UKC

Supposedly. Trouble is it's nothing like; whatever the outcome of these final talks the anti-EU Tories are so bonkers they will continue to have issues with EU and be obstructive, rude and disruptive, whatever the economic, social or security costs. I said before and I genuinely think the only thing that will satisfy is the resumption of WW II.

And they're not even having the grace to die off - somehow they find partners and replicate themselves. This is going to go on for frigging ever.

Some Belgian MEP was on the radio this morning, saying quite explicitly that a) Europe do not trust or respect Johnson at all and b) they will welcome Scotland with open arms. The Union is stuffed.

I'll agree the union is stuffed, I've been keen on moving to the West coast of Scotland for a while, my partner isn't so keen so we've been looking at Wales but I think I need to try and convince her Scotland could work for us.

It's not that I dislike where I am, just think we're shifting ever closer to privatised health care in England and I've always said if that happens I'm off.

The saddest part of Johnson’s 2019 victory for me was that it signalled the end of the Union. An independent Scotland and a united Ireland in a generation. The Conservative and Unionist Party have achieved in few years what the IRA couldn’t do in a hundred; ironically abetted be the DUP. 

I find it fascinating that so many hard-core remainers still haven't accepted the fact that leaving the EU was a perfectly logical course of action with much to commend it, widely supported across many parts of society. They prefer to blame it  on a small group of bogey men, Cummings and Johnson etc.

Remainers have overwhelmingly accepted the result...perhaps you should accept what vote Leave put forward was founded on lies...and own the mess that is coming in 4 weeks time. 

I'm still waiting for the logic to become apparent.  As far as I can see the wide support is based on reducing immigration  (it won't), 'sovereignty' (we were never compelled to adopt any legislation we didn't sign up to) or 350m to the NHS (really ?)

Good parody response. Like it. Theresa May’s hard Brexit deal was voted down by the ERG, Johnson took it and threw the DUP under the bus and imposing a sea border between GB an NI. He then reneged on the agreement, breaking international law and sowing distrust. So you’re right, all the fault of ‘hard core remainers’

Brexit Endgame?

It was always going to be the same conclusion from 5 years ago. The Tory Civil War and UKIP speeding up the war ensured a No Deal was buried deep into the minds of the swivel eyed loons.

Brexit logic. I think you might have missed this: 

https://www.kentonline.co.uk/dover/news/brexit-will-spark-rise-in-dogging-2...

Ireland. Has water in between you and the English.

Be careful out there...

Think my home counties accent might make that a moot point really.

One of my best friends is back in Dublin at the moment, he's saving up to move over here again.

I just want to be closer to the mountains and sea as much as anything else. It might not work out but it definitely won't if I never try

I'm still struggling to accept the virgin birth too...I just can't get my head around it, yet I'm assured it's the most logical explanation for the birth of the son of god, by people right at the top who should really know their coconuts. Surely, if you can get to the top of either the Tory Party or the Catholic Church, then you must really be in sound possession of the truth, right?

Maybe you can help me with that one too, since you've done such a great job of explaining the logic and benefits of Brexit.

Or maybe both are complete bullshit, believed by millions of people, propagated by people in authority for self-serving reasons that have no connection to reality?

Should I accept the virgin birth and the benefits of Brexit? One but not the other? Or should you accept that you've been conned and we're all going to suffer for it?

Go for it. I have lots of ideas but no real plan. I would love to be at the bottom of an alp somewhere, just haven't figured out the logistics and legalities and whether I would like to keep a foot in England (expensive, may need to rely on relatives and friends). Possibly Haute Savoie or further south.

I love Ireland and it seems basically friendly, but my longest memory is of chatting to a priest in a church in Cork where I was a tourist. After a few minutes I thought, I'll put a few euros in the box and sidle out, but unfortunately it had the opposite effect and I was there for another hour!

You have set a high bar here, viz: 'a perfectly logical course of action with much to commend it.' Can you please come back to us very soon with your 'logical' argument to support this contention, i.e. with a) true premisses, b) your valid logical argument, c) evidence to show that your 'perfectly logical' conclusion, your favoured 'course of action', has 'much to commend it.' Thanks in advance. I imagine it won't take you very long to answer this.

Like what?

We kept hearing this. We were going to be amazing again. Now suddenly we get 'well we always knew there was going to be a negative impact' 

We certainly are not better off. Everyone else in the world is desperately negotiating FTAs and we're trying to leave one with our closet neighbours who are 5x bigger than us. 

It's been a demonstrable failure. As everyone knew it would be. Everything they said wouldn't be impacted has, from food standards to long term residency abroad. 

I hope from January, Boris is asked, as often as possible, what he is going to spend the extra £350million each week he will have at his disposal.

I recall, even when challenged about that figure, he was robust in defending it(both by standing by the bus as it travelled around the country and in national TV) as the amount we send to the EU each week.

As far as the negotiation go I think this quote(which I posted in The Pub) bears repeating here

"This will be the first negotiation in history where both parties started off with free trade and then discussed what barriers to erect" - Pascal Lamy, former Director-General of the WTO.

Dave

Like many others here, I’m waiting with bated breath for the big reveal.

What is this perfectly logical course of action if which you speak?  Give me just a taste of what it had to commend it.

Check out the profile of the thing you're replying to.

Best not to feed them.

Be assured I and many others blame it on all of you.

Fuxake cheer up.

A deal will be done, we're at the who blinks first stage. You can expect more doom and gloom right up to a few minutes before the deadline. What you are currently witnessing is willy waving.

The deal will get through Parliament because Labour will not vote against it and risk a No Deal and there aren't enough ERG or DUP nutters to sabotage the whole thing by voting against the government.

Labour desperately needs to create a narrative that allows it space to vote against any deal not to support a no-deal but to force a renegotiation. Simply abstaining would be disastrous.

I assumed it was postman pat after a huff.

"hard core remainers"

Is that really a thing?

No, abstaining would be the right thing to do.

Brexit is going to happen, we have to accept that. With a majority of 80 the Tories aren't going to be defeated in a commons vote.

To oppose the exit bill and effectively vote for no deal is not in the national interest and not in the party's interest either. It has spent the time since March rebuilding support in Red Wall seats and would, if there were a GE tomorrow, probably win them back and enough other seats to form a government. Why would Labour throw away its gains by making a futile final attempt to halt Brexit?

No, better to walk away from the whole shitshow. Leave Johnson, Gove and the rest of the shower holding the baby. The deal will not be one that Labour would ever negotiate, it is a Tory deal and therefore something labour should not vote for anyway. However in order to avoid the risk of no deal Labour should not oppose it. Just leave it to the Tories to put it through Parliament while arguing bitterly about having sold out the fishermen, probably the farmers and Northern Ireland while their constiuents in Kent whinge on about traffic jams. The Tories can take all the flak for it as it goes through Parliament and again when the shit hits the fan next year. It's theirs, it was their idea, they lied to the country about sunlit uplands and the easiest deal in history they own it and must be seen to own it.

If, as many expect, the deal is a dreadful one and a Tory one then it will hasten the return of a Labour government quite probably on a manifesto that includes renegotiating part or all of our Brexit deal. Abstain now, win later.

I agree. I think a full-on Brexitaggeddon will be better for the country in the long run. And I'm not talking about some mystical "50 years from now we will once again rule the waves and conquer the savages" like Jacob Rees-Mogg; the worse the mess in the short term, the quicker the shit and sick all over every room of the house will be cleaned up.

You say that but this is the worst thing to happen to this country in my lifetime, and it will have a direct effect on my children and grandchildren. My daughter took the EU for granted so planned a career in hospitality, is doing French and German at university; she just squeezed in the last Erasmus funded year abroad, but her career prospects in Europe for the next few years have disappeared. 

I really don't think everyone has engaged with how cr*p this is going to be, Johnson hasn't the bottle to deal with his swivel-eyed loons so he can't possibly concede anything at all, and the EU has too much to lose - and too little to gain - by conceding either. 

And, frankly, they're going to hate us. Not as individuals, but as a country who believes there is such a thing as unfettered 'sovereignty' - that in fact disappeared when we started trading with free nations rather than colonies. They  really, really aren't going to be very cooperative, and Anglophobia is going to have a real new lease of life, particularly in France.

I don't think we do have to accept it. Plenty of times we've voted one way and later changed it. Letting the bloody women vote for one..

It's obvious it's a disaster and should be stopped if at all possible. It seems most now realize it's wrong but want to continue because that's what we said should happen after being told a bunch of lies, we now know to be bollox.

Probably.

It can't be, we left the EU the best part of year ago and they aren't daft enough to let 'us' back in at a time when 'we' would just cause disruption and probably leave again soon anyway.

Brexit has already happened, this is just about whether we get a trade deal in place before the transitional deal ends.

What some of the brexiteers don't seem to realise is that we obviously are going to make a trade deal with the EU, our nearest neighbours and largest trade partner. We just might have to go through some months or maybe years of disruption and lost opportunity first, between the end of the transitional arrangement and the point where we eventually do make an ongoing one.

I think we can, we'd just have to sign back in with the euro as well. This is going to be the greatest loss of sovereignty in history. The EU and the US have us over a barrel on any negotiations. We've already accepted we'll be tied to the CFP, an argument we used to leave the EU for.. and we'll have little input into the CFP.

But I think the EU would absolutely love it if we acknowledge the failure brexit has been. 

While the majority of the country no longer want to leave the EU the majority bin Parliament do. An 80 seat majority, it's not going to be defeated.

I'd hope though that we can repair relations with the EU, a change of government would help enormously and Starmer knows all the important people due to the time he spent as shadow Brexit secretary. I'd like to think that if things are obviously not working then in a few years we can start renegotiating our relationship with the EU and get restore some of the things we're about to lose.

We'll see.. tbh the main thing I want is the right for my kids to travel around europe and work with ease like I did on a British passport.

The worst thing? How do you know that? It hasn't really happened yet. I'd say the worst thing to ever happen to to this country was the devastation Thatcher wreaked on the economy in the early 80s when unemployment rose past 3 million and stuck there for years. I'm sorry about your daughter but are you sure her prospects have been destroyed. My office in Edinburgh is still hiring Europeans on a regular basis.

Don't over estimate the power of the ERG. They're a noisy minority inside the Tory party and I imagine Johnson will deal with them with the same ruthlessness as he dealt with the Remainers in his party if he has to.

I work in a French/Italian multi national. I haven't seen any enmity at all towards us over Brexit. More a sense of bewilderment and sadness. At levels below governmental I don't imagine much bad feeling.

https://www.itv.com/news/2020-12-06/the-12-reasonable-worst-case-outcomes-i...

The Government's classified assessment of no-deal says:

1) Flow rates of medicines and medical products "could initially reduce to 60-80% over three months which, if unmitigated, would impact on the supply of medicines and medical products across the UK".

2) "Protests and counter-protests will take place across the UK and may absorb significant amounts of police resources. There may also be a rise in public disorder and community tensions."

3) "EU and UK fishers could clash over the lost access to historic fishing grounds, and there could be a significant uplift in illegal fishing activities."

4) "Competing demands on UK government and devolved administration maritime agencies and their assets could put [maritime security] enforcement and response capabilities at risk."

5) There will be "reduced [food] supply availability, especially of certain fresh products" and "supply of some critical dependencies for the food supply chain... could be reduced".

6) "Low income groups will be disproportionately affected by any price rises in food and fuel."

7) "Border delays, tariffs and new regulatory barriers/costs may result in disruption to supply of critical chemicals used in the UK... leading to the disruption of essential services (such as food, energy, water and medicine). Economic factors could result in some chemicals suppliers reducing operations or closing."

8) "Border delays could affect local fuel disruption. There will not be wider national-level oil shortage."

9) There is a risk of a reduction in the supply of medicines for UK veterinary use which "would reduce our ability to prevent and control disease outbreaks, with potential detrimental impacts for animal health and welfare, the environment, wider food safety/availability and zoonotic disease control which can directly impact human health".

10) "Between 40-70% of trucks travelling to the EU might not be ready for new border controls. This could reduce flow across the short channel crossing to 60-80% of normal levels with maximum queues of 7,000 trucks in Kent and delays of two days. The worst disruption would subside within three months".

11) The transition from "internal security cooperation with the EU" to "non-EU mechanisms" may not be smooth and seamless and may "result in a mutual reduction in capability to tackle crime and terrorism".

12) Around one in 20 local authorities are at risk of financial collapse as a result of higher service demand caused by a disruptive EU exit.

I think most would be absolutely fine with leaving the EU on the terms Vote Leave won the referendum with. Single market access, our rights to live and work in Europe unchanged, all the benefits of EU membership with none of the drawbacks and £350m a week extra for the NHS. Where do I sign up for that Brexit?

Leaked because hardly any politician in the UK bothers to argue against it. It is the same as half a year ago when they were all silent when the deadline for transition extension passed.

Sadly no. If the rise of UKIP was matched with a proEU party that whined on about joining the euro etc for 15 years nonstop, I imagine the outcome of the referendum would have been different.

The argument for it now is literally.. 'it might not be that bad. Any argument we'll be better off has gone.

I do hope so. And I say that as someone who voted to stay in the union last time. 

Don't hold your breath.  I'll be glad if there is no deal, and we get to see, it was all your imagination.

Really? You don't want any sort of deal with our nearest neighbours?

What have you got against the people who will no longer be able to sell their produce? Why do you want to see their lives in tatters?

Don't you think that the fact that everything the brexiters said has turned out to be a lie kind of makes you infinitely less likely than me to be right? 

I suppose there might be one thing that ‘Leave’ are right about in this whole shit show. But given their track record, it seems unlikely. 

Tells you all you need to know about the motives of many of those in favour of Brexit.  It's not about improving the UK. It's not always about racism and biggotted attitudes (although clearly it often is).  At it's core it's about jealousy and dislike of "others".  Bit like mask wearing.  All attitudes cut from the same cloth.  Pathetic really.

That's an interesting point, which I hadn't really considered. Explains a lot.

I wish someone would leak the "reasonable best case no-deal planning scenario" so we can look forward to how much better things might be. 

How do you infer my post was about "jealousy and dislike of "others""  ?

No deal has been my preference all along.  I believe and hope there will not be many problems. The possibility has been hyped beyond all reason on UKC.  A good outcome seems to be the greatest dread of many. Why ?

I predict that in about 2/3 years time all my Brexit voting friends will be saying cannot we not renegotiate on point A or point B. This is because they will have had something that impacts on their lifes that they would have got within the EU. It will be something along the lines of , easier access at airports, longer holidays, travel, education, , job or making life just easier.They will scratch their heads and say " why cant we have this".

We will then spend another few years faffing around until the penny drops and we rejoin as something like an associate member.

It is almost as enivatable as the sun rising each morning.

There is no “good outcome”. Nothing good will come from Brexit. We will not be richer, more influential, free-er, better educated, more equal, healthier, have more opportunities or even be happier.

People should pin their hopes on that then.   Rather than pushing for a  'Brexitaggeddon'.

Despite every single piece of evidence pointing to the contrary........

You know this ?  How ?

I used to think that after the first referendum. But the last 4 years has clearly shown that hatred - real, visceral hatred - of Europe is in the DNA of some Tories. And they're passing it on to their spawn. They may not be a majority, but by God they know how to hate, and how to hold their leaders' feet to the fire. 

And despite the fact that they are (mostly) venal, corrupt, none too bright, selfish, ignorant, atavistic and deeply unattractive, they keep winning elections. Unless the Tory induced fiasco of Scottish independence finally breaks their stranglehold as the 'natural party of power', I don't see that changing in my lifetime.

It's already started, you clown. We're the frogs in the pan, and the temperature is rising.

Already we can't plan foreign holidays, we can't plan sabbaticals in Europe, our children can't study abroad, car companies are winding down investment, financial companies are edging away, the £ is in steady decline... 

Do you really think the borders in Calais, Dover, Holyhead are ready for new paperwork and new computer systems on Jan 1st? How can they be when no-one knows what is going to be involved? And between now and then is Christmas. 

We will start the New Year in chaos and that will become the new normal, just like it is in countries we used to laugh at like India, Columbia and Italy, and we used to thank God we weren't like that. And you'll be saying 'it could be worse'. Excellent. 

Of course I don’t. Nobody can predict the future.

I can, like you, only hope.

Your post says more about you than anything else.

You think to consider leaving the EU is "ignorant" and "real visceral hatred" ?

But you would consider it reasonable to emigrate to Australia (so leaving the EU) ?

FTFY 😉

So not escaping leaving the EU.  Nearly as bad as Rob's chaos outside the EU, like Italy.

I'm afraid you are rather clearly demonstrating my points for me. Your second sentence doesn't follow from anything I wrote. If you can't see that then you really need to brush up your skills of comprehension and logic.  For clarification: what I wrote - and what I meant - is that there is a rump of Tory MPs who genuinely hate Europe - listen to the likes of IDS, JRM or Mark Francois, they cannot talk of any European matter without a sneer, they just can't. Some of it seems to be a military thing, I think they are trying to impress their war decorated fathers by continuing hostilities without the shooting, but what other psychological weirdness is going on I have no idea. 

And your point about Australia is a non sequitur, it's just a silly childish thing to say so I can't be bothered to address it.

Nobody dreads a great outcome you utter womble.

There isn't going to be one though. Even the most Orwellian of the truth twisters who sold you this glittered turd are now basically limiting themselves to catchy little offerings like: 'adequate food', 'get ready for customs declarations' and 'we'll break international law'. It's the most dismal and complete implosion of a nation and still cheered on by a third of its brainwashed jingoistic voters.

I want to see you back here in March proudly proclaiming no deal is what you wanted all along. And again next March when Johnson's successor has been back to Brussels on bended knee to start mending what you've all so ignorantly wrecked.

When the dust has settled there should be a terrible price to pay for those who've so appallingly mislead us.

jk

Go on, give me a break. What tangible, genuine changes have occurred or you are expecting to happen after Dec 31st that will mean life is better for you than it would otherwise have been? You'll get up, stretch your arms and say 'Well thank Goodness I don't have to salute Angela Merkel anymore; I'm not being forced to eat croissants; the government is giving me my share of the £350 million a week we're saving;  none of my taxes are going into shared scientific projects, planet saving nonsense or supporting democracy.'

I'm absolutely fascinated. 

Eh?

For clarification I’m no huge fan of the EU. It’s a hugely flawed political structure. But rather that than the alternative we’re being offered, IMO.

Labour is nowhere near being able to win an election and form a government and there isn't going to be an election until 2024. There's no reason yet to suspect the tories won't win that too. Next year might change that but I have my doubts.

I agree Labour should just steer clear of all this now, let the Conservatives own it. It will create space for the lie of 2021 that 'Labour could have stopped this' but there we go, lies on lies on delusional lies, that's brexit for you.

Don't count on it. A proper renegotiation will take more than an electoral cycle to see through so while a decent chunk of brexit voters are still able to top up the tory vote vote it's unlikely not to be scuppered by another single issue government.

We're out, there is no way back, the union will disintegrate and our relationship with the EU (and political reality) going to remain a totally dysfunctional for the rest of our lifetimes. This is now unstoppable and as we'll see, essentially about looting state assets Soviet style and rolling back the reach of the state out of health and individual welfare.

jk

Well then, you’ll be disappointed.  We can’t function as an advanced economy without some deals with the EU and we will eventually have them.

Of course, there will be a period of chaos and downward adjustment of expectations for some years before we get back to some more or less tolerable accommodation.  It’s just that it will be considerably worse than what we have now.

Totally worth it though, apparently, although so far literally no-one has been able to explain to me why.

The list of the ways no-deal brexit (NDB) make us poorer is extensive you already know most of them, but essentially we are making trade more difficult with our biggest trading partners.

I cannot forsee any scenario that NDB makes us more secure. It creates more barriers to the sharing of intel between police forces for example.

We are not a big nation. The only way the likes of China or the US will pay serious attention to our needs is if we are part of a bigger bloc. Brexit will not make us more influential on the world stage.

Our domestic politics are a mess, and using brexit as a pretext, there has been a concerted attempt to shift power to govt and away from the courts and parliamentary scrutiny so brexit is making us less "free". In terms of sovereignty, we will end up trading this away to strike the FTAs (that we already had through the EU) so whilst we gain something initially we'll end up somewhere like we are now - for instance the much trumpeted FTA with Japan has more stringent rules about state aid than the EU.

Health, education etc are domestic affairs and so are not benfitted by NDB, although the economic impact of NDB will inevitably mean those areas will have less money spent on them - hardly a brexit bonus

So when Graeme says "We will not be richer, more influential, free-er, better educated, more equal, healthier, have more opportunities or even be happier." I would agree. You may be happier because you've got your NDB, but unless I'm missing something major, it will be shit for the majority. I really don't get why that makes you happy.

There's no way back from here. We won't recognise and own our deception so any and all negative consequences flowing from brexit must in fact stem from the EU. The EU in any form can't therefore possibly provide a solution.

A big bloc of brexit voters have to die before we can seriously talk about going back but that'll take maybe 15-20 years, time enough it'll involve going through all this pain again unpicking treaties and relationships we've become economically reliant upon. We've learned the cost of that or at least we will have by the time the coming decade is out.

jk

Quite right.  But it would be best to deal with them one at a time after we have properly left.

Can anyone explain to me the reasoning behind the EU claim to fish in UK waters ?

The EU is basically a trading cartel which involves making trading within the block easy while discouraging trading outside with tariffs, In spite of having been a member for over 40 years we still do more trade outside the block than in. I other words, we are paying a very large membership fee in order to make most of our trading position more difficult. And you can't see any logic in leaving?

Oh god please tell me you've not been this stupid all along. Can you not understand the difference between an individual making a choice with consequences and them making that choice for everyone else?

Not that moving to Oz would cost you your rights in the EU as one of UKC's sadly banned loud-mouth 'expat' brexiters proved upon his return.

jk

The 'why' was always in a particular political philosophy and in money terms win win for the main leadership of that group. To me that has always been a very clear logic, its just not the logic that political leadership sold to the voting public. The EU does interfere in a few ways that a significant minority of voters don't like... the trick was to hide all the benefits of that interference, invent bogus new problems (like banana bendiness) and so trick enough others to get to 50%. That most will suffer in these grand european games is little different to what used to happen in the glory days of empire, as typified by WW1 cannon fodder. I'd also remind everyone it's not just the UK cutting off its nose to spite its face, if we end up with no deal this week. Compare the EU negotiation team concerns on rules with the really serious anti-democratic change going on in Poland or Hungary, let alone Italy's rule breaking over the decades or even Germany where the entry into the Euro put it an unfair competitive advantage from the beginning. The EU is faulty but its way better for most in the UK than being under the unconstrained full control of a popularist tory leadership trading under WTO rules.

Well Francois apparently can't say anything, he's vanished. Hopefully he's currently being turned into a gigantic red white and blue independence day firework with an annoying whine we can blast out over the channel at the stroke of midnight. Who knows, maybe he'll resurface to cut the ribbon on the lorry park or join Nigel shouting at the French from a clifftop photo op. Maybe not. No loss.

jk

From a position of profound weakness and distress? Could you expand your reasoning here please.

Because their members want to. In choosing to leave you gifted them the the upper hand so now they can and they will demand what they want. If we cut our nose off over fisheries our finance and advanced manufacturing industry will up sticks to the EU anyway. Win win. We the taxpayer (at cost to other priorities like health, remember that £350M?) will end up subsidising, farmers (because we need food), fishing villages (optics) and bribing multinationals behind closed doors to maintain a token presence or keep this plant or that open for one more product cycle (remember Nissan. Do you know what they got?).

Also sharing fisheries just makes sense, they're seasonal, shoals don't respect borders, a bigger pooled resource makes conservation work easier (without decimating or carrying a fleet/town with subsidies), we export what we catch and visa versa.

I think fishing rights is one area in which the EU are overreaching. What is most infuriating about the fishing issue that it is, in economic terms, so inconsequential. A squabble over fishing rights which results in the whole arrangement tumbling down will represent a hopeless failure on both sides. 

But "outside the EU" encompasses 167 separate countries. All of which are further away and most of which are considerably less well developed, so I would disagree that EU membership is making our trading position more difficult.

They wish.  Do you not register the panic.   Unfair competition, level playing field, border controls, etc.

Exactly.  Is complete endless surrender the answer ?    Do you want to be in that sort of club anyway?

Are they offering equal access to the rest of their fisheries ?    I don't think so.

Can you name a few logical reasons?

We do twice as much trade in windows and doors than the fishing industry is worth!

It's a red herring   The real issue is lack of progress in the other areas. There is no way the  EU or even France will dump an incredibly valuable deal over fishing; leaving no fishing access at all to UK waters rather than a deal that is less good than they would like. It's no good short term for UK fishing either: we export most of our fish to the EU even with our unfair looking small quota.

No deal might be good for the fishing area's environment. 

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/dec/03/auditors-slam-eu-for-ma...

Where's the money for all this state aid you think they fear going to come from? The thing you dream of, the thing you think the EU fears is like the one farmer in a famine village staying plump eating next year's seed. It's not sustainable and there will be conflict when it runs out.

As for the rest of the level playing field: anti-corruption laws, environmental protections, workers' rights, health and safety, minimum wage... which bits specifically are you cheering to see cut?

Surrender? Anyway, I'd rather be in the big bloc than on the margin being squeezed. I think in a year's time most of those who voted to get trampled, will in the brief moments of honesty they allow themselves, agree. Farms everywhere around here had brexit boards up in 2016. Fu*ked now aren't they.

They don't have to now, you saw to that. That's what the EU was doing for us, it gave us an equal footing in negotiation, now undermined.

jk

In spite of the barriers created by our membership of the EU our trade with these countries has recently been rising more rapidly then our trade within the EU. There is every reason to expect that this increase will continue when we leave.

Which eventually is a net benefit to the EU over offering terms we will easily agree, if talks collapse we inevitably come back weaker in a year or two to rehash much the same negotiations. In the mean time business and investment migrates while we can't. You don't have to like it to see it's worth them pressing their advantage. Countries don't have friends.

jk

They obviously aren't doing a very good job of discouraging trade outside the block when four of the top ten exporting countries in the world are in the EU.

http://www.worldstopexports.com/worlds-top-export-countries/

It would have been five out of the top ten except for the UK under the Brexiteers, doing a world-class job of not exporting and falling to place 11.

Conservatives don't do state aid.

The EU have to survive without us to fund them and are scared we will carry on as normal, while they demand more money from EU members.

None.

Pull the other one, it's got bells on it.

Nobody with any grasp of what's about to happen is scared we'll carry on as normal. Carry on as normal is way beyond best case expectations.

So what's the point? Which bit of 'brexit' makes us more or even just equally competitive despite all the additional barriers we've put up?

jk

If we don't have a FTA with a country, then we trade with them on WTO rules. The EU does not create any barriers to trade with 3rd countries.

There is no reason that trade with non-eu countries wouldn't continue to increase had we remained in. 

No. It's very clear they know they have the upper hand, moreso with Biden's win. I do see the Daily Express headlines on my news feed so I'm aware of why you might thing that way, but it is complete b*llocks.

Compromise is the answer, it always is when it comes to trade deals.

No, they are offering access the the EUs energy market, which the UK is desperate for. You won't read that in your favoured rag but here's a link

https://www.rte.ie/news/brexit/2020/1016/1171941-brexit-energy-negotiations...

'The EU have to survive without us to fund them and are scared we will carry on as normal,'

Organisations are only 'scared' in that sort of context in the most febrile imagination of Daily Express  or Daily Mail headline writers. Do you really think that's how the world works? Why use such a silly word that has connotations and values associated with it - it's the wrong word to use. You're like IDS, you can't refer to the EU or anything it does without using words that convey value judgements, irrationality and loathing.

I'll tell you how frigging scared they are. Every phone call, every Zoom meeting, every summit the UK and Brexit will be on the agenda - though further and further down with each passing month - and the negatives from the EU point of view - the loss of funds, and trade, the end of scientific, educational, security, environmental cooperation etc - will be discussed with regret, they will discuss how best to deal with them, like grownups do, and move on. Grownups don't do 'scared' until the tanks are massing on the border (or, possibly, gunmen start taking  potshots at hard borders where it was promised there would be none.)

Yes I tend to agree with you. However my concern is that when the sh*t hits the fan, the Tories and their media buddies ( thankyou murdoch) will just claim all the problems that will no doubtedly come up, will be because of Covid and absolutely nothing to do with brexshit.

I think you will find I use minimal and factual language.  I do not insult, swear, or hate.  Just try to make my point.  Compare that to your language and that of many other posters.

The Tories hate the EU for the same reason they hate the Scottish Parliament.   They both take power away from London and therefore from the coterie of public school, Oxbridge, landowning and banking families that run the English establishment. 

They also provide an example of modern and superior forms of government to that provided by the Tories and their mates at Westminster and make it harder to preserve the myth of English exceptionalism and rationalise historical bullsh*t like the monarchy and aristocracy.

'I use minimal and factual language. ' You don't even know when you're not doing it.

'Scared' is a value laden word with only negative connotations, straight from an Express or Daily Mail headline; there's any number of other words you could have used instead (not that I believe your point anyway.)

Are you really a climber ?

I said scared of.  Would you have preferred worried about ?  Does it matter ?

Whereas you state tories are (mostly) venal, corrupt, none too bright, selfish, ignorant, atavistic and deeply unattractive,    Negative connotations there, or what.

How long do we have to wait before these trade deals with other nations on better terms than we had in the EU (or would have had if we'd remained) outweigh the costs of brexit?

When these trade deals come up with the goods, you'll have an argument. Not looking good is it? Until then, it's complete bollocks, and the outlook now is that's going to remain the  case for the foreseeable future. So no, because I don't believe in fairy tales or the virgin birth or magic trade deals that don't exists, I can't see the logic. 

No.  Here's why.

1.  First of all, our membership covers a whole lot of benefits other than freedom from tariffs, as even you must know.  And, even leaving aside a balance sheet of what we gain vs what it costs us, I happen to think that being part of the EU is valuable for cultural, scientific, philosophical and strategic reasons other than just trade.

2.  You are obviously right, in total we export more to everywhere else that to the EU.  However, the EU is by far our biggest single export market.  It would be astonishing is it were otherwise given that it's a huge single block with a unified set of rules that we already adhere to.  And it's only 20-odd miles away. 

EU: $294B

United States: US$72.6 billion (15.5% of total UK exports)

Germany: $46.6 billion (9.9%)

France: $31.2 billion (6.7%)

Netherlands: $30.3 billion (6.5%)

China: $30 billion (6.4%)

It's important not to underestimate non-tariff barriers like safety and consumer standards, frictionless borders.

The there's the other side of the equation; imports.  Again, unsurprisingly, the EU is the biggest origin of our imports by miles, and again, it's currently frictionless.  Why in God's name would we want it otherwise? 

Imports

EU: $374B

DE: $85B

US $67B

CN $65B

Of course, both export and import restrictions will kill our car industry, for instance.  Large scale manufacturing is an international business with components and assemblies crossing the channel multiple times to produce a complete car.

3.  All this stuff about being in the EU stifling our export markets is bollocks.  Don't you think the reason we don't do more trade with the US might be at least partly because it's quite a long way away?  As part of the EU, we traded with the US on WTO rules.  After we leave... we will trade on WTO rules.  A free trade agreement with the US is (a) years away, (b) even post-Trump will come with some pretty unpalatable strings attached, especially for our farmers, who will be in bad enough shape when their access to the CAP ends.  Plus the issue with drug prices and the NHS.

Germany doesn't seem to think they are unreasonably constrained in their exports to the US.  How come they can do it when apparently EU rules prevent us? 

This one sentence shows the idiocy of right wing trolls.

It is simply wrong, internal trade is and always was secondary to, if not merely a tool to achieve, greater peace and cooperation across Europe.

Not understanding this despite 40 years of membership, instead considering everything as zero sum economic transactions was one of the reasons why the UK was such a troublesome member, and why its negotiators f*cked up so badly (in particular after May spelled out her red lines).

CB

I'm glad you made that point, I was beginning to flag!

They own a significant proportion of the fishing rights to our waters. When the FIFG was introduced in 1993,the cost of the quota's was met from EU funds and from national governments. The UK government chose not to cough up its share, so the UK fishermen were left at  disadvantage when bidding for fishing rights , and sold them to the (largely) french and spanish fishermen, who had received both pots of funding. The French and Spanish are as a result dead set against being excluded from waters they have paid for to fish in by those they paid for that right.

Note also we have signed an agreement with the Norwegians that allows for annually negotiated acess to each others waters, hailed by the environment secretary as historic etc. What it fails to highlight is that the shellfish caught in UK waters by Norway will be able to be sold into the EU tariff free under the EFTA arrangements, whilst those caught by UK fishermen will be subject to significant tariffs.........

The EU has trade agreements with 70-odd countries with more in negotiation, representing a majority of our trade. It is categorically untrue that our membership of the EU makes most of our trade more difficult. On the contrary, being in the EU has allowed all EU countries an advantage in trade negotiations.

The UK has managed to negotiate several of these to roll-over after we leave the EU bloc, but none are any more advantageous to the UK than they were as part of the EU. Trade with non-EU countries has increased faster than from within the EU - as it has for most of the countries in the EU - because the EU is a mature economy. However, it is still our largest trading partner and there is a long way for any other country or bloc to go before it can overtake the EU.

There may be some opportunity for trade agreements when we leave, but I would like to see a lot more evidence that they can come close to making up the loss of unfettered trade with the EU. Under Trump, the USA was an unreliable potential partner and Biden has indicated that his priority is with the EU. Either way, the US will push us to lower standards and will have a much stronger hand in negotiations. China is very reluctant to open up its internal market. India may be more open, but it is a difficult market and I don't see a trade deal leading to rapid increase in our exports there. Of course, being a much smaller market, our negotiating position outside the EU will be much weaker than it has been. At the current state of affairs, if there is no EU trade deal, 90% of UK trade will not be covered by trade agreement.

It is therefore very very unlikely that our international trade and ability to grow exports will be better outside the EU. Furthermore, I have seen no evidence or substantiation for claims that it is remotely likely that we will be in a better trading position after Brexit. 

If you can substantiate your claims, I would be willing to listen. I would like some reassurance that my job, the jobs of family and friends and the welfare of our country are not going to suffer after Brexit. I have heard nothing credible in the last 4 years though.

The endgame is disaster capitalism and some very rich people avoiding the new EU tax laws.

Sold to people under the guise of nationalism and finding someone else to blame for the austerity of the past decade.

It's all bullsh#t.

It's not idiocy, it's just cynical advertising to shore up support and keep people bought into brexit as we finally go over the edge. Keeps pressure on the government plus it's much harder to change your position in light of the January shitshow if you were on the internet a month earlier chivied into proclaiming no deal is what you always wanted and expected. That should buy government time to re-write history (it's all EU aggression and Labour's fault).

Is it coming from an ordinary brexit voting climber prompted by a pep-up media advertising drive or is this part of one?

jk

What's driving your friend to leave Dublin?

The ludicrous cost of rental accommodation?

Hopefully nothing to do with his accent?

He's Dublin born and bred, and sounds like it.

Moved over here for work many years ago, ended up back there recently after traveling for a bit but feels more at home here. Like most people home is where you find you fit best and the friends you make I guess.

The ludicrous cost of living in Dublin probably has something to do with it as well, although I'm in the London commuter belt so not exactly cheap either.

Thanks for your reply.   Are they paying us annually ?  Does all the money go to the UK government ?

Did the money come mostly from EU funds, to a large degree provided by the UK ?

Isn't that Brexitaggeddon?

That basically we are spending our time dismantling things we spent ages building, we'll then realize it's in fact shit not having such luxuries and then rejoin, for the same privileges but much less say. At best it will just cost us a billions and make the country far poorer for a decade or so and reduce opportunities for our young for a generation.

I'm with NeilH, us rejoining in some form or other in 5-10 years is a near certainty. We've already had crops rotting in Scottish fields from a lack of workers. 

You don't understand fishing do you? or the history of fishing quotas. Yet feel qualified to say it's a good thing we leave for the fishing..

We also land a lot of fish outside of British waters. We ignore our long history of doing that and just blame other countries when they do it to us. Remember the Cod Wars?

British Skippers sold off quota's to EU boats and now moan that they fish those quotas they bought legally..

That's a rational thing to hope for, for sure. For that reason, I don't think it will happen in my lifetime: Tories like IDS are batshit crazy, but if anything the more extreme and xenophobic they were last election the larger their majorities became. The tyros will have taken note.

This is probably a bot.

I'm still intrigued how an industry that represents 0.1% of our GDP is such a large part of the basis for negotiating everything else.

And suddenly seems so important to people who haven't cared one bit about it before 2016.

I completely agree. Except on the timeframe.

I think we’re looking more at 40 years. Don’t count on the penny dropping any time soon. 
 

So far what I’ve seen is that when they realise they can’t get something they use to get before, they just blame Europeans.

There were a couple of articles in the daily Mail and telegraph blaming the french government because Britons who have a second home in France won’t be able to retire in them without a visa... the comment section was full of people complaining that the french want to “punish” them...

No.  That's why I asked.

I didn't say that.   Did I ?

Yeah I almost said that. I'm not sure if its an island thing or the historic importance of fishing fleets to our coastal communities but we see it as far more important than it is. For most of the UK, apart from a few small areas of Scotland, fishing is dead or just not that important. 

This is the landings in each port. For most of England outside the SW there's just a few million quids worth. 

https://thefishingdaily.com/latest-news/uk-fisheries-administrations-releas...

Hi Vladimiir's man, How's it hangin?

There you go https://unearthed.greenpeace.org/2018/10/11/fishing-quota-uk-defra-michael-...

And those who followed like sheep shouldn't be omitted from paying some price either.

I've seen similar, what the hell did they think ending freedom of movement meant?

(I'm well aware of what they took it to mean sadly)

They are the Children of Suez

They wanted freedom of movement to end for Johnny Foreigner, not for them.  

Apparently ' No Deal 'is a good thing for the Dogging Community...particularly in Kent.

I thought you were suggesting UK waters should be for UK boats.. it's like selling your land to a foreigner and then complaining a foreigners own all the land. 

We essentially went to war with Iceland because they tried to stop us fishing in their waters, and we had no claim on their water. That's what killed the British fishing industry. We've been fishing seas well outside of our own territorial waters for over 500 years so had a massively over inflated fishery. We've fished well out into the Atlantic, even up in the Barents Sea. The US was initially found because it was somewhere to salt cod on before the sail back to Western Europe.

These boats in UK waters legally purchased the quota's from us. The British have a long history of pillaging other peoples seas and then complaining when anyone fished our own. But they bought their quotas from us. We are happy to take their money, even take their landings, yet then complain.

However it's always easier to just blame the foreigner. 

Brexit will just further complicated matters because many fish follow migration patterns and don't stop at borders. Herring are a classic example, lots are caught in UK waters but the young are found elsewhere. Mackerel has similar issues. We just cannot manage many fisheries on a single country basis. We're finally getting towards a sustainable future for fish stocks.

https://www.marmaed.uio.no/outreach/blog/fish-without-borders.html

They're a bit ill informed, then. We and France were allies, we even considered full political union!  As Churchill and the French Government did in 1940.

What strange universe do you live in where people who exercised their democratic rights should be punished because they didn’t vote for the same thing that you did?

You’ve lost the plot.

A lot of people are going to be significantly poorer, with poorer life chances, than they would have been if they hadn't voted for Brexit. No one is suggesting they are punished for exercising their democratic right, but instead just suggesting they accept some responsibility for the entirely predictable consequences. 

They won't though, it will all be down to the fault of some 'other'.

Well, I'm staggered that Johnson hasn't 'got Brexit done' with his 4pm phone call. How did the famous Boris bluster not work?

I'm thinking he might end up getting Brexit done in a way that pleases no one, certainly not the hard brexit at all costs members of his own party. It's at the stage where they will see any deal as a failure.

Of course the deal they are currently working on will still cause chaos so I'll be stocking up on some bits before the 1st of Jan!

Fred99 is suggesting that people pay a price  for following Brexit leaders. Not all the people who might be affected by the economic effects of Brexit but just the ‘followers,.

What do you think he means by that?

I think that's quite likely, basically a "in enough to not be a total disaster" and out enough to try to say that Brexit has happened.. and basically piss everyone off. We're going to spend the next few years working through each thing we lost and one by one trying to renegotiate back to what we had. 

Not years. Decades. It took 40 years to build the integration we had. It’s starting again from zero. In fact even less than zero in many respects.

I don't think he has the luxury of that though, so many members of his own side see any capitulation (or negotiation as I would term it) to agree a deal as outright failure and surrender. The fact they've been using this rhetoric is likely to come back and bite Boris on the a*se.

The other problem is he will quite happily say whatever he thinks will make people like him. He isn't trying to work out what's best for Britain from a soft or hard exit, he's trying to work out how to come out of this as best for himself.

Couple that with his inability / unwillingness to make tough decisions and I've no idea how this is going to go.

Yes, I agree that there are going to endless negotiations ,renegotiations and arguments in the coming years. No-one will trust us and more than likely, Bozo will have cleared off by then.

Its much the same from the EU perspective. For some reason the tories and Macron have decided its the industry to care about.

Always worth remembering just how many times Farage bothered turning up to the fisheries committee despite whining on about it endlessly.

I expect he means that those who voted for it should bear the brunt of the costs and the attempts to mitigate the damage should be focussed on them who werent idiots.

So, for example, those areas which benefited massively from the EU regional funds should be back of the queue when it comes to the replacements, if there are any.

I thought maybe Farage had some weird fish hangup after he got less votes than the bloke dressed as a shark when he tried to run for parliament.

'least bad' is the stage we've got to, both for Brexit and for Johnson.

It depresses me that 'our side' are still saying they expect to be able to trade into the EU without following EU regulation, when it was made utterly clear right from the instigation of the referendum that that would simply not be on the table.

I was pleased to see the BBC explain that the 'Australian option' as regularly mentioned (including by Penny Maudant in the house today) simply means WTO rules, and no specific agreement.

You’re much more generous in your interpretation of Fred99’s post than I am.

Is there any precedent for a policy of rewarding only those of the electorate who are deemed worthy according to how they voted in a referendum? I must have missed that bit of the remain manifesto.

What will happen to the large number of people who couldn’t be bothered to vote at all? 

Like I said before, he’s lost the plot.

Don't see him thinking in those terms, he's never wanted to take responsibility for his actions before, why start now? It'll be looking for a way to say he did great but it was someone else's fault.

We're talking about a man who missed 5? COBRA meetings at the start of the pandemic for no good reason.

​​​​​

True. And that someone (for Johnson and Brexiteers) will be the EU.

I thought it was perfectly reasonable to offer to buy that Arc'teryx jacket for the price I paid for my Peter Storm cagoule, but the evil, vindictive shop manager flat-out refused.

I'm not entirely convinced he's batsh*t crazy enough to want to put a full on No Deal to his name, harder to blame someone else then when it hits the fan in January. 

Easier to make a few concessions behind a shedload of bluster, sign a deal, claim he "got Brexit done" and any problems then are, as you say, down to the EU as far as he's concerned.

Then waffle a bit, recite a totally inappropriate poem badly in Latin and wander off to making £££ giving after-dinner speeches and have nothing to do with cleaning up the mess left behind.

Edit: The problem with this from Johnson's point of view is too many of his own party will see any concession to the EU as betrayal after the months of jingoism.

You have got it backwards. Its rewarding the leavers with their dream of being out of the EU.

Its odd really I thought the right were into self responsibility and yet when it comes to dealing with the consequences of a vote suddenly its reversed.

probably not best for leavers to go there really.

tough shit.

You’re as daft as Fred99.

He wants to punish people for voting for Brexit and you cannot find it in yourself to condemn him.

Instead you turn it into a rant about Brexit and how those who voted for it won’t accept responsibility.

Do you have a list of these deniers?

You could share it with the others on this forum who seem to want to visit violence and misfortune on those who disagree with you.

Completely agree. Remainers are almost by definition moderate, sensible, calm, middle of the road, clear thinking etc etc.

Martin

Because of course your nutty interpretation of what someone says has to be the right one? Rather telling.

Maybe Fred99 can tell us what he meant with his post about followers.

I could, of course, be wrong in my interpretation but I don’t think that I am!

No prob. The wiki page explains it not too badly; the money paid goes to the fishing industry directly, so not to the government; each government was expected to contribute as well; an odd arrangement of state subsidy where all states subsidised their own fishing industry......except the UK didn't.

Yes, mostly from EU funds; i had read somewhere it was supposed to be a 50/50 split, but cant find the reference, nor any other to a 50/50 split, so I assume I was mistaken in that. But no, not "largely" provided by the UK; we would have contributed to the general pot as we were net contributors to the EU, but despite potentially being one of the main beneficiaries of FIFG funds, the lack of UK govt inputs meant our fishermen werent going to receive adequate funding, sold their quotas for a quick buck, and so the money goes to the french / spanish who bought the quotas. Not ideal, but entirely self inflicted.

The CFP is a crock of sh1t generally, but the UK through its representative on the commission (Farage) and the novel interpretation of the funding requirements by the Major government have meant we managed to make the worst of a bad job.

I wouldn't necessarily agree.   I think there are as many Remainers who don't see any faults in the EU (which do exist even if we benefit more from membership than we lose) as there are pitchfork-waving Leavers.

Not voting is an expression of indifference as to the result.  You can't read any more into it than that.

Indeed.

But I was enquiring in to what would happen to these people if the electorate was going to be split into those who voted remain and those who voted leave.

Quote a single post from the last 5+ years where a single Remainer has ever said that. Just one.

And when you can't find one, come back here and quote the following: "I'm sorry, my mistake, no Remainer has ever said the EU doesn't need significant reform.'

I'm not trawling through UKC, but I certainly do know a few EU federalists who are very close to that view.  Maybe not that it's perfect, but that there is almost nothing that needs fixing about it.

Rubbish.  There are absolutely Remainers who do not believe that.

FWIW, my personal view is that I'd rather it had never gone past being a trading bloc (i.e. EEA/EEC rather than the full EU), but as it's here the choice was be in it or not be in it, and being in it seemed better on balance.

From my somewhat limited sample that’s a view held by most Europeans too. It was only the politicians who wanted ever closer integration.

I didn’t vote at the time (was travelling for work), but would have probably leant towards remain on balance. Had there been a second referendum I would have voted leave. I’m just indifferent now - at least there will be something else in the news come January.

FWIW, it's also the view held by many Leave voters e.g. my parents - they voted for the EEC as a trading bloc, but they feel they've "been had" by it progressing to a political entity they never wanted, and therefore no longer want to be a part of it.

Interestingly, the most pro-EU person I know (not on UKC) is a federalist, but it may be relevant that he's staunchly Welsh and hates everything about Westminster, so would rather an independent Welsh state within the EU, which is the only way Welsh independence would be even vaguely viable, as without membership I reckon an independent Wales would look rather like Albania.  The slight irony is that he works in England because he can't (and not for want of trying) get a suitable job in Wales.

Here's a primer on fishing quotas:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/52420116

Farage hardly went to any meetings. And then complained about what the committee did..

https://www.google.com/amp/s/descrier.co.uk/politics/brexit-nigel-farage-tu...

Whatever you might think about Brexit, Farage is just self-serving scum.  A proper nasty piece of work.

Does anyone else find it amusing the way one of the LBC presenters (forget who) keeps referring to the lorry stack thing as "Farridge's Garridge" (pronounced as written)?  Indeed, it seems to be LBC editorial policy to refer to him as "Farridge", as I don't think I've heard a single presenter pronounce it correctly.

What's neat about this is that if you pronounce both Farage and garage as most people do (Fararge and gararge), it still works.

Given that Johnson’s popularity is at an all-time low, the cynical among us might regard the latter part of the negotiations as a stage managed con. At the 59th minute of the 11th hour, our PM will return triumphantly from Europe to great fanfare with a ‘deal’. The likes of the Daily Mail, and by implication the hard of thinking, will no doubt hail Saint Boris as the all conquering hero. Popularity restored - at least until the inevitable reality of Brexit (even with a deal) knocks him and his vile chumocracy back down again. It won’t take long.

"I hold in my hand a piece of paper"... "deal in our time"...

Wanting to be Churchillian, but ending up Chamberlainian...

In that time frame if the democrats get a second term very likely there will be a trade agreement between US and EU and Brexit will look even stupider.  What little logic there was for Brexit went out the window when Trump lost the US election.

It's also about access to waters - boats from EU countries were fishing close to the UK for generations before the EU was even invented.  Because a lot of fish in the English Channel aren't popular in the UK UK boats never put much effort in compared to their European counterparts and thus lost out massively when quotas were shared out - there were fewer boats catching fewer fish than their European counterparts.  The French fleet especially spend a lot of time working as close as the UK 6 mile limit, so to lose access to half the English Channel, Western Approaches and Irish Sea would result in a tremendous lack of fishing opportunities for them. Thus the EU has asked for a gradual withdrawal of its fleets from access to 'UK' waters and quotas over time in order to allow the fleet to naturally contract to match the fish available.  The UK want them out straight away, which is not how 'grandfather rights' are normally dealt with.

Indeed, and one of the reasons is that from next year, the Norwegians will be expecting to be negotiating access to UK waters as described upthread. Its going to be bloody busy out in the north Sea!

But not necessarily in any UK fishing port......

But my understanding is that Australia participates in Regional Trade associations, so it would not be equivalent to an Australian deal. Our equivalent with that would be having no deal with a bloc in another part of the world.

We should be referring to it using the names of any countries not involved in any trading blocs .....

But where is honesty in all this?

Look at this map, the white countries in particular, to see where we are being taken by the traitorgang

https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/region_e/rta_participation_map_e.htm

before you call me a socialist madman let me tell you I supported Ted Heath wholeheartedly

Punishment is deserved by those who do us harm, not by those who just have a different opinion and the thugs who lied to take power have harmed us and will harm us with the shite they have induced idiots to vote for

Are you presuming that the UK will forever trade under WTO rules or is that merely a temporary position until trade agreements can be negotiated?

As for punishment - it would be a very dangerous road to go down.

I

Frankly when I said the ringleaders should pay a terrible price I was quite cross and thinking of the gibbet. I've calmed down since, I'd settle for transportation to a rotting Southern Atlantic whaling station, leave them to go full Lord Of The Flies on each other. I'd spare the duped.

jk

I think a bilateral agreement with Norway was agreed a few months ago, coming into effect on 1 Jan 21.

That’s very magnanimous of you.

It'll take 30+ years of solid work to rebuild what you wrecked whether by turning back to Europe or by building a strung out web of connections to the Pacific, part empire nostalgia, part grasping at Asian coat tails. Either way many of us won't live to see England break even.

jk

You seem to be saying that it is not too difficult for nations within and without the EU to trade together. That is a powerful argument for leaving - why then do we need to spent billions on the cost of EU membership.

As we’re dealing in hypothetical situations -

how about -

Brexit is the disaster you predict it to be and Labour sweeps to victory in the 2024 election with a rejoining the EU manifesto.

The EU accepts the UK back into the fold subject to it meeting all of the EU’s criteria.

 The UK accepts.

Total time out of EU about 10years max.

So it's not so much the Australian deal as the Somalia deal?

Of course it's not too difficult, nor is it any surprise that EU nation external trading is so strong. One of the primary roles of the EU is to club together to establish mechanisms and deals to achieve precisely that end. Deals we've been benefiting from hugely and which we won't be able to replace now that we've taken our ball home.

That's not what I am saying at all.

I'm saying that the claim we can do more trade outside the EU is total and utter bullsh*t.

The EU has a huge array of trade agreements built up over decades which we currently take advantage of.

It is far easier for non-EU countries to trade with the UK while we are EU members.  Once they figure out how to import/export/qualify products for the EU they have access to 28 countries.  Twenty eight countries at once is a f*ck of a lot less hassle than dealing with one medium sized country on its own.

You and your fellow brexit voters will never own the consequences of your choice so Labour won't win offering to reverse it while you're still voting.

Anyway, while the Conservatives hold the leash on Scotland Labour faces an almost insurmountable hurdle in 2024 whatever corrupt hell this government inflicts upon us.

There is politically no way back to the EU for Britain, not for generations. It simply isn't possible in the toxic aftermath of 2016 that we would accept institutions like the Euro, the ECJ, that we would pay our way properly without a discount and there is no way in hell the EU would have a troublemaker like us back without full buy in. Add to that we'd have to dump the transatlantic trade deal we'll doubtless eventually get tangled up in and that will prove nearly as painful as brexit once we're fully adjusted to it.

You made a one off nearly irreversible choice. The one way back was by demanding accountability, ensuring the brexit you got was the one you were sold but you refused that.

There will be no UK, it's done, brexit destroyed it. You need to think about England now when you're looking to the future. Scotland and maybe even Wales could be back in the EU by the 2040s. NI... god help us.

I'd take a bet on 40 but neither of us will live to see it.

jk

So far as the other aspects of the EU are concerned, do we really want to end up as part of a European super-state? I believe that we can maintain excellent cultural relationships with our neighbours in Europe without losing our own national identity and without it cost us billions in budget contributions.

I don’t know where this idea of Brexit voters not accepting the consequences of their actions comes from?

I voted for Brexit and I’ll accept the consequences of that action!

Yes.

I believe that we can maintain excellent cultural relationships with our neighbours in Europe without losing our own national identity and without it cost us billions in budget contributions.

California pays significantly into the US coffers. So why not us, in a super power EU?

I don’t really want you to reply. I just want you to know that I would quite happily be Scottish, British and European. Much as Californians are Americans.

We'll see how it turns out. We seem to be making progress on replicating those agreements. In time, we should be able to go further. In the meantime, we are saving huge amounts of money which we would have spent on budget contributions.

Like f*ck we are.

🤣

No we are not. Not by a *very* long shot. Without even having left the transition arrangement yet, the cost has eclipsed *the sum* of the UK's budget contributions to the EU.

I hate to break it to you, but the UK is still paying into EU coffers, and will be for some time. 

"The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) estimates that the UK’s net spend through the EU will be £8.9bn in 2020, and that this will fall in coming years as commitments are fulfilled under the Withdrawal Agreement. The OBR estimates that this net spend will be under £7bn in 2021, falling to under £1bn in 2025. This assumes only the settling of outstanding financial obligations. The UK and EU could agree to continue payments to participate in EU programmes, for example the Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme."

The UK contributions are based on GNI, so you will be pleased to know that as GNI is reduced, as per Treasury modelling, so will the UK contributions. 

Classical right wing revisionism.

FFS just read what you sign up for before actually signing. 

This goes for joining the EU (see the preamble to the Treaty of Rome, 1957), as well as for the legally binding WA agreement you signed on the way out, or the treaty of Lisbon signed by the UK government some time in between.

However, reading comprehension does not seem to be the strength of right wingers worldwide,.

Your internal market bill to protect your glorious sovvinty, innit,  just proves you cannot trust Tories as far as you can vomit.

I, for one, think that a United States of Europe is a logic end-point.

We sure will. I for one will be delighted by your apology when it comes.> 

Hahahahahaha. wtf?

When you finally come out of that k-hole, you're going to be very very disappointed with what reality looks like. It's not what is going on inside your head. Sober up, man!

You don't think he actually believes any of the crap he's being paid to spout, do you?

Postman pat believes it, he's genuine. I must be missing something because I don't understand the incentive of promoting this point of view here at this stage, for money, and getting laughed out of town. 

FTFY

Inland revenue says £7.5Bn cost of extra paperwork and that's probably not the half of it because it isn't just tax and customs forms.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/hmrc-brexit-transition-busin...

Yes, I don’t understand this fear of the amorphous superstate.  I don’t see much evidence of the Germans, French and Italians losing their cultural identity just because they agree on some common sense rules on standards and how to behave.  
 

What is the source of this massive inferiority complex that Brexiteers have?  You’d think they’d relish the chance to boss the French and Germans about - which would be much easier from inside the EU if we are so obviously brilliant.

This misrepresents the EU federalist position. They argue that there is plenty structurally wrong with the EU as it is and that the solution lies in further federalization.

So:

Indecision in foreign policy => move towards QMV on foreign policy

Lack of democracy => move towards less power for the Council and more for the Parliament

Euro stuff => move towards a full currency union with debt sharing etc

But economy and politics cannot be separated that easily. If you want a single market, you require a formal structure in which the rules for the market are decided in a way that has a democratic mandate. Also the market has a boundary. This boundary needs to be controlled for the market to function. Therefore there is an EU border force.

It was, announced sept 30th by George Eustace, the environment secretary. Allowing Norway, a nation with tariff free access to the EU market, to fish in "our" waters in competition with UK fishing boats who will have significant tariffs applied to their exports of the same goods.

I'm not absolutely certain this was very well thought through, in the context of not screwing our fishing fleet over again.

There isn't one. If any of them had bothered to actually look, rather than swallow what was written in certain popular media outlets, they'd have seen that we had quite a significant influence on how the EU operates. 

That would be a bloody brilliant outcome; if it can be decided on quickly, then we could retain much of our manufacturing, and finance industries; but greater than that, it would inevitably spell the end of the hard right of uk politics, and the loss of much of the media who have perpetuated the lies that led to this point.

Unfortunately, the hard right, and their puppet press are hugely influential in the UK. It would take an almighty reset of the mindset of a large part of the UK population.

I don’t want to be governed by Westminster. I don’t want to be governed by my local council. I don’t want to be governed by my immediate neighbours. I don’t want to be governed by anyone further than 6 inches from my face......etc etc

As much as I’m Scottish and understand the independence debate, getting smaller just isn’t the way to go. Unless you want to play in the junior playground. Which is ok until the big kids walk in and start bossing you around.

If Brexit turns out to be even half of the shit show that some are predicting might that be what it takes to alter the mindset of some or a large number of the population?

I read it more a continuation of the existing agreement where the UK fleet currently  fishes in Norwegian waters(and them in UK waters) and will after 31 dec 20, nothing changes.  They are sharing existing quotas or tariffs as before. 

Not sure of what existing arrangements are, but this allows for annual renegotiation of access into each others waters; its certainly being sold as a new thing, and as a result of our ability to do things "independently" as a result of brexit. So I suppose there is every possibility it is being oversold, and may well be an extension of something already in place.........or more Tory lies, as some may choose to frame it.

Edit; They may well be sharing / renegotiating existing quotas, but the tariffs cant be shared. The imposition of tariffs on UK exports to the EU is a result of brexit; the norwegians can export tariff free under Efta.

... and a desirable one as well.

CB

That would be a welcome corollary, but i fear for the chances of this ,as the necessary proportion of the population have taken their info from the influential media (Mail, Torygraph etc)

Exactly this.

CB

I don’t. It would be economically disastrous for Southern European economies and as I’ve said further above I don’t think your average Joe in the street has any desire to see it happen.

Some EU politicians might like to see a United States of Europe, but voters won’t. Given it would need unanimous consent from member states and euro scepticism is growing in some EU countries I just can’t see it happening.

Why would a German taxpayer want to be responsible for Greek debt (even if in reality they already are)?

Why would a Greek exporter want to be locked into the Euro for ever?

And probably the thing that’s guaranteed to sink a  United States of Europe, why would Hungary and Poland want to have French/ German laws?

At some point something like gamma fluorescence or some other quiet corner of Physics is going to let people build fusion bombs without access to fissile material, which is the main gatekeeper used to withhold fusion devices from most nations.  In general the march of physics and engineering driven weapons technology continues, and recent events don't give me much confidence in the world's ability to resist a deliberate biological weapon.  The advances in the bioscience that led to a record breaking vaccine development program over Covid are a foundation that goes both ways.    

I'd rather the world was globally federated before we get to the next world war.

Things aren't looking good for either bottom up or top down federation these days.  

Not something I would ever support, and I would absolutely vote "leave" if it looked likely to be the case.

What I want from the EU is a trading and freedom of movement bloc, not homogenity.

Unlikely. It will all be the fault of somebody else. The nasty EU for being mean to us.

Not exactly. Food and drink aren't included in their free trade agreement. But they have precise tariff free quotas for a few products. Fishing is reciprocal, but there are quotas and tariffs on some sea food, as well as compensation agreements. Norway didn't want to pay into the Brussels slush fund and instead directly pays into their development fund and projects for poorer nations. 

This is it precisely.  Technical trends shape history.  We can no longer afford war as a way of settling disputes between nations and technology is becoming so complex and specialised that it requires global workforces to develop and global markets to sell into.

That means we need to develop larger trading blocks like the EU and we need to strengthen global institutions like the UN.   The Brexiteers and Trump are on the wrong side of technical trends which means they are on the wrong side of history.

They are dicking about with last century's politics when technology is putting us on the cusp of revolution in artificial intelligence, genetic engineering and space exploration.

Exactly. I always saw the EU as a (faltering and wobbly) step on the road to this. I didn't vote Remain for economic reasons. I wish the visionary and idealistic arguments had been made much more forcefully - but I think both sides of the debate appealed much too frequently to people's wallets. Hard to keep any sputtering flame of idealism burning in these wintry days.

I think it's just rallying the troops to reaffirm loyalty to, and identity with, the project. A wave of chest thumping noise will make it easier to twist the government's arm not to compromise in the days to come and recent public reaffirmation of support makes it harder for individuals in the mob to turn on a paid-for majority government in the aftermath of January.

It could be vocal support organically re-surfacing as we get to the short strokes but if I wanted the hardest of hard brexits and had money to spend I'd be whipping the voters up, reconnecting them with brexit. If I was a brexity media boss with an eye on the future recriminations I'd be looking to write history now while I had control of it, to create the impression of clear ongoing public support right up to the point where they hoof us off the cliff.

jk

Why is being part of a superstate idealism?

It sounds like a dystopian nightmare to me.
 

Being governed by someone you have very little in common with, with no chance of getting them out of power. It’s all awful. I think if the remain camp had put this argument forward leave would have won by a landslide.

Sounds like the UK since 1979?

Yeah but then you end up with civil wars and "rebellions" which can be far more bloody.

I would have my doubts about a Federal Europe when looking at the US and how it is still heavily fractured and divided despite having a far more homogenous starting point.  Unless you have a strong identity before merging (eg Germany or Italy) then dealing with the tensions is very hard unless you spend a century or so crushing the individual identities (eg in many of the French regions).

 For someone who is desperate to take Scotland out of the UK (even before the Brexit farce) I'm going to call you a liar here.

Or would you care to explain how breaking up the UK is "developing a larger trading block"...

If I was in scotland I'd vote for independence now and join the EU. Any argument for the union has gone.

I've told this story before - last year I was talking to a farmer friend who had voted to leave but was definitely getting twitchy. I was extolling all the advantages of the EU other than the economic ones, when he said he'd never heard those arguments before. Bit hard to believe.

Why?

That's just little englander. That's how the US works, separate states in a federal government.

A-ha; thanks for info. Makes sense from their point of view....

It pretty obviously means he thinks Scotland should be in the larger trading block of the EU rather than the smaller one of the UK. 

Many people in Scotland agree.

Will it change yours?

If all we've warned of comes to pass and the outcome is more wealth transfer/looting, awful suffering and national diminution will you hold your hands up on here, accept you were duped and commit tireless effort to rectifying your mistake? Will you balls. You'll bleat on about EU aggression, metropolitan remain supporters or Labour undermining the one true glorious brexit, you'll blame our calamity on covid even as all around recover ahead of us. You'll do this because you'll be told to and you'll listen because it's easier, less painful that accepting the truth.

You already set your judgement aside and voted for an IRA supporting Communist to keep your project alive, does she really represent who you are, your values? Don't tell me after all that you'll hold your hands up and admit it was all a terrible mistake, to do so would make you a truly extraordinary example of our species, it's just not how we work.

jk

Possibly. But I seem to recall that he was campaigning to break up the UK even when the UK (and, by definition, Scotland) WAS part of the EU.

We're not governed by others. In a democracy we are the ones who are self-governing. Growing the concept of nation by wider Federalism is simply growing our constituency. We still have votes, but it becomes that much harder for malign movements to get to wield power in a much larger election as the number of voters they need to hoodwink grows considerably.

Another aspect of pooling some of our sovereignty that's often overlooked is that, in return for us having less chance of behaving as a country in selfish and universally unpopular ways, so too are the other Federal member states constrained to rein in behaviours that we and others would find objectionable (e.g. the EU's current issue with Hungary and Poland would be far easier to resolve in a Federal EU.) This would make for a much more secure Europe and is in everyone's interests.

Little Englander? Really?

To me that suggests you’ve learn nothing about how the majority of Britain’s view the world over the past 4 years.

I think the desire not to be governed by an Italian for example who has a completely different worldview to you is completely understandable.

It amazes me that people still wonder why remain lost when remainers are happy to call anyone who doesn’t want a pan-European superstate a “little Englander”. 

Only if you think Italians and others have "completely different worldviews ", which is a bonkers thing to believe  and well described by Little Englander.

Please provide some substantiation for this claim. I have already outlined above how it will be extremely unlikely to replace the loss of frictionless trade with the EU (and other trade deals). Stop and think about what it would take to do so.

Well, no. The cost of Brexit now far exceeds our annual contribution to the EU*. In a couple of years it will exceed all the contributions the EU has ever made. And that seems to be just the economic costs and does not include the extra spent on replicating EU institutions (e.g. customs, standards agencies, agricultural subsidies...)

*https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-01-10/-170-billion-and-countin...

Welcome to Scotland under the Tories.  Not voted for since 1955 and laying down the law about when we will be permitted to have a referendum to kick them out.

The EU on the other hand, is not a superstate it is a community of nations which you can leave if you choose to do so.  It is not dominated by one state with 90% of the population and votes.

That is the next job at hand: Get rid of the Visegrad traitors, starting by freezing them out of funding until they leave voluntarily or change their tune.

The same applies to them as to the UK:

Look at the f*cking treaties before you sign up, and try to understand the words if your tiny Brexiter or Fidesz/PIS brain offers sufficient reading comprehension.

Going back all the way to the Treaties of Rome the EU and its precursors were not, and were never meant to be, primarily an economic block or free trade area. This was already the case in the 1970s.

I hope the EU negotiators will bang that concept in your head when you will eventually apply to rejoin.

If you are only interested in internal market access, fine, but then you will have to play by the rules of that market 100% (FoM, ECJ supervision, nonregression and dynamic alignment of standards, etc. ....).

CB

It's not even the costs to the state of duplicating institutions which are the worst problem - although they are bad enough.  It's the cost to industry of needing to deal with 28 governments with different regulations instead of one regional block.

What else would you call it?

You believe people just a few hundred miles away have a completely different world view. It's a fear of different people who are very similar. 

Shetland is culturally probably more different than london and many european cities.

Personally I'd have no problem with an Italian heading the tier of government covering high level interactions between states and the bloc's interactions with the wider world. I'd hope it was one I'd voted for of course but if not, in a functioning democracy we get another say soon enough.

It's not as if she'd be deciding whether green bin collections start in March or whether the park needs a second poo bin.

jk

There are a few border shops where norwegians shop at to stock their freezers up, when returning from holidays.

Norway does run its own cap scheme too, arguably more generous than the eus, but it does have higher welfare expectations, so things like antibiotic use are one of, if not the lowest in Europe. It's likely part of the reason there are tight quotas on meat and diary sales, it's back to the subsidising industries and equal market place thing!!  

I’d call it the majority view in the UK (and in Europe for that matter).

Why would you want to be governed by someone from a random European state, even if they did share your views, when you could be governed by someone from the UK?

No one wants a pan European state (except maybe the Germans and the French) - see https://yougov.de/news/2017/12/28/ein-drittel-der-deutschen-fur-vereinigte-... if your German is up to scratch.

Your views are supported by approximately 10% of the of the UK I.e. you’re in a tiny minority.

Ah, but Somalia uses the Shilling as currency, a fine upstanding currency unlike those filthy newfangled Euros. How can it fail to be an economic powerhouse? Perhaps by abandoning decimalisation and returning to l.s.d post Brexit we too can rule the waves again.

There's probably only two or three EU states that would do a worse job of governing Scotland than the English.  Odds are it would be an improvement.

But that is not how the EU works.  It is 28 sovereign countries each of which can leave if it wants and which have a veto on many areas.

That was branded "project fear", I believe.

I’m not arguing against the EU, I just don’t agree that the idea of a fully federalised Europe is a good thing.

You might like the idea of an independent Scotland being governed from Edinburgh, but you’d probably be less keen on being part of a United States of Europe and Scotland being governed from Brussels, which some of the other posters seem keen on.

I would prefer to choose a leader on their merits rather than nationality. Anyway, one of the attractions of Scottish independence is to escape a broken political system which can give nothing but a straight choice between Boris Johnson and Jeremy Corbyn.

Yeah; much better to have proper British, incompetent, venal scumbags and unelected autocrats ruling us, eh.. ? Until the unelected autocrat says something mean about the girlfriend of one of the incompetent, venal scumbags, that is.

I feel so in control of our national destiny now that we've taken back control.. 

I refer you to Rob Exile Ward's reply at 18:45 Monday.

Is a fully federalised UK a good thing? If so, why?

I don't mind you personally deciding to take a running jump off Beachy Head (and I wish you would).

But I object to you tying a rope to other people who don't want to follow you over the precipice.

This is nothing like trying a beef-burger one day at the takeaway, and changing your mind to have a Hot Dog the next. It's more like having a peanut butter sandwich and forcing everyone else to have the same, even if they're allergic and it'll kill them - and then not only not giving a damn about their fate, but actually revelling in it !

Because you aren't governed by another European country.. if that is your understanding of the EU as an adult that is horrific.

I think you're behind the times, Corbyn is no longer in the position you refer to - thank God.

I was thinking about the last general election.

I have no idea whether it is a good thing or a bad thing although like many of my generation I lean towards the latter. This is because at the time of voting to join we were lied to and grossly mislead. We were told we were simply voting for a better trading relationship.  That was all.  Over the years we were gradually drawn into closer political ties and union and all of this at some cost to UK fishing, agriculture and other industries.  We were never asked and therefore by implication this was done without our consent. It's hardly surprising therefore that we specifically, as an age group, are highly suspicious of both the EU and UK politicians in this regard. I think the worst we can be accused of is being naive at that time.

Al

That is precisely the argument my Dad (who is not thick, nor particularly racist) uses - they were sold one thing in 1970-whatever, which became something that wasn't what they voted for.

Which backs up my idea that a series of mistakes have been made (which could have been fixed along the way, but for whatever reason weren't) which led to this as the climax.

Indeed, given that they *did* vote for the EEA (EEC), an EEA/EFTA based Brexit (Norway model, sort of) would probably be fine for the majority of Leavers, other than the real right-wingers who aren't in the majority.  I could even have been convinced to vote for that.  So how have we ended up here?

Interesting question.

For emotive reasons I’d say yes it’s a good thing and I consider myself to be British not English, but when I rack my brain (I haven’t racked it too hard, so don’t read to much into this) with my English hat on the only real advantage I can see is defence I.e. somewhere to park the subs and having limited land borders with other nation states.

From a Scottish (or Welsh/ NI) perspective I guess it depends on whether you value the economic benefits of being part of the UK more than the desire to be self governing. 
I’d like Scotland to remain part of the UK, but it’s not the end of the world if they leave (I certainly wouldn’t want to prevent them striking a free trade agreement with the rest of the UK).

Replace a few bits of text and that reads as though you’re talking about the UK.

I wouldn't mind federalising the UK, indeed I think that's the only even vague chance of Scotland staying (though Wales won't secede, however much Plaid Cymru bleat).  It would also solve the issue of England being the exception, by separating English MPs from federal MPs.

Equally if Scotland really wants to secede (and I think it will), that's for the Scottish people to decide.  It was never really a comfortable part of the Union anyway.  That can be done without excessive animosity - they managed to split Czechoslovakia without a massive war, at least.  Scots, particularly our very own Braveheart ( ), need to remember that quite a lot of people in England think that Bozza is a tw*t, too.  Certainly I have a lot more respect for Sturgeon than I ever will for him, particularly over the handling of COVID.

So a relationship more akin to the current EU? Sounds fair enough to me. Interestingly the only argument I can find for not leaving the UK is defence. Interesting that the politicians seem incapable of picking up on this.

Would you care to substantiate your claim? Most industries and people benefited greatly from being in the EU. Please be careful not to assign blame to the EU for UK policies or business practices.

Al, you say we have been drawn in closer without your consent. What is it, specifically, that you object to being drawn into? Environmental regulations, standards, worker protection? I'm just trying to understand what it is exactly that Brexiters, or just EU-sceptics don't like about the EU - to the extent that they see leaving as better.

I’m really starting to worry about you now.

Is there any particular code that I need to decipher this post or shall I just take it as one of your anti Brexit rants that often wishes harm on someone else?

Not real harm of course because you’re not like that, are you?

Brussels is never going to be a super powerful capital city for the EU.  It's a medium sized city in a medium sized country.   There are many cities in the EU with far more economic and political power than Brussels.   The very choice of Brussels as the administrative hub shows an intention not to become a centralised super-state and the principle that the EU is a 'bottom up' structure with sovereignty in the member states who choose to cede some of their powers to the EU.

This is the reverse of 'devolution' in the UK where the very word is about Westminster retaining final authority and allowing the regions to exercise some of its powers but able to be overruled or have powers taken or given at will.

The best constitutional outcome for the UK would be for Scotland and England to be independent nations within the EU with an additional co-operation treaty for aspects above and beyond what are provided by the EU e.g. some aspects of defence in a similar way to Canada and the US.   The key difference between this and a federal UK is Scotland can leave any time it chooses and there is no majority voting on policies where one country has 90% of the population and always wins.

And that was what the EEC was at the time, and for most then what it would remain. So you weren't lied to.

Subsequent steps that brought about the European Union were assented to by a (mainly) wildly popular Conservative government and prime minister operating with a strong mandate from the British people.

Were you ever asked about NATO membership? After all, British governments there were agreeing to be ready to trade Birmingham or Portsmouth and their entire populations (I taught English to a Russian chap once who in his youth had driven an SS-20 carrier and asked me to show him on a map where Portsmouth is. When I asked why, he said "our missile - sometime we point at Portsmouth sometimes at Cherbourg... It was USSR time, ha ha!") to defend West Berlin.

Over the last couple of decades I would say that's not really true anymore. Follow the lobbying money for instance - it all goes to Brussels now, as the EU institutions have become about the most important regulatory authorities in the world - surpassing the US ones. Changes in the governance structures within the EU account for this.

I thought that it was generally accepted that UK fishing had taken a big hit, the fleets were decimated.  Agricultural policies seemed to favour the French and the larger UK farming enterprises while small farms struggled although I can't really provide hard evidence of that. Similarly with business.  Organisations that were big enough to cope with increased rules and bureaucracy thrived whilst smaller businesses went to the wall. German industry thrived whilst UK industry was allowed to languish.  This is of course based on my perception of what was happening in front of me and not a deep analysis of events. I think it would be very difficult to compare economic benefits and losses and I was not blaming the EU per se. My reluctance to fully endorse it are however based on democracy and politics rather than economics.

Al

'I thought that it was generally accepted that UK fishing had taken a big hit, the fleets were decimated.'

Yes, we fished the whole world (and over fished at that) and had a much bigger fishing fleet than was sustainable if we were to sustainably fish our own shelf seas.

The EU had very little influence on the decline of our fishery.

OK I'll settle for mislead.  I also accept my own, and many others it must be said, naivety at the time in these matters;

As was Brexit so we presumably changed our minds. So why is the one mandate acceptable to you and not the other?

Al

Evidence please.

Al

I don't like commissioners rather than elected officials making and proposing laws and elected officials approving or disapproving behind closed doors. I don't like that if I disagree with the direction those commissioners are heading, policy wise, I can't directly influence or get rid of them.  It's too tenuous and remote for my liking. Simply stated it's not my idea of democratic.

Al

Because the second one was predicated on lies.

Dispute with iceland in the 70's

Selling off our quotas in the 90's / 00's.

any evidence that it was the EU?

Read cod, selling quotas, cod wars, this is common knowledge. We went to war with iceland because they tried to close their grounds. The fish weren't there in other areas. Look at the graphs of cod stocks. Blaming the EU is ludicrous.

https://www.sustainweb.org/news/jan19_frc_briefing_fishing/

https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms1013

https://britishseafishing.co.uk/the-cod-wars/

That's not really evidence that it wasn't the EU but as I can't provide evidence that it was lets agree to a draw. With regard to lies the whole thing, since the early 70's,  has been predicated on lies.

To be clear I'm not blaming this on the EU as an institution, I blame successive UK Governments. I fully appreciate why the European countries want an EU and are endeavouring to "federalise" it, it's simply that I do not want to be part of it in that guise.

Al

Its 2 examples that are entirely independent of the EU; against your absolutely nothing. You'd be getting away very lightly if I accepted a draw. So i won't. And no it hasn't been predicated on lies since the 70's. That only really started with the ERG and the right wing media, strongly featuring a certain A.B.deP. Johnson.

Which is a choice I respect, if not agree with, nor understand. You are one of the few people I have come across who have simply said "I just dont want to be part of it" without coming up with stupid excuses / reasons.

'I fully appreciate why the European countries want an EU and are endeavouring to "federalise" it'

Do you? Why's that then? I think it's a fair question.

There was no fish left.. we had a fleet which fished the world. That's what caused our decline. There's no participation awards here, you are factually wrong.

At best we could have a few more ships but cod stocks dropped to more than 99% of historic values, check the nature paper, so how can we have as many fishing boats..

Some atlantic stocks were 0.33% of historic stock levels. You cannot fish those grounds anymore. 

Exactly!

We will have downgraded ourselves into an extremely small club of nations

Putin could not have done it better

Thanks for that.  I'm not denying the other factors but it is my recollection that the CFP allowed huge fishing boats from France and Spain to "over fish" our waters at the expense of our fishermen and introduced legislation that forced fisherman to throw back perfectly good fish because they did not meet some EU criteria that seemed illogical at that time.

Please bear in mind that I am recollecting media reports at that time and consequential perceptions not articles written in retrospect. It is also of little consolation to those fishermen who lost their livelihoods that it would all be OK in the long run.  That may well prove true of Brexit.

It's a good job it doesn't work like that then

Have a read of this - you might learn something

https://europa.eu/european-union/law/decision-making/procedures_en

What possible justification could you have for imagining Brexit could in any way be ok in the long run? Absolutely every shred evidence seems to suggest we'll be worse off in virtually every respect, and it's really only a question of to what extent it will be worse.

Because most of the member countries suffered under occupying forces at one time or another and never want to see that again. The UK wasn't so our cultural back ground is different added to which we are an island country and have a different mindset. 

A couple of items from today's news:

"Vocal Brexiter Sir Jim Ratcliffe vowed to make new Grenadier 4x4 in Bridgend but has now bought car plant at Hambach"  https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/dec/08/ineos-boss-opts-to-build-b...

"With a Brexit deadline just days away, Britain's biggest car plant "will not be sustainable" if there is no deal, Nissan has warned."  https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-54986195

With fishing, it does seem to be very muddy waters as there are so many contributing factors and other have mentioned some above. I've tried to make it out myself but it's very complicated. Some of the factors contributing to the decline of the EU fishing industry are, as far as I can gather:

In the 60s and 70s, most of the UK's fishing fleet were deep ocean - we didn't fish as much in our more local waters. So when the quotas were dished out, French and Dutch and others got a relatively large slice. Then Iceland banned foreign fishing within their 200 mile territorial waters and won the cod war. This left many of our fishermen in the lurch.

Fish stocks are declining so quotas across the EU have been reduced. This was necessary to prevent complete collapse. 

British fishermen sold a lot of quotas to other European nations.

The UK has not stood up for the fishing industry. Note Farage not attending the European Parliament committee.

So it's not clear to me how far the EU is really to blame. Not anywhere near as much as our own government I reckon though.

Al seems bitter and twisted in his recollections.  There was endless debate during the 60s (I had current affairs prominently in our education from 1964 onwards, aged 8 and I read the newspapers delivered to our house and watched the news (mainly to see the space race).  There was endless mention and consideration of the EEC and us joining and what the future might hold. As an avid Tomorrow's World viewer I was a bit surprised when they had features telling us about the European way of doing things and VAT etc instead of technology.   Even comedy programmes like Hancock got references in.   You'd have to assume we were all newly hatched in 1973-5 to think it was all suddenly foisted on us.

It was my first adult vote apart from voting for Heath in an election and I'm still glad I voted as I did and unless you were a sun reader exclusively for your information you'd be untruthful to say it was all a deception.

All EU policies have to be passed by both the Council (made up of national leaders or ministers) and by the parliament (elected directly by the EU electorate). In the council, for some matters, each country has a veto (admitting other countries (like Turkey!) or agreeing trade agreements (like with the UK). In others, there is qualified majority voting where at least 55% of the countries representing at least 65% of the total EU population must agree. It's quite a high bar and requires cooperation and consensus for anything to be passed. Somewhere around 90% of the time (I've seen varying figure), the UK was on the side that won.

So if you don't like how it is going, you can use your vote in EU parliament elections AND in which party you want in the UK government to represent us in the council. As with any democracy, your vote is diluted by the rest of the population.

Also, this doesn't happen behind closed doors. It is all out in the open. It's just not reported by the majority of the media in this country - unless it involves bent bananas.

There has been a lot of misinformation and negative propaganda in the UK press about the EU for 30 or more years. With such a big organisation, there are many ways it could be improved but when you look a bit deeper into how the EU operates, it is not even close to being as bad as it has been portrayed.