Brexit

[towny44]

I had a good laugh at Labour's winning candidates acceptance speech:-

Ms Forbes hailed her "significant" victory and said it showed people had "rejected the politics of division".

As Richard Littlejohn would say, you couldn't make it up.

[barney]

Read Littlejohns piece about the screamy Nazi woman at the anti trump protest.

That is good.

Not much time for his politics but he certainly is observant.

My favourite right wing journo is Peter Oborne.
You never know what he is going to come out with.
Very sharp.

[Mervyn and Trish]

I had a good laugh at Labour's winning candidates acceptance speech:-

Ms Forbes hailed her "significant" victory and said it showed people had "rejected the politics of division".

Oh how they forget. In 2015 there were protests that the Conservative general election wasn't legitimate because the Tories only got 37% of the vote. That means 63% don't want them said Labour.

So now Labour win this seat with 31%. By their own maths that means 69% didn't want them. Significant victory?

In fact if you take the maths used by some, the turnout was only 48.4%. Which means only 15% voted for them. So we assume the other 85% didn't want them. Not exactly the will of the Peterborough people.

Personally if I was running either of the two main parties I'd be seriously worried that a new party, with no party machine, no manifesto and only one policy, had achieved 29% of the vote, only 2% behind one of them (should we run the vote again?) and thrashing the other.

[david63]

One can "cobble" together any number of statistics from those results - such as the Brexit party split the Conservative vote (which it probably did) which would have meant the the Conservatives could have won.

"lies, damned lies, and statistics" comes to mind!

[barney]

And that is exactly why the remain side won the EU parliament elections David.

I quite like statistics personally. I love the way people interpret them.

[barney]

I had an e-mail from one of our suppliers last week saying that they had gone into receivership.

A bit of a nuisance but not the end of the world as it's always easier to find suppliers than customers. I have got a replacement already.

Anyway, being a Danish company, I thought I'd find out why.

They have quoted Brexit as the main reason. ????

Bearing in mind that they trade in eight or nine other European countries, it makes me wonder whether this is just a convenient excuse.

Surely our Brexit uncertainty cannot have such impact on European companies that export here.

I though that we were just some tiny backwater, on the outskirts of Europe that was irrelevant in the grand scheme.

It does appear that EU countries do actually need our business.

[oldbluefox]

In the world of the politician no matter what the outcome everybody is a winner as they twist the statistics to suit themselves. Even Anna Soubry was claiming what an encouraging result the Peterborough bye election had been. A few days later half of the 'party' quit and Ms Soubry became the leader. Everybody happy!!!
Are they really so out of touch with the electorate that they fail to understand the real reasons for their lack of success, blind to the facts, putting on a brave face or their egos so big they don't care anyway?

[Ray Scully]

snake oil.jpg

STOCKS rapidly running out after big demand from PM contestants

[barney]

I'm not totally sure that I understand your standpoint Ray.
Are you saying that it is not possible to leave the EU?

If so, what is the point of Article 50?

The EU and UK press are still talking about the WA, but the reality is it has never been agreed.

It was a proposed agreement that was rejected by Parliament.
It is therefore dead.
So, the EU saying that they will not renegotiate is irrelevant.
There is no WA.

All that is left is a managed withdrawal, no managed withdrawal or a new negotiation.

I think that the existing proposal could pass parliament with tweeks to the Irish backstop but the EU say they will not move on that.
So, it is what it is.

[Manoverboard]

I still think that the EU will move on the backstop, albeit at the eleventh hour.

[screwy]

Which eleventh hour.? There have been a couple already. No.?

[Ray Scully]

Barney are you watching Years and Years (BBC1) It's becoming to appear more credible that our current Parliamentary antics.
If not, watch it. It's far more interesting than the often regurgitated stuff on here

[Manoverboard]

Which eleventh hour.? There have been a couple already. No.?

Nope … the only real eleventh hour is the one that strikes just an hour before we leave

[Ray Scully]

Barney are you watching Years and Years (BBC1) It's beginning to appear more credible that our current Parliamentary antics.
If not, watch it. It's far more interesting than the often regurgitated stuff on here

[towny44]

There is one other major problem, all the leading contenders except Gove have been fierce critics of May's withdrawal agreement, so they will want the EU to agree to more changes than just the Irish backstop; and I don't think the EU are likely to agree to that, even at the eleventh hour.

[barney]

Barney are you watching Years and Years (BBC1) It's beginning to appear more credible that our current Parliamentary antics.
If not, watch it. It's far more interesting than the often regurgitated stuff on here

I have watched some of it Ray and you are 100% correct.
This current parliament has been nothing short of disgraceful.
All folk are asking for is a resolution.

You know my views.
I thought Brexit was pretty well over after they renaged on March 29th.
There may be some cobbled agreement but by and large, the UK will be staying in most of the EU agencies.
As Towny has often said, we would be better off remaining as we are.

[Quizzical Bob]

I'm not totally sure that I understand your standpoint Ray.
Are you saying that it is not possible to leave the EU?

If so, what is the point of Article 50?

The EU and UK press are still talking about the WA, but the reality is it has never been agreed.

It was a proposed agreement that was rejected by Parliament.
It is therefore dead.
So, the EU saying that they will not renegotiate is irrelevant.
There is no WA.

All that is left is a managed withdrawal, no managed withdrawal or a new negotiation.

I think that the existing proposal could pass parliament with tweeks to the Irish backstop but the EU say they will not move on that.
So, it is what it is.

It is at this stage that I recommend to you all the long-term offerings of researcher Dr. Richard North, spomeone who has worked at Brussels and with Farage and who has worked out that in order to leave the EU without completely trashing the economy it must be done in slow stages. The first of these is to enter EFTA/EEA and then try to change things from there. He calls this process 'FLEXCIT' and he has a daily blog on

www.eureferendum.com

You will find all sorts of views on the EU there from one extreme to the other including mine. For all that you might want to know about the EU and its workings you will find it there.

[barney]

Quite an interesting read QB, but fails to address the most significant point.
By joining EFTA, the UK would still remain under the political constricts of the European Union.

It's all far to complicated.
It clearly suits small economies such as Norway, but would stifle UK competitiveness with the EU.

A simple tariff free trade agreement would be better for both parties.

Customs can be done off site, as it currently is with most other 'third countries'

The 'problem' of Ireland still remains, but with goodwill on both sides, this should also be solvable if we ever leave.

The EU didn't and still doesn't want the UK to leave.
It's only after we have formally gone will these sticking points be resolved, assuming of course, that they require unrestricted access to the very lucrative UK market place.

[Quizzical Bob]

Quite an interesting read QB, but fails to address the most significant point.
By joining EFTA, the UK would still remain under the political constricts of the European Union.

It's all far to complicated.
It clearly suits small economies such as Norway, but would stifle UK competitiveness with the EU.

A simple tariff free trade agreement would be better for both parties.

Customs can be done off site, as it currently is with most other 'third countries'

The 'problem' of Ireland still remains, but with goodwill on both sides, this should also be solvable if we ever leave.

The EU didn't and still doesn't want the UK to leave.
It's only after we have formally gone will these sticking points be resolved, assuming of course, that they require unrestricted access to the very lucrative UK market place.

Thanks for reading it Barney. Being a member of the EEA in no way puts us politically under the EU.

Leaving the EU will reduce our competitiveness under all scenarios.

A Free Trade Agreement is better than nothing but much worse than the Single Market in which Customs do not get involved. It makes no difference whether you do customs procedures on- or off-site it's the very fact of having to do them that involves the costs. Effectively there is an extra overhead on every transaction which means that it is uneconomic to handle small trades and depending on your profit margins puts a lower limit of a few hundred pounds on any sales.

The Irish problem is greatly reduced if we were to be in the EEA. Most products would not involve any extra costs. Dr North has devoted a lot of time to this aspect.

The UK market is important to the EU but not at the cost of compromising the Single Market. We represent a mauch smaller fraction of their export market than they do of ours.

[barney]

I'll happily be corrected if I'm wrong QB, but my understanding of EFTA/EEA is that members must subscribe to the EU 'four freedoms' and take on any new EU legislation that comes in the future.
Add to that, that the UK would be expected to make substantial financial contributions as well, then it looks less and less attractive.

I'll agree that the Irish 'problem' would be reduced but then I'm convinced that this is all a bit of a red herring anyway.

Should we ever leave with no withdrawal agreement in place, I'm 100% positive that a hastily cobbled together agreement would be reached between all parties involved.
There is no way in a million years that the EU will put up a hard border in Ireland.
The UK will not, the Irish will not, so who will build and man this so called border? Germans? French?

If my calculation is wrong and the EU decided that a hard border is a must, then they will need to explain it to the Irish.

I appreciate that we represent a smaller fraction of the overall EU (combined) export market but that doesn't negate the fact that we have an almost £100 Billion trading deficit with them.
Many EU coutries will hardly notice a difference but you can bet that the big players will, particularly Germany, Belgium and Holland.

It has very recently occured to me why I dislike so much about how the EU is run.

It is because of the equality in it.

Minnow states like Malta, The Baltic States and Luxembourg roll onto the international stage, strutting their stuff and giving their opinons while taking litterally billions in subsidies.
Muscat's vote, with a voting population of 340K is equal to Macron's or Merkel's is just a bizarre situation.
With more QMV coming onto the statute, they will have the tail wagging the dog.
For instance, the majority could vote for a punitive financial transaction tax.
That would not affect them but have a major impact on the City or Frankfurt.
There would be nothing that we could do about it.

I was reading on Politico last week that there may be an agreement between warring factions in Brussels to allow Verhofstadt the job as President of the Parliament in return for allowing Weber to be President of the Commission.

That seems about right doesn't it?

[towny44]

And they complain that only 150,000 get to choose our new PM.

[Ray Scully]

Did anyone watch Liam Fox's interview on the Andrew Marr show today. It was encouraging to hear him speak to the reality that could be facing UK ltd. Got to admire him for his honesty on this occasion, better late than never.

[Gill W]

He’s probably trying to distance himself from Brexit. Self preservation comes to mind

[towny44]

He’s probably trying to distance himself from Brexit. Self preservation comes to mind

Are you thinking of starting a career writing political satire Gill?

[Gill W]

He’s probably trying to distance himself from Brexit. Self preservation comes to mind

Are you thinking of starting a career writing political satire Gill?

No, there’s no point.

Satire is no longer required when daily political events are beyond parody