homepage
  roll on christmas  
click here to find out more about ship of fools click here to sign up for the ship of fools newsletter click here to support ship of fools
community the mystery worshipper gadgets for god caption competition foolishness features ship stuff
discussion boards live chat cafe avatars frequently-asked questions the ten commandments gallery private boards register for the boards
 
Ship of Fools


Post new thread  Post a reply
My profile login | Register | Directory | Search | FAQs | Board home
   - Printer-friendly view Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
» Ship of Fools   » Community discussion   » Purgatory   » Shake it all about: Brexit thread II (Page 30)

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.  
Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  ...  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  ...  59  60  61 
 
Source: (consider it) Thread: Shake it all about: Brexit thread II
Alan Cresswell

Mad Scientist 先生
# 31

 - Posted      Profile for Alan Cresswell   Email Alan Cresswell   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by lowlands_boy:
So, we've kicked if all off then..... [Frown]

Pulled the trigger [Frown]

--------------------
All I want for Christmas is EU

Posts: 32191 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Garden Hermit
Shipmate
# 109

 - Posted      Profile for Garden Hermit     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
It won't be as good as some hope, and it won't be as bad as some fear. That's Life. Always look for the Win/Win in every situation. This could be Win/Win for the EU and the UK.
Posts: 1410 | From: Reading UK | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330

 - Posted      Profile for mr cheesy   Email mr cheesy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Garden Hermit:
This could be Win/Win for the EU and the UK.

How on earth could it be a win-win for the EU and the UK? If it is a win for the UK, it will by definition be a fail for the EU - the UK wants unfetted access to the single market without the inconvenience of freedom of movement. If the UK gets that without paying a high price, the EU is finished.

If the EU wins, then the UK is paying a high price for less-than-EU-membership. Which will not be good for the UK economy, and the EU regulations will still have force.

So, what exactly is this mythical win-win?

--------------------
arse

Posts: 10327 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740

 - Posted      Profile for quetzalcoatl   Email quetzalcoatl   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Yes, the idea of 'frictionless' trade baffles me. We have that now, because of harmonized regulations; thus, I can drive a truck to Bucharest, as long as details of its load, point of origin, and so on, are entered on the electronic database. How do I do that as a 'third country'? Well, I can carry paper documents, which are checked at every border. Is that a win?

If the EU awards harmonized regs to a third country, then there is no point to the EU, is there?

--------------------
the main fear that flat-earthers face is sphere itself.

Posts: 9708 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011  |  IP: Logged
Bishops Finger
Shipmate
# 5430

 - Posted      Profile for Bishops Finger   Email Bishops Finger   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Oh well. Here we go.....trigger pulled, bullet entering brain....

.....and I think I'll move to Scotland, 'cos the First Minister has nice legs (better than Maybe's, anyway).

IJ

--------------------
Our words are giants when they do us an injury, and dwarfs when they do us a service. (Wilkie Collins)

Posts: 9449 | From: Behind The Wheel Again! | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564

 - Posted      Profile for Leorning Cniht   Email Leorning Cniht   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
How on earth could it be a win-win for the EU and the UK? If it is a win for the UK, it will by definition be a fail for the EU

Neither politics nor economics is a zero-sum game. In principle, it is possible for both the EU and the UK to benefit from an alteration in the arrangements between them.

I don't think that will happen with Brexit, but it's not a theoretical impossibility.

Posts: 4900 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013  |  IP: Logged
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330

 - Posted      Profile for mr cheesy   Email mr cheesy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
Neither politics nor economics is a zero-sum game. In principle, it is possible for both the EU and the UK to benefit from an alteration in the arrangements between them.

I don't think it has to be. For example, the UK is one of few net contributors to the EU budget, so (on paper) it might make sense for the EU negotiators to agree something which the UK is happy with that involves the UK paying a net contribution - as this would at least fill a bit of the EU's economic hole.

But if the EU agreed even this, then the UK would be getting something that other EU states did not get.

So whilst politics is not generally a zero-sum game, it is really, really hard to see how the EU and the UK can possibly agree a win-win deal. Indeed, it seems more like a version of the prisoners gamble, in some ways it would be better for both sides (politically) to blame the other for a breakdown in negotiations and WTO rules, even though this would appear to be the worst possible deal for both sides.

quote:
I don't think that will happen with Brexit, but it's not a theoretical impossibility.
But I'm not talking about a theoretical impossibility, I'm asking how exactly a win-win would look like without either the destruction of the EU or things that the UK (apparently) doesn't want like free movement.

--------------------
arse

Posts: 10327 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Alan Cresswell

Mad Scientist 先生
# 31

 - Posted      Profile for Alan Cresswell   Email Alan Cresswell   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
If the EU awards harmonized regs to a third country, then there is no point to the EU, is there?

A third country can decide to conform their regs to the EU regs, thus removing one barrier to trade. Which still leaves the EU nations deciding the regulations within the EU, and hence having a say in those regulations (as the UK has had, with a large proportion of EU regulations, including it seems several on the Tory hit list to get rid of in a show of "regaining control from Europe", being introduced by the UK). That other nations decide to adopt those same regulations is their decision, even if in so doing they surrender their regulations to an organisation over which they have no influence.

I suspect that post-Brexit the UK government will have a symbolic Act repealing a small number of largely irrelevant regulations to be able to say "look, we've regained control" but actually find the vast majority are not a problem. Then, either the UK Parliament will adopt all new EU regulations (just give them a British sounding title as though they thought them up), or UK business will do so by default inorder to trade with the EU. Ultimately, regardless of any lofting aims of creating an international trading empire overnight, the EU will always be our largest trading partner by a long way.

--------------------
All I want for Christmas is EU

Posts: 32191 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Stephen
Shipmate
# 40

 - Posted      Profile for Stephen   Email Stephen   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
Oh well. Here we go.....trigger pulled, bullet entering brain....

.....and I think I'll move to Scotland, 'cos the First Minister has nice legs (better than Maybe's, anyway).

IJ

Well join the queue because there'll be about 16 million of us....... [Smile]

Oh and they have Anglican churches there as well, unless you go to St.Giles Edinburgh in which case you'll scarcely notice the difference. Choral services weekly Eucharists.What's not to like?

--------------------
Best Wishes
Stephen

'Be still,then, and know that I am God: I will be exalted among the nations and I will be exalted in the earth' Ps46 v10

Posts: 3941 | From: Alto C Clef Country | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330

 - Posted      Profile for mr cheesy   Email mr cheesy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:


I suspect that post-Brexit the UK government will have a symbolic Act repealing a small number of largely irrelevant regulations to be able to say "look, we've regained control" but actually find the vast majority are not a problem. Then, either the UK Parliament will adopt all new EU regulations (just give them a British sounding title as though they thought them up), or UK business will do so by default inorder to trade with the EU. Ultimately, regardless of any lofting aims of creating an international trading empire overnight, the EU will always be our largest trading partner by a long way.

I think the Brexit hardliners think that the EU is so desperate for British products that they'll fall over themselves to take them. This seems fundamentally like a delusion to me.

As to the other stuff, I think many are desperate to change some regulations very quickly, in particular those about fishing and agriculture. I think these are actually quite significant and that as the EU regulations will suddenly not apply, the market for those products in the EU will suddenly evaporate.

I'm actually not sure if that's a terrible thing in itself, providing leads to increased local consumption of local products (for example I was told when we lived in Kent that fish landed in local ports actually went to a wholesale fish market in France and from there much of it returned).

--------------------
arse

Posts: 10327 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Alan Cresswell

Mad Scientist 先生
# 31

 - Posted      Profile for Alan Cresswell   Email Alan Cresswell   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
So whilst politics is not generally a zero-sum game, it is really, really hard to see how the EU and the UK can possibly agree a win-win deal. Indeed, it seems more like a version of the prisoners gamble, in some ways it would be better for both sides (politically) to blame the other for a breakdown in negotiations and WTO rules, even though this would appear to be the worst possible deal for both sides.

In the prisoners dilemma (at least the standard version) both prisoners have an equal hold over the other. In the coming Brexit negotiations that isn't an equality. Though a Brexit to WTO rules would be bad for both parties, the EU would be much better able to absorb the damage than the UK. And, fundamentally, Mrs May has two strong cards in her hand to play - the nuclear option of walking away to WTO rules, and the status of EU nationals currently settled in the UK. If she has any nous at all she will realise that although both may appeal to the hard core Brexiteers in her party and UKIP, both will be deeply unpopular with the UK electorate. If she plays either card to try and force something from the EU that the EU isn't willing to give, even worse if she plays both, then the prospect of a good 2020 general election are shot - even Labour would be picking up seats from all but the bluest of blue seats, and UKIP likely to gain from a platform of "the Tories failed" platform (despite actually liking the result). She really needs to produce a deal, any deal, to stand any prospect of electoral victory in 2020. Which basically means she's walking into negotiations where the EU holds all the strong cards. And, where the EU negotiators know she will be desperate for a deal. That's not a good position to be in when entering negotiations.

--------------------
All I want for Christmas is EU

Posts: 32191 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Garden Hermit
Shipmate
# 109

 - Posted      Profile for Garden Hermit     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
quote:
Originally posted by Garden Hermit:
This could be Win/Win for the EU and the UK.

How on earth could it be a win-win for the EU and the UK? If it is a win for the UK, it will by definition be a fail for the EU - the UK wants unfetted access to the single market without the inconvenience of freedom of movement. If the UK gets that without paying a high price, the EU is finished.

If the EU wins, then the UK is paying a high price for less-than-EU-membership. Which will not be good for the UK economy, and the EU regulations will still have force.

So, what exactly is this mythical win-win?

The EU has many problems. Mainly caused by the EURO and a reluctance to change. The CAP (Agriculture) is a mess relying on subsidies to support non-agricultural activities like breeding Race Horses. (every EU country says it should be abolished or radically altered) With Britain's money gone the EU are going to have to radically look at ways of saving money. Of course there is a Win/Win in every situation in Life. You get around 90% of what you want on both sides.
Posts: 1410 | From: Reading UK | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Garden Hermit
Shipmate
# 109

 - Posted      Profile for Garden Hermit     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The only thing as certain in Life as Death and Taxes is 'Change'. All 'Change' has opportunities and problems. Those that overcome the problems the quickest and seize the Opportunities make the most money. Simple.
Posts: 1410 | From: Reading UK | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330

 - Posted      Profile for mr cheesy   Email mr cheesy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
In the coming Brexit negotiations that isn't an equality. Though a Brexit to WTO rules would be bad for both parties, the EU would be much better able to absorb the damage than the UK.

True, but also false, in my opinion.

The balance of trade might well suggest that as it has a bigger market the EU will get on better (both internally and externally). But if there is no agreement, then that also means that the EU has a huge UK-sized hole in its budget. Which might be enough to make the whole project non-viable. Plus politically, the UK has been a strong supporter of Western European values such as human rights. With the UK gone, Germany, Netherlands etc are going to be batting with a far weakened team.

I don't think it is an obvious calculation that suggests the UK is in a weaker position than the EU, certainly not from the perspective of Netherlands, Sweden and Germany within the EU.

The fact is that both the UK and the EU are likely to be destabilised post-Brexit. It's a gamble as to who will be more destabilised and who will be better off. In a perverse way, with increased borders, it might well be that the UK can avoid the costs of dealing with refugees and instead can dump all of that cost onto the depleted EU budgets, and therefore ends up stronger (whilst simultaneously seriously pissing off our neighbours).

[ 29. March 2017, 17:03: Message edited by: mr cheesy ]

--------------------
arse

Posts: 10327 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238

 - Posted      Profile for Crœsos     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Garden Hermit:
The EU has many problems. Mainly caused by the EURO and a reluctance to change.

And yet the U.K. was allowed to opt out of the Euro. Whatever problems it causes, and I'd be happy to agree it causes problems, those problems are largely confined to the countries that actually use the Euro. Brexit seems to be a non-solution to what is a non-problem, at least as regards the Euro.

--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto

Posts: 10506 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081

 - Posted      Profile for Eutychus   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
A couple of things in the letter stick in my throat.

1. The UK is described as the
quote:
closest friend and neighbour
of the EU. Which is a bit of cognitive dissonance. And I wonder how, say, Norway and Switzerland feel about that?

2. This:
quote:
If, however, we leave the European Union without an agreement the default position is that we would have to trade on World Trade Organisation terms. In security terms a failure to reach agreement would mean our cooperation in the fight against crime and terrorism would be weakened.
The issue of security is out side by side with a trade agreement and appears to serve as an implicit threat: "you must be soft in negotiations because terrorism". Shades of Project Fear all over again.

3. The lecturing tone of the seven principles for discussions "we should... we should" as if the EU needs educating on how to conduct itself.

I'm really not sure this will go down well on this side of the Channel.

--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy

Posts: 17316 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Alan Cresswell

Mad Scientist 先生
# 31

 - Posted      Profile for Alan Cresswell   Email Alan Cresswell   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
I'm really not sure this will go down well on this side of the Channel.

I'm not sure it will go down well this side of the Channel either.

It will go down well with the Tory Party members who were contemplating defecting to UKIP, and with UKIP. But, not the majority of the country. But, this whole nonsense was, and is, all about appeasing that part of the Tory Party. The best for the UK as a whole takes a back seat way behind the internal issues of one party. And, future relations with other nations in the EU (and without) are even further down the governments priority list. I'm pretty sure Mrs May doesn't actually care how her letter will go down across the Channel, so long as it goes down well enough with her party.

--------------------
All I want for Christmas is EU

Posts: 32191 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740

 - Posted      Profile for quetzalcoatl   Email quetzalcoatl   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Farron mentioned that trade is cited six times in the letter, and security about a dozen. Whether this amounts to a veiled threat, who knows. Quite amusing to see the government hastening to deny that it is, which indicates that it is.

What staggers me, when I see people interviewed on TV, is the widespread ignorance about most of it. What kind of trade deal? Nobody has a clue, except I suppose, those businesses which are desperate for a continuance of harmonized customs rules.

--------------------
the main fear that flat-earthers face is sphere itself.

Posts: 9708 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011  |  IP: Logged
Callan
Shipmate
# 525

 - Posted      Profile for Callan     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Originally posted by Eutychus:

quote:
The issue of security is out side by side with a trade agreement and appears to serve as an implicit threat: "you must be soft in negotiations because terrorism". Shades of Project Fear all over again.
That's incredibly crass. It's basically an implicit threat to let ISIS get on with it, if we don't get what we want. I am currently envisaging a scenario where a bunch of French people get murdered by Islamists and it transpired we knew but didn't tell the French government because Mrs May wasn't happy with the EU's position on passporting.

--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton

Posts: 9705 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
SusanDoris

Incurable Optimist
# 12618

 - Posted      Profile for SusanDoris   Author's homepage   Email SusanDoris   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
This evening (approx. 5:40 p.m.) on BBC Radio 4's PM programme, there were two people speaking on the subject of leaving the EU, one a pro and one an anti. The man who was a strong remainer was pointing out just how many people did not vote in the referendum and how many voted to remain. I wish far more time had been given to this glaringly obvious fact prior to the referendum.

--------------------
I know that you believe that you understood what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.

Posts: 2947 | From: UK | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740

 - Posted      Profile for quetzalcoatl   Email quetzalcoatl   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
May is likely to do a smoke and mirrors job, isn't she? She will talk tough about making our own rules, but she will also allow firms to export, obeying EU regulations and the appropriate electronic database. Whether this will work - who knows?

--------------------
the main fear that flat-earthers face is sphere itself.

Posts: 9708 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011  |  IP: Logged
Boogie

Boogie on down!
# 13538

 - Posted      Profile for Boogie     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
May said “Perhaps now more than ever the world needs the liberal, democratic values of Europe – values that the UK shares.”

Yeah, right.

So that's why her party carelessly led us out? [Mad]

--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk

Posts: 12740 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008  |  IP: Logged
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081

 - Posted      Profile for Eutychus   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
It occurred to me after posting that as Alan says, it was probably designed more to play well at home than over here.

I also notice withdrawal from the European Atomic Energy Community is concurrent, although I'll have to read up on the implications of that.

quote:
Originally posted by Callan:
because Mrs May wasn't happy with the EU's position on passporting.

In point vi there's something about a trade agreement covering financial services as a priority, which sounds like a bid to stop flight from the City.

The BBC had a cleartext version of the letter up on their website and now it's gone. Somebody obviously didn't like it being there. I wish I'd grabbed the text while it was there as the PDF does not lend itself so easily to copy pasting.

[ETA: CNBC is obviously beyond the reach of such censorship, for now. Warning: autoplay video]

[ 29. March 2017, 18:05: Message edited by: Eutychus ]

--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy

Posts: 17316 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Rocinante
Shipmate
# 18541

 - Posted      Profile for Rocinante   Email Rocinante   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
In point vi there's something about a trade agreement covering financial services as a priority, which sounds like a bid to stop flight from the City.

No chance. Not a snowball in Hell's. The EU will happily allow us to keep buying their cars, wine and machine tools, and send them Peppa Pig and lots of our money in return. But the position on financial services will be "Services are just people, and you don't want people, so all those banks can move to Paris and Frankfurt."
Posts: 362 | From: UK | Registered: Jan 2016  |  IP: Logged
Humble Servant
Shipmate
# 18391

 - Posted      Profile for Humble Servant     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by SusanDoris:
This evening (approx. 5:40 p.m.) on BBC Radio 4's PM programme, there were two people speaking on the subject of leaving the EU, one a pro and one an anti. The man who was a strong remainer was pointing out just how many people did not vote in the referendum and how many voted to remain. I wish far more time had been given to this glaringly obvious fact prior to the referendum.

Forgive me if I misunderstand you, but surely the number of people who didn't vote was not a fact prior to the referendum.
Posts: 240 | Registered: Apr 2015  |  IP: Logged
Alan Cresswell

Mad Scientist 先生
# 31

 - Posted      Profile for Alan Cresswell   Email Alan Cresswell   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The relevant bit about the number of people who voted is that the referendum does not support Mrs May in her assertions of what the people of the UK voted for. Her confidence in her statements does not alter the fact that the question did not allow anyone to know. Did the majority vote for more control over immigration? Did the majority vote against the Single Market? Did the majority consider cooperation over security to be a bargaining chip? We simply don't know - but the chances that the majority of people who voted last year would have supported what Mrs May proposes is very unlikely.

--------------------
All I want for Christmas is EU

Posts: 32191 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Alex Cockell

Ship’s penguin
# 7487

 - Posted      Profile for Alex Cockell     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Does EFTA need free movement? Or is this likely to be something Theresa backtracks over - and we find ourselves in there? And if the LibDems manage to get back into power - we return?
Posts: 2138 | From: Reading, Berkshire UK | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815

 - Posted      Profile for Gee D     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
What we do know is that a majority of those voting at the referendum voted in favour of leaving the EU. There was probably a range of specific reasons why, some finding 1 sufficient, others combining, but all wanting out.

--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican

Posts: 6775 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008  |  IP: Logged
SusanDoris

Incurable Optimist
# 12618

 - Posted      Profile for SusanDoris   Author's homepage   Email SusanDoris   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
humble Servant
I think the following post sums it up exactly.
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
The relevant bit about the number of people who voted is that the referendum does not support Mrs May in her assertions of what the people of the UK voted for. Her confidence in her statements does not alter the fact that the question did not allow anyone to know. Did the majority vote for more control over immigration? Did the majority vote against the Single Market? Did the majority consider cooperation over security to be a bargaining chip? We simply don't know - but the chances that the majority of people who voted last year would have supported what Mrs May proposes is very unlikely.



--------------------
I know that you believe that you understood what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.

Posts: 2947 | From: UK | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged
Alan Cresswell

Mad Scientist 先生
# 31

 - Posted      Profile for Alan Cresswell   Email Alan Cresswell   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Alex Cockell:
Does EFTA need free movement?

The free movement of persons is one of the core rights guaranteed in the European Economic Area (EEA), the extended Internal Market which unites all the EU Member States and three EEA EFTA States – Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway. It is perhaps the most important right for individuals, as it gives citizens of the 31 EEA countries the opportunity to live, work, establish business and study in any of these countries.

I would still very much prefer that the UK government stops playing political games with the whole country, using the lives of millions of UK citizens (and millions more EU citizens living in the UK) to maintain the coherence of a political party of a few tens of thousands, and just leave things as they are with the UK a full member of the EU. However, if the government is determined to go through with this decision based on a dodgy referendum then joining Norway and Switzerland in the EFTA would be an acceptable compromise. It satisfies the economic demand for free trade with the EU, retains the existing trade deals with about 60 other nations (which would also need to be renegotiated if we leave), retains the access we need to EU labour and allows UK citizens to access the EU job market (plus, universities etc for study, or simply to retire to the sun), and we repatriate some powers from the EU (most notably control over fishing in UK territorial waters, the reason why Norway isn't in the EU, which was a large factor in the Leave vote in much of the country). But, that's all way too sensible for the numpties in our government to accept, so we're crashing out of the EU with no real chance of retaining the free access to the single market that EFTA would provide.

quote:
And if the LibDems manage to get back into power - we return?
Within a decade the changing demographics of the UK electorate would be well and truly pro-EU membership. At least one of the national parties will stand on a return to the EU platform, the LibDems being most likely to do that along with the Greens. Whether that would be all the way back to full EU membership (which would be to a different position than the UK currently has - there will probably need to be a commitment to enter the Eurozone and Schengen, and no rebates) or to EFTA will depend in part on how badly things go in the first 5-10 years post Brexit.

--------------------
All I want for Christmas is EU

Posts: 32191 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Garden Hermit
Shipmate
# 109

 - Posted      Profile for Garden Hermit     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
As one who has been an Agent in Elections may I point out the following regarding the percentage voting. The Electoral Register is compiled around August/September when Councils send out letters to all Houses. They are returned over the next few weeks and those who don't reply are re-contacted. The new Register is usually published in October. It often contains children's names, dog names and fraudulent names. There was recently a prosecution in Reading of 26 people all with the same First Name all living in the same 2-bedroomed house. Many people are on 2 registers, eg at Uni and their parents. (Not illegal. But to use 2 votes is.) There are many who don't want to register for a variety of reasons - eg to avoid detection for crimes etc.
So the Register is only a rough guide of the Adults who are registered to vote. As the year progresses people die, emigrate, go into Care or Hospital, move etc. and so are quite often not available to vote on Polling Day. (I am aware of postal voting but it doesn't cover rapid changes.) So by the June the following year, the Register is way out-of-date and the Councils are busy getting ready for a new one. I would regard any turnout of over 70% as fantastic in a June Election.

Posts: 1410 | From: Reading UK | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Garden Hermit
Shipmate
# 109

 - Posted      Profile for Garden Hermit     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The BBC Correspondent today had it right when he said 'Brexit seems to have been a wake-up call to the EU Leaders who now seem determined to address the many problems the EU has.' Hallelujah.
Posts: 1410 | From: Reading UK | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Alan Cresswell

Mad Scientist 先生
# 31

 - Posted      Profile for Alan Cresswell   Email Alan Cresswell   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The turnout to vote in June was fantastic. The people who didn't vote aren't the issue (though, I think all of us would have prefered it if even more people voted). The issue is that the question was very poorly considered since one option (Leave) was undefined. Which is the result of Cameron playing political games.

--------------------
All I want for Christmas is EU

Posts: 32191 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330

 - Posted      Profile for mr cheesy   Email mr cheesy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Garden Hermit:
The BBC Correspondent today had it right when he said 'Brexit seems to have been a wake-up call to the EU Leaders who now seem determined to address the many problems the EU has.' Hallelujah.

An interesting thing to observe will be to see whether the EU leaders can actually agree an EU-wide Brexit position given that they seem to be moving in different directions.

I also read that MEPs will effectively have a veto on the final agreement on Brexit, I wonder what chance of a vote against something there which is too favourable to the UK. Which would be ironic.

--------------------
arse

Posts: 10327 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338

 - Posted      Profile for L'organist   Author's homepage   Email L'organist   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
posted by Alan Cresswell
quote:
The issue is that the question was very poorly considered since one option (Leave) was undefined. Which is the result of Cameron playing political games.
First, the question wasn't poorly considered: it was a clear IN or OUT - and it had to be that because the rest of the EU didn't take seriously the chances of the UK voting to leave. The only way that either option could have been better defined with any credibility would have been if the other EU leaders and, in particular, members of the European Commission had shown any willingness not only to address some of the very real issues which were brought to them by the UK government but also to propose credible solutions. In other words, the Eurocrats and 27 leaders should have taken the election in the UK seriously: they didn't and the result was seen at the Referendum. The Leave campaign had to make it up on the hoof (a bit like punching fog) and the Remain campaign had to try to defend an institution whose actions and words throughout the campaign showed intransigence, arrogance and no regard for democracy.

Second: I think history will confirm that Mr Cameron wasn't playing games, he was desperately trying to lance the anti-EU boil while giving a realistic chance of the UK voting to remain in the EU. He was fatally undermined by statements and posturing from members of the EU commission, in particular Jean-Claude Juncker, and some other EU leaders who seemed to have little idea of how a Referendum works, or what was at stake.

To be blunt, they thought it unlikely that the UK would vote to Leave but, if we did, were confident they could pull the same trick they had previously with other electorates who had voted the wrong way; despite being told by Mr Cameron that the UK electorate would never wear a second referendum they thought they knew better.

Yes, you could say that there has been a large and vocal minority of the UK electorate who have never wanted to be in the EU, but it has to be acknowledged that much of the damage done to the pro-EU cause before the 2016 referendum was done by the EU.

[ 30. March 2017, 08:27: Message edited by: L'organist ]

--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet

Posts: 4720 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012  |  IP: Logged
Barnabas62
Host
# 9110

 - Posted      Profile for Barnabas62   Email Barnabas62   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I think the fate of the City and the UK financial institutions will be a key factor in deciding whether the negotiations are successful. I've thought for some time that there might be lots of migration of HQs of financial services.

The markets don't seem to reflect these concerns but maybe the international financial institutions don't care all that much about national self damaging stupidities, provided they can compensate by making money somewhere else, or even out of our self-handicapping.

I really would not want to be a UK negotiator. 'Success' will be redefined as the best bad job we can manage. And I'll be voting for any party that supports rejoining.

--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?

Posts: 20934 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330

 - Posted      Profile for mr cheesy   Email mr cheesy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:

I really would not want to be a UK negotiator. 'Success' will be redefined as the best bad job we can manage. And I'll be voting for any party that supports rejoining.

I think it might be wise to wait and see what happens to the EU over the next couple of years before committing to that particular political manifesto.

--------------------
arse

Posts: 10327 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740

 - Posted      Profile for quetzalcoatl   Email quetzalcoatl   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Rocinante:
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
In point vi there's something about a trade agreement covering financial services as a priority, which sounds like a bid to stop flight from the City.

No chance. Not a snowball in Hell's. The EU will happily allow us to keep buying their cars, wine and machine tools, and send them Peppa Pig and lots of our money in return. But the position on financial services will be "Services are just people, and you don't want people, so all those banks can move to Paris and Frankfurt."
The whole thing sounds like fantasy Brexit to me. 'Regulatory alignment', which used to be known as convergence, passporting, and high immigration.

Well, the immigration is a separate issue, but I can't see the EU accepting such a deal. It's like leaving a club but still claiming benefits.

It also seems to mark a shift from hard Brexit, to something softer. Some journos are saying that the govt has realized that just leaving would be ruinous, but May has to protect her back from the Ultras, who want Empire 2.0. So talk hard, but act soft? But it's not our choice.

--------------------
the main fear that flat-earthers face is sphere itself.

Posts: 9708 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011  |  IP: Logged
Alan Cresswell

Mad Scientist 先生
# 31

 - Posted      Profile for Alan Cresswell   Email Alan Cresswell   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
posted by Alan Cresswell
quote:
The issue is that the question was very poorly considered since one option (Leave) was undefined. Which is the result of Cameron playing political games.
First, the question wasn't poorly considered: it was a clear IN or OUT
Except OUT wasn't at all clear. You had different Leave campaigners saying different things - some that Leave would be to remain in the EFTA, others that it would be control over immigration from the EU (mutually contradictory), most saying we would be able to regain legislative control (but, no agreement on what we were being prevented from doing as a government - a lot of the examples still being given of "we'll be able to do this post Brexit" are things we'd have been equally free to do within the EU), a lot of Leave campaigners who were (and still aren't) in Government promising the Government would do things post Brexit without any means to put that in place (eg: UK government paying farmers the subsidies lost from CAP, ditto for regional development and social fund or scientific research funding).

Without the Leave campaign producing a definition of what they were campaigning for (rather than against - they were against EU membership is the only thing they were clear about) then there was nothing clear about the OUT option on the referendum paper. Also, if the Leave campaign had been clear then the Article 50 notification would have been given months ago, it could have even been given the day after the referendum, because there would have been no need to draw up a negotiating position because we'd have a clear statement of what the UK electorate voted for.

quote:
if the other EU leaders and, in particular, members of the European Commission had shown any willingness not only to address some of the very real issues which were brought to them by the UK government but also to propose credible solutions.
What real issues? When did the UK government go to the EC, or any other European institution or national government, with "very real issues" to be addressed? We had David Cameron parading around Europe with a bit of paper that would tinker a bit around the edges, but real issues? Get real. He was playing at being a great statesman, and the genuine great statesmen and women within Europe saw right through him.

You can hardly blame the Commissioners and others in Europe for not offering credible solutions to issues that had not been brought to them. If you wanted the Commissioners to do that then why weren't you putting pressure on David Cameron to take those concerns to Brussels in the summer of 2015, rather than let him play games with trivial issues?

quote:
The Leave campaign had to make it up on the hoof (a bit like punching fog)
Exactly. A serious referendum campaign would have started with the Leave campaign defining exactly what they wanted. Something at least as substantial as the Government produced in the White Paper a few months back. Making it up as they went along, finding the words to appeal to each audience in turn, without consideration of whether they were contradicting themselves or promising the impossible, wasn't a serious campaign. It was a game, the aim to win as many votes as possible by any means possible (including from some campaigners threats of violence).

quote:
and the Remain campaign had to try to defend an institution whose actions and words throughout the campaign showed intransigence, arrogance and no regard for democracy.
The EU institutions were exemplars in staying out of the campaign. We all knew what they thought, that they didn't want the UK to Leave. But, they respected our democracy enough to let UK politicians do the campaigning. It wasn't the EU that decided that a national referendum was a suitable method of preventing a few thousand Conservative Party members defecting to UKIP. What sort of regard for democracy is that? And, subsequently it wasn't the EU that decided that the version of Brexit with the least support among the UK population was "what the people voted for", what sort of regard for democracy is that? Nor, the EU that is preventing the democratically elected government of Scotland ask the people of Scotland what future they want, what sort of regard for democracy is that?

quote:
Second: I think history will confirm that Mr Cameron wasn't playing games, he was desperately trying to lance the anti-EU boil
He was trying to lance the boil within his own party. To drag the whole nation through an ill-defined, highly devisive referendum just to fix a problem within a single party is playing games. Politics always has been a bit of a game anyway, but that took things to new heights. And, he didn't even play the game well. The manifesto pledge did the trick of getting him back into No 10, kept his party together for one more election. If he'd played the game well his next move would have been to ask a Leave campaign group to form and define what they were going to campaign for - that would have tied them up for years of internal dispute and infighting, giving him both a get-out on holding the referendum, and probably destroying UKIP in the process (or, at the very least, making defection to them look a lot less attractive). He'd have pissed off the Scots by having that in the manifesto (because, you can't say "Scotland is assured a place in the EU only if it stays in the UK" one moment and then suggest a referendum on whether the UK stays in the EU the next), but he was unlikely to avoid pissing off the Scots anyway. It wouldn't have been enough to justify another IndyRef, though might have brought that time scale forward a few years from the other side of 2030 as we all expected in Sept 2014.

quote:
Yes, you could say that there has been a large and vocal minority of the UK electorate who have never wanted to be in the EU, but it has to be acknowledged that much of the damage done to the pro-EU cause before the 2016 referendum was done by the EU.
Yes, there has always been a small but vocal minority wanting out of the EU. A larger number who had specific concerns (eg: about fisheries policy) but not as stringent a position against the EU.

I would like to know what damage you think was done by the EU.

--------------------
All I want for Christmas is EU

Posts: 32191 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330

 - Posted      Profile for mr cheesy   Email mr cheesy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Dear me, can we stop rehearsing this argument now? Nobody knew the full ramifications of voting Leave, we all know that now. Move on, it is a broken record.

--------------------
arse

Posts: 10327 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641

 - Posted      Profile for chris stiles   Email chris stiles   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:

in particular, members of the European Commission had shown any willingness not only to address some of the very real issues which were brought to them by the UK government but also to propose credible solutions.

I'm not sure that the nebulous Very Serious Concerns gain much clarity by being promoted to Very Real Issues.

Realistically the only thing that had particular traction with voters was the access of of EU workers living in the UK to tax credits and child benefit (a relatively tiny issue that was more than made up for by the extra income the exchequer pulled in).

The working time directive was solid pub bore territory.

There is one argument in your post that is true however (though for the reasons). Undoubtedly when the UK gets a bad deal the blame will be put on the Europeans.

Posts: 3878 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740

 - Posted      Profile for quetzalcoatl   Email quetzalcoatl   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Yes, I bet the right-wing press are lining up their headlines for EU 'intransigence' and 'bullying'. After all, any club should be glad to carry on giving benefits to ex-members.

--------------------
the main fear that flat-earthers face is sphere itself.

Posts: 9708 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011  |  IP: Logged
Alan Cresswell

Mad Scientist 先生
# 31

 - Posted      Profile for Alan Cresswell   Email Alan Cresswell   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
Dear me, can we stop rehearsing this argument now? Nobody knew the full ramifications of voting Leave, we all know that now. Move on, it is a broken record.

There are two issues. One is did we know the proposal that Leave was campaigning for? The second is what the ramifications of that would be. Of course the ramifications were, and still are, unknown. There's a slim chance that it will actually all work out quite well. Time will tell, and we can look back and analyse that in 10 years time.

The issue for me is the first, that we didn't know what Leave was campaigning for. Which I would leave aside if it wasn't for the fact the Mrs May (and others in the UK Government) are so adamant that what they are proposing is what the people of the UK voted for. When there is no way to know that since the question "do you want to Leave the EU and have the UK government attempt to get a deal on these terms?" was never asked. And, even more so when the pollsters analyses of what people were voting for indicates that there was a substantial range of views all brought together under "Leave", and that the number of voters with the views the government is acting on would have been significantly less than the number of voters with other views (those who voted Remain + those who voted for a different form of Brexit). While Mrs May insists on following what I believe to be a disasterous course of action without a mandate from either a referendum or a free and open substantive discussion and vote in Parliament (I would accept either) then I will continue to point out that she is acting without a democratic mandate.

If the UK electorate had clearly and unambiguously voted for the course of action Mrs May is taking I would be unhappy with it, but would reluctantly accept that it is the will of the people. As it is I'm not going to shut up, because that isn't the case.

--------------------
All I want for Christmas is EU

Posts: 32191 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330

 - Posted      Profile for mr cheesy   Email mr cheesy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:


If the UK electorate had clearly and unambiguously voted for the course of action Mrs May is taking I would be unhappy with it, but would reluctantly accept that it is the will of the people. As it is I'm not going to shut up, because that isn't the case.

How is it helping? It is beyond doubt that the British government, as the Executive of the UK Parliament, has the power to invoke Article 50. The referendum wasn't binding, the simple binary question has been used as an unofficial mandate for the invoking, which wasn't legally necessary.

So how we got here now doesn't really matter. They lied, they cheated, they managed to persuade poor people to blame the other.

Yes, we know. Got it.

--------------------
arse

Posts: 10327 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Boogie

Boogie on down!
# 13538

 - Posted      Profile for Boogie     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Yes, I bet the right-wing press are lining up their headlines for EU 'intransigence' and 'bullying'. After all, any club should be glad to carry on giving benefits to ex-members.

This, exactly this.

But I do think things will work out OK (ish) as many many people, especially in business, will work their socks off to make it work. My brother is one of these. He didn't vote 'leave' but is already working to make sure his business survives - why wouldn't he?

Politicians have less to lose it seems, and will give away much to make the soundbites and keep in the public eye.

--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk

Posts: 12740 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008  |  IP: Logged
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330

 - Posted      Profile for mr cheesy   Email mr cheesy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:


But I do think things will work out OK (ish) as many many people, especially in business, will work their socks off to make it work. My brother is one of these. He didn't vote 'leave' but is already working to make sure his business survives - why wouldn't he?


I think this is right - although quite what effect a massive walk-out of the London financial set would have, I don't know.

It would be nice to believe that EU products in the UK market were replaced by locally produced items, that British items were only exported where they could actually be competitive (even with any trade tariffs) and that things will work out alright.

I don't know that we can have any certainty on any of that, but knuckling down and trying to work out how to make the best of it seems like pretty good advice for everyone. The game has changed, so we've got to work out how to change with it.

--------------------
arse

Posts: 10327 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
betjemaniac
Shipmate
# 17618

 - Posted      Profile for betjemaniac     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:


But I do think things will work out OK (ish) as many many people, especially in business, will work their socks off to make it work. My brother is one of these. He didn't vote 'leave' but is already working to make sure his business survives - why wouldn't he?


I think this is right - although quite what effect a massive walk-out of the London financial set would have, I don't know.

It would be nice to believe that EU products in the UK market were replaced by locally produced items, that British items were only exported where they could actually be competitive (even with any trade tariffs) and that things will work out alright.

I don't know that we can have any certainty on any of that, but knuckling down and trying to work out how to make the best of it seems like pretty good advice for everyone. The game has changed, so we've got to work out how to change with it.

Completely agree. I voted Remain*, but it was pretty clear from the 24th of June that we were going. So since that time we've been working out how to survive in the new world. I would be lying if I said that it hasn't been/isn't exciting actually.

Which is good, because not being excited by the challenge is a recipe for not rising to it.

*but then I was a Remainer through fear of change, rather than because I wanted to be a member of the EU, so I accept that perhaps I could make the change more easily when presented with it.

--------------------
And is it true? For if it is....

Posts: 1439 | From: behind the dreaming spires | Registered: Mar 2013  |  IP: Logged
Garden Hermit
Shipmate
# 109

 - Posted      Profile for Garden Hermit     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The only thing as certain in Life as Death and Taxes is Change. No-one actually likes 'Change'. It moves us from our comfort zone and makes us think and move about. Brexit is one of those little changes that come about from time to time. But enough. I have important things to do like get my Potatoes in the Allotment whilst the Weather is Good.
Posts: 1410 | From: Reading UK | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238

 - Posted      Profile for Crœsos     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
There are two issues. One is did we know the proposal that Leave was campaigning for? The second is what the ramifications of that would be. Of course the ramifications were, and still are, unknown. There's a slim chance that it will actually all work out quite well. Time will tell, and we can look back and analyse that in 10 years time.

What you seem to be complaining about here is that human are punctual entities, only capable of directly perceiving one point in time and unable to see the future. While true, this is not unique to the Brexit vote. Indeed, the inability to foresee all ramifications is inherent in all decisions. If that weren't the case we wouldn't need a term like "unintended consequences".

Still, as far as the Brexit goes, the range of likely outcomes was fairly easy to guess by interpolating from the relations the EU has with various friendly but non-EU nations. (e.g. Switzerland, the United States, Japan, etc.) The "all of the benefits of EU membership with none of the drawbacks" position being sold by some was always unrealistic, but you can't keep some people from believing unrealistic things if they're really determined to do so.

--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto

Posts: 10506 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641

 - Posted      Profile for chris stiles   Email chris stiles   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:

Still, as far as the Brexit goes, the range of likely outcomes was fairly easy to guess by interpolating from the relations the EU has with various friendly but non-EU nations.

However the range of outcomes was fairly wide, and even the likes of Hannan and Farage were playing up the Norway/Switzerland comparisons.

In the event, the actual vote is being taken as justification for something significantly different.

[ 30. March 2017, 14:01: Message edited by: chris stiles ]

Posts: 3878 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged



Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  ...  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  ...  59  60  61 
 
Post new thread  Post a reply Close thread   Feature thread   Move thread   Delete thread Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
 - Printer-friendly view
Go to:

Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement

© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0

 
Check out Reform magazine
sip of fools mugs from your favourite nautical website
 
  ship of fools