belonging to the customs union and single market impossible.

Altering these significantly makes leaving the EU a waste of time.

So for example, joining EEA is a waste of time and we might as well stay in the EU.

Hard line brexiters posiibly have a different opinion than mine.

1
john yates55 22 Sep 2018
In reply to jkarran:

You are one twisted soul. 

3
john yates55 22 Sep 2018
In reply to neilh:

But deeply revelatory. The game all along has been to humiliate and punish the UK because the EU ruling class fears the game is up, and that if we left and were successful  then the grand project would be over. As you say, it will only harden opinion against the EU among leave voters. The zealots on here will still spew out their bile. But they should be urging their beloved EU to reach a deal that allows a mutually beneficial outcome. Instead of screaming abuse at their fellow countrymen and women. 

6
Jim C 22 Sep 2018
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:

> Several EU leaders have already said they would like there to be a second referendum.  If the UK asked for more time on the Article 50 schedule to hold one why wouldn't it get it?

And people worried about the Russians secretly interfering in our democratic process, but it seems  it's ok for EU leaders of other countries to blatantly do it !

1
Jim C 22 Sep 2018
In reply to john yates55:

The EU tactics will certainly harden Brexiteers against the EU, you are quite correct , but it will also shift some marginal Remainers to now be against the EU too. 

Any referendum is likely to be marginal either way, so it will solve nothing even if it was a small majority for Remain. There is no point in a second referendum, Remainers would still not accept it, even if they lost again

1
Jim C 23 Sep 2018
In reply to Sir Chasm:

It's not about me, it's what other leaders think of his actions.

 

Behaviour unbecoming of his position, particularly at this late stage .

IF May had publicly ridiculed by Tweeting Tusk in such a manner , you ( and many others) would criticise her I'm sure, and you would be right to do so. 

Jim C 23 Sep 2018
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:

> Other than a blue passport number of course, (which we could have had anyway.)

The other thing we could have had, but Cameron never took up, was restrictions on migration, as Freedom of Movement , was very generously interpreted by the UK, the Freedom of Movement is  only that of 'Workers' and Cameron could easily have taken a letter of the law interpretation, and sent back those that were not meeting that criteria, but he did not, why not ? 

IF we get a deal, and IF we get into a transitional period, I would fully expect the UK to follow EU rules, but only the most favourable interpretations that we can possibly justify.

Freedom of Movement ( of Workers) should be just that during any transition out of the EU. (We could gave had that anyway.)

Post edited at 00:16
Jim C 23 Sep 2018
In reply to wercat:

> we're gonna havta stickit to those gents

What is the ' stickit- to-em plan ?

Say nasty things about them on Social Media? ( done that)

What is plan B ?

In reply to Lusk:

> The same old worn out tired cliches.

> Is that the best you can do?

Maybe I just imagined I saw the largest circulation Brexit supporting newspaper run a front page trumpeting the return of the blue passport.

https://goo.gl/images/scKMi9

oh no, I didn’t imagine it. 

1
Jim C 23 Sep 2018
In reply to Martin W:

 

> As for Tusk's tweet of the cake, surely he was simply reiterating the point that the EU has made over and over: no cherrypicking.

And if May had the one that tweeted , no cake (with cherries) , no 40 billion, would that have been acceptable?

Jim C 23 Sep 2018
In reply to jkarran:

> Charming.

You are right, I see no reason to abuse others for having a differing view. I too get a fair bit of abuse, but I neither give out or retaliate with personal abuse on any subject , it's only about the argument, it should nothing to do with personalities .

I'm pretty sure if we all met up in a pub and there was a rule , no revealing your Brexit views  for the first 4 hours, we would mostly all get on great, and few would be able to guess, which were which. 

After the Brexit badges were pinned on, later in the evening however, I predict it would get 'heated' 

( As yet, I have not ( that I can recall) resorted to personal insults , but there is still 6 months to go  

 

 

 summo 23 Sep 2018
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:

> All we ask is one single benefit that you sincerely believe we will receive as a result of brexit

Stop paying farmers subsidises based on land ownership, instead of food production and environmental measures.

Stop giving a far larger proportion of fish away than the UK gains from fishing other eu waters.

End Strasbourg.

Stop giving money to very dubious eastern block governments who refuse to play ball and are simply on the take, with the eu even slower to react than it was over the migrant crisis, Ukraine or anything else.

Give migrant workers from anywhere in the world equal rights compared to European workers. 

Brexit will fix all of the above regardless of what flavour trade deal comes out in the end. 

 

1
 john yates 23 Sep 2018
In reply to summo:

All very valid benefits. But there are many, many more. Freedom to compete on our own terms, setting our own rules rather than the EU rule book, such as state aid, which is what Brussels fears most. Having fully accountable law makers who can be booted out of office if and when they get it wrong. Freedom to set our own rules on migration, from open door to more tightly regulating. Freedom from migration rules that privilege EU citizens rather than citizens of the world. Re engaging with the left-behinds, showing them their views count rather sneerin at them like they are idiots. A chance to heal divisions, build a future as an independent state willing and eager to collaborate with others on the big, transnational issues, from environment to defence. A nation state that grows in confidence and competiveness by investing in its people, research and innovation, industry, towns and cities; because it is not bound by rules set by an emerging but dysfunctional supra-national state and is free to be different.

 

8
 john yates 23 Sep 2018
In reply to Jim C:

You’ve made some great points well and they deserve to be heard in a spirit of fraternal debate. Sadly, not much in evidence on UKC. I confess I lack your ability not to hit back at them in their own terms. 

1
 Robert Durran 23 Sep 2018
In reply to Jim C:

> Any referendum is likely to be marginal either way, so it will solve nothing even if it was a small majority for Remain. There is no point in a second referendum, Remainers would still not accept it, even if they lost again.

I think that is untrue. Remain win, we remain (easy to do compared with leave). Vote to leave again and I think remainders would have to reluctantly accept it, although I think it would lead to the break up of the UK. Either way the country will be divided and may never be the same again but we have that anyway and whatever happens.

 

 

 

 john yates 23 Sep 2018
In reply to Jim C:

Such a good point. From the first leaks of private conversations at the start of the talks to the Trump-like jibes of unelected Tusk the EU mandarins have shown themselves for what they are. The EU fears a successful, independent, Britain. Read this weekend’s pro-EU Financial Times, It’s under siege from the rise of populism from Sweden to Hungary, is having to break its own rules on free movement to quell a growing bottom-up revolt, and has a currency that inflicts massive pain on a whole generation of young people. The so-called lies emblazoned on the Leave bus, pale into insignificance when compared to the daily drip, drip, drip of publicly/funded propaganda from the EU. 

8
 RomTheBear 23 Sep 2018
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:

Maybe she is a genius: The more she makes the EU reject chequers the more it becomes acceptable to the Brexit loons in parliament and her cabinet.

Post edited at 08:44
1
Pan Ron 23 Sep 2018
In reply to baron:

Shouldn't that wish list of yours make evident that Brexit will mean different things to different people?  Many Brexiteers will be happy surrendering some of those demands (funny how EU red lines apparently need to be negotiable, but the long list of Leave red-lines are unbreakable), or may be unhappy to leave at all without them.  This is exactly why a final vote should, and should always have, been on the cards.  

1
Pan Ron 23 Sep 2018
In reply to john yates55:

You seem deeply paranoid.  The EU needs only to safeguard the benefits of membership.  The punishment is self-inflicted. 

What you are seeing in action are the protections and bargaining power that collective membership gave us.  These are things each country makes some sacrifices for but which appear to be more than balanced out by the power gained.  What you are also seeing is the vulnerability of being outside of that bloc.

If that hardens the resolve of leave voters then I really don't know what to say.

1
Pan Ron 23 Sep 2018
In reply to Jim C:

> And if May had the one that tweeted , no cake (with cherries) , no 40 billion, would that have been acceptable?

I'm sure the most heavily subscribed newspapers in the UK would be crowing if she had done so.

Pan Ron 23 Sep 2018
In reply to summo:

All that could happen within the EU. 

I doubt very much farm subsidies with vanish from UK land after leaving the EU.  We seem extremely content to give money to dubious Middle Eastern governments.  It is arguable whether there is much to be gained by allowing labour from further away rather than our nearest neighbours.  Ending Strasbourg is a worthy goal - it won't be ended by us not being in the EU.

How widely shared do you really think those benefits are?  Do you think most Brexit supporters prefer African or Arab economic migrants over Polish ones?

1
 kevin stephens 23 Sep 2018
In reply to john yates: unfortunately all of those aspirations, some worthy and some illusionary will not make up for the devestation  of the UK economy due to disruption of supply chains in much of UK manufacturing industry. I know this from my work for a wide range of companies in aerospace pharmaceutical car sectors Etc. All of these products are much more complex than can be made by a single country as in pre EU days and rely on unhindered passage of materials components and personnel across borders several times to make a product. In many cases it will be cheaper and less hassle to relocate manufacture to elsewhere in the EU. 

Post edited at 09:14
 summo 23 Sep 2018
In reply to Pan Ron:

 

> I doubt very much farm subsidies with vanish from UK land after leaving the EU. 

Already being trialled and expanded to more trial areas. 'Payment by results' is the branding. Land owners will be funded after they've produce the crops or have environmental measures working on the ground. 

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/environmental-farming-scheme-given-green...

> We seem extremely content to give money to dubious Middle Eastern governments. 

Two wrongs don't make a right?

> It is arguable whether there is much to be gained by allowing labour from further away rather than our nearest neighbours

Are suggesting that Europe is already the pick of the crop as far as the employment market goes? Best educated in all sectors etc..?

> .  Ending Strasbourg is a worthy goal - it won't be ended by us not being in the EU.

It won't ever end. The eu doesn't do budget streamlining etc..  It gives Greece some ridiculous budget rules that last until 2060, but refuses to sort it's own internal expenditure. 

> How widely shared do you really think those benefits are?  Do you think most Brexit supporters prefer African or Arab economic migrants over Polish ones?

I don't care. I'm not against migration at all in any form. But it should be an equal playing field globally, what make Europeans so special? 

Post edited at 09:24
2
 kevin stephens 23 Sep 2018
In reply to summo:

> Already being trialled and expanded to more trial areas. 'Payment by results' is the branding. Land owners will be funded after they've produce the crops or have environmental measures 

> Are suggesting that Europe is already the pick of the crop as far as the employment market goes? Best educated in all sectors etc..?

Having worked in all of the countries/ regions you mention I would say definitely yes.

 

1
 neilh 23 Sep 2018
In reply to john yates:

Well made . The counter point  I would put is that the Eu is just an admin function of issues that need to be put together for what are in effect our neighbours and allies.

in a globalised world such relationships are important otherwise you just become little Englander. 

And you overlook the economic benefits of migration and the ease of doing business with our neighbours. It has created a very simple cross border trading partnership which has taken years and years  to put   benefits most people .

Yes there are downsides. Nobody denies that. 

 Andy Hardy 23 Sep 2018
In reply to baron:

If we are apportioning blame for a disorderly brexit, then I would say that

a) brexit is the UK's idea

and

b) the laying down of "red lines" by the uk, outside of the negotiating room was stupid.

As soon as you let the other side know that you cannot accept something, you give them a massive lever in the talks.

In reply to Jim C:

> And if May had the one that tweeted , no cake (with cherries) , no 40 billion, would that have been acceptable?

She can tweet what she likes.  Nobody cares.  The situation is still exactly what the UK government itself said it would be in the leaflets before the 2016 referendum i.e. the UK would need to choose between Norway/Switzerland/Canada/WTO models or minor variations. 

The Tories have been having a debate with themselves for the last two years and then expect that when they get to a consensus within the cabinet the EU is just going to accept it.   They've been studiously ignoring the views of more than half the population of the UK (i.e. everyone who voted for no Brexit or Brexit into the EEA), the views of the EU, the UK's Good Friday commitments and the ability of individuals and businesses to take their money and skills out of the UK.  They've only got away with it so far because Corbyn is a waste of space.

 

,

1
 jkarran 24 Sep 2018
In reply to john yates55:

> You are one twisted soul.

Care to elaborate or is it just more throw-away unpleasantness?

jk

Post edited at 10:28
cb294 24 Sep 2018
In reply to kevin stephens:

No, the RoI will not "..set up EU customs points on its side of the border...", as they are legally bound by the Good Friday agreement. One key problem for the current UK government in the ongoing Brexit negotiations is that they are bound by the same agreement, quite obviously cannot be seen to simply tear up binding agreements Trump style (especially right before a phase of negotiating many new trade agreements), but are propped up by the DUP. 

Talk about shooting yourself in the foot....

CB

 wercat 24 Sep 2018
In reply to Andy Hardy:

These Red lines were declared by people who had no business to  - such as Reet-Mouth and the ERG and of course they had to be adopted by an anything but Strong and Stable government running in fear of the ERG sturmabteilung

 john yates 25 Sep 2018
In reply to jkarran:

You’re the master of that dear. 

4
 john yates 25 Sep 2018
In reply to jkarran:

Here’s a selection of your phrases..,,

‘Vulture capitalist, f*cks our children, Christ on a bike, self serving pricks, bullshit, buklshit, glorious bullshit, humiliating herself...’there’s a scatological and pornographic language in your hysterical comments.

5
 john arran 25 Sep 2018
In reply to john yates:

and which of those were aimed at you? Or are you gallantly taking offence on behalf of others?

2
In reply to john yates:

I feel JK's pain. We're faced with an existential threat potentially as serious as WW II (that's at the far end of the spectrum for sure, but it's there nonetheless),  that may well turn the UK into an impoverished banana republic and/or US satellite, only making way in the world by participating in a race to the bottom orchestrated by climate change deniers, tax avoiders, right wing ideologues and free market fanatics.

When facts are pointed out - such as the legal as well as moral obligations imposed by the Good Friday agreement, the inevitability of businesses that depend on complicated supply chains deserting the UK, the requirement for both skilled and unskilled labour, and the sheer bl**dy privilege of 'being able to get on a train and go anywhere I please' (in the EU, at any rate) being taken from us, and not refuted, just simply ignored - then it's hard not to get scatological and impassioned.

There seems to be a collective madness in the air; and try as I might, I see far more  madness among  brexiters more than remainers. Maybe Osborne was wrong about the emergency budget, though with plunging sterling and reducing tax revenues EVERY budget will reflect our declining economic position. But that exaggeration seems pretty small beer - you KNOW Johnson lied about his position (which he flip flopped only weeks before the referendum), you KNOW Farage lied about fish quotas and payments to the EU, you KNOW Fox lied about easy trade deals, you KNOW IDS doesn't care if the Troubles kick off again, or Dover becomes a smugglers paradise, you KNOW Davis took a minister's salary for two years without any intention of negotiating (let alone any having the capability)...

3
 john yates 25 Sep 2018
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:

The only madness I detect is the kind of stuff you and the other remainers are relentlessly peddling. I suspect you are actually only talking to one another. 

8
 john yates 25 Sep 2018
In reply to john arran:

It would help if you read the exam question before you replied. But you always seem to know the answer before the question is posed, like those know it alls on university challenge who press the button too early and get penalised as a result. 

4
 john yates 25 Sep 2018
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:

The ‘go anywhere I please’ remark gives the game away.  A few minutes delay in getting through customs, or not being a ‘citizen’ of the EU, that’s at the heart of it really. And damn what the majority of your fellow citizens voted for. McLaren are just building a £50 m production facility in the UK. They are  re/shoring from Austria. But don’t let facts deflect you from your poisonous but self serving narrative. 

5
In reply to john yates:

1) No, it's the potential for living anywhere in Europe I choose has been a huge life enhancing asset for many. 2) It wasn't a majority of fellow citizens who voted for it, it was a (small) majority of those who voted - an important difference 3) Let's hope Maclaren sell enough luxury sports cars to replace Tatra, Honda, Airbus, Unilever, Nissan (when they finally up sticks)... 

2
 skog 25 Sep 2018
In reply to john yates:

> A few minutes delay in getting through customs ... And damn what the majority of your fellow citizens voted for.

Serious question, how do you know whether a majority voted to end the free movement of goods and people?

Clearly quite a lot did, but it wasn't in the question - and there were definitely quite a lot of people with other reasons for voting to leave the EU who didn't care about that, or were even actively in favour of it.

I'm not sure how you can claim a majority for anything other than leaving the EU, which isn't the same thing.

2
 jkarran 25 Sep 2018
In reply to john yates:

> Here’s a selection of your phrases..,, ‘Vulture capitalist, f*cks our children, Christ on a bike, self serving pricks, bullshit, buklshit, glorious bullshit, humiliating herself...’there’s a scatological and pornographic language in your hysterical comments.

Oh bless, you're bothered by a little mild bad language that wasn't even directed at you. For someone so opinionated, who's posting style is so abrasive you really are a delicate little mite.

Context can be tricky, keep trying.

Also what do you think BMW's brexit month line closure is costing as a fraction of McLaren's non-brexit related investment? 14.5k cars/month, £15k/unit, what's that... £218M

jk

2
 MG 25 Sep 2018
In reply to jkarran:

> Oh bless, you're bothered by a little mild bad language that wasn't even directed at you. For someone so opinionated, who's posting style is so abrasive you really are a delicate little mite.

Good job you didn't go for "The zealots on here will still spew out their bile. "  He'd have probably had a heart attack.

2
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:

Maclaren are definitely not going to sell more luxury sport cars than Tatra, Airbus and Unilever. Prams almost definitely though

 john yates 25 Sep 2018
In reply to MG:

Aghhhhhhh

 john yates 25 Sep 2018
In reply to Bjartur i Sumarhus:

Airbus and the others are not car makers. Nor is Airbus yet to leave. Not sure who Tatra is. Perhaps you could explain. The most recent figures indicated record levels of inward investment. 

 john yates 25 Sep 2018
In reply to jkarran:

Phew. And that is mild. Do the family sit together for dinner. Love to eavesdrop on that one. 

 john yates 25 Sep 2018
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:

If...,not when. Unless you have inside information. If you don’t know and are just guessing, then your statement is both untrue and misleading. You should consider taking up sign writing on the side of buses.

 john yates 25 Sep 2018
In reply to jkarran:

More dishonesty from you on BMW. The company always shuts down for a week. Maintenance and repair. Read the press release. They have simply brought it forward to coincide with Brexit. No change then in its production. Just a sensible business move. McLaren are creating jobs, 300 plus in an area that is on the up. You seem to hate good news, and love bad news. 

6
 skog 25 Sep 2018
In reply to john yates:

> If you don’t know and are just guessing, then your statement is both untrue and misleading. You should consider taking up sign writing on the side of buses.

And yet, you haven't answered my question a few posts above...

 john yates 25 Sep 2018
In reply to skog:

Remind me please 

 john yates 25 Sep 2018
In reply to skog:

Well. The small matter of 10 years of polling evidence to show immigration was by a country mile the biggest issue in the European elections.. And the fact that ending free movement is now the order of the day for both main parties. That’s it. And you could look at this in the pro Remain Indy

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/brex...

 

 

Post edited at 20:59
1
 skog 25 Sep 2018
In reply to john yates:

That shows it to be a major concern but it certainly doesn't show that a majority voted on that basis.

52% voted to leave the EU. That's a small majority, but clear enough that it can't really be disputed.

For you to be able to say that a majority voted to end free movement (or to introduce customs barriers, or whatever you were saying), you'd have to show that over 96% of leave voters were voting for that.

I think you know you can't do that!

That question wasn't asked; fulfilling the result of the referendum simply involves leaving the EU, anything else is someone else's add-on - not something which can, on available evidence, be claimed to be the will of the majority.

1
 john arran 25 Sep 2018
In reply to john yates:

People don't 'fear immigration'. It simply makes no sense on any level. What they may well have feared and continue to fear is the effects of immigration on local services, such as schools, hospitals, etc. But, as you well know, these effects are only a problem if they are not properly managed and sufficiently funded. Look at the attitudes to immigration in London. And I'm sure you also know that most studies have been very clear in concluding a net economic benefit to migration. So it's pretty obvious that people's gripes really should be with those failing to properly manage the local effects of migration, rather than with those who are, on the whole, bringing net worth to the country.

Unfortunately, the popular press has portrayed a very different story and has done so consistently over a very long time. Hence the widespread reported discontent with 'immigration' rather than with 'the management of immigration'. This is most notable in places where immigration is extremely low, so where people have very little direct experience but have simply read media stories.

1
 neilh 25 Sep 2018
In reply to john yates:

Well it’s a month shutdown not a week. The shutdown had been rescheduled in case of disruption arising from supply chain issues due to Brexit. 

Sensible planning .

 

 jonfun21 25 Sep 2018
In reply to skog:

> 52% voted to leave the EU. That's a small majority, but clear enough that it can't really be disputed.

....whilst remembering 52% was only 27% of people who live in the UK.

25% Remain 27% Leave 48% Didn't vote and/or not eligible to vote (i.e. EU citizens living in the UK, 16 & 17 year olds, <16 year olds) Have tried, but to date not found a way to  is no way to disaggregate the 48% into didn’t and couldn’t. 

Post edited at 22:00
 john yates 25 Sep 2018
In reply to jonfun21:

Why bother? 

 john yates 25 Sep 2018
In reply to john arran:

Read the blooming post. I never used the word fear.  And the government’s own most recent study on immigration from EU is that it’s benefits are at the very best minimal. So stop making things up. Another one who should consider writing slogans on buses as a career. 

5
 john yates 25 Sep 2018
In reply to skog:

Whatever. The fact remains (forgive the pun) the majority voted to leave. And that immigration was among the biggest concern. Short of interviewing every voter, we cannot day why each individual voted. Night night. 

3
 john yates 25 Sep 2018
In reply to neilh:

Thanks. The point is still made. It was not an extraordinary act.

1
 skog 25 Sep 2018
In reply to john yates:

Good, glad you agree we don't know.

Night!

1
 john yates 25 Sep 2018
In reply to skog:

Night 

 john yates 25 Sep 2018
In reply to neilh:

What the poster tried to claim is that this move by BMW was evidence of  looming disaster. He didnt quote what the BMW guy said wHen asked about the prospect of a no deal: “While we believe this worst case scenario is an unlikely outcome, we have to plan for it.”

An unlikely outcome. Unlikely. Hmmm

3
 john arran 26 Sep 2018
In reply to john yates:

> Read the blooming post. I never used the word fear.

The headline of the article you linked was "Brexit: People voted to leave EU because they feared immigration, major survey finds" Seems pretty clear to me, despite your Trumpian denial.

> And the government’s own most recent study on immigration from EU is that it’s benefits are at the very best minimal

Even without a link this shows that the study you refer to actually agrees with me, amd you wouldn't have mentioned it unless it was the most one-sided credible study you could find. And you have the Trumpian gall to imply that it's me that's being misleading.

> So stop making things up.

Please tell me what you're accusing me of making up. It's a serious allegation you really shouldn't throw around without any justification at all. There's a certain US President with a very similar habit.

> Another one who should consider writing slogans on buses as a career. 

If I were to write any slogan on a bus, I'd make damned sure it wasn't an outright lie for personal gain.

So what is it that you stand to personally gain from Brexit, John? You don't seem like someone who's blind to facts, rather someone who repeatedly attempts to misleadingly select and present them. It can't be easy keeping up this pretence of cake-eating unicorns just around the Brexit corner, so what's your real reason for doing so?

1
 neilh 26 Sep 2018
In reply to john yates:

It is still highly unusual and it is not just BMW who are doing this. 

Out of interest have you any direct experience of supply chain management or shipping ?

i know from past posts you have been involved in some form of instrumentation. 

 jkarran 26 Sep 2018
In reply to john yates:

> More dishonesty from you on BMW. The company always shuts down for a week. Maintenance and repair. Read the press release. They have simply brought it forward to coincide with Brexit. No change then in its production. Just a sensible business move. McLaren are creating jobs, 300 plus in an area that is on the up. You seem to hate good news, and love bad news. 

I could mirror your accusation but what would be the point. They're closing for a month, not a week, it is a direct result of brexit. Yes, there is usually summer downtime to coincide with holiday season, low demand and to facilitate re-tooling. Unless there is to be widespread cancellation of leave and the new model tooling is ready early this will ultimately prove an additional brexit related line closure.

Source in case anyone wants to decide for themselves which of us has pants on fire https://www.ft.com/content/5e4db246-bb56-11e8-94b2-17176fbf93f5

I don't hate good news but your oft touted McLaren investment while no doubt good for Sheffield and of some personal or business interest to you is not brexit related. It is I will concede good news in spite of brexit but as a small scale ultra-luxury manufacturer with a relatively compact supply chain it is not subject to quite the same pressures other mainstream car makers are, it is not representative or in any way a good omen for post-brexit mass employment.

300 jobs is great. BWM employ 18,000 directly.

jk

1
 wercat 26 Sep 2018
In reply to john yates:

Time flies Like an Arrow

 deepsoup 26 Sep 2018
In reply to wercat:

Fruit flies like a banana.

 wercat 26 Sep 2018
In reply to deepsoup:

excellent.

Cats No less Liquid than their Shadows offer no angles to the wind ...

In reply to john yates:

It was just a lighthearted post about the spelling of Mclaren and Tata motors and the implication in the sentence construction that the other companies built cars.

Other than that, I steer well clear of debating anything political on here now. Just not worth it, 

 john yates 30 Sep 2018
In reply to Bjartur i Sumarhus:

Apologies. I’m not so good at texting on a phone. And you do right to avoiding d politics here unless you are willing to get abuse and hand it back. 

 john yates 30 Sep 2018
In reply to wercat:

Tits like coconuts 

 john yates 30 Sep 2018
In reply to Rob Exile Ward

Usual disingenuous conflation of EU with Europe from the Remoaners. Clever propaganda tactic, but the kind of economy with the truth that belongs on the side of a bus. One is a centuries old reality the other a very recent political and economic project that is doomed to fail. Indeed. Is failing.  No one who wants to leave the EU thinks they are leaving Europe. Thatcher’s Bruges speech is very pro-European but not based on a project that wants to create a superstate. 

4
 john yates 30 Sep 2018
In reply to john arran:

Once was. Couldn’t stand the arrogance of people who make misguided claims to be best in the world. Better off out. 

3
 john yates 30 Sep 2018
In reply to john arran:

Once was. Couldn’t stand the arrogance of people who make misguided claims to be best in the world. Better off out. 

1
 john yates 30 Sep 2018
In reply to jkarran:

Bollocks. The JLR press release says its precautionary bringing forward of something that would happen anyway. They don’t think no deal will happen. And they remain committed to the UK. You spin it how you like. FT leading voice of City Establishment in favour of Remain. Are you surprised they tilt the story to reflect the Estabkishment’s preferred outcome, as do its fellow travellers on UKC. What did Lenin call them? Useful idiots. There’s an army of them on here. 

5
 MG 30 Sep 2018
In reply to john yates: No, that’s bmw. Jlr have put 2000 on a 3day week... But carry on with your delusions.

 

 MG 30 Sep 2018
In reply to john yates:

No doubt you think business secretary is a useful idiot and this is entirely normal too

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45693341

In reply to john yates:

>  FT leading voice of City Establishment in favour of Remain. Are you surprised they tilt the story to reflect the Estabkishment’s preferred outcome,

I don't think that's true.  The difference between the FT and papers like the Telegraph and Guardian is that Telegraph and Guardian readers are looking for stories which confirm their own views and prejudices.    The FT audience is more interested in making money and to do that they want information they can act on rather than stories that make them feel good.

For example, most of the UK press is pretty biased when it comes to reporting anything to do with Scotland's oil industry.   They've got their narrative of disaster and they stick to it.   The FT is far more neutral and will report when the price is rising or is predicted to rise in future.

 

1
 john yates 30 Sep 2018
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:

The FT was and is firmly in favour of remain and its editor makes no apology for that -- like many on here, he thinks it is a serious mistake. Here is an extract from the leader the day of referendum it was headlined Britain should vote to stay in the EU


This newspaper has supported British membership of the EU from the outset in 1973. The Financial Times does not favour membership of the single currency. It makes no economic sense. But opting out of the euro is quite different from opting out of the EU, which would seriously damage the UK economy.

 

Your oil and Scotland comments are pure nationalist fantasy.

 aln 01 Oct 2018
In reply to john yates:

Who are you? 

In reply to john yates:

> The FT was and is firmly in favour of remain and its editor makes no apology for that -- like many on here, he thinks it is a serious mistake. Here is an extract from the leader the day of referendum it was headlined Britain should vote to stay in the EU

There is a difference between an editor taking a political position in a leader and bias in reporting of news stories.   

In reply to aln:

A Kremlin stooge probably.

In reply to aln:

> Who are you?

I'm guessing he's John Yates.

Who are you...?

 neilh 01 Oct 2018
In reply to john yates:

Is that because from a business perspective it is pretty economically daft to come out of the EU?

Apart from a few ardent business exponents of the Brexit position  most businesses want to stay in. The FT is reflecting what most business and most business owners actually think is right!

You can say the same about the Economist which is pro remain.

 

 john yates 03 Oct 2018
In reply to neilh:

Pretty much spot on. I get howled down for saying it, but Remain is the ruling economic and political class position. Or what I call the Establishment. The few rich kids and Mavericks in favour of leave are cranks and gadflies. And all the remainers on here are liberally minded useful idiots for the ruling elite. They like the first and second homes in     EU land, the freedom to come and go as they please. Hate the thought of being held up at passport control. And think that low wage nannies and plumbers fromthe Eastern bloc are a damn good thing. Bloody lazy working classes. None of them fleeing to monocultural Poland in search of a job! 

18
 john arran 03 Oct 2018
In reply to john yates:

Is there a suggestion of a better alternative somewhere in that diatribe? Or are you just playing the disillusionment card, in the hope that enough people might continue to be sucked into support for a protest movement that ultimately will leave them all worse off? (but presumably not you, as you no doubt will have some way of personally benefiting from this slow motion catastrophe, otherwise you wouldn't appear on here every week trying to revive the flagging support for it.)

4
 john yates 03 Oct 2018
In reply to john arran:

I just don’t buy you gloomy, doom laden, shop soiled analysis of the future. You are the guys filling the room with sarin gas not me. 

11
 john arran 04 Oct 2018
In reply to john yates:

Well most business and a growing majority of individuals would disagree, and those that are left are notable in not having any credible workable alternative vision, except variations on the theme of cake and unicorns, so I think it will take more than you and a few others insisting that 'it'll be reet' for me to be convinced.

With that level of unsupported optimism you could cross roads with your eyes closed and your fingers in your ears.

What do you personally stand to gain from the national car crash you're encouraging?

4
 George Ormerod 04 Oct 2018
In reply to john yates:

Shame the ‘lazy working class’ are the ones who are going to suffer most from your Brexit. We’re already £500 million a week worse off and we haven’t even left yet. Your only hope is that they don’t notice. But a Minford, free wheeling capitalist, arse raping hard Brexit that would make even your hero Thatcher (champion of the single market) wince would lead to a political back lash that would be a joy to behold. 

2
 George Ormerod 04 Oct 2018
In reply to john yates:

> You are the guys filling the room with sarin gas not me. 

You’re not wrong there John, I’ve had a chickpea curry tonight.   

 

 john arran 04 Oct 2018
In reply to john yates:

Alice laughed. “There’s no use trying, one can’t believe impossible things.”
“I daresay you haven’t had much practice,” said the Queen. “When I was your age, I always did it for half-an-hour a day. Why, sometimes I’ve believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast.

3
 wercat 04 Oct 2018
In reply to john yates:

you really are our resident Poison Pen, wot a larf.

2
 Andy Hardy 04 Oct 2018
In reply to john yates:

Time and again we "remoaners" ask you for solutions to the problems your brexit causes, and all we ever get is some variation on "it'll be alright". No wonder you have failed dismally to convince any remain voter to change their minds. Are you really so blind to the risks of brexit or just insulated from the effects?

And if you were thinking of telling me remaining is risky (again), don't bother.

2
 john yates 04 Oct 2018
In reply to George Ormerod:

wow...arse raping...and I'm the one using the poisonous language. Love it. Bring it on boys.

4
 john yates 04 Oct 2018
In reply to john arran:

Arran gazing into the looking glass x

3
 George Ormerod 07 Oct 2018
In reply to john Yates

I’m glad you could only find my language to criticize, so you agree with the substance: we’re already poorer for the Brexit vote, leave voters willl suffer most and Thatcher was fundamental to and enthusiastic about that single market.

 

Post edited at 05:23
2
 wercat 07 Oct 2018
In reply to George Ormerod:

we'll have a lot of poorer people here with little chance of climbing out if we choose only to take the most skilled and affluent elite of the world's workforce instead of keeping freedom of movement in our own region.

 

And of course we are taking away our own freedom of movement in that region as well

Post edited at 09:48

New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...