|
Post by Audio Watchdog on Jul 4, 2017 18:57:55 GMT
Like Americans voting for Trump, Leave voters got sold a bill a goods that doesn't hold up upon closer inspection.
|
|
aztec
Chancellery Guard
Likes: 2,849
|
Post by aztec on Jul 4, 2017 19:05:29 GMT
Like Americans voting for Trump, Leave voters got sold a bill a goods that doesn't hold up upon closer inspection. I'm no great fan of the EU and voted Remain somewhat reluctantly (never considered myself European and I have no emotional attachment to the block from a cultural point of view, for me the reasons for voting Remain were entirely economically/politically based), but the Leave campaign had absolutely no convincing arguments or clear plan for what they wanted to do, and a year later it still holds true, more to the point it's unclear how hard/soft a brexit we will get (I highly doubt immigration will full at all, far from extra funding for the NHS I can only see more cuts if the economy falters, especially with the Conservatives negotiating) as different areas of the country and even different parts of the same political parties have very different points of view and needs The referendum has poisoned politics in this country, divided us rather than brought us together and massively altered, even damaged our international standing...I'm still inclined to think calling a referendum was the right thing to do as there is clearly huge discontent with the EU in this country, but the referendumwas held under stupid circumstances and I remain very angry that EU citizens weren't given a say in something that effects their future every bit it does ours.
|
|
|
Brexit
Jul 4, 2017 20:37:02 GMT
Post by charlesuirdhein on Jul 4, 2017 20:37:02 GMT
Like Americans voting for Trump, Leave voters got sold a bill a goods that doesn't hold up upon closer inspection. I'm no great fan of the EU and voted Remain somewhat reluctantly (never considered myself European and I have no emotional attachment to the block from a cultural point of view, for me the reasons for voting Remain were entirely economically/politically based), but the Leave campaign had absolutely no convincing arguments or clear plan for what they wanted to do, and a year later it still holds true, more to the point it's unclear how hard/soft a brexit we will get (I highly doubt immigration will full at all, far from extra funding for the NHS I can only see more cuts if the economy falters, especially with the Conservatives negotiating) as different areas of the country and even different parts of the same political parties have very different points of view and needs The referendum has poisoned politics in this country, divided us rather than brought us together and massively altered, even damaged our international standing...I'm still inclined to think calling a referendum was the right thing to do as there is clearly huge discontent with the EU in this country, but the referendumwas held under stupid circumstances and I remain very angry that EU citizens weren't given a say in something that effects their future every bit it does ours. The UK has always treated the EU in much the same was as it treats the Eurovision, it's a big joke but you get annoyed for some reason when you don't win...don't ask me, I didn't say it made sense. Plus no other country had the same rebates and "go your own way" leeway while inside the EU. It has its problems, it really does. But it also has some great stuff going on for it. And quite simply you can't fix what's wrong with it from the outside.
|
|
|
Post by number13 on Jul 5, 2017 11:19:14 GMT
I voted Remain but accepted that Leave won. But in the last few days I've surprised myself by moving more positively Leave-wards. The reason: noises from France about setting unified tax rates across the EU. That effectively creates a single state rather than the cooperating Union I supported, a state inevitably run by France/Germany just by weight of voting numbers (when the U.K. has left.)
Some of the smaller countries are sounding worried about blocking these ideas without the support of the U.K. in the future. There's the problem. We should be in the EU to steer it in the direction we would prefer, but why be members of a club which is always trying to drag you in a direction you don't want? Could we expect them to give us opt-outs on everything major forever, when it effectively gives the U.K. an "unfair" advantage?
I didn't want Brexit, I thought the EU might even have been moving in 'our' direction over some key issues - but now the swing is the other way and maybe Brexit is partly to blame for causing that centralising reaction - but that swing makes Brexit less unattractive - if only by comparison.
|
|
|
Post by sherlock on Jul 5, 2017 22:25:14 GMT
I'm no great fan of the EU and voted Remain somewhat reluctantly (never considered myself European and I have no emotional attachment to the block from a cultural point of view, for me the reasons for voting Remain were entirely economically/politically based), but the Leave campaign had absolutely no convincing arguments or clear plan for what they wanted to do, and a year later it still holds true, more to the point it's unclear how hard/soft a brexit we will get (I highly doubt immigration will full at all, far from extra funding for the NHS I can only see more cuts if the economy falters, especially with the Conservatives negotiating) as different areas of the country and even different parts of the same political parties have very different points of view and needs The referendum has poisoned politics in this country, divided us rather than brought us together and massively altered, even damaged our international standing...I'm still inclined to think calling a referendum was the right thing to do as there is clearly huge discontent with the EU in this country, but the referendumwas held under stupid circumstances and I remain very angry that EU citizens weren't given a say in something that effects their future every bit it does ours. The UK has always treated the EU in much the same was as it treats the Eurovision, it's a big joke but you get annoyed for some reason when you don't win...don't ask me, I didn't say it made sense. Plus no other country had the same rebates and "go your own way" leeway while inside the EU. It has its problems, it really does. But it also has some great stuff going on for it. And quite simply you can't fix what's wrong with it from the outside. Ironic thing is according to a (British) EU civil servant who gave me a tour round the European Parliament last year (that's what they do when it's on recess evidently) about 70-80% of what the EU Parliament passed was in line with Britain's interests, so we weren't even losing.
|
|
|
Brexit
Jul 6, 2017 0:12:47 GMT
Post by jasonward on Jul 6, 2017 0:12:47 GMT
The UK has always treated the EU in much the same was as it treats the Eurovision, it's a big joke but you get annoyed for some reason when you don't win...don't ask me, I didn't say it made sense. Plus no other country had the same rebates and "go your own way" leeway while inside the EU. It has its problems, it really does. But it also has some great stuff going on for it. And quite simply you can't fix what's wrong with it from the outside. Ironic thing is according to a (British) EU civil servant who gave me a tour round the European Parliament last year (that's what they do when it's on recess evidently) about 70-80% of what the EU Parliament passed was in line with Britain's interests, so we weren't even losing. The conversation at the EU had shifted, not only because of UK scepticism, but because scepticism was (and still is) rife amongst many EU nations. I suspect, indeed expect, the idea of EU wide tax code will go nowhere, or get watered down to a code about large international businesses, when it comes to the likes of Amazon, Google, Microsoft etc, it actually makes sense that they should pay a "European" tax instead of choosing which nation within the EU they want to pay taxes in (as is basically the case now). For me the biggest problem with the EU was always that it was beholden to the various governments and that was then exploited by the bureaucrats to gain power, which is not a thing a bureaucrat should have. I actually wanted a EU parliament that actually did things, mattered, and the bureaucrats would answer to, but I never expected it to really happen, because if it did, it would mean Westminster (and all the other EU national parliaments) accepting that, in certain areas at least, it was the EU parliament that had the final say. Of course, few if any government/parliament would sign up to that, so instead the bureaucrats set the direction and the council of ministers and various EU summits agreed or disagreed on how to achieve what the bureaucrats set out before them. But this of course means that the leadership of the EU, i.e. the people that set its direction and create policy have no accountability and will inevitability shape things as they feel is best and having no accountability not really care who agrees or disagrees, just care about how they get the horse trading done such that they get their way. Parliaments need to be sovereign, or at least have some notion of it, and the EU parliament has none, individual governments wield slices of sovereignty (in the EU sense) and horse trade it with other governments to agree of disagree with policies of of the bureaucracy. I can see how you could fix the mess, remove the power from the bureaucracy and give it to the elected representatives of the people, but I can't see how to sell it to the governments that would have to give up their power. I've never understood when people claim that EU is run by the Germans and they are taking power in the UK by way of the EU where their tanks and war warmongering could not. Germany may well have a lot of "votes" in the council of ministers, but it is no more in control of the bureaucracy than any other EU nation is, the bureaucrats wag the dog in the EU.
|
|
|
Brexit
Jul 8, 2017 12:52:50 GMT
via mobile
Post by ulyssessarcher on Jul 8, 2017 12:52:50 GMT
We know the Supreme Court has the final say over here.
Who or what has the final say in the EU?
|
|
|
Brexit
Jul 8, 2017 12:56:58 GMT
Post by sherlock on Jul 8, 2017 12:56:58 GMT
We know the Supreme Court has the final say over here. Who or what has the final say in the EU? Matters of EU law are determined by the European Court of Justice. Anything else is the highest court in individual countries (the UK has a Supreme Court, it just doesn't do nearly as much as the US one) except for human rights matter which can be finally determined by European Court of Human Rights (which presides over the European Convention of Human Rights, an entirely separate entity to the EU though one condition of EU membership is to ratify the Convention).
|
|
|
Brexit
Jul 9, 2017 13:03:18 GMT
Post by anothermanicmondas on Jul 9, 2017 13:03:18 GMT
I'm normally of the opinion that people should carefully listen to what politicians/governments/etc say to determine exactly what is and is not being said to avoid being taken in by half-truths and innuendo (public figures usually try to avoid actually saying things which are literally untrue but have no such problem in being misleading), however, when it comes to political campaign posters (especially those on vehicles) they should be ignored completely because they don't really say anything but are just slogans and similar nonsence intended to get attention. Of course, if there was a significant amount of information on such a poster, then, hardly anyone would read it - but that just means people should look elsewhere for real information. The poster on the bus is a typical example - the 350 million is stated as being the UK's GROSS contribution to the EU - it does not matter if the figure is factually right or wrong as the important figure is the NET contribution. The EU will stop sending money to the UK when/if we leave and stop paying so the UK government will have to take over the payments. The rebate will obviously disappear completely so there is no way the 350 million will be available. The second sentence just says "Let's .. fund the NHS" - it does not refer to the first sentence so it's just a suggestion to spend an unspecified amount of money on the NHS made by people with no real say in how government money is spent (both Prime Minister and Chancellor were Remain spokespeople and, at the time, there was no suggestion of either of them being replaced). And, of course, there are many things that need government money so it would be ridiculous to assume all the UK's net contribution would go to the NHS. So, it was just a meaningless slogan to be ignored.
|
|
|
Brexit
Jul 9, 2017 13:09:15 GMT
Post by jasonward on Jul 9, 2017 13:09:15 GMT
I'm normally of the opinion that people should carefully listen to what politicians/governments/etc say to determine exactly what is and is not being said to avoid being taken in by half-truths and innuendo (public figures usually try to avoid actually saying things which are literally untrue but have no such problem in being misleading), however, when it comes to political campaign posters (especially those on vehicles) they should be ignored completely because they don't really say anything but are just slogans and similar nonsence intended to get attention. Of course, if there was a significant amount of information on such a poster, then, hardly anyone would read it - but that just means people should look elsewhere for real information. The poster on the bus is a typical example - the 350 million is stated as being the UK's GROSS contribution to the EU - it does not matter if the figure is factually right or wrong as the important figure is the NET contribution. The EU will stop sending money to the UK when/if we leave and stop paying so the UK government will have to take over the payments. The rebate will obviously disappear completely so there is no way the 350 million will be available. The second sentence just says "Let's .. fund the NHS" - it does not refer to the first sentence so it's just a suggestion to spend an unspecified amount of money on the NHS made by people with no real say in how government money is spent (both Prime Minister and Chancellor were Remain spokespeople and, at the time, there was no suggestion of either of them being replaced). And, of course, there are many things that need government money so it would be ridiculous to assume all the UK's net contribution would go to the NHS. So, it was just a meaningless slogan to be ignored. None of that changes the fact that a) the slogans were/are believed b) the politicians that backed the slogan lied to us, and not by omission, just out right, in your face, lied.
|
|
|
Brexit
Jul 9, 2017 13:16:41 GMT
Post by anothermanicmondas on Jul 9, 2017 13:16:41 GMT
I'm normally of the opinion that people should carefully listen to what politicians/governments/etc say to determine exactly what is and is not being said to avoid being taken in by half-truths and innuendo (public figures usually try to avoid actually saying things which are literally untrue but have no such problem in being misleading), however, when it comes to political campaign posters (especially those on vehicles) they should be ignored completely because they don't really say anything but are just slogans and similar nonsence intended to get attention. Of course, if there was a significant amount of information on such a poster, then, hardly anyone would read it - but that just means people should look elsewhere for real information. The poster on the bus is a typical example - the 350 million is stated as being the UK's GROSS contribution to the EU - it does not matter if the figure is factually right or wrong as the important figure is the NET contribution. The EU will stop sending money to the UK when/if we leave and stop paying so the UK government will have to take over the payments. The rebate will obviously disappear completely so there is no way the 350 million will be available. The second sentence just says "Let's .. fund the NHS" - it does not refer to the first sentence so it's just a suggestion to spend an unspecified amount of money on the NHS made by people with no real say in how government money is spent (both Prime Minister and Chancellor were Remain spokespeople and, at the time, there was no suggestion of either of them being replaced). And, of course, there are many things that need government money so it would be ridiculous to assume all the UK's net contribution would go to the NHS. So, it was just a meaningless slogan to be ignored. None of that changes the fact that a) the slogans were/are believed b) the politicians that backed the slogan lied to us, and not by omission, just out right, in your face, lied. I only know of one UKIP person who backed up that interpretation and assumed he was an idiot who didn't know what he was talking about
|
|
|
Post by jasonward on Jul 9, 2017 13:23:18 GMT
Vince Cable says UK may never leave EU because in effect we may just not be able to. www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-40547733Whilst he's making political capital, it does strike me that as we get closer to exit date, as our complete unpreparedness comes to the fore and as the looser of Brexit start to scream louder (I don't mean the politicians, but the real loosers in business and elsewhere who will see job losses etc) and then as politicians are asked time and time again to vote for something that not only don't believe in, but each vote appears to hurt more and more people, I'm left to wonder if Brexit will fail to happen, and at some point the electorate will again be asked to vote on it, but this time with actual Brexit costs very much in their faces. When the vote initially happened I was dismayed, but very quickly came to the conclusion that the vote must be carried through into Brexit despite my belief it was a huge mistake, even a month ago I thought Brexit was still inevitable, but now I'm starting to see, not that a true opposition to Brexit could arise, but that Brexit in of itself could falter and perhaps fail as reality bites.
|
|
|
Brexit
Jul 9, 2017 13:26:56 GMT
Post by jasonward on Jul 9, 2017 13:26:56 GMT
None of that changes the fact that a) the slogans were/are believed b) the politicians that backed the slogan lied to us, and not by omission, just out right, in your face, lied. I only know of one UKIP person who backed up that interpretation and assumed he was an idiot who didn't know what he was talking about You are extremely "generous" in your interpretation. Every politician that stood in front of the bus to be photographed or travelled on to campaign back it, what the bus clearly said to the majority of readers was that the NHS could be given £350m per week if we left the EU, to argue semantics and punctuation is to totally ignore the reality of what the bus was seen to say and stand for. They lied.
|
|
|
Brexit
Jul 11, 2017 14:05:04 GMT
Post by jasonward on Jul 11, 2017 14:05:04 GMT
Boris Johnsone says : The EU can "go whistle" when it comes to paying a high exit price. Boris Johnsone says : the government had "no plan" for what to do in the event of no deal being agreed www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-40571123Errrrmmmm... so... yeah... on one hand you point blank to refuse to consider some possible demands, yet on the other have no plans what so ever to deal with the event that may well materialise from such a refusal. I'm not saying the UK should allow itself to get "robbed", but it beggars belief that the government has no ideas what so ever about what to do if negotiations fail despite their own aggressive posturing.
|
|
|
Brexit
Jul 11, 2017 15:58:51 GMT
Post by charlesuirdhein on Jul 11, 2017 15:58:51 GMT
Boris Johnsone says : The EU can "go whistle" when it comes to paying a high exit price. Boris Johnsone says : the government had "no plan" for what to do in the event of no deal being agreed www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-40571123Errrrmmmm... so... yeah... on one hand you point blank to refuse to consider some possible demands, yet on the other have no plans what so ever to deal with the event that may well materialise from such a refusal. I'm not saying the UK should allow itself to get "robbed", but it beggars belief that the government has no ideas what so ever about what to do if negotiations fail despite their own aggressive posturing. Boris is what he is, a hubris ridden egomaniac who isn't as clever as he thinks he is.
|
|
|
Brexit
Jul 11, 2017 17:34:18 GMT
Post by sherlock on Jul 11, 2017 17:34:18 GMT
Boris Johnsone says : The EU can "go whistle" when it comes to paying a high exit price. Boris Johnsone says : the government had "no plan" for what to do in the event of no deal being agreed www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-40571123Errrrmmmm... so... yeah... on one hand you point blank to refuse to consider some possible demands, yet on the other have no plans what so ever to deal with the event that may well materialise from such a refusal. I'm not saying the UK should allow itself to get "robbed", but it beggars belief that the government has no ideas what so ever about what to do if negotiations fail despite their own aggressive posturing. Why oh why is he our foreign secretary. Thank god he's not in charge of Brexit at least.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 11, 2017 22:36:46 GMT
Boris Johnsone says : The EU can "go whistle" when it comes to paying a high exit price. Boris Johnsone says : the government had "no plan" for what to do in the event of no deal being agreed www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-40571123Errrrmmmm... so... yeah... on one hand you point blank to refuse to consider some possible demands, yet on the other have no plans what so ever to deal with the event that may well materialise from such a refusal. I'm not saying the UK should allow itself to get "robbed", but it beggars belief that the government has no ideas what so ever about what to do if negotiations fail despite their own aggressive posturing. The arrogance of the man, and in many ways the government, is almost worse than the complete chaos they appear to be in. What an absolute embarrassment Johnson has proven to be. It seems to me Theresa May got the job of Prime Minister after her predecessor walked away from the situation he had created, because she was the only Conservative with any qualifications for doing the job. I actually pity her, because imperfect though she undoubtedly is, she appears to be surrounded by a tribe of utter unmentionables. Frightening times.
|
|
|
Brexit
Jul 11, 2017 23:23:40 GMT
Post by number13 on Jul 11, 2017 23:23:40 GMT
Boris Johnsone says : The EU can "go whistle" when it comes to paying a high exit price. Boris Johnsone says : the government had "no plan" for what to do in the event of no deal being agreed www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-40571123Errrrmmmm... so... yeah... on one hand you point blank to refuse to consider some possible demands, yet on the other have no plans what so ever to deal with the event that may well materialise from such a refusal. I'm not saying the UK should allow itself to get "robbed", but it beggars belief that the government has no ideas what so ever about what to do if negotiations fail despite their own aggressive posturing. From the linked page: "The sums I have seen that they propose to demand from this country appear to be extortionate." "Go whistle seems to me to be an entirely appropriate expression," I would guess that public opinion would agree strongly - and will be outraged by whatever sum we do eventually have to pay to meet our many obligations - e.g. pensions, programmes we wish to still belong to, etc.. The problem is that the government's definition of 'extortionate' is probably very large indeed, like the ludicrous €50-100bn being thrown around in similar rhetoric from the EU side. But in hard times, how much will 'extortionate' be in the national mind? Anything over €10bn? We will probably have to pay far more than that to meet our obligations. "There is no plan for no deal because we are going to get a great deal" Be optimistic and don't admit even the possibility of failure when negotiating. Of course there is effectively a 'plan' that would happen in the event of no deal - we would leave and become like every other non-EU country without a deal with the EU. (WTO rules on tariffs etc.) It doesn't mean we would like it or that it would be a good option (it would be a very bad option in my opinion), but it is no secret.
|
|
|
Brexit
Jul 12, 2017 11:44:08 GMT
Post by jasonward on Jul 12, 2017 11:44:08 GMT
Of course there is effectively a 'plan' that would happen in the event of no deal - we would leave and become like every other non-EU country without a deal with the EU. (WTO rules on tariffs etc.) It doesn't mean we would like it or that it would be a good option (it would be a very bad option in my opinion), but it is no secret. That's not correct... or it is only correct in so far as it goes, yes we revert to WTO rules, and putting aside the economic disaster that would be, what isn't correct about that statement is all the stuff we do or have been doing with the EU that isn't covered in the least by WTO rules, WTO rules only cover trade, so co-operation on science, policing, common standards, EU citizens in the UK, UK citizens in the EU, reciprocal health care, fishing, civilian air control, visa requirements, continue co-operation on foreign embassies and so so so much more. Plus you have to imagine, that if talks fail to reach an agreement because we refuse to pay the demanded exit fee, the EU may think about imposing sanctions of some sort of some other means of punishing us, having no plan to deal with this stuff is a disaster waiting to happen.
|
|
|
Brexit
Jul 12, 2017 11:54:46 GMT
Post by sherlock on Jul 12, 2017 11:54:46 GMT
Boris Johnsone says : The EU can "go whistle" when it comes to paying a high exit price. Boris Johnsone says : the government had "no plan" for what to do in the event of no deal being agreed www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-40571123Errrrmmmm... so... yeah... on one hand you point blank to refuse to consider some possible demands, yet on the other have no plans what so ever to deal with the event that may well materialise from such a refusal. I'm not saying the UK should allow itself to get "robbed", but it beggars belief that the government has no ideas what so ever about what to do if negotiations fail despite their own aggressive posturing. From the linked page: "The sums I have seen that they propose to demand from this country appear to be extortionate." "Go whistle seems to me to be an entirely appropriate expression," I would guess that public opinion would agree strongly - and will be outraged by whatever sum we do eventually have to pay to meet our many obligations - e.g. pensions, programmes we wish to still belong to, etc.. The problem is that the government's definition of 'extortionate' is probably very large indeed, like the ludicrous €50-100bn being thrown around in similar rhetoric from the EU side. But in hard times, how much will 'extortionate' be in the national mind? Anything over €10bn? We will probably have to pay far more than that to meet our obligations. "There is no plan for no deal because we are going to get a great deal" Be optimistic and don't admit even the possibility of failure when negotiating. Of course there is effectively a 'plan' that would happen in the event of no deal - we would leave and become like every other non-EU country without a deal with the EU. (WTO rules on tariffs etc.) It doesn't mean we would like it or that it would be a good option (it would be a very bad option in my opinion), but it is no secret. Optimism and don't admitting failure is a fine strategy for most negotiations. Thing is these are international negotiations which will potentially make or break the UK's economy for years to come, add to that the two year time limit (which sounds like a decent enough amount of time, but as 27 governments have to agree to this deal really isn't). They really need to conducted realistically not idealistically. I'd hope the government has at least a vague plan for if these negotiations fail, hopefully beyond 'we go to WTO rules and hope the economy doesn't buckle', to use a crude analogy if you're teetering on the edge of a cliff packing a parachute might just be a good idea.
|
|