|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Shake it all about: Brexit thread II
|
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by chris styles:
That would be the same Chuka Umunna who - a few months back when Corbyn was being portrayed in the media as being soft on immigration - stated categorically that in his opinion leaving the SM was a price worth paying in order to control Freedom of Movement.
Touche Chris. I walked right into that one. And I thought Chuka was being serious about securing the softest possible Brexit!
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul
Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
Touche Chris. I walked right into that one. And I thought Chuka was being serious about securing the softest possible Brexit!
I fear this is one of those issues on which very few serving politicians are pronouncing on unambiguously - and the ones that do are those most in favour of a very Hard Brexit.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
There is a very simple reason for this, which plenty of people are saying but nobody important dares to.
There are three options.
1. The 'Moronic Brexit' advocated by Farage, Davis, Fox, Leadsom, Rees-Mogg etc.
2. Various versions of what is described as 'Soft Brexit'. These involve in some way remaining within the single market and the customs union. But our fellow Europeans probably won't agree to any permutation of this. Those politicians who are not stupid and aspire to have the country's best interests at heart vaguely try to give the impression that this is what they favour, but they don't agree on what they mean by it. This is partly because they want to keep the votes of electors who are really Remainers and partly because being too clear what one is advocating makes one a hostage to fortune. And
3. No Brexit. All the sensible supported that until the referendum. Even quite a lot of otherwise weak ones did. If they didn't feel they had to pander to the small majority Leave voters, and if they had any intellectual integrity, most of them would recognise that they are still obliged to advocate this.
The trouble is that unless you're a crack-head in the Moronic Brexit camp, as soon as you look seriously at option 2, it's self-evident that option 3 is better. The extra alleged freedoms to control national affairs in 2 are illusory. To get the benefits of the single market, the customs union etc., it is better to be a proper member and to play the proper part in this community of nations to which for every reason of history and geography, objectively we should belong.
But everybody is so afraid of the votes of those who voted leave, that nobody in the political sphere dares say that.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
But everybody is so afraid of the votes of those who voted leave, that nobody in the political sphere dares say that.
Why is no one afraid of the votes of those who voted Remain?
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
Why is no one afraid of the votes of those who voted Remain?
Because the perception is that they are less likely to vote, and that as the most vocal newspapers are Leave anyone who sticks their head above the parapet will get monstered.
So we have an odd situation where 48% of the country voted to Remain, but 90% of MPs support Leave.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican't
Shipmate
# 15292
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
But everybody is so afraid of the votes of those who voted leave, that nobody in the political sphere dares say that.
Why is no one afraid of the votes of those who voted Remain?
Because most Remainers accept the result...?
Posts: 3613 | From: London, England | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
But everybody is so afraid of the votes of those who voted leave, that nobody in the political sphere dares say that.
Why is no one afraid of the votes of those who voted Remain?
Because most Remainers accept the result...?
Since quite a lot of those who voted Leave are not "accepting the result" because the result isn't what they voted for I think it's becoming clearer that the story about anyone "accepting the result" is obviously a fiction. What we're all still waiting for is to find out exactly what the vote last year was for, then we can decide whether or not it's something we can support or at least accept.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
But everybody is so afraid of the votes of those who voted leave, that nobody in the political sphere dares say that.
Why is no one afraid of the votes of those who voted Remain?
Because most Remainers accept the result...?
Since quite a lot of those who voted Leave are not "accepting the result" because the result isn't what they voted for I think it's becoming clearer that the story about anyone "accepting the result" is obviously a fiction. What we're all still waiting for is to find out exactly what the vote last year was for, then we can decide whether or not it's something we can support or at least accept.
We'll be waiting a long time too. Article 50 only covers leaving the EU. All the negotiations for trade deals, cross-border movement of currency, provision of financial services plus freedom of movement for people won't start in earnest until then.
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
What a fucking nightmare the world has become in such a short time.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
There are three options.
Aren't you forgetting 4. the "cliff-edge" Brexit where nothing is agreed at all?
I don't think anyone except Alan has mentioned the prospect of crashing out of Euratom yet, but that looks truly alarming.
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
fletcher christian
Mutinous Seadog
# 13919
|
Posted
Posted by LilBuddha:
quote:
What a fucking nightmare the world has become in such a short time.
At least when it does all go to shit you have a very clear understanding of exactly who is to blame. I hope they are never allowed to forget it.
--------------------
'God is love insaturable, love impossible to describe'
Staretz Silouan
Posts: 5235 | From: a prefecture | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
I don't think anyone except Alan has mentioned the prospect of crashing out of Euratom yet, but that looks truly alarming.
The only way of explaining it is that May has taken an irrational exception to a number of bodies with 'Europe' in their name.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-40461496
"Mr Davis has said a new international body will have to be set up to settle disputes between the UK and the EU after Brexit, a job currently done by the ECJ."
May doesn't like the ECJ, so therefore for the purposes of disputes a new body has to be set up under a different name that will serve the same purpose that the ECJ would under the trade agreement that has not yet been agreed upon.
On Euroatom:
"Mr Chapman said the reason for wanting to withdraw from Euratom was to prevent the free movement of nuclear scientists, which is governed by the ECJ."
The same issue is presented over the rights of EU citizens currently living in the UK.
[From the European's point of view it's perfectly rational that they'd want an independent body arbitrating residency rights, because they don't want to be left without the legal means of enforcing any such agreement.]
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
rolyn
Shipmate
# 16840
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by fletcher christian:
Posted by LilBuddha:
quote:
What a fucking nightmare the world has become in such a short time.
At least when it does all go to shit you have a very clear understanding of exactly who is to blame. I hope they are never allowed to forget it.
And who is to blame for humanity's apparent misfortunes the Serpent for offering temptation or humans for yielding to it?
Accepting that one little Island's exit from a former trading Bloc isn't the defining moment in the collapse of all human civilisation as we know it.
--------------------
Change is the only certainty of existence
Posts: 3206 | From: U.K. | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
But everybody is so afraid of the votes of those who voted leave, that nobody in the political sphere dares say that.
Why is no one afraid of the votes of those who voted Remain?
Because most Remainers accept the result...?
No such luck, Anglican't.
It's because Remainers are polite middle class educated respectable people, who grumble rationally, protest nicely and encourage people to sign things, but Leavers are abusive skinheads who will smash up bus shelters and turn violent if thwarted.
You only have to look at the language of the two conversation streams on Facebook to pick this up.
[ 01. July 2017, 10:33: Message edited by: Enoch ]
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
I suspect your massive classist stereotype of being a massive classist stereotype.
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
fletcher christian
Mutinous Seadog
# 13919
|
Posted
posted by rolyn:
quote:
And who is to blame for humanity's apparent misfortunes the Serpent for offering temptation or humans for yielding to it?
Accepting that one little Island's exit from a former trading Bloc isn't the defining moment in the collapse of all human civilisation as we know it.
Well I guess you could say that the twin serpents of Farage and Borris tempted enough with their fruit of knowledge, but Eve ate it whereas in this instance Adam will be force fed it whether he wants it or not - consequences be damned.
You will note I didn't frame my answer in terms of the collapse of human civilisation but I can see what many mean when they say that the USA and the UK certainly has a 'last days of Rome' vibe at the moment. You know its gone to shit when a country pins its hopes of covering up its stupidity by gunning for a far right party to succeed in one of its nearest neighbours. When you get to that stage in local and global politics, you aren't just down the rabbit hole, you're fucked.
[ 01. July 2017, 11:50: Message edited by: fletcher christian ]
--------------------
'God is love insaturable, love impossible to describe'
Staretz Silouan
Posts: 5235 | From: a prefecture | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican't
Shipmate
# 15292
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
But everybody is so afraid of the votes of those who voted leave, that nobody in the political sphere dares say that.
Why is no one afraid of the votes of those who voted Remain?
Because most Remainers accept the result...?
No such luck, Anglican't.
It's because Remainers are polite middle class educated respectable people, who grumble rationally, protest nicely and encourage people to sign things, but Leavers are abusive skinheads who will smash up bus shelters and turn violent if thwarted.
You only have to look at the language of the two conversation streams on Facebook to pick this up.
I would give this a longer, more considered response but I've just mugged an old lady so got money to spend today. Going to get another swastika tattoo done and then hit the Stellas with the boys down the Dog & Duck.
Posts: 3613 | From: London, England | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
rolyn
Shipmate
# 16840
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by fletcher christian:
You will note I didn't frame my answer in terms of the collapse of human civilisation but I can see what many mean when they say that the USA and the UK certainly has a 'last days of Rome' vibe at the moment. You know its gone to shit when a country pins its hopes of covering up its stupidity by gunning for a far right party to succeed in one of its nearest neighbours. When you get to that stage in local and global politics, you aren't just down the rabbit hole, you're fucked.
Noted Sir. I often use a point extreme to gain a sense of perspective on a seemingly dire situation, which isn't actually as bad as many believe.
Trouble was many of us thought the EU was fucked because of the Bankers crash, Greece going down, talk of the Euro folding and all that crap. Yet now there is audible chuckling from across the Channel at Blighty's current self inflicted debacle.
But as I have asked many times since this debate has been raging, what was it that made Middle Englanders align themselves with the previously isolated Nationalist rabids? The seeds of this go right back to the Blair Premiership and beyond. It is likely something that has nothing to do with Party politics whatsoever.
As a footnote I still wonder what good EU rule has done us. It did not prevent Blair from joining Bush in a catastrophic Military campaign. And now, as has become apparent it did not prevent construction corporations from using hazardous materials on hundreds of our large buildings.
--------------------
Change is the only certainty of existence
Posts: 3206 | From: U.K. | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dafyd
Shipmate
# 5549
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by chris stiles:
That would be the same Chuka Umunna who - a few months back when Corbyn was being portrayed in the media as being soft on immigration - stated categorically that in his opinion leaving the SM was a price worth paying in order to control Freedom of Movement.
Even by the time we reach the bottom of that article he'd retreated from that stark position.
--------------------
we remain, thanks to original sin, much in love with talking about, rather than with, one another. Rowan Williams
Posts: 10567 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
Even by the time we reach the bottom of that article he'd retreated from that stark position.
First, lets be clear on what he's saying at the beginning of the article: the SM is important but ultimately it must give way to FoM. That is indeed the logic of his position - that if the choice is between the SM with FoM and no SM than he would choose the latter.
Now let's quote the end of the article:
"“But I have always been totally consistent in saying that Britain must be a member of the Single Market, on which thousands of jobs and rules protecting workers’ rights rely.
“At the same time, we need an alternative to free movement as we know it. The government should aim for both in its EU negotiations.”"
The latter is complete rubbish - it's equivalent to Boris' 'have our cake and eat it' promise. There is no real precedence for such an agreement [*] - and the political logic of the EU is against it if only on the economic grounds that it would lead to wage arbitrage.
It's equivalent to a motion that 'under no circumstance can the economy be negatively affected by Brexit' it's a truism that's the refuge of the madman and the self-promoter. You can read Umunna's speech in the House and decide which category to put him into.
[*] and no, Liechtenstein isn't a precedent in this case.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
I see Barnier has been getting hot and heavy, saying that there is no possibility of frictionless trade outside the customs union. Well, who thought otherwise?
Well, the Daily Express did maybe, as they are saying that this is punishment of the UK. Apparently, if you leave a club, you are still entitled to use its facilities.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jul/06/frictionless-trade-impossible-if-uk-leaves-eu-single-market-says-barnier
I wonder though if a shift is going on; business is saying no to hard Brexit, Barnier is saying that you can't have your cake, etc. Are May and Davis getting squeezed?
[ 07. July 2017, 15:09: Message edited by: quetzalcoatl ]
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
stonespring
Shipmate
# 15530
|
Posted
Would the DUP press the Tories to concede on free movement of people in order to achieve frictionless trade (not just with the Republic of Ireland but particularly with it)?
Posts: 1537 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
betjemaniac
Shipmate
# 17618
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by stonespring:
Would the DUP press the Tories to concede on free movement of people in order to achieve frictionless trade (not just with the Republic of Ireland but particularly with it)?
The DUP are possibly more anti freedom of movement than the Conservative Party....
--------------------
And is it true? For if it is....
Posts: 1481 | From: behind the dreaming spires | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jane R
Shipmate
# 331
|
Posted
Now, there I think you are doing the Conservative Party an injustice, betjemaniac. They fully support (rich) British people's right to go wherever they wish. They just don't think anyone else should have the right to come here (unless they're rich tourists who will go home after their holiday is over and won't get in the way while they're here).
Posts: 3958 | From: Jorvik | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
And, in the case of UKIP it's OK if you're a rich stockbroker and want to marry a foreigner. But, no other foreigners allowed.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
And, in the case of UKIP it's OK if you're a rich stockbroker and want to marry a foreigner. But, no other foreigners allowed.
The other day, friend made the case that the UK never properly engaged with EU by listing the awful people the UK sent there as MEPs. I was unable to refute her argument.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
stonespring
Shipmate
# 15530
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
quote:
Originally posted by stonespring:
Would the DUP press the Tories to concede on free movement of people in order to achieve frictionless trade (not just with the Republic of Ireland but particularly with it)?
The DUP are possibly more anti freedom of movement than the Conservative Party....
But is the DUP willing to torpedo the NI economy, jeopardize the relative peace in NI in the last two decades, and thereby perhaps render itself politically extinct - all in order to end free movement of people? Does it maybe stand more to lose as a party from Brexit than the Tories?
Posts: 1537 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
quote:
Originally posted by stonespring:
Would the DUP press the Tories to concede on free movement of people in order to achieve frictionless trade (not just with the Republic of Ireland but particularly with it)?
The DUP are possibly more anti freedom of movement than the Conservative Party....
We're going to build a wall and the English will pay for it.
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
The DUP are possibly more anti freedom of movement than the Conservative Party....
Except that is on the freedom of (mostly middle-aged) men in sashes and bowler hats to go where they please in Norn Iron.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
I noticed that the EU has published nine discussion papers as part of the Brexit negotiations. The UK side has published one.
Yes, but that one was of a rare and rarefied lustre, don't you know, so that the EU nine could be seen as poor quality lavatory paper really.
Are we living in the middle of a farce or a tragedy?
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eirenist
Shipmate
# 13343
|
Posted
Like Oscar Wilde, Boris Johnson cannot resist a headline-grabbing remark. And like Oscar Wilde, that will eventually destroy him.
--------------------
'I think I think, therefore I think I am'
Posts: 486 | From: Darkest Metroland | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
Although Kinnock is pretty anti-Corbyn, I think. I wouldn't put it past him to be using this to plot against the leadership.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
This is looking hopeful 🤔
Well, maybe. Except that Norway is stupid. There is absolutely no reason to want to be Norway. If you want Brexit, Norway offers no advantages over remaining in the EU. You don't save money, you don't get to opt out of free movement, you don't get to do any of the purported advantages of Brexit.
But because you're not in the EU, you also don't get a seat at the decision-making table.
About the only case for Norway is that it lets Brexiteers save face and deliver on "leaving the EU". Which may be the way the wind has to blow, but it's just stupid.
Certainly if I was a Brexiteer, I'd choose remaining in the EU over Norway.
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jane R:
Now, there I think you are doing the Conservative Party an injustice, betjemaniac. They fully support (rich) British people's right to go wherever they wish. They just don't think anyone else should have the right to come here (unless they're rich tourists who will go home after their holiday is over and won't get in the way while they're here).
That sounds fairly accurate to me.
Everyone in contemporary British politics supports British people's rights to go wherever they wish. The British government does not and should not try to prevent people from leaving Britain. Equally, nobody in contemporary British politics thinks the British government can or should force arbitrary foreign countries to allow British people to settle there.
And your last sentence is also spot on - they don't think that anyone should have the right to settle in the UK, but are in general happy to extend an invitation to settle in the UK to people who will fit in and not cause problems. There are differences of opinion over how to define "cause problems".
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
There are differences of opinion over how to define "cause problems".
It's easy. Too much brown and/or not enough money = trouble maker.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stephen
Shipmate
# 40
|
Posted
So......
How about this, then?
Wonder what the Daily Yell will say about it?
--------------------
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: 3954 | From: Alto C Clef Country | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cod
Shipmate
# 2643
|
Posted
Probably nothing at all, but I'd say it was the Guardian being wanky.
Posts: 4229 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
Unpleasant stories flying around that there could be food shortages after Brexit, if a trade deal isn't achieved.
It's not so much about tariffs, as non-tariff trade barriers, for example, that goods would have to be checked at borders, leading to the stack problem - trucks queuing.
You have to hope that the government are aware of this danger, and taking steps to avert it. But how much do the headbangers want it, so that they can bring about serious austerity and the collapse of the welfare state? Alarmist?
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
Probably alarmist. Brexit won't affect food imports from outside the EU and the other nations where there are trade deals with the EU. And, though there may be delays for trade with the EU, it'll still continue. What is much more likely is that food prices will rise. Which won't bother the wealthy much, but could push even more of the JAMs into the food banks.
What it highlights is the lack of foresight, all the bits we (as a nation) should have considered in the discussion we didn't have before calling the referendum.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
What is much more likely is that food prices will rise. Which won't bother the wealthy much, but could push even more of the JAMs into the food banks.
Further fueled by the rise in sterling, which would also affect the JAMs more, but then perhaps the following reaction is more universal
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jul/17/tory-party-reputation-new-leader
'“Sterling falling? Who the fuck cares if sterling’s falling? You’ll be all right; I’ll be all right. It’s a revolution!”'
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320
|
Posted
It's been fashionable in this long thread to blame every difficulty on Britain, while extolling the virtues of our beloved brethren in the EU for their noble behaviour. So I would like to ask if anyone thinks a "divorce bill" of 100 billion Euros is fair, or does it take the piss? Starting from the point that there is no legal basis for the UK to pay anything, I would agree with those who say we have a moral obligation to pay what we have already agreed. But some sources say this is no more than 20 billion. The EU is obviously worried to be losing a long term net contributor like the UK, and when reconfiguring future budgets, none of the net receivers want to receive less, and none of the net contributors want to pay more. But does this mean that the UK has to finance Polish agriculture into the next decade? I don't think so, and I would like to see the final bill put to an independent assessor. The UK has already acknowledged that it owes money, but we won't and shouldn't agree to 100 billion.
Next the ECJ in the future rights of EU citizens. Did anyone see when Msr Barnier was asked to name any other country in the world where an outside court could exercise jurisdiction? He couldn't because there isn't one which shows how absurd the idea is. A tribunal body of some sort, not controlled by one side or the other is fair, but a post Brexit UK should never have to accept the jurisdiction of the ECJ. That these talks aren't going so well isn't exclusively the fault of the British. And where is the Labour Party on this? Waiting for the government to fuck it up so they can pounce. But without putting up a single credible position on any of this.
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul
Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
It's been fashionable in this long thread to blame every difficulty on Britain
Well you have rather brought this whole thing on yourselves. It wasn't the EU-27 who kicked you out, you know. quote:
a post Brexit UK should never have to accept the jurisdiction of the ECJ
Which is why it would have been worth thinking through the implications of dropping out of, say, Euratom and the Single Aviation Market, both of which are under the jurisdiction of the ECJ, before committing to it.
Besides, I'm pretty sure not a few people voted Leave under the mistaken apprehension that doing so would ensure withdrawing, not from the ECJ but from the European Court of Human Rights, and its related Charter. Or are you keen to see that happen, too?
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
ThunderBunk
Stone cold idiot
# 15579
|
Posted
For the benefit of the comprehension-resistant, there are these deeply inconvenient pieces of paper called international treaties, which among grown-up countries have force of law. Britain has engaged in certain obligations under those treaties which are not negated by our attempted petulant flounce straight onto our own forehead.
--------------------
Currently mostly furious, and occasionally foolish. Normal service may resume eventually. Or it may not. And remember children, "feiern ist wichtig".
Foolish, potentially deranged witterings
Posts: 2208 | From: Norwich | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
Besides, I'm pretty sure not a few people voted Leave under the mistaken apprehension that doing so would ensure withdrawing, not from the ECJ but from the European Court of Human Rights, and its related Charter. Or are you keen to see that happen, too?
I'm keen to see democracy enacted. If that means leaving the European Court of Human Rights, then yes. So I ask again. Should the UK pay 100 billion Euros as a severance. I don't know how easy it would be to do, but let's put the figure before parliament. Many Commons and Lords members go on about scrutiny. Let them scrutinise a 100 billion payment and say if they agree with it.
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul
Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dafyd
Shipmate
# 5549
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
Should the UK pay 100 billion Euros as a severance.
You yourself have said that we have a moral obligation to honour our commitments. That is apparently what we have committed ourselves to: I see nobody disputing it whom I would trust with a box of tissues.
--------------------
we remain, thanks to original sin, much in love with talking about, rather than with, one another. Rowan Williams
Posts: 10567 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
It's been fashionable in this long thread to blame every difficulty on Britain, while extolling the virtues of our beloved brethren in the EU for their noble behaviour. So I would like to ask if anyone thinks a "divorce bill" of 100 billion Euros is fair, or does it take the piss?
So your question is actually, "Should the UK pay a figure made up by the press?" ?
What's your basis for judging any figure as 'taking the piss'? Presumably this is a considered judgement based on a deep knowledge of every agreement and obligation the UK has been party to.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by chris styles:
What's your basis for judging any figure as 'taking the piss'? Presumably this is a considered judgement based on a deep knowledge of every agreement and obligation the UK has been party to.
Of course it isn't based on a deep knowledge. But you knew that! It's based on a distrust of the EU team's assessment of how much we owe. Which is why, from the beginning, I've wanted an independent arbitrator to tell us how much,
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul
Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
I thought that Barnier had explicitly said that the EU has not arrived at a figure. But of course, the tabloids and Brexiteers have enjoyed speculating with various figures, esp. the 100 million one. I thought this was a guess by the FT.
Still, fantasy outrage is much more fun than facts.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
Of course it isn't based on a deep knowledge. But you knew that! It's based on a distrust of the EU team's assessment of how much we owe.
They haven't assessed how much we owe, you are huffing over a strawman figure drawn up by the press.
Presumably you trust the UKs own assessors to get it right.
And the referendum wasn't a vote for leaving the EHCR, what a silly thing to say.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Printer-friendly view
