Hard or Soft Brexit?

[callan]

If Mrs May is to be believed she will invoke article 50 by the end of March 2017, at which point we start our negotiations to the leave the EU.

What are Zoners thoughts on either a hard or soft Brexit?

 

[mrsblue]

If Mrs May is to be believed she will invoke article 50 by the end of March 2017, at which point we start our negotiations to the leave the EU.

What are Zoners thoughts on either a hard or soft Brexit?

After project fear failed,she might as well get on with it.

The Germans will be quivering regarding their motor sales,whilst other nations won't want to lose their UK exports...too many jobs rely on us IMO.

 

[South Bank Hank]

Even a company as brutal as Microsoft asks me if I really want to do it before shutting down a simple document on my computer, yet we're ploughing through on a decision of this magnitude based on a 51/49 vote (which itself was based on **** politics, spurious unchecked facts, and lies on both sides)? That's insane.

Logic for me is for the elected representives to agree terms of the Brexit then put it to the vote again.

 

[callan]

Even a company as brutal as Microsoft asks me if I really want to do it before shutting down a simple document on my computer, yet we're ploughing through on a decision of this magnitude based on a 51/49 vote (which itself was based on **** politics, spurious unchecked facts, and lies on both sides).

Logic for me is for the elected representives to agree terms of the Brexit then put it to the vote again.

A third referendum then, would this be only on the terms of exit or would you want remain as an option?

 

[mrsblue]

Even a company as brutal as Microsoft asks me if I really want to do it before shutting down a simple document on my computer, yet we're ploughing through on a decision of this magnitude based on a 51/49 vote (which itself was based on **** politics, spurious unchecked facts, and lies on both sides).

Logic for me is for the elected representives to agree terms of the Brexit then put it to the vote again.

We could do the best of 5 referendums...first side to hit 3 is the winner !

When Cammy returned from his talks with the EU and he returned with nothing,the penny dropped for million of voters that the EU was an unswerving machine which had zero brakes.

Then people watched Germany inviting mass immigration and frankly the circles I mix with all say immigration has gone way too far,nobody IMO believed the 350 mill was going to the NHS.

The remain camp tried the fear factor which became tedious and boring..

 

[South Bank Hank]

A third referendum then, would this be only on the terms of exit or would you want a remain as you are option?

Simply:

1) Leave "on the following terms now we understand them"
2) Remain part of the EU

It won't be true for everyone, but for most people this isn't a divorce (**** you Europe, you cheated on me, I'm taking the kids and never want to see you again), it's about getting the best deal for the UK.

 

[callan]

Simply:

1) Leave "on the following terms now we understand them"
2) Remain part of the EU

Shouldn't the remain part also have a caveat on bearing in mind that the Eu of 2016 looks wholly different to what we signed up to in the original referendum in the 70's?

 

[RHB]

The remain camp tried the fear factor which became tedious and boring..

I don't think that was/is the sole prerogative of the 'remain' camp. Some supporters of the 'Leave' camp also fit that bill.

 

[South Bank Hank]

Shouldn't the remain part also have a caveat on bearing in mind that the Eu of 2016 looks wholly different to what we signed up to in the original referendum in the 70's?

Of course but isn't that implied anyway?

As for "three referendums", the whole point is that time moves on and things change. A referendum in the 70s took a pulse on the nature of the beast at the time, our most recent one the same, as would any future one based on terms of exit once they are known. Each different in circumstance and each entirely relevant to the will of the people given the facts at hand at the time.

"Favourable" terms versus "unfavourable" terms (however individuals might perceive them) MUST be part of the ultimate decision this country takes. The right terms might sway a number of Leavers just as the wrong terms might sway a number of Remainers. Let's see the terms.

 

[callan]

I don't think that was/is the sole prerogative of the 'remain' camp. Some supporters of the 'Leave' camp also fit that bill.

I think it's fair to say that neither side offered a clear vision of the future, whether in or out.

 

[manor15]

Have added a poll.

 

[Ricky Otto]

I can only comment on implications in the sector I work because this is a complex scenario and could have positive or detrimental effects and I'm not sure if the sum of these would be an overall positive of negative. For the Lloyds insurance market access to the single market is key, which has already been emphasised by Lloyds chairman John Nelson. Without access to the single market there is a very real possibility that the market and syndicates will move a lot of operations. John Nelson's "Lloyds is Lloyds, not Lloyds of London" speech is a very clear warning to the government in that respect. The deputy chairman Simon Beale works for my Syndicate and he paints the same picture. That is a risk of a lot of jobs in tory strongholds, would the government risk that with a hard brexit? Would the benefits elsewhere make it worth it? What would we have to concede in negotiations to keep access to the single market?

 

[mrsblue]

I don't think that was/is the sole prerogative of the 'remain' camp. Some supporters of the 'Leave' camp also fit that bill.

I sgree both sides were silly ,but the remain every day announced yet another doomsday scenario.

 

[callan]

Of course but isn't that implied anyway?

As for "three referendums", the whole point is that time moves on and things change. A referendum in the 70s took a pulse on the nature of the beast at the time, our most recent one the same, as would any future one based on terms of exit once they are known. Each different in circumstance and each entirely relevant to the will of the people.

Indeed but as the EEC/EU evolved we were not given the option of a referendum, despite various lies by government(s) that we would.

There are several posters on here that actually defend the position that the people should not have a say in the future of their country, and Cameron has come in for wholesale criticism over offering the second referendum.

Somewhere along the line there does need to be compromise on leaving the EU from both leave and remain.

For me personally to even see remain on any future ballot would be a red line, as this part of the decision has already been made however I guess for many Remainer's they would see it as red line not to have it there.

 

[mrsblue]

I can only comment on implications in the sector I work because this is a complex scenario and could have positive or detrimental effects and I'm not sure if the sum of these would be an overall positive of negative. For the Lloyds insurance market access to the single market is key, which has already been emphasised by Lloyds chairman John Nelson. Without access to the single market there is a very real possibility that the market and syndicates will move a lot of operations. John Nelson's "Lloyds is Lloyds, not Lloyds of London" speech is a very clear warning to the government in that respect. The deputy chairman Simon Beale works for my Syndicate and he paints the same picture. That is a risk of a lot of jobs in tory strongholds, would the government risk that with a hard brexit? Would the benefits elsewhere make it worth it? What would we have to concede in negotiations to keep access to the single market?

Lloyds "names" are always unhappy when they are losing,when the dividends are cushty they are happy as Larry.

Remember when big banks all threatened to leave,they still remain simply because London has the correct timezone worldwide.

If Lloyds leave then I'm certain another company will eagerly take their place,their warnings are their way of demanding better deals from the Government as possibly better Corp tax.

 

[superblue24]

God! Another bloody referendum on how we exit the EU!? Should we just hold referendums on every decision we ever make as a country and get rid of our MPs? Brexit worthy of voting? Yes. Should we vote on the specifics of the deal upon which we leave the EU and hand these choices to the same "so called ****wits" that voted Leave? I've met people in the UK who can barely tie their own shoelaces yet alone understand this kind of information being presented before them?

There is a dangerous assumption being made here that people are intelligent enough to understand what it all means!

You could say that maybe these voters would simply abstain from voting if they do not understand the language on such a referendum. But then you are excluding people from voting who may well have an opinion on something, but it has been presented to them in a way that they do not understand.

Maybe we elect a group of people who understand this stuff better than the average person to decide the best course for the country.....Oh wait.... We have that already, it's called the government!

 

[Ricky Otto]

Lloyds "names" are always unhappy when they are losing,when the dividends are cushty they are happy as Larry.

Remember when big banks all threatened to leave,they still remain simply because London has the correct timezone worldwide.

If Lloyds leave then I'm certain another company will eagerly take their place,their warnings are their way of demanding better deals from the Government as possibly better Corp tax.

Why do you think you are an expert on everything? This is a clueless post. What is your qualification on knowing the Lloyds market may I ask?

"names" have nothing to do with this, "names" are a rare and antiquated occurrence now and certainly don't hold the sway that the syndicates do. The syndicates that need to write European business in the single market.

I'd love to hear what other company would step into Lloyds shoes? and who would deal with them? I really think you have shown your complete lack of knowledge on the subject matter.

 

[mrsblue]

God! Another bloody referendum on how we exit the EU!? Should we just hold referendums on every decision we ever make as a country and get rid of our MPs? Brexit worthy of voting? Yes. Should we vote on the specifics of the deal upon which we leave the EU and hand these choices to the same "so called ****wits" that voted Leave? I've met people in the UK who can barely tie their own shoelaces yet alone understand this kind of information being presented before them?

There is a dangerous assumption being made here that people are intelligent enough to understand what it all means!

You could say that maybe these voters would simply abstain from voting if they do not understand the language on such a referendum. But then you are excluding people from voting who may well have an opinion on something, but it has been presented to them in a way that they do not understand.

Maybe we elect a group of people who understand this stuff better than the average person to decide the best course for the country.....Oh wait.... We have that already, it's called the government!

Yes of course everyone who voted leave are all dimwits who havnt a scooby about anything .

Get over yourself bloke and stop looking down your nose at people who never voted as you did.

 

[mrsblue]

Why do you think you are an expert on everything? This is a clueless post. What is your qualification on knowing the Lloyds market may I ask?

"names" have nothing to do with this, "names" are a rare and antiquated occurrence now and certainly don't hold the sway that the syndicates do. The syndicates that need to write European business in the single market.

I'd love to hear what other company would step into Lloyds shoes? and who would deal with them? I really think you have shown your complete lack of knowledge on the subject matter.

Brexit is happening so why don't Lloyds begin making tracks for the exit door then ?

Im not arguing with you I'm merely pointing out those firms shouting from the rooftops should be judged on their final action and not on their bleating.

 

[callan]

I can only comment on implications in the sector I work because this is a complex scenario and could have positive or detrimental effects and I'm not sure if the sum of these would be an overall positive of negative. For the Lloyds insurance market access to the single market is key, which has already been emphasised by Lloyds chairman John Nelson. Without access to the single market there is a very real possibility that the market and syndicates will move a lot of operations. John Nelson's "Lloyds is Lloyds, not Lloyds of London" speech is a very clear warning to the government in that respect. The deputy chairman Simon Beale works for my Syndicate and he paints the same picture. That is a risk of a lot of jobs in tory strongholds, would the government risk that with a hard brexit? Would the benefits elsewhere make it worth it? What would we have to concede in negotiations to keep access to the single market?

If we go to to WTO terms, I'm assuming (possibly incorrectly) that Lloyds would still have access to the same markets just under different terms?