Brexit

[Jack Staff]

Nothing wrong with Barney's post. He is absolutely right.

Yes he is.
But think on the implications of what he's saying.

[anniec]

Calm down Barney, you are another one who has sounded angry for the last three years. It can’t be doing you any good

I do try to see both sides of this debate, but you are sounding increasingly like our beloved Speaker

Soothing medicament?

[Stephen]

Nothing wrong with Barney's post. He is absolutely right.

l wouldn't go that far Foxy, he's been really nasty to my Theresa ....come to think about it so have you

Oi sheep sha**er, don't start picking on my mates.

[oldbluefox]

But think on the implications of what he's saying.

Absolutely. That's why I voted to leave.

[towny44]

I don't know why you include Corbyn in the role of 'saboteur'.

How about passing a motion at the Labour party conference to reject the deal before anyone knew what the deal was?

Whatever may or may not have happened at the conference - I'm convinced that Corbyn himself is a Leaver

I agree Gill but he is also after getting into number 10 whatever the cost, even if it means we its tiny Mays agreement, which is probably better than anything he could have negotiated.

[barney]

Calm down Barney, you are another one who has sounded angry for the last three years. It can’t be doing you any good

I don't think that I'm angry about it Gill, more frustrated, if anything.
Anyone who knows me would probably say that I'm one of the most chilled people they know.
The frustration is borne out of this Government's and particularly Keefy's fantasy figure, Mrs. May's inability to see through something that should have been relatively straight forward.
The mandate was to leave the EU, and by any standards they have made a total mess of it so far.

I know we cannot turn the clock back, but the problems started the day she took leadership of the Tory party.
She allowed the EU to dictate the terms, thinking that in return, she would get the deal she was looking for.
She was sorely mistaken.

For my tuppence worth, the WA and the trade deal should have been negotiated in tandem.
Then it would have become quickly obvious how far or near the two sides were apart.

A free trade deal and the use of current technology negates the need for a back stop altogether.
That could have been done by now with good leadership.

The way I see it, the EU have made very step as difficult as possible, thinking that the UK would at some stage 'come to it's senses'
They are so in love with their project,( and their gravy train) that they cannot contemplate how anyone could not be.
The penny has now dropped and the Irish have realised that they may well be hung out to dry to protect the project.
The Irish Europe minister said on Sophie Ridge on Sunday, that if there is a No Deal scenario, then the two Governments will need to come up with a bilateral agreement.
Simon Coveny contradicted this on the BBC a few hours later.
One of them must be wrong.

The point really is, no matter which way you voted and what you views are now, there was a democratic vote and the decision was made.
To deny that fly in the face of all this country has stood for, for hundreds of years.

I wasn't 18 when the last referendum was taken in 1975, but I'm quite sure that the ballot paper did not say Remain or Leave, but if you vote Remain, you are tied in forever.
Heath admitted in his memoirs that had he told the British people the truth, about future political alignment, the vote would more than likely gone the other way.

There is a mechanism for leaving and the UK has triggered it.
Common sense and logic dictates that we will leave the EU.
To what ?
Well, we'll see won't we, but leave we must.

[Jack Staff]

“The community which we are joining is far more than a common market. It is a community in the true sense of that term. It is concerned not only with the establishment of free trade, economic and monetary union and other major economic issues, important though these are — but also as the Paris Summit Meeting has demonstrated, with social issues which affect us all — environmental questions, working conditions in industry, consumer protection, aid to development areas and vocational training.” Source: Illustrated London News. Prime Minister Edward Heath, December 1972

[barney]

“The community which we are joining is far more than a common market. It is a community in the true sense of that term. It is concerned not only with the establishment of free trade, economic and monetary union and other major economic issues, important though these are — but also as the Paris Summit Meeting has demonstrated, with social issues which affect us all — environmental questions, working conditions in industry, consumer protection, aid to development areas and vocational training.” Source: Illustrated London News. Prime Minister Edward Heath, December 1972

I'm not disagreeing with any of that Jack, my point simply is that this was not common knowledge at the time.
There was no Internet then, and I'm pretty sure that the daily papers didn't carry stories of political intergration and monetary union.
My recollection (and I stand to be corrected by others) is that the UK had joined The Common Market.
A trade agreement between neighbouring countries.
Had it been a trade agreement between neighbouring countries, I don' expect that Brexit would have even been talked about.

One of my past heroes, Tony Benn, was one of the few who forecast correctly and could see the writing on the wall.
I watched an archive film of him debating with Roy Jenkins.
History has proved old Wedgie to be the one who called it correctly.

[Mervyn and Trish]

I see three outcomes now, and I think the EU negotiators do too.

A: The EU blinks first, a time limit is set on the Backstop and TM secures backing for her deal and we leave on that basis, moving on to negotiate a decent trade deal, removing the need for a backstop altogether.

B: No-one blinks. We leave with no deal. In this case the Backstop is irrelevant as there will have to be a border of some sort in Ireland.

C: We blink first and Brexit doesn't happen.

In case A, a majority of middle-ground UK will be happy, or at a minimum relieved and accepting (and we are for the most part a middle-ground country), the notable exception being the hard wing of Brexit and the hard wing of Remain. Industry will be happy, which also means the majority of EU national governments will be happy. The Irish will be happy. The EU (by which I mean the EU as an institution as opposed to the sum of its national parts) will be deeply unhappy, because they are opposed to any sort of Brexit.

In case B, the large majority of the UK will be unhappy, the exception being the hard wing of Brexit. Ireland will be unhappy. Industry will be unhappy. European national governments will be unhappy. The EU (as defined above) will be unhappy.

In case C, a large part of the UK (probably still a majority) will be unhappy, many in the UK will consider democracy to be dead, Ireland will be happy, industry will be happy, the EU will be dilirious.

So the EU is only happy with outcome C. Which dictates their negotiating stance, as it has from day 1.

[Mervyn and Trish]

“The community which we are joining is far more than a common market. It is a community in the true sense of that term. It is concerned not only with the establishment of free trade, economic and monetary union and other major economic issues, important though these are — but also as the Paris Summit Meeting has demonstrated, with social issues which affect us all — environmental questions, working conditions in industry, consumer protection, aid to development areas and vocational training.” Source: Illustrated London News. Prime Minister Edward Heath, December 1972

That still falls a long way short of the ever closer union now top of the EU agenda.

[Gill W]

Bit Rich !

If Gill is representative of most remainers then yes it is a "Bit Rich". She along with the other saboteurs have done nothing but display 'anger' at what was a democratic vote by the country.

They all need to get behind Theresa's deal or this is definitely going to end up in tears.

Thanks Keith, it's really lovely for one forum member to directly call another forum member a saboteur, especially on such a small forum as this

[Gill W]

Calm down Barney, you are another one who has sounded angry for the last three years. It can’t be doing you any good

I do try to see both sides of this debate, but you are sounding increasingly like our beloved Speaker

Soothing medicament?

I'll take that as a compliment, as Bercow makes Parliament worth watching (and I like to see what brightly coloured tie he is wearing!)

[Gill W]

Calm down Barney, you are another one who has sounded angry for the last three years. It can’t be doing you any good

I don't think that I'm angry about it Gill, more frustrated, if anything.
Anyone who knows me would probably say that I'm one of the most chilled people they know.
The frustration is borne out of this Government's and particularly Keefy's fantasy figure, Mrs. May's inability to see through something that should have been relatively straight forward.
The mandate was to leave the EU, and by any standards they have made a total mess of it so far.

I know we cannot turn the clock back, but the problems started the day she took leadership of the Tory party.
She allowed the EU to dictate the terms, thinking that in return, she would get the deal she was looking for.
She was sorely mistaken.

For my tuppence worth, the WA and the trade deal should have been negotiated in tandem.
Then it would have become quickly obvious how far or near the two sides were apart.

A free trade deal and the use of current technology negates the need for a back stop altogether.
That could have been done by now with good leadership.

The way I see it, the EU have made very step as difficult as possible, thinking that the UK would at some stage 'come to it's senses'
They are so in love with their project,( and their gravy train) that they cannot contemplate how anyone could not be.
The penny has now dropped and the Irish have realised that they may well be hung out to dry to protect the project.
The Irish Europe minister said on Sophie Ridge on Sunday, that if there is a No Deal scenario, then the two Governments will need to come up with a bilateral agreement.
Simon Coveny contradicted this on the BBC a few hours later.
One of them must be wrong.

The point really is, no matter which way you voted and what you views are now, there was a democratic vote and the decision was made.
To deny that fly in the face of all this country has stood for, for hundreds of years.

I wasn't 18 when the last referendum was taken in 1975, but I'm quite sure that the ballot paper did not say Remain or Leave, but if you vote Remain, you are tied in forever.
Heath admitted in his memoirs that had he told the British people the truth, about future political alignment, the vote would more than likely gone the other way.

There is a mechanism for leaving and the UK has triggered it.
Common sense and logic dictates that we will leave the EU.
To what ?
Well, we'll see won't we, but leave we must.

I think everybody is frustrated

For example, it's doing my head in that one of the amendments to be tabled is to have the Backstop re-written - whereas the the EU have said until they are blue in the face that there will be no re-negotiation on the backstop. It's like going round and round in circles. As you say, someone must be wrong - but we never get anywhere nearer finding out who is right.

I know we are leaving, and I have accepted that ages ago. However, that doesn't stop me thinking that a small majority in an advisory referendum, marred by lies and law breaking is a sufficient mandate to plunge the whole country into chaos for years and years ahead. (as always, I refer particularly to a no deal scenario)

It would be a gross failure of government to allow us to leave the EU with a no deal, but we are slipping there be default as nobody agrees on anything. Even Leavers can't agree with each other - Keith wants Mays deal and you hate Mays deal. It's a complete mess.

However, it should be remembered that none of this is down to members of this forum. I'll say this, I've been finding your posts quite difficult to read recently as they seem so angry, and when I see you scatter around terms like Remainer claptrap and Project Hysteria, it makes you sound like the hysterical one! That's why I tried to call for a bit of calm, but I wished I hadn't bothered really

[Gill W]

I see three outcomes now, and I think the EU negotiators do too.

A: The EU blinks first, a time limit is set on the Backstop and TM secures backing for her deal and we leave on that basis, moving on to negotiate a decent trade deal, removing the need for a backstop altogether.

B: No-one blinks. We leave with no deal. In this case the Backstop is irrelevant as there will have to be a border of some sort in Ireland.

C: We blink first and Brexit doesn't happen.

In case A, a majority of middle-ground UK will be happy, or at a minimum relieved and accepting (and we are for the most part a middle-ground country), the notable exception being the hard wing of Brexit and the hard wing of Remain. Industry will be happy, which also means the majority of EU national governments will be happy. The Irish will be happy. The EU (by which I mean the EU as an institution as opposed to the sum of its national parts) will be deeply unhappy, because they are opposed to any sort of Brexit.

In case B, the large majority of the UK will be unhappy, the exception being the hard wing of Brexit. Ireland will be unhappy. Industry will be unhappy. European national governments will be unhappy. The EU (as defined above) will be unhappy.

In case C, a large part of the UK (probably still a majority) will be unhappy, many in the UK will consider democracy to be dead, Ireland will be happy, industry will be happy, the EU will be dilirious.

So the EU is only happy with outcome C. Which dictates their negotiating stance, as it has from day 1.

Whatever the outcome, huge damage has been done. It'll take years, possibly a generation to mend this divided country.

[barney]

" Remainer claptrap and Project Hysteria"

For the purposes of clarity Gill, Remainer is the term accepted to describe a person who would prefer to remain in the EU. Vince Cable described himself as a Remainer just today.
Remainer Claptrap is what some of the Remainers speak.
Just as some Leavers spout a load of rubbish, so do some Remainers.

As for Project Hysteria. well, that is simply a couple of notches up on Project Fear.
If you had read this Sunday's Observer, you would see exactly to what I allude.
There were five separate Brexit stories, all full of coulds and maybes but very little actual fact.
Now, I'm sensible enough to realise that they are pandering to their readership, just as the Sunday Express does, in an opposite editorial.

Today's Guardian lead with Food Shortages - extract below
The store bosses warned of “major disruption” at Calais, a key route for food imports to the UK, potentially reducing freight trade by nearly 90%, as the French government has said it will enforce sanitary and customs checks on exports from the EU, which will cause long delays.


So, IF true, it is an example of the malicious nature of our 'friends' (as Jack likes to call them) in France, and a punitive act, as there is absolutely no need to check goods on export. It is normally done on import, to one degree or another.

What doesn't seem to be taken into account, is the massive impact that it will have on food producers all across the EU, who will see their precious cargo sitting at Calais for weeks, while awaiting clearance.

It's simply not going to happen and is part of Project Hysteria.

https://www.eveningexpress.co.uk/news/u ... ort-chief/
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/ ... -port-boss

Read both links and you will understand why our press cannot be trusted.
Same story.
Opposite outcome.

[Mervyn and Trish]

Whatever the outcome, huge damage has been done. It'll take years, possibly a generation to mend this divided country.

On that we can probably agree Gill. Where we may disagree is whose fault that is.

I certainly don't blame anyone who voted either way in good faith in a referendum.

I blame it on self serving Call Me Dave for calling the referendum in the first place for the benefit of himself and his party, having totally failed to grasp why large parts of the country were so angry about the EU. He could and should have addressed those concerns in a different way.

I also blame it on the EU (the institution, not Europe the continent) for failing to recognise the pressures growing, not just here but across the continent, and burying their head and ploughing on instead of considering the reforms needed to make their precious project acceptable.

I also blame John Major for backing changes to take the EU further towards "ever closer union" rather than the acceptable and useful common market it began as.

I also blame Tony Blair for encouraging unfettered immigration and multiculturalism ignoring the need for integration.

I further blame both of them for forgetting their role in creating the problem and sticking their oar in and helping to whip up dissent now.

I blame Gordon Brown for calling a woman a bigot when she pointed out the nation's concerns, ensuring that neither major party would address the concerns and opening the way for extremists.

The list goes on. Division in this country goes way back before Brexit, as it does across Europe. It's just the political elite failed to see it.

[barney]

The programme tonight on BBC 2 should be interesting.

[oldbluefox]

Whatever the outcome, huge damage has been done. It'll take years, possibly a generation to mend this divided country.

On that we can probably agree Gill. Where we may disagree is whose fault that is.

I certainly don't blame anyone who voted either way in good faith in a referendum.

I blame it on self serving Call Me Dave for calling the referendum in the first place for the benefit of himself and his party, having totally failed to grasp why large parts of the country were so angry about the EU. He could and should have addressed those concerns in a different way.

I also blame it on the EU (the institution, not Europe the continent) for failing to recognise the pressures growing, not just here but across the continent, and burying their head and ploughing on instead of considering the reforms needed to make their precious project acceptable.

I also blame John Major for backing changes to take the EU further towards "ever closer union" rather than the acceptable and useful common market it began as.

I also blame Tony Blair for encouraging unfettered immigration and multiculturalism ignoring the need for integration.

I further blame both of them for forgetting their role in creating the problem and sticking their oar in and helping to whip up dissent now.

I blame Gordon Brown for calling a woman a bigot when she pointed out the nation's concerns, ensuring that neither major party would address the concerns and opening the way for extremists.

The list goes on. Division in this country goes way back before Brexit, as it does across Europe. It's just the political elite failed to see it.

Good post Merv.
Pre the referendum there was so much unrest which was fully exploited by Nigel Farage and UKIP whilst the mainstream parties chose to ignore it.
Much as I hate to defend Call Me "We never quit" Dave he was pretty well pushed towards approving a referendum because UKIP were picking up a lot of Tory votes. He failed to realise the strength of feeling within the nation, especially those regions which had been starved of investment for so long and was confident a Remain vote would prevail.
As for Bliar he had got himself another term in office by promising a referendum and then retracting it.
The unrest goes way back before Brexit and is based on inequality.

[anniec]

Whatever the outcome, huge damage has been done. It'll take years, possibly a generation to mend this divided country.

On that we can probably agree Gill. Where we may disagree is whose fault that is.

I certainly don't blame anyone who voted either way in good faith in a referendum.

I blame it on self serving Call Me Dave for calling the referendum in the first place for the benefit of himself and his party, having totally failed to grasp why large parts of the country were so angry about the EU. He could and should have addressed those concerns in a different way.

I also blame it on the EU (the institution, not Europe the continent) for failing to recognise the pressures growing, not just here but across the continent, and burying their head and ploughing on instead of considering the reforms needed to make their precious project acceptable.

I also blame John Major for backing changes to take the EU further towards "ever closer union" rather than the acceptable and useful common market it began as.

I also blame Tony Blair for encouraging unfettered immigration and multiculturalism ignoring the need for integration.

I further blame both of them for forgetting their role in creating the problem and sticking their oar in and helping to whip up dissent now.

I blame Gordon Brown for calling a woman a bigot when she pointed out the nation's concerns, ensuring that neither major party would address the concerns and opening the way for extremists.

The list goes on. Division in this country goes way back before Brexit, as it does across Europe. It's just the political elite failed to see it.

I could not agree more, though we can thank Brown (and Balls) for keeping us out of the Euro.

[oldbluefox]

I could not agree more, though we can thank Brown (and Balls) for keeping us out of the Euro.

We dodged a bullet there, didn't we?

[anniec]

I could not agree more, though we can thank Brown (and Balls) for keeping us out of the Euro.

We dodged a bullet there, didn't we?

Didn't we just.

[Onelife]

Bit Rich !

If Gill is representative of most remainers then yes it is a "Bit Rich". She along with the other saboteurs have done nothing but display 'anger' at what was a democratic vote by the country.

They all need to get behind Theresa's deal or this is definitely going to end up in tears.

Thanks Keith, it's really lovely for one forum member to directly call another forum member a saboteur, especially on such a small forum as this

With respect Gill the word 'Sabotuers' is perfectly apt when you consider what the country has now bern forced into.  Remainers and political opportunists have done everything in their power to thwart the political process, a process of which 80% of parliamentarians voted for. 

The backstop issue could be sorted tomorrow if the saboteurs stopped giving parliament their interpretation of what the country voted for.
But of course they know by sending 'we love you messages' to the EU they are effectively telling them "we will blink first"..

Yes Barney and me do differ on what we think is the best way forward....l can't get my head around how WTO rules could work without a transition period....Unfortunately falling into WTO rules would mean we start from scratch with no transitions period and no trade deals in place, this could lead to a very protracted process with no guarantees or time frames in which trade deals could be struck. Under these circumstances l would be reluctant to go down this route especially as we would still have to negotiate our way round EU trade deals.....This l believe could be very detrimental to our countries economy stability.

There are of course no guarantees with May's proposal, indeed, if she gets her WA ratified we still have, what will undoubtedly be very difficult trade talks ahead of us...but for me it's a means to an end with economic stability which is more reassuring than what Barney is advocating....l would however prefer pain for more long term gain should Theresa's deal get diluted into some kind of customs alliance.


P.s if you think being called a 'saboteur' is bad, how do you think l feel being called a Sheep Sh*agger?

[Jack Staff]

P.s if you think being called a 'saboteur' is bad, how do you think l feel being called a Sheep Sh*agger?

Keith, you fail to understand the significance of 'saboteur' in this instance.

[oldbluefox]

P.s if you think being called a 'saboteur' is bad, how do you think l feel being called a Sheep Sh*agger?

In more elite circles it is known as sheep botherer, doesn't one know? Just saying.............

[Onelife]

P.s if you think being called a 'saboteur' is bad, how do you think l feel being called a Sheep Sh*agger?

In more elite circles it is known as sheep botherer, doesn't one know? Just saying.............

I did know that Foxy l was just highlighting what circles Stephen mixes with...common or what?