Brexit negotiations thread

[MK Shrimper]

I'm not a tory voter or a Cameron fan but don't agree with you on this one. Cameron advised the country to vote remain and I think it was actually democratic to hold the referendum after the success UKIP had in the previous GE.

Cameron should have had the balls to ignore Farage & UKIP and ignored the calls for a referendum full stop. Hardly anyone who voted knew the implications of what an out vote really meant as we're finding out, leaving the EU is incredibly complex. UKIP were never a threat and would have exploded in time, especially if the media ignored him.

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

May, by dithering and stalling has managed to keep it (the Conservative Party) roughly all together. Me thinks, crunch time is rapidly approaching. In the words of that Tom Robinson song,............."better decide which side you're on."

Tom Robinson also has a song 'sing if you're glad to be May' or something like that

 

[Ricky Otto]

Cameron should have had the balls to ignore Farage & UKIP and ignored the calls for a referendum full stop. Hardly anyone who voted knew the implications of what an out vote really meant as we're finding out, leaving the EU is incredibly complex. UKIP were never a threat and would have exploded in time, especially if the media ignored him.

I don't agree and I would hope that any leader would listen in that circumstance. I was/am heavily in the remain camp but when a party that is set up with one real objective gets that volume of votes in a GE then the democratic thing to do is to put it to the vote IMO. The fault came in the complacency of remain voters who thought it was a forgone conclusion and didn't vote, I believe the majority of the country wanted to remain but the people who wanted to leave ALL voted whereas the remains didn't.

 

[MK Shrimper]

I don't agree and I would hope that any leader would listen in that circumstance. I was/am heavily in the remain camp but when a party that is set up with one real objective gets that volume of votes in a GE then the democratic thing to do is to put it to the vote IMO. The fault came in the complacency of remain voters who thought it was a forgone conclusion and didn't vote, I believe the majority of the country wanted to remain but the people who wanted to leave ALL voted whereas the remains didn't.

They won one seat in 2015, the same as the Green Party. Why pander to one and not the other?

 

[Ricky Otto]

They won one seat in 2015, the same as the Green Party. Why pander to one and not the other?

One seat but 12.6% of the vote, which is significant in comparison to the green party who got one seat and 3.8%. In addition the greens have many policies and its not like the Tories aren't making any policies regarding the environment. UKIP had one main goal, to force a referendum. Without that goal they are dead in the water, nobody is interested anymore except a few people who used to vote BNP

 

[londonblue]

The Tories have been divided since the 80's over Europe.Now theyre divided over Brexit.Plus ça change and all that.:winking:



Actually, you asked two questions.I answered the specific question you asked about JC's referendum vote.It's a matter of public record.

Frankly, I don't have ***'s patience to deal with your endless,obsessive questioning of Jeremy Corybn,especially in non-related threads (arguably like this one).

You may have noticed that HMG under Mrs May are currently in charge of the Brexit negotiations.

I asked a simple question about *********, after you brought him up. You still haven't answered the question. I suppose there really isn't any way to reconcile his anti EU stance and saying he is use 70% for it.

Personally I don't think someone as schizophrenic as that should be making any kind of decisions.

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

I asked a simple question about *********, after you brought him up. You still haven't answered the question. I suppose there really isn't any way to reconcile his anti EU stance and saying he is use 70% for it.

Personally I don't think someone as schizophrenic as that should be making any kind of decisions.

If you want no change in previously stated EU stance vs current EU policy you'd need to ditch Corbyn, May, Johnson, even Cameron bad mouthed the EU for years and picked a fight with Junker before asking for a new deal then asking for a Remain vote.


If politicians never changed their minds to fit changing circumstances we would be stuck in a time warp.

 

[londonblue]

If you want no change in previously stated EU stance vs current EU policy you'd need to ditch Corbyn, May, Johnson, even Cameron bad mouthed the EU for years and picked a fight with Junker before asking for a new deal then asking for a Remain vote.


If politicians never changed their minds to fit changing circumstances we would be stuck in a time warp.

So let's not try and make out that ********* is any better than any other politician.

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

So let's not try and make out that ********* is any better than any other politician.

Which is of course the exact opposite of what I just did - I lumped him in with all the others.


Probably best if we try to keep the 'oh yes he is' , 'oh no he isn't' panto to the other thread. I think the wider community would appreciate that. If it's possible to put a thread on ignore that would be a popular function I expect.

 

[londonblue]

Which is of course the exact opposite of what I just did - I lumped him in with all the others.


Probably best if we try to keep the 'oh yes he is' , 'oh no he isn't' panto to the other thread. I think the wider community would appreciate that. If it's possible to put a thread on ignore that would be a popular function I expect.

Good. So no-one will try to make him out to be anything other than a hypercritical politician. If I have to prove my point on this thread, where people try to imply he would actually make a difference (as opposed to being part of the problem as A1 pointed out), then I will.

After all, in the last few pages people have tried to work out what has led us to the mess we're in now, but have completely ignored *********'s role in it. He was pretty much non-existent during the referendum campaign, and when he was quoted he was luke warm at best. He needs to be man enough to admit he was part of the problem. Granted Camerscum has to shoulder most of the blame for putting his party and own career ahead of what is best for the country, but ********* needs to shoulder some of the blame too.

 

[Benfleet A1]

Good. So no-one will try to make him out to be anything other than a hypercritical politician. If I have to prove my point on this thread, where people try to imply he would actually make a difference (as opposed to being part of the problem as A1 pointed out), then I will.

After all, in the last few pages people have tried to work out what has led us to the mess we're in now, but have completely ignored *********'s role in it. He was pretty much non-existent during the referendum campaign, and when he was quoted he was luke warm at best. He needs to be man enough to admit he was part of the problem. Granted Camerscum has to shoulder most of the blame for putting his party and own career ahead of what is best for the country, but ********* needs to shoulder some of the blame too.

Wow, that sounds like someone agreeing with me (sort of) I'm claiming that one.:smile:

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

Good. So no-one will try to make him out to be anything other than a hypercritical politician. If I have to prove my point on this thread, where people try to imply he would actually make a difference (as opposed to being part of the problem as A1 pointed out), then I will.

After all, in the last few pages people have tried to work out what has led us to the mess we're in now, but have completely ignored *********'s role in it. He was pretty much non-existent during the referendum campaign, and when he was quoted he was luke warm at best. He needs to be man enough to admit he was part of the problem. Granted Camerscum has to shoulder most of the blame for putting his party and own career ahead of what is best for the country, but ********* needs to shoulder some of the blame too.

it's up to you if you want to target such a disproportionate amount of your political thought towards one person, I would suggest that most weeks each individual politian doesn't do anything that newsworthy, but politics in general constantly has eye opening moments.
Think this may have already been covered - Corbyn traveled the whole country campaigning to Remain. When asked on a comedy program he said he was 7/10 enthusiastic about the EU which personally I would say is quite high - above that sounds a bit unbelievable, and believability was important because Cameron was threatening WW3 and Johnson was promising the EU would give us back more money than we pay in. And just to cover all of the bases - yes he refused to campaign with the Remain Tories as his job was to get the Labour vote out not get the Tory vote out - and we are told that 70% of Labour voters voted Remain so that aim was largely achieved.

But this subject has moved on massively since the referendum so fighting that battle over and over again seems rather fruitless. There's nothing new to say on the actual vote. What happens next is far more....topical.

 

[Lord Football]

So. What did I learn today.

Well, last week, but now I know its in the public domain.....

One of the things Leavers championed was the ability for the UK to make their own trade deals as a stand alone member of the EU. Seems, its not that east. An early (and hardly reported) success was an agreement between the UK and EU over WTO schedules. Basically, we agreed to split our quotas proportionally.

However, it seems the rest of the world aren't so happy, as there is a secondary effect of doing that. For example New Zealand sells a lot of lamb to the UK, using most of its "EU quota" to do so. By splitting the quota, they can now only export a smaller amount of lamb to the UK as the rest belongs to the EU. So our "early win" has backfired.

Similarly, the US are concerned that that EU goods can be exported to the UK via Ireland if there isn't a border, thus giving the EU an advantage over the US who need to pay duty when exporting to Ireland whereas the rest of the EU, don't. So the option of "no border" is becoming increasingly unlikely.

For much the same reason, it has become clear that without a trade deal it is against WTO rules to give a better rate of duty to any country. So we don't actually have the power to set our rates on an individual basis.

Oh, and it seems all those things we joined as a member of the EU we will need to re-apply for as a single stand alone nation.

What does that mean? It means that one of the underpinning arguments for post Brexit trade isn't going to work without another set of extremely complex negotiations and agreements.

And we've got to do all this in 18 months.....

 

[Benfleet A1]

it's up to you if you want to target such a disproportionate amount of your political thought towards one person, I would suggest that most weeks each individual politian doesn't do anything that newsworthy, but politics in general constantly has eye opening moments.
Think this may have already been covered - Corbyn traveled the whole country campaigning to Remain. When asked on a comedy program he said he was 7/10 enthusiastic about the EU which personally I would say is quite high - above that sounds a bit unbelievable, and believability was important because Cameron was threatening WW3 and Johnson was promising the EU would give us back more money than we pay in. And just to cover all of the bases - yes he refused to campaign with the Remain Tories as his job was to get the Labour vote out not get the Tory vote out - and we are told that 70% of Labour voters voted Remain so that aim was largely achieved.

But this subject has moved on massively since the referendum so fighting that battle over and over again seems rather fruitless. There's nothing new to say on the actual vote. What happens next is far more....topical.

Who is telling us those figures? Tbe North East and West, The Midlands, Labour heartlands with massive Leave percentage's. Where are those figures coming from when it's clear that many Labour areas returned resounding leave results.

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

Who is telling us those figures? Tbe North East and West, The Midlands, Labour heartlands with massive Leave percentage's. Where are those figures coming from when it's clear that many Labour areas returned resounding leave results.

Sorry the rounded stat for Remain Labour voters was two thirds rather than 70%


Lord Ashcroft told us about Cameron having sex with a pig so now we believe everything he says and his stats are:


63% of Labour voters voted Remain
42% of Tory voters voted Remain


http://lordashcroftpolls.com/2016/06/how-the-united-kingdom-voted-and-why/

 

[yogi bear up the cagire]

I'm not a tory voter or a Cameron fan but don't agree with you on this one. Cameron advised the country to vote remain and I think it was actually democratic to hold the referendum after the success UKIP had in the previous GE.

Whether Cameron offered the referendum to the British people in order to preserve his Conservative hide or as an advancement of democracy, is a debateable issue. What was criminal on Cameron's part was to propose a referendum on such a profound and complex change to Britain's future, on a simple majority. To set in motion the enormous changes and disruption we can now see Brexit is bringing about should have required, at least a 60% (and possibly more) vote. The fact it didn't was down to his sheer arrogance and cocksuredness.................it's that which is unforgiveable.

 

[yogi bear up the cagire]

So. What did I learn today.

Well, last week, but now I know its in the public domain.....

One of the things Leavers championed was the ability for the UK to make their own trade deals as a stand alone member of the EU. Seems, its not that east. An early (and hardly reported) success was an agreement between the UK and EU over WTO schedules. Basically, we agreed to split our quotas proportionally.

However, it seems the rest of the world aren't so happy, as there is a secondary effect of doing that. For example New Zealand sells a lot of lamb to the UK, using most of its "EU quota" to do so. By splitting the quota, they can now only export a smaller amount of lamb to the UK as the rest belongs to the EU. So our "early win" has backfired.

Similarly, the US are concerned that that EU goods can be exported to the UK via Ireland if there isn't a border, thus giving the EU an advantage over the US who need to pay duty when exporting to Ireland whereas the rest of the EU, don't. So the option of "no border" is becoming increasingly unlikely.

For much the same reason, it has become clear that without a trade deal it is against WTO rules to give a better rate of duty to any country. So we don't actually have the power to set our rates on an individual basis.

Oh, and it seems all those things we joined as a member of the EU we will need to re-apply for as a single stand alone nation.

What does that mean? It means that one of the underpinning arguments for post Brexit trade isn't going to work without another set of extremely complex negotiations and agreements.

And we've got to do all this in 18 months.....

Thanks for the updates. It appears, as layer upon layer of the complexity of our detatchment from the EU are revealed, the greater the complications and difficulties of this process, in such a limited time, become apparent.

 

[callan]

So. What did I learn today.

Well, last week, but now I know its in the public domain.....

One of the things Leavers championed was the ability for the UK to make their own trade deals as a stand alone member of the EU. Seems, its not that east. An early (and hardly reported) success was an agreement between the UK and EU over WTO schedules. Basically, we agreed to split our quotas proportionally.

However, it seems the rest of the world aren't so happy, as there is a secondary effect of doing that. For example New Zealand sells a lot of lamb to the UK, using most of its "EU quota" to do so. By splitting the quota, they can now only export a smaller amount of lamb to the UK as the rest belongs to the EU. So our "early win" has backfired.

Similarly, the US are concerned that that EU goods can be exported to the UK via Ireland if there isn't a border, thus giving the EU an advantage over the US who need to pay duty when exporting to Ireland whereas the rest of the EU, don't. So the option of "no border" is becoming increasingly unlikely.

For much the same reason, it has become clear that without a trade deal it is against WTO rules to give a better rate of duty to any country. So we don't actually have the power to set our rates on an individual basis.

Oh, and it seems all those things we joined as a member of the EU we will need to re-apply for as a single stand alone nation.

What does that mean? It means that one of the underpinning arguments for post Brexit trade isn't going to work without another set of extremely complex negotiations and agreements.

And we've got to do all this in 18 months.....

My understanding is that the quotas were to be divided on consumption levels, worked out over a three year period....is that not the case?

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-41684111

Some good news (maybe).

 

[Shrimpers are Magic]

Reports of Brexit deadlock have been exaggerated say Donald Tusk.

Who says the great and the good don't read Shrimperzone!