Life After Brexit

[Stephen]

Who’s going to be milk monitor today.

[Kendhni]

You win Ken I give up, your stupidity seems even greater than mine.

There's no doubting it Towny John ... we're all stupid except the ' Special One ' of course

Shame there is not an ignore button .
I find this Remoaner even more nauseating than most of them.

Never liked ignore buttons - they are only for snowflakes that cannot defend their asinine comments.
When I dig at brexitards you find nothing but ignorance, lies, and made up fairy tales, such delusion is nauseating (and probably a mental illness)
These gullible fools then get so frustrated by their own ignorance that they blame everybody else rather than inform themselves.

Maybe he’s right and the entire country will go to the dogs and the 4 million plus Eu citizens will no longer wish to stay.
Maybe he can go and join them.
Must be awful to live in a country that you obviously despise.

Point proven. I have never said any of the comments you are attempting to attribute to me.
Just your usual lies and make believe.

[Manoverboard]

Bitterness, sadly, can be such a destructive force ...

Anyhowz it's approx 26 days to Christmas and approx 32 days to freedom

[Kendhni]

Bitterness, sadly, can be such a destructive force ...

Anyhowz it's approx 26 days to Christmas and approx 32 days to freedom

Indeed, brexiteers don't like being continually proved to be liars.
But don't worry I can take it - I just expect impartial moderation .... OOPPS

PS: You need to keep up, we were 'free' (allegedly) 10 months ago

[screwy]

You obviously forgot that we’re still tied while in transition.

[towny44]

Bitterness, sadly, can be such a destructive force ...

Anyhowz it's approx 26 days to Christmas and approx 32 days to freedom

Indeed, brexiteers don't like being continually proved to be liars.
But don't worry I can take it - I just expect impartial moderation .... OOPPS

PS: You need to keep up, we were 'free' (allegedly) 10 months ago

Ken, on many other topics than Brexit you make quite sensible posts, but your apparent hatred of all things Brexit seems to cloud your judgement when you start writing.
I do not think that all remainers are ignorant nor liars, as you categorise Brexiteers, they believe that the EU is the best option for the UK and I understand many of the reasons why. The initial common market that we joined was an excellent way of improving prosperity across all member countries, unfortunately as it succeeded more countries from W. Europe joined and the original idea of a federal Europe began to get stronger in those running the EU. It was the creation of a European parliament and the extra powers that the EU's appointed leaders began to exercise on the World stage that, IMHO, changed the way I viewed the EU. I wanted the sovereignty of the member states to be paramount and as the EU became ever more Federal and the Euro was created it became apparent to me that the EU was becoming less and less an institution that I could admire.
I did not want to leave. but I certainly wanted change, and I hoped that Cameron might find support for my ideas from the northern and Nordic countries, and return with something that made staying in the EU more attractive to me, unfortunately that proved illusory. When it came to the referendum I considered long and hard how to vote, but in the end I thought that this was probably the last chance we would have to leave the EU and, although I thought it unlikely that leave would win I felt it was the right way to vote. I suspect that the Leave leaders were equally as surprised by the victory which is why I do not blame them for the slow start and possible mistakes they made in the initial negotiations, but I do believe that the EU is mainly at fault for the possibility that we could end up with a no deal.
I understand why remainers believe this was a major mistake, but I cannot accept that their actions to try and re-run the referendum were in any way democratic, and their actions had a major impact on the way Brussels handled the negotiations, leading them to believe a change of heart was possible if they remained instransigent.

[Stephen]

Bitterness, sadly, can be such a destructive force ...

Anyhowz it's approx 26 days to Christmas and approx 32 days to freedom

tenor.gif

[Kendhni]

I don't believe it .. I typed in a long concilatory reply and this f***n site timed out and lost it. So here goes again but I will reply in multiple posts.

Ken, on many other topics than Brexit you make quite sensible posts, but your apparent hatred of all things Brexit seems to cloud your judgement when you start writing.

I don't hate all things brexit, I have just never been convinced that it is the right thing for this country. In the last 4 years not a single person has been able to verbalise or provide any verifiable tangible benefit to brexit. When it comes to change the onus is on those pushing for the change to bring everyone along with them. In this instance though there has been no attempt from the brexit camp to do that.

I do not think that all remainers are ignorant nor liars, as you categorise Brexiteers, they believe that the EU is the best option for the UK and I understand many of the reasons why.

I don't really think all brexiteers are ignorant or liars, just the majority - only joking. The reality is my best mate was a very staunch brexiteer which led to some great discussions (he also loved his conspiracy theories) - sadly I really miss those discussions with him.
I just hate it when people misrepresent me - it really gets my goosy goosy up.

The initial common market that we joined was an excellent way of improving prosperity across all member countries, unfortunately as it succeeded more countries from W. Europe joined and the original idea of a federal Europe began to get stronger in those running the EU. It was the creation of a European parliament and the extra powers that the EU's appointed leaders began to exercise on the World stage that, IMHO, changed the way I viewed the EU.

As long as we accept a couple of things
1. When we joined the Common Market it was well understood what the political aspirations of the union were - that information was well publicised and sent to every household. The UK knew exactly what it was getting into.
2. I know that a few years back the media made a big thing about a federal europe, but they failed to say that the UK is basically a federal country. In fact proposals that have been included in the press are, at the minute, just people giving opinion and commentary - even those proposals do not put the same constraints on the UK as the UK already puts on its members - for example Scotland has to get permission from Westminister for a referendum - we did not need to get permission from the EU for a referendum.

I wanted the sovereignty of the member states to be paramount and as the EU became ever more Federal and the Euro was created it became apparent to me that the EU was becoming less and less an institution that I could admire.

I know sovereignty was cited as one of the key reasons for leaving but yet
1. If it was so important why has there been no debate on sovereignty? What is sovereignty? Was it really taken from us? What does it actually mean? How do we represent sovereignty to the public? How did affect us?
2. After 4 years all we seem to have achieved is some rollover trade deals. If sovereignty was so important how come we are accepting of deals on the same terms as we had. The only difference now is that, metaphorically speaking, we have removed the money from the bank and given it to the borrowers directly - we have chosen to take on that risk and absolve the bank.
3. The only real trade deal we have negotiated is with Japan (a small but significant trade deal, more so for it being the first). But yet our skilled negotiators seem to have negotiated a deal that is less than what we would have got as a member of the EU. One of the stumbling blocks to a trade deal with the EU is (apparently) the use of state subsidies, yet in the Japan deal we agreed to no state subsidies on a long list of products


Chris Patton on sovereignty
"A man, naked, hungry and alone in the middle of the Sahara desert is free in the sense that no one can tell him what to do. He is sovereign, then. But he is also doomed."



Sorry have to go out will continue later.

[Mervyn and Trish]

I don't know the truth of it as I'm not an insider and have to rely on media reports. But a number of sources are now reporting that EU leaders are leaning on Barnier to get his finger out. They see him, not us, as the block on progress. That may be unfair on him as he is not a leader, merely a trumped up EU civil servant with an inflexible brief and no wriggle room to use his initiative. However, they should have listened to me. I've been saying that for months.

[Kendhni]

I don't know the truth of it as I'm not an insider and have to rely on media reports. But a number of sources are now reporting that EU leaders are leaning on Barnier to get his finger out. They see him, not us, as the block on progress. That may be unfair on him as he is not a leader, merely a trumped up EU civil servant with an inflexible brief and no wriggle room to use his initiative. However, they should have listened to me. I've been saying that for months.

That is actually correct and has been the case for a couple of months now, but not for the reasons that some seem to be suggesting. From what I have read, some of the member states are sick of the dilly-dallying and what they see as Barnier's pandering to the UK and its intransigence, so they want someone that will take a much harder line to replace Barnier so that they can get the EU focus back on their own business.

[oldbluefox]

From what I have read, some of the member states are sick of the dilly-dallying and what they see as Barnier's pandering to the UK and its intransigence, so they want someone that will take a much harder line to replace Barnier so that they can get the EU focus back on their own business.

Not according to this article..............
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/merk ... -3lqhhnrw3

Where is the link to what you have read since I can find no evidence of this claim?

[Mervyn and Trish]

That's the tone of what I saw Foxy.

[barney]

I don't know the truth of it as I'm not an insider and have to rely on media reports. But a number of sources are now reporting that EU leaders are leaning on Barnier to get his finger out. They see him, not us, as the block on progress. That may be unfair on him as he is not a leader, merely a trumped up EU civil servant with an inflexible brief and no wriggle room to use his initiative. However, they should have listened to me. I've been saying that for months.

That is actually correct and has been the case for a couple of months now, but not for the reasons that some seem to be suggesting. From what I have read, some of the member states are sick of the dilly-dallying and what they see as Barnier's pandering to the UK and its intransigence, so they want someone that will take a much harder line to replace Barnier so that they can get the EU focus back on their own business.

Honestly, you couldn’t make it up.
The U.K. and it’s intransigence
Sad!

[oldbluefox]

If Ken is true to his word he will be able to provide the link.

[barney]

Maybe intransigence is not agreeing to all of the Eu terms?
Maybe some would call that negotiation.
Maybe some will NEVER accept the actual reality?

[oldbluefox]

I see the EU has offered to give back 18% of fish caught in British waters in bid to seal a Brexit deal. Really? If there is no deal they will get nothing. It is in the interests of both sides to seal a deal but it appears the EU are finding difficulty in conceding control. No deal will not be the best scenario but at least we will be out of the controlling clutches of the EU.

[Kendhni]

As a final bit in relation to 'sovereignty'
One of the good things about the EU was that it allowed common government departments from across Europe to be merged into a single department handled within the EU. The EU employed some 32,000 civil servants. As part of brexit we now have to take back control of about 140 governmental departments. My question on this is why has our own civil service said they will need an additional 70,000 staff to handle just these new departments (that is in addition to the 330,000 civil servants the UK already has)?

Part 2 of your post.

I did not want to leave. but I certainly wanted change, and I hoped that Cameron might find support for my ideas from the northern and Nordic countries, and return with something that made staying in the EU more attractive to me, unfortunately that proved illusory. When it came to the referendum I considered long and hard how to vote, but in the end I thought that this was probably the last chance we would have to leave the EU and, although I thought it unlikely that leave would win I felt it was the right way to vote.

I was actually the same when it came to choosing and remember standing in the polling booth with my pen wavering over both the Yes and no options. In the end I chose 'remain' simply because I didn't feel that brexit had proved its corner - and, in my opinion, 4 years on it still hasn't. But then you have to remember that real driving factor for brexit was new tax scrutiny legislation being introduced by the EU.

Cameron actually achieved quite a bit. He got concessions on most of his requests. Sadly our negative media decided to focus on what he didn't get - many seem to be under the misapprehension that the EU offered nothing.

I suspect that the Leave leaders were equally as surprised by the victory

Without doubt, they never had any plan in place for if they did win, which is why we saw the brexit leadership go into hiding for a couple of weeks immediately after the referendum - probably all waiting for one of the others to show their heads. There were even headlines in some of the papers asking 'Where is ...'.

which is why I do not blame them for the slow start and possible mistakes they made in the initial negotiations, but I do believe that the EU is mainly at fault for the possibility that we could end up with a no deal.

On this I disagree with you. Prior the the referendum the EU laid out its stall. While the brexit leadership was telling us 'we held all the cards', 'we could have our cake and eat it', 'nobody is talking about the customs union' etc. etc. the EU was saying that if you want to leave then you must actually leave ALL the institutions (leave-means-leave was actually an EU demand prior to being a brexit war cry). The brexit camp put that all down to project fear (their standard answer for everything that they did not have an answer for).

The lack of impetus was 100% down to having no brexit plan or strategy. The biggest mistake made was to send David Davies to the EU (a man that has been described by his peers as arrogant, lazy and incompetent). He then came home leaving Ollie Robbins to pick up the pieces while he explained to May that they may actually need to think of a strategy. Unfortunately their strategy was then to fall back on blaming everything on the EU instead of taking ownership of their brexit (a strategy that has served many UK politicians well over the last 40 years, when you don't want to admit to your own decisions then just blame the EU).

As Dominic Cummings said
“In short, the state has made no preparations to leave and plans to make no preparations to leave even after leaving.”

I understand why remainers believe this was a major mistake, but I cannot accept that their actions to try and re-run the referendum were in any way democratic, and their actions had a major impact on the way Brussels handled the negotiations, leading them to believe a change of heart was possible if they remained intransigent.

Personally I think any attempt at rerunning was very half hearted and was never going to succeed. However I think there was legitimate call for a rerun on such an important issue. It was obvious that both sides were using mass mis-information and outright lying to the population - and the population were soaking it up - plus there was undoubtedly outside interference. The entire referendum was an insult to informed democracy.

I even remember listening to people being interviewed as they left the polling booths and on more than one occasion Johnsons fake bendy banana story was their reason for voting to leave.

However, something to think about. One of the common pieces of misinformation used by brexiteers is that the EU asks the same question until they get the answer they want - if that is the case, and the UK is so important to the EU (especially as a net contributor) then why has the EU done nothing to retain the UK (beyond the concessions granted to Cameron)?

Johnson tried to bluff and the EU has called his bluff on multiple occasions now. In reality I believe Johnson knows that to leave without a deal will be an "unmitigated disaster" (as one brexit group put it) to the British economy and he is working with the EU to come to an agreement for the end of year. This may require the status quo to be retained on some aspects allowing them to be kicked down the road for later resolution.

It is also a lesson as to why something of such importance should never have been negotiated in public.


However we are where we are and all I ask now is that the government delivers what they have promised (both in word and manifesto). My main concerns are
1. There is no post-brexit plan for success. Johnson created a department for brexit failure but not for brexit success. I am also concerned that this government continues to play the blame game and is not taking ownership of its brexit.
2. Many government departments and industries have said that they are not ready (this year their focus has rightly been elsewhere). That means that much of the political infrastructure is not in place including many required computer systems (some of which may be years away from delivery)
3. (in a no deal situation) Inability to control our borders due to lack of intelligence
4. Now that Biden has been elected there is whole new impetus. Biden will not allow Johnson to ride roughshod over agreements they are part of. I suspect Johnson is busy trying to mend bridges he destroyed as he kowtowed to Trump and alienated Democrats (including stupid comments he made in relation to Obama).
5. The loss of Johnsons key advisors and the introduction of Carrie Symonds into the equation at such a vital point of the negotiations.
6. The cumulative impact to the economy of brexit and COVID. The government may be able to blame COVID for a short period but the public will soon see through overuse of that excuse.
7. Selling out of sovereignty in order to get trade deals.
8. Brexit has developed into a 'brexit at any cost' (something I have heard more than one brexiteer state). By the governments own range of estimates brexit will cost the economy somewhere between 2% (soft) and 9% (hard) - in monetary terms that is somewhere between £40bn and £180bn per year. The costs are totally out of control - so there will be absolutely no monetary benefit likely to be realised for at least 1, possibly 2 generations (and we still do not know what damage has been done due to assets that have been stripped out of the UK up to this point).

Some of these concerns may be unfounded, but sadly there still seems to be nobody from the brexit arena that is charged with providing answers to legitimate concerns and queries that are being asked.


Overall I really do not think Johnson has done a good job and he is not the man to drive brexit forward (PS: does not mean I don't like him).

[Frank Manning]

They really don't do themselves any favours. I saw a video clip of a German AfD MEP laying into Merkel et al over Brexit. saying that Cameron's requests were not unreasonable and that the blinkered French were pulling the strings of the EU attitude and Merkel etc., stood by and let them dictate. There must be many a former remainer, who although wanting the EU to be successful, are totally frustrated by the blinkered attitude of their organisation. They are just proving the Brexit supporters right time and time again. One of my friends is an Isle of Wight fisherman, and he was a quietly ardent Brexit supporter, but he is very concerned that our government don't understand the real issue of fishing rights. The European factory trawlers are vacuuming the seas around our shores with little care for the EUs own quotas never mind our own rights.

As for Johnson, he is the epitomy of every thing I don't like. A philandering, lazy bumbler. Who quotes Churchill when he hasn't got the intellect or imagination to construct his own words, but isn't fit to be mentioned in the same sentence, as Churchill, or for that matter Atlee..

[Kendhni]

From what I have read, some of the member states are sick of the dilly-dallying and what they see as Barnier's pandering to the UK and its intransigence, so they want someone that will take a much harder line to replace Barnier so that they can get the EU focus back on their own business.

Not according to this article..............
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/merk ... -3lqhhnrw3

Where is the link to what you have read since I can find no evidence of this claim?

Could relate to 2 different scenarios since your article is from October.
If and when I get time I will try to dig it out.
From memory I think it may have been a speech from the Hungarian prime minister backed by Macron. They felt that Barnier was giving away too much. Now I think about it was there not also a call to replace Barnier with Ursula von der Leyen in September as well (a concillatory option)?

Given Merv may be talking about something more recent we could all be talking about different incidents.

[barney]

I agree totally about Johnson Frank but simply cannot understand how anyone can seriously think that the U.K. has been intransigent.

We have agreed a no regression clause on Eu standards but that is not enough for them.
They want us to also sign up to any new and further clauses that they may choose to turn into Eu law in the future.
Why on earth would any country agree future laws dictated by a third party.
There may well be some new Eu standards that we are happy to subscribe to, but that has to be our choice, not theirs.
As Foxy has said, they are now willing to concede that we may be able to keep a higher percentage of fish caught in U.K. national waters.
How very generous.
They can’t seem to get their heads around the simple fact that we dictate that, not them.
They negotiate annually with Norway but insist on a ten year deal for the U.K.
If we get to the end of next month without an agreement, it will be very much on them , not us.

[oldbluefox]

Macron has consistently taken a hard line on fishing rights, much to the annoyance of many EU leaders including Merkel who is concerned about her car industries.

Your quote from Dominic Cummings was an interesting one. He also said "government ministers who had sought to make practical preparations for Brexit were "blocked" by officials whose priority was the "maintenance of this broken system and keeping Britain as closely tied to the EU as possible".
"Whitehall's real preparations are for the continuation of EU law and the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice,"
It appears there were plenty in government who were openly and actively seeking to sabotage the referendum result so it is hardly surprising we are where we are four years down the line.

[Kendhni]

Macron has consistently taken a hard line on fishing rights, much to the annoyance of many EU leaders including Merkel who is concerned about her car industries.

Yea, I get the feeling Macron is pushing his luck a bit - but I am guessing he has to play act to his audience in the same way as Johnson play acts to his.

Your quote from Dominic Cummings was an interesting one. He also said "government ministers who had sought to make practical preparations for Brexit were "blocked" by officials whose priority was the "maintenance of this broken system and keeping Britain as closely tied to the EU as possible".
"Whitehall's real preparations are for the continuation of EU law and the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice,"
It appears there were plenty in government who were openly and actively seeking to sabotage the referendum result so it is hardly surprising we are where we are four years down the line.

I remember him saying something like that and thought it strange that our own civil service were not fulfilling government policy. However if memory serves me right that was in reference to Mays handling of brexit. He also said something like "The government has no credible policy and the whole world knows it" (I think that was in May's day as well).

[Kendhni]

I see the EU has offered to give back 18% of fish caught in British waters in bid to seal a Brexit deal. Really? If there is no deal they will get nothing. It is in the interests of both sides to seal a deal but it appears the EU are finding difficulty in conceding control. No deal will not be the best scenario but at least we will be out of the controlling clutches of the EU.

To go for no deal based on fishing issues, would not only be the most stupid thing Johnson has ever done but it would be crassly irresponsible.
I suspect there is a bit more to this other than the headline - must have a read.

[oldbluefox]

I fail to understand why the EU are denying the UK conditions which they have so readily, and successfully negotiated to Canada and Norway.

Why are they so concerned about state subsidies from this little nation compared to their might (unless we are of course much bigger than some of our friends like to portray us and could be seen as a trading threat on the EU doorstep ). Clearly it is a more than insignificant concern.

Macron is scared stiff of his fishermen but without a deal they could lose all fishing concessions so he is between a rock and a hard place. A fishing deal is vital from his point of view but 18% should be laughed out of court.

[oldbluefox]

To go for no deal based on fishing issues, would not only be the most stupid thing Johnson has ever done but it would be crassly irresponsible.

To go for no deal based on fishing issues, would not only be the most stupid thing Barnier has ever done but it would be crassly irresponsible.

On both sides of the coin I agree.