Brexit

[Jack Staff]

anti democratic ?? So it's the remainers, the judges, business leaders, her own party members, her own cabinet members. Where is this overwhelming majority you keep banging on about?

I don't recall ever using the word "overwhelming".

In a democracy a majority is enough. Even if it is just one. And it was rather more than that.

[Mervyn and Trish]

Ah so now I understand your highlight and see the principle you are advocating. As established by the EU. And espoused by Mrs Krankie in Scotland.

If you don't like the outcome of a referendum you have another one, and another, and another, until you get the result you want.

[Jack Staff]

Ah so now I understand your highlight and see the principle you are advocating. As established by the EU. And espoused by Mrs Krankie in Scotland.

If you don't like the outcome of a referendum you have another one, and another, and another, until you get the result you want.

Yes, it's called democracy.

[oldbluefox]

.....................or if you whinge long enough and hard enough you may get what you want. Just saying..........

[Jack Staff]

.....................or if you whinge long enough and hard enough you may get what you want. Just saying..........

It's our turn. Brexiters have been doing it for forty years. Then when they get their chance, they just blame everyone else for it going wrong.

[barney]

I blame just one person Jack and that person is our PM. She wanted the job and has failed to deliver.

[Stephen]

We are either in or out, that's it, no compromise. And as the majority are f the country voted OUT, then that is how it must be otherwise what was the point of the country voting.

[Jack Staff]

I blame just one person Jack and that person is our PM. She wanted the job and has failed to deliver.

Yet again I am forced to agree.
But I also think the job was/is impossible (I'm sure we will revisit this point).

Your comment started a train of thought however.
Got me to thinking the blame lay with the appearance of the career politicians (specifically the Blair/Cameron/Clegg clones) who only cared about there own position. But Blair must have been an OK politician, he won three terms and Cleggy still talks sense (to me at least).
So it must have been Majors fault for not stomping on the 'Barstewards' back in the 90's.
But at that time the barstewards were being stirred up by ridiculous stories in the Telegraph, written by a certain Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson:
“I was sort of chucking these rocks over the garden wall and I listened to this amazing crash from the greenhouse next door over in England as everything I wrote from Brussels was having this amazing, explosive ­effect on the Tory party – and it really gave me this, I suppose, rather weird sense of power,” he told the BBC years later.
So I think my vote for real blame for wrecking the country goes to our ex Foreign Secretary for the last 30 years of damage.

[Jack Staff]

Femi:
"OK, now I am saying this as a joke, but still... Maybe Brexit did just save the NHS... "

[towny44]

Jack, you are beginning to ramble, either lay off the booze or take a cold shower and remember we voted to leave the EU, and hopefully we will.

[Jack Staff]

Jack, you are beginning to ramble, either lay off the booze or take a cold shower and remember we voted to leave the EU, and hopefully we will.

Not watching the news then?

[barney]

Femi:
"OK, now I am saying this as a joke, but still... Maybe Brexit did just save the NHS... "

I'm as much for Care in the Community as the next guy , but there are limits

[oldbluefox]

But Blair must have been an OK politician, he won three terms

Blair won two elections having promised a vote on the EU which he then reneged on. And whilst on the subject of the NHS it was he who pushed through PFI, a policy which has crippled the NHS throughout the country and will do so for a good many years. We won't mention Iraq!!!
Major (the deluded one who pushed for citizens' rights but omitted citizens' responsibilities) doesn't get off scot free either. He was the clown who dreamt up PFI in the first place. And who can forget his infidelities despite presenting himself now as a paragon of virtue with his Remainer ideals.
Major, Blair, Clegg - what a disastrous trio they are, representing the worst of the political elite. I wouldn't believe anything which came out of their lips.

[Jack Staff]

But Blair must have been an OK politician, he won three terms

Blair won two elections having promised a vote on the EU which he then reneged on. And whilst on the subject of the NHS it was he who pushed through PFI, a policy which has crippled the NHS throughout the country and will do so for a good many years. We won't mention Iraq!!!
Major (the deluded one who pushed for citizens' rights but omitted citizens' responsibilities) doesn't get off scot free either. He was the clown who dreamt up PFI in the first place. And who can forget his infidelities despite presenting himself now as a paragon of virtue with his Remainer ideals.
Major, Blair, Clegg - what a disastrous trio they are, representing the worst of the political elite. I wouldn't believe anything which came out of their lips.

The question was who was to blame. May inherited the situation (but has made it worse).
Blair won elections, so therefore we was a good politician (like him or loathe him). They are all politicians so none rate very highly in my book.

But it was Boris who has worked on the current debacle for three decades. Purely for his own advancement, with no care for the country or its' people.
He is the one who should shoulder the real blame for what is happening to this country now.

[oldbluefox]

I was commenting on your comment that Bliar had been an OK politician. He thinks he was/is but history shows he was far from it. This is further underlined by his tenure as a Middle East envoy. Boris does not begin to compare with him. Pity you choose to ignore the mess Bliar created and then left behind for Brown to sort out.

[Jack Staff]

I was commenting on your comment that Bliar had been an OK politician.
He thinks he was/is but history shows he was far from it. This is further underlined by his tenure as a Middle East envoy. Boris does not begin to compare with him. Pity you choose to ignore the mess Bliar created and then left behind for Brown to sort out.

Blair won elections. The primary purpose of a politician. That's it.
I mention those politicians only to give a sense of the timescale of Johnson duplicity.

We can talk about Blair if you wish or the failings of other politicians of antiquity, but I do not think it relevant to this topic.

Does take the focus off Boris saying the "Brexit dream is dying" however.

[Mervyn and Trish]

I wouldn't deny our politicans on all sides have been extraordinary in the way they've got their knickers in a twist over this as they put personal and party ambition above the stated will of the people.

By a clear majority (note I am not saying overwhelming or any other such extreme adjective, but it was clear) the electorate who could be bothered to get off their backsides voted to leave the EU. Any who couldn't be bothered have no basis to gripe. And I for one was very clear that meant leaving the EU and all its institutions, including the single market, the customs union, the jurisdiction of the EU courts etc. The question was simple enough.

The mystery to me is why we and the EU are shilly shallying about. According to both the IMF and the World Bank, on 2017 figures, we are the fifth largest economy in the world, the second largest in the EU. For a brief time I believe France was above us because of the fall in the £ and because these numbers are calculated in $. But we are now back to fifth. We are the closest major economy to the rest of the EU, with a land border to one country and a rail link to another. We offer services particularly, as well as some manufactured products, which are world class.

If we were not in the EU and had never been in the EU they would be falling over themselves to do a trade deal with us. They would not be insulting us. They would not be saying we can only do a deal if you adopt all our laws, join our customs union, accept free passage of our citizens to your country, whether they have a job or not, and where they can claim benefits, free education and free healthcare paid for by those who have lived and paid taxes here all their lives. That will not be part of any trade deal they do with the US or Australia, so why should it be with us?

So here's my idea. Let's agree an immediate trade deal with tariffs, but let's set those tariffs at 0%, with agreement that can be adjusted my mutual consent in the future. Let's agree they can reject any of our goods which do not meet or exceed their quality standards, and vice versa, on a sector by sector basis, and each based on our own laws. But let's assume for now all are acceptable, which they have been and will be until either they or us change our standards.

How hard can it be, if they had the will? Of course it will require leaders such as Angela Merkel to stamp on Juncker and his fellow bureaucrats, the classic tails trying to wag the dog, protecting their own interests and careers. But it should be simple if only they'd get on with it and various people on all sides in the UK didn't keep giving them the idea that if they make it hard enough we'll scrap the idea of leaving anyway.

[screwy]

I wouldn't deny our politicans on all sides have been extraordinary in the way they've got their knickers in a twist over this as they put personal and party ambition above the stated will of the people.

By a clear majority (note I am not saying overwhelming or any other such extreme adjective, but it was clear) the electorate who could be bothered to get off their backsides voted to leave the EU. Any who couldn't be bothered have no basis to gripe. And I for one was very clear that meant leaving the EU and all its institutions, including the single market, the customs union, the jurisdiction of the EU courts etc. The question was simple enough.

The mystery to me is why we and the EU are shilly shallying about. According to both the IMF and the World Bank, on 2017 figures, we are the fifth largest economy in the world, the second largest in the EU. For a brief time I believe France was above us because of the fall in the £ and because these numbers are calculated in $. But we are now back to fifth. We are the closest major economy to the rest of the EU, with a land border to one country and a rail link to another. We offer services particularly, as well as some manufactured products, which are world class.

If we were not in the EU and had never been in the EU they would be falling over themselves to do a trade deal with us. They would not be insulting us. They would not be saying we can only do a deal if you adopt all our laws, join our customs union, accept free passage of our citizens to your country, whether they have a job or not, and where they can claim benefits, free education and free healthcare paid for by those who have lived and paid taxes here all their lives. That will not be part of any trade deal they do with the US or Australia, so why should it be with us?

So here's my idea. Let's agree an immediate trade deal with tariffs, but let's set those tariffs at 0%, with agreement that can be adjusted my mutual consent in the future. Let's agree they can reject any of our goods which do not meet or exceed their quality standards, and vice versa, on a sector by sector basis, and each based on our own laws. But let's assume for now all are acceptable, which they have been and will be until either they or us change our standards.

How hard can it be, if they had the will? Of course it will require leaders such as Angela Merkel to stamp on Juncker and his fellow bureaucrats, the classic tails trying to wag the dog, protecting their own interests and careers. But it should be simple if only they'd get on with it and various people on all sides in the UK didn't keep giving them the idea that if they make it hard enough we'll scrap the idea of leaving anyway.

[Jack Staff]

I wouldn't deny our politicans on all sides have been extraordinary in the way they've got their knickers in a twist over this as they put personal and party ambition above the stated will of the people.

17,410,742 is not "the people". Especially when 16,141,241 stated specifically it was not.

By a clear majority (note I am not saying overwhelming or any other such extreme adjective, but it was clear) the electorate who could be bothered to get off their backsides voted to leave the EU. Any who couldn't be bothered have no basis to gripe. And I for one was very clear that meant leaving the EU and all its institutions, including the single market, the customs union, the jurisdiction of the EU courts etc. The question was simple enough.

The vote was illegal.

The mystery to me is why we and the EU are shilly shallying about.

On what? They are still waiting for May to state what she wants. It has taken her two years to come up with something that only lasted 48 hours. Even if her cabinet could have held together, that 'deal' was rejected by the EU two years ago.

According to both the IMF and the World Bank, on 2017 figures, we are the fifth largest economy in the world, the second largest in the EU. For a brief time I believe France was above us because of the fall in the £ and because these numbers are calculated in $. But we are now back to fifth. We are the closest major economy to the rest of the EU, with a land border to one country and a rail link to another. We offer services particularly, as well as some manufactured products, which are world class.

If we were not in the EU and had never been in the EU they would be falling over themselves to do a trade deal with us.

But we wouldn't then be the fifth largest economy then, would we?

They would not be insulting us.

I am not aware of any insults, can you provide evidence please?

They would not be saying we can only do a deal if you adopt all our laws, join our customs union, accept free passage of our citizens to your country, whether they have a job or not, and where they can claim benefits, free education and free healthcare paid for by those who have lived and paid taxes here all their lives. That will not be part of any trade deal they do with the US or Australia, so why should it be with us?

I can only assume you have not yet grasped what the EU actually is, or you would not ask that.

So here's my idea. Let's agree an immediate trade deal with tariffs, but let's set those tariffs at 0%, with agreement that can be adjusted my mutual consent in the future. Let's agree they can reject any of our goods which do not meet or exceed their quality standards, and vice versa, on a sector by sector basis, and each based on our own laws. But let's assume for now all are acceptable, which they have been and will be until either they or us change our standards.

While you are reading up on what the EU is, check out how WTO works too.

How hard can it be, if they had the will? Of course it will require leaders such as Angela Merkel to stamp on Juncker and his fellow bureaucrats,

Juncker is the representative of the member states. He does what he is told to do by Merkel et al.

the classic tails trying to wag the dog, protecting their own interests and careers.

You spelt countries wrong.

But it should be simple if only they'd get on with it and various people on all sides in the UK didn't keep giving them the idea that if they make it hard enough we'll scrap the idea of leaving anyway.

You won, get on with it. Stop moaning and blaming remainers, the EU, experts and anyone else who does not agree with your (Brexiters) flawed plan.

[Mervyn and Trish]

Thank you Jack for your usual useful point by point analysis.

[Jack Staff]

Thank you Jack for your usual useful point by point analysis.

You're welcome.

[barney]

I think that Merv may be alluding to the comments from Juncker, Tusk and Verhofstadt about 'punishing' the UK for having the sheer audacity to leave.
Not even a Euro Nutter like you can deny that these words were spoken on record.

Obviously, at that stage they thought the whole thing was easily reversible, as previous referendums about the EU had been.

Now the penny has finally drop and the clock is ticking, it seems that it's their side of the table who are getting a bit jittery.

I'm sort of in Merv's corner in this one.
It didn't need to be like this.
A strong leader could have spelled out our terms. That would have then been negotiated in good faith and ultimately a deal done, or not.

I'm ambivalent as to whether a trade deal is done before March 2019.
If it is, good, if not, well we just leave.
Once out and a third country (their phrase) negotiations could seriously start.
If the EU side decide that don't want to trade with the UK on a tariff free basis, I'm cool with that.
We'll both charge tariffs.
If they decide that planes cannot fly into the EU, well then they can't come this way either.
And they cannot use our airspace to fly West.. Ireland will become very isolated..
The tourism industry both ways will take a big hit.
Their fishing fleet can head south instead of north.
They can sell their millions of tons of produce locally.
We'll import from elsewhere.
As someone who lived in Kent for most of my life, I know how many foreign trucks trundle up and down the M20 & M2 on a daily basis.
As a victim of many an Operation Stack, I'd confirm that the vast, vast majority of the trucks in the miles of tailback were not UK registered.

I'm amazed that UK tour firms are selling holidays for summer 2019 with no idea whether the purchaser can go.
Surely prudence should dictate that it's unwise to sell a Med holiday without knowing that the customer can get on a plane.
Maybe if there is a massive slump in bookings the minds will be more focussed.

You see Jack, it's all portrayed as one way.
All we here is how badly the UK will be hit.
All we hear is the threat to UK jobs.
The reality is that it's a two way street.

Ok I've heard the blarb about 500 million customers in the EU but the reality is that the UK is a major buyer (£70 billion +) of goods from the 27. Actually that should read goods from the top five because the other 22 are financial minnows and are sort of irrelevant.

I can take May's compromise simply because it does mean us leaving and more importantly, it doesn't tie the hands of any future Government.
Now, having said that I don't think that the EU team will buy it.

They'll be back for more, in my opinion.
More concessions will no doubt lead to more resignations.
It will end up like Corbyn's front bench of wannabees and never wasses.

[oldbluefox]

[Jack Staff]

I think that Merv may be alluding to the comments from Juncker, Tusk and Verhofstadt about 'punishing' the UK for having the sheer audacity to leave.
Not even a Euro Nutter like you can deny that these words were spoken on record.

Obviously, at that stage they thought the whole thing was easily reversible, as previous referendums about the EU had been.

Seriously, I have not heard anything. There may have been the odd off the cuff comment like Johnson's "they can go whistle" or something (they are human after all). But this is oft quoted and I haven't seen it. I really am asking!

Now the penny has finally drop and the clock is ticking, it seems that it's their side of the table who are getting a bit jittery.

Really? I thought they were just bored. True they are busy preparing for no deal (unlike us), but other matters are more important to them.

I'm sort of in Merv's corner in this one.
It didn't need to be like this.
A strong leader could have spelled out our terms. That would have then been negotiated in good faith and ultimately a deal done, or not.

Finally something we can all agree on.
In June 2016 we should have taken 2 years to decide what to do (though this has since proved inadequate), trigger A50 now, so that we have two years to tarmac Kent and leave 2020 prepared.
But that of course is ignoring the Anti Tax Avoidance Directive, and the effects it would have on Conservative party donors and Russian oligarchs. Funny how we HAVE to leave before April 2019.

I'm ambivalent as to whether a trade deal is done before March 2019.
If it is, good, if not, well we just leave.
Once out and a third country (their phrase) negotiations could seriously start.
If the EU side decide that don't want to trade with the UK on a tariff free basis, I'm cool with that.
We'll both charge tariffs.

Lets save this for another of my "usual useful point by point analysis" !

If they decide that planes cannot fly into the EU, well then they can't come this way either.
And they cannot use our airspace to fly West.. Ireland will become very isolated..

It's not a question of airspace (though that is another question).
It's things like type approval and maintenance.
UK planes fly as EU.
The US will not allow UK planes to land/fly over their territory as they have no agreement. Same with EU. Now you would have thought that people would be negotiating those agreements right now. They aren't.

The tourism industry both ways will take a big hit.

Big time! I would not want to be a Brexiter when Joe Bloggs finds out he and his mates can no longer fly to Benidorm.

Their fishing fleet can head south instead of north.
They can sell their millions of tons of produce locally.
We'll import from elsewhere.

That means we will have to eat stuff we don't like (that we currently flog to them) and not stuff we do like (that they catch in their waters).
Do you want to have to explain to Joe Bloggs that instead of a fish supper he has to eat tapas from now on????

As someone who lived in Kent for most of my life, I know how many foreign trucks trundle up and down the M20 & M2 on a daily basis.
As a victim of many an Operation Stack, I'd confirm that the vast, vast majority of the trucks in the miles of tailback were not UK registered.

Hence the new ferry services Ireland/EU. But more importantly those trucks are bringing the stuff we want, when we want it.
I would not want to be a Brexiter trying to explain to Joe Bloggs that he can no longer impress his latest 'pull' with an avocado, but will have to make do with a Bramley and then only in autumn (yes, I'm exaggerating, but I think the point holds).

I'm amazed that UK tour firms are selling holidays for summer 2019 with no idea whether the purchaser can go.
Surely prudence should dictate that it's unwise to sell a Med holiday without knowing that the customer can get on a plane.
Maybe if there is a massive slump in bookings the minds will be more focussed.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... xit-caveat In the Gwardyan, no, I didn't read it.

You see Jack, it's all portrayed as one way.
All we here is how badly the UK will be hit.
All we hear is the threat to UK jobs.
The reality is that it's a two way street.

To be honest I only really care about how hard I, my family, my friends, colleagues and countrymen will be hit.
If I am suffering, it is of little consequence to me that my European neighbours might be slightly put out.
I would not want to be a Brexiter trying to explain to Joe Bloggs that it's all worthwhile because Hans can no longer eat Walkers crisps.

Ok I've heard the blarb about 500 million customers in the EU but the reality is that the UK is a major buyer (£70 billion +) of goods from the 27. Actually that should read goods from the top five because the other 22 are financial minnows and are sort of irrelevant.

I can take May's compromise simply because it does mean us leaving

That compromise is dead. It was dead two years ago. It might please some people, but is equivalent to me informing Mrs. Staff that I will have a Maserati rather than the Ferrari.

and more importantly, it doesn't tie the hands of any future Government.
Now, having said that I don't think that the EU team will buy it.

The EU can't, even if they wanted to.

They'll be back for more, in my opinion.
More concessions will no doubt lead to more resignations.
It will end up like Corbyn's front bench of wannabees and never wasses.

Don't think so, personally. Corbyn is unelectable. May's replacement (as a Conservative) will be unelectable.
I suspect a 'Government of National Unity'.

[barney]

Most of that seemed like a reasonable counter argument, even for you Jack, then you had to go and spoil it with the last sentence.

'A Government of National Unity' ???

There is no unity in any political party, Greens apart, and only them because they only have one MP, so have no one to fall out with.
Even the dozens or so Liberals manage to fall out with each other.
I've figured out why.
It's because they are all 100% correct.

I was listening to the radio this morning and they were wondering where Labour go from here because May's white paper is pretty much what Labour's policy has been.
Can they vote it down ?
I reckon that they will try out of habit but it will pass anyway.